This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world's books discoverable online.
It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.
Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.
Usage guidelines
Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:
+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.
+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.
+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.
+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.
About Google Book Search
Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web
at jhttp : //books . qooqle . com/
!ffffffi*I MHM»i il
vvvTT^^
m^^^mm&mm
snap
3 m
♦itt*
A dictionary of the Bible
Sir William Smith, John Mee Fuller
b»->\K.
NoNdceppopeNcque in OoLo
JamesHardyRopes
Andover
Theological Seminary
THE GIFT OF
Alice • Lowell • Ropes
1933
Andover-Harvard
Theological Library
Digitized by
Google
&tUC4
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE
COMPRISING ITS
ANTIQUITIES, BIOGRAPHY, GEOGRAPHY,
AND NATURAL HISTORY.
EDITED BY
Sib WILLIAM SMITH, D.C.L., LL.D.,
JLXD
Rev. J. M. FULLER, M.A.
fteconD ffiDinon,
IN THREE VOLUMES.— Vol. I., Paht II.
ELZABAD— JUTTAH.
LONDON:
JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET.
1893.
The right of Trantlatum it racrotd.
Digitized by CjOOQIC
AHD07ER-HARVARD
THBMflGICALliBHARl
OAMBfODOE, MA9&
DIRECTIONS TO BINDER.
The Map of Jerusalem, Plate I., to face page 1596.
Do. da Plate II to Emm page 1646.
Do. da Plate IIL, to face page 1654
Digitized by
Google
\
1
DICTIONAEY
OF
BIBLICAL ANTIQUITIES, BIOGRAPHY, GEOGRAPHY,
AND NATURAL HISTORV.
ELZABAD
EL-ZA'BAD 0?$K = 0«f *<*<* S»w". Cp.
Theodore et aim.; B. 'Z\ia(4p, A. 'E\t(a0dS ;
Eltehad). 1. The ninth of the eleven Gadite
heroes who came across the Jordan to David
when he was in distress in the wilderness of
Jodah (1 Ch. xii. 12).
2. B. 'E\r)(afrie, A. 't\(afiiS. A Korhite
Levite, son of Shemaiah and of the family of
Obed-edora ; one of the doorkeepers of the " house
of Jehovah " (1 Ch. xxvi. 7). [G.] [F.]
EL-ZATHAN (JDX^ = Godhatk protected.
Cp. Phoen. ^lOJBX [MV.»]; 'EXMro^dV; Elsa-
phtm), second son of Uzziel, who was the son of
Kohath son of Levi (Ex. vi. 22). He was thus
cousin to Moses and Aaron, as is distinctly stated.
EJzaphsn assisted his brother Mishael to carry
the unhappy Nadab and Abihu in their priestly
tonics out of the camp (Lev. x. 4). The name
U a contracted form of the more frequent
Kxjzapiias. [G.] [F.]
EMBALMING, the process by which dead
bodies are preserved from putrefaction and decay.
The Hebrew word D3I1 (chdnat), employed to
denote this process, is connected with the
Arabic Vy— - which in conj. 1 signifies " to be
red," as leather which has been tanned ; and in
conj. 2, " to preserve with spices." In the 1st
and 4th conjugations it is applied to the ripening
of fruit, and this meaning has been assigned to
the Hebrew root in Cant. ii. 13. In the latter
passage, however, it probably denotes the red
colour of the ripening figs (see Delitzsch in loco).
The word is found in the Chaldee and Syriac
dialects, and in the latter | AAjQlm (chuntetho) is
the equivalent of plypa, the confection of myrrh
and aloes bronght by Micodemus (John xix. 39).
Tlie practice of embalming was most general
among the Egyptians, and it is in connexion with
this people that the two instances which we meet
with in the O. T. are mentioned (Gen. 1. 2, 26).
Mummies exist which are to be dated just before
and after this period (Ebers). Of the Egyptian
method of embalming there remain two minute
accounts, which have a general kind of agree-
ment, thongh they differ in details.
Herodotus (ii. 86-88. Cp. Wilkinson, Anc.
£fypt. ii. 383, &c. [1878])— whose account is
BIBLE DICT.— VOL. L
EMBALMING
on the whole accurate — describes three modes,
varying in completeness and expense, and prac-
tised by persons regularly trained to the pro-
fession, who were initiated into the mysteries of
the art by their ancestors. The most costly
mode, which is estimated by Diodorus Siculus
(i. 91) at a talent of silver (about £250), was
said by the Egyptian priests to belong to him
whose name in such a matter it was not lawful
to mention, viz. Osiris. The embalmers first
removed part of the brain through the nostrils,
by means of a crooked iron, and destroyed the
rest by injecting caustic drugs. An incision
was then made along the flank with a sharp
Ethiopian stone, and the whole of the intestines
removed. The cavity was rinsed out with palm-
wine, and afterwards scoured with pounded
perfumes. It was then filled with pure myrrh
pounded, cassia, and other aromatics, except
frankincense. This done, the body was sewn
up and steeped in natron (subcarbonate of soda,
Ebers) for seventy days (cp. the extract given
by Ebers from the Setnan papyrus). When the
seventy days were accomplished, the embalmers
washed the corpse aud swathed it in bandages of
linen, cut in strips, and smeared with gum. They
then gave it up to the relatives of the deceased,
who provided for it a wooden case, made in the
shape of a man, in which the dead was placed,
and deposited in an erect position against the
wall of the sepulchral chamber. Diodorus Siculus
gives some particulars of the process which are
omitted by Herodotus. When the body was laid
out on the ground for the purpose of embalming,
one of the operators, called the scribe (ypan-
partis), marked out the part of the left flank
where the incision was to be made. The dis-
sector (rapcurxiarris) then, with a sharp Ethio-
pian stone (black flint, or Ethiopian agate,
Rawlinson, Herod, ii. 141), hastily cut through
as much flesh as the law enjoined, and fled,
pursued by curses and volleys of stones from
the spectators. When all the embalmers (rapi-
X<vral) were assembled, one of them extracted
the intestines, with the exception of the heart
and kidneys ; another cleansed them one by one,
and rinsed them in palm-wine and perfumes.*
The body was then washed with oil of cedar,
and other things worthy of notice, for more than
• Ebers allocates these duties somewhat differently,
and adds the names and special functions of other officers.
3
Digitized by
Google
930
EMBALMING
thirty days (according to some MSS. forty), and
afterwards sprinkled with myrrh, cinnamon, and
other substances, which possess the property not
only of preserving the body for a long period,
but also of communicating to it an agreeable
smell. This process was so effectual that the
features of the dead could be recognised. It is
remarkable that Diodorus omits all mention of
the steeping in natron.
The second mode of embalming cost about 20
minae (about £60). In this case no incision was
made in the body, nor were the intestines re-
moved, but cedar-oil was injected into the
stomach by the rectum. The oil was prevented
from escaping, and the body was then steeped in
natron for the appointed number of days. On
the last day the oil was withdrawn, and carried
off with it the stomach and intestines in a state
of solution, while the flesh was consumed by the
natron, and nothing was left but the skin and
bones. The body in this state was returned to
the relatives of the deceased.
The third mode, which was adopted by the
poorer classes, and cost but little, consisted in
rinsing out the intestines with syrmaca, an in-
fusion of senna and cassia (Pettigrew, p. 69), and
steeping the body for the usual number of days
in natron.
Porphyry (De Abst. iv. 10) supplies an omis-
sion of Herodotus, who neglects to mention what
was done with the intestines after they were
removed from the body. In the case of a person
of respectable rank they were placed in a separate
vessel and thrown into the river. This account
is confirmed by Plutarch {Sept. Sap. Cont. c. 16).
Although the three modes of embalming are
so precisely described by Herodotus, it lias been
found impossible to classify the mummies which
have been discovered and examined under one or
other of these three heads. Dr. Pettigrew, from
his own observations, confirms the truth of
Herodotus' statement that the brain was re-
moved through the nostrils. But in many
instances, in which the body was carefully pre-
served and elaborately ornamented, the brain
had not been removed at all ; while in some
mummies the cavity was found to be filled with
resinous and bituminous matter.
M. Rouycr, in his Notice stir les Embaumcmtnts
des Ancient jZjypticns, quoted by Pettigrew,
endeavoured to class the mummies which he
examined under two principal divisions, which
were again subdivided into others. These were
— I. Mummies with the ventral incision, pre-
served (1) by balsamic matter, and (£) by natron.
The first of these are filled with a mixture of
resin and aromatics, and are of an olive colour —
the skin dry, flexible, and adhering to the bones.
Others are filled with bitumen or asphaltum,
and are black, the skin hard and shining. Those
prepared with natron are also filled with resinous
substances and bitumen. II. Mummies without
the ventral incision. This class is again sub-
divided, according as the bodies were (1) salted
and filled with pisasphaltum, a compound of
asphaltum and common pitch, or (2) salted only.
The former are supposed to have been immersed
in the pitch when in a liquid state.
The medicaments employed in embalming were
various. From a chemical analysis of the sub-
stances found in mummies, M. Rouelle detected
three modes of embalming — 1, with asphaltum,
EMBROIDERER
or Jew's pitch, called also funeral gum, or gum
of mummies ; 2, with a mixture of asphaltum
and cedria, the liquor distilled from the cedar ;
3, with this mixture together with some resinous
and aromatic ingredients. The powdered aro-
matics mentioned by Herodotus were not mixed
with the bituminous matter, but sprinkled into
the cavities of the body.
It docs not a|t]>car that embalming, properly
so called, was practised by the Hebrews. Asa
was laid " in the bed which was filled with sweet
odours and divers kind of spices prepared by the
apothecaries' art " (2 Ch. xvi. 14) ; and by the
tender care of Kicodemus the body of Jesus was.
wrapped in linen cloths, with spices, "a mixture
of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound
iceu/ht ... as the manner of the Jews is to bury '*
(John xix. 32, 40).
The account given by Herodotus has been
supposed to throw discredit upon the narrative
in Genesis. He asserts that the body is steeped
in natron for seventy days, while in Gen. 1. 3 it
is said that only forty days were occupied in
the whole process of embalming, although the
period of mourning extended over seventy days.
Diodorus, on the contrary, omits altogether the
steeping in natron as a part of the operation;
and though the time which, according to him,
is taken up in washing the body with cedar oil
and other aromatics is more than thirty days,
yet this is evidently only a portion of the whole
time occupied in the complete process. Heng-
stenberg (Egypt and the Books of Moses, p. 69,
Eng. tr.) would reconcile this discrepancy by
supposing that the seventy days of Herodotus
include the whole time of embalming, and not
that of steeping in natron only; others, with
more probability, explain any differences of
detail and variations of practice by local or
dynastic customs (cp. Dillmann, Ucncsis,* in loco),
bbers thinks that there are grounds for be-
lieving that the embalming the body of Jacob
would have been after the manner of Memphis.
Their religious views suggested to the Egyp-
tians the idea of embalming. They practised it
in accordance with their doctrine of the trans-
migration of souls (see further, Eovpt, p. 872,
col. 2). The actual process is said to have been
derived from " their first merely burying in the
sand, impregnated with natron and other salts,
which dried and preserved the body " (Rawlin-
son, Herod, ii. 142). Drugs and bitumen were
of later introduction, the latter not being gene-
rally employed before the 18th dynasty. When
the practice ceased entirelv is uncertain (cp.
Wilkinson, Anc. Egypt. U. 398 [1878]).
The subject of embalming is fully discussed,
and the sources of practical information well-
nigh exhausted, in Dr. Pettigrew's History of
Eqyptian Mummies. See also Ebers in Riehm's
HWB. a. n.' Einbalsamiren.' [\V. A. W.] [F.]
EMBROIDERER. This term is given in the
A. V. as the equivalent of rokem (Dp.1), the pro-
ductions of the art being described as " needle-
work " (HOpl). In Exodus the embroiderer is
contrasted with the " cunning workman," chosheb
(3ETI): and the consideration of one of these
terms involves that of the other. Various ex-
planations have been offered as to the distinction
between them, but most of these overlook the dis-
Digitized by
Google
EMBROIDERER
EMERODS
931
tinction marked in the Bible itself, viz. that the
rvktm wore simply a variegated texture, without
gold thread or figures, and that the chosheb inter-
wove gold thread or figures into the variegated
texture. We conceive that the use of the gold
thread was for delineating figures, as is implied
in the description of the corslet of Amasis (Her.
iii. 47), and that the notices of gold thread in
some instances and of figures in others were but
different methods of describing the same thing.
It follows, then, that the application of the term
"embroiderer" to rokem is incorrect; if it belongs
to either, it is to chosheb, or the " cnnning work-
man," who added the figures. But if " em-
broidery " be strictly confined to the work of
the needle, we doubt whether it can be applied
to either, for the simple addition of gold thread,
or of a figure, does not involve the use of the
needle. The patterns may have been worked
into the stuff by the loom, as appears to have
bten the case in Egypt (Wilkinson, Anc. Egypt.
ii. 81 [1878]; cp.'Her. loc. cit.% where the
Hebrews learned the art, and as is stated by
Josephns (Syft; Irwparrm, Ant. iii. 7, § 2). The
distinction, as given by the Talmudists, and
which has been adopted by Gesenius ( Thesaur.
p. 1311) and Bahr (Symbotik, i. 266), is this—
that was rikmah, or " needlework," where a
pattern was att.iched to the stuff by being sewn
on to it on one side; and that was the work of
the chosheb when the pattern was worked into the
staff by the loom, and so appeared on both sides.
This view appears to be entirely inconsistent with
the statements of the Bible, and with the sense
of the word rikmoji elsewhere. The absence of
the figure or the gold thread in the one, and its
presence in the other, constitutes the essence of
the distinction. In support of this view we call
attention to the passages in which the expressions
are contrasted. Rikmah consisted of the fol-
lowing materials, •' blue, purple, scarlet, and
fine twined linen " (Ex. xxvi. 36, xxvii. 16,
xxrvi. 37, xxxviii. 18, xxxix. 29). The work of
the chosheb was either '* fine twined linen, blue,
porple, and scarlet. icitt clicrtihim" (Ex. xxvi.
1, 31 ; xxxvi. 8, 35), or "gold, blue, purple,
scarlet, and fine twined linen " (xxviii. 6, 8, 15 ;
xxxix. 2, 5, 8). Again, looking at the general
sense of the words, we shall find that chotheb
involve* the idea of invention, or designing
patterns; rikmah the idea of texture as well as
rarieyated colour. The former is applied to
other arts which demanded the exercise of in-
ventive genius, as in the construction of engines
of war (2 Ch. xxvi. 15) ; the latter is applied to
other substances, the texture of which is remark-
iMe, as the human body (Ps. exxxix. 15). Fur-
ther than this, rikmah involves the idea of a
regular disposition of colours, which demanded
fto inventive genius. Beyond the instances
already adduced, it is applied to tessellated pave-
aest (I Ch. xxix. 2), to the eagle's plumage
(Ezek. xvii. 3), and, in the Targnms, to the
leopard's spotted skin (Jer. xiii. 23). In the
■am* sense it is applied to the coloured sails of
the Egyptian vessels (Ezek. xxvii. 16), which
were either chequered or worked according to a
regalarly recurring pattern (Wilkinson, -<4nc.
Egypt, i. 413 [1878]). Gesenius considers this
passage as conclusive for his view of the dis-
tinction, but it is hardly conceivable that the
patterns were on one side of the sail only, nor
does there appear any ground to infer a departure
from the usual custom of working the colours
by the loom. The ancient Versions do not con-
tribute much to the elucidation of the point.
The LXX. varies between toi/ciAtV and ia<pi-
Btvrfo, as representing rokem, and toikiXtJ);
and v<pwnhs for chosheb, combining the two
terms in each case for the work itself, tj xoi/aAi'a
too JKuptotvrov for the first, tpyov idwrbv
s-oikiAtov for the second. The distinction, so far
as it is observed, consisted in the one being needle-
tcork and the other laom-icork. The Vulgate
gives generally plumaritis for the first, and poly-
mitarius for the second ; but in Ex. xxvi. 1, 31,
plumarim is used for the second. The first of
these terms (plmnarius) is well chosen to express
rokem, but potymitarius, i.e. a weaver who
works together threads of divers colours, is as
applicable to one as to the other. The rendering
in Ezek. xxvii. 16, scutulata, i.e. "chequered,"
correctly describes one of the productions of the
rokem. We hare lastly to notice the incorrect
rendering of the word |*3C in the A. V. —
"broider;" "embroider" (Ex! xxviii. 4, 39; R.V.
" chequer-work "). It means stuff worked in a
tessellated manner, i.e. with square cavities, such
as stones might be set in (cp. r. 20). The art of
embroidery by the loom was extensively practised
among the nations of antiquity. The Baby-
lonians were also celebrated for it, but em-
broidery in the proper sense of the term, i.e.
with the needle, was a Phrygian invention of
later date (Plin. viii. 48). [W. L. B.]
EMERALD 01 W ; LXX., avfyo{ ; N. T. and
Apoc., aiiipaySos), a precious stone, first In the
second row on the breastplate of the high-priest
(Ex. xxviii. 18, xxxix. 11), imported to Tyre from
Syria (Ezek. xxvii. 16), used as a seal or signet
(Ecclus. xxxii. 6), as an ornament of clothing
and bedding (Ezek. xxviii. 13 ; Judith x. 21), and
spoken of as one of the foundations of Jerusalem
(Rev. xxi. 19; Tob. xiii. 16). The rainbow
round the throne is compared to emerald in Rev.
iv. 3, Sfioios ipdott fffiaparftirif.
The etymology of T|gj is uncertain. Gesenius
suggests a comparison with the word TpB, a paint
with which the Hebrew women stained their
eyelashes. Kalisch on Exodus xxviii. follows
the LXX., and translates it carbuncle, trans-
ferring the meaning emerald to D7JV in the
same r. 18. The Targum Jer. on the same verse
explains T|5il by K313 "O =carchcdonius,carbuncle
(so R. V. inarg.). Riehm (HWB. ' Edelsteine,'
No. 13) prefers " granat." [H. W. T.]
EMERODS (D^DT Dnint?; (Spa; ami*,
nates ; Deut. xxviii. 27 '; 1 Sam.' v. 6, 9, 12, vi.
4, 5, 11). The probabilities as to the nature of
the disease are mainly dependent on the probable
Toots of these two Hebrew words ; the former of
which * evidently means " a swelling ; " the
latter, though less certain, is most probably from
• Closely akin to it Is the Arab. V flp , which means
tumor qui apud vim oritur in posticis partibus, apud
nuliercs in anterior* .parte vulvae similis herniae
viroruM.
3 2
Digitized by
Google
932
EMIM
a Syriac verb, r***Wi meaning "anhelavit sub
onere, enixus est in exonerando ventre" (Park-
hurst and Gesenius) ; and the Syriac noun
|)Q*» 4 from the same root denotes (l)such
effort as the verb implies, and (2) the intestinum
rectum. Also, whenever the former word occurs
in the Hebrew Kethib,* the Keri gives the latter,
except in 1 Sam. vi. 11, where the latter stands
in the Kethib. Now this last passage speaks of
the images of the emerods after they were ac-
tually made, and placed in the Ark. It thus
appears probable that the former word means
the disease, and the latter the part affected,
which must necessarily have been included in
the actually existing image, and have struck the
eye as the essential thing represented, to which
the disease was an incident. As some morbid
swelling, then, seems the most probable nature
of the disease, so no more probable conjecture
has been advanced than that haemorrhoidal
tumours (R. V. Deut. marg. Or, tumours or
plague boils; in 1 Sam. text "tumours," marg.
or plague boils), or bleeding piles, known to the
Romans as mariscae (Juv. ii. 13), are intended.
These are very common in Syria at present;
Oriental habits of want of exercise and improper
food, producing derangement of the liver, con-
stipation, &c, being such as to cause them.
The sense of plague-Mis, a disease found among
the Druses, is preferred by others (see Dillmaun*
on Deut. I. c). The words of 1 Sam. v. 12, " the
men that died not were smitten with emerods,"
show that the disease was not necessarily
fatal. It is clear from its parallelism with
" botch " and other diseases in Deut. xxviii. 27,
that DyBV is a disease, not a part of the body;
but the translations of it by the most approved
authorities are various and vague.' Thus the
LXX. and Vulg., as above, uniformly render
the word as bearing the latter sense. The men-
tion by Herodotus (i. 105) of the malady, called
by him <W)X«m vouaos, as afflicting the Scythians
who rubbed the temple (of the Syrian Venus) in
Ascalon, has been deemed by some a proof that
some legend containing a distortion of the Scrip-
tural account was current in that country down
to a late date. The Scholiast on Aristophanes
(Acharn. 231) mentions a similar plague (fol-
lowed by a similar subsequent propitiation to
that mentioned in Scripture), as sent upon the
Athenians by Bacchus. 1 The opinion mentioned
by Winer (s. v. P/iilister), as advanced by
Lichtenstein, that the plague of emerods and
that of mice are one and the same, the former
being caused by an insect (solpuga) as large as a
field-mouse, is hardly worth attention. [H. H.]
E'HIM (D'P'K; B. 'Ofituulr, A. 'Ooptlv
ly. 10], 'Opfuflr [v. 11], only twice mentioned,
» Parkhurst, however, ». v. Q'fjBO, thinks, on the
Authority of Dr. Kcnnicott's Codices, that D»"tf ITO Is in
all these passages 1 very ancient Hebrew varia lectio.
* Jusephu-1, Ant. vi. 1, ( 1, tvvtrrteia ; Aqulla, it
rr/t $aytSaitnjt i Ajcoc.
" Pollux, Onom. lv. 29, thus describes what he calls
ftovfivy. olRijfjM p«Tu d>Aryporijf aipq^ov ylvtrai Kara
tt|c i&pav ivros, itrri It dpoiafitfpoit wpotf. Cp. Bochart,
Bierosoic. I. 33X.
EMMAUS
Gen. xiv. 5 [LXX. om.] and Deut. ii. 10, 11).
As a Semitic word the name appears to mean
" terrors," and is used of the idols of Chaldea,
which " is a land of graven images, and they
are mad upon their idols" (Jer. 1. 38). It
appears that the Emim were the aborigines of
Moab : they " dwelt therein aforetime, a people
great, and many, and tall as the Anakim " (R. V.).
They may have been of the same race as the
Rephaim in Bashan, the Znzim in Ham, and the
Horites in Mount Seir. It is not, however, at
ail certain that they were of Semitic race,
although the word presents a Semitic plural.
The Hittites are believed by scholars to have
been non-Semitic, and the Emim may have
belonged to the ancient Turanian people, who
preceded the Semitic stock in Chaldea, as the
Emim preceded the sons of Lot in Moab. If
these aborigines were really what is called
Turanian, the meaning of the word is to be
sought in Turanian languages. In this case it
would be comparable with the widely diffused
word aima for a " horde " or "tribe " (Tunguse
aiman, Buriat aimah, Mongol irimak, Lironian
aim, " tribe "). The name of the Hittites occurs
in the Bible with a Semitic plural attached. In
the A. V (but not in the R. V.) the English
plural has in like manner been added to the
Hebrew — Emims being a case in point. [C. R. C]
EM'MAUS ('Ewioofa), the village (mfyn?)
to which the two disciples were going when oar
Lord appeared to them on the way, on the day
of His Resurrection (Luke xxiv. 13). The only-
indication of position is the distance from Jeru-
salem, which St. Luke gives as 60 stadia * (A. V.
threescore furlongs) or about 6ft English miles.
St. Mark (xvi. 12) simply says that the disciples
were on their way into the country (fit kypiy).
Josephus (J?. /. vii. 6, § 6) mentions a place
(xtsplor) called Emmaus, which was the only
portion of Judaea exempted from the general
lot of being sold. It was given by Titus to 800
men discharged from the army, and the distance
from Jerusalem is stated to have been 60, or,
according to the Latin copies, 30 stadia. This
last feature has led to the general supposition
that it is the same place as the Emmaus of the
N. T. Six sites have at various times been
proposed for Emmaus.
1. Eusebius and Jerome (OS.* p. 257, 21 ;
p. 121, 6) identify it with the city of Emmaus,
'Amwds, afterwards called Nicopolis, which was
176 stadia, or about 20 Euglish miles, from Jeru-
salem, and situated on the maritime plain, at the
foot of the mountains of Judah. This view was
held by all Christians down to the 12th century
(Sozomen, JJ. E. v. 20 ; Abbot Daniel, lxii.), and
has been maintained in modern times by Dr.
Robinson (iii. 147 sq.), and by Guerin (Judge,
i. 301 sq. Cp. Schiners, Amvas, das Emmaus
d. hi. Lucas, 160 Stad. v. Jems. 1891). It
necessitates a journey of 40 miles in one day,
and is at variance with the circumstances of the
narrative. The two disciples having journeyed
• The SlnalUc MS., supported by I, K, and N, has 160
sttdla; but the best MSS. are decisive in favour of so
stadia (see Westcott and Hort). If the Slnsltlc be one
of tbo MSS. of the N. T. prepared by Eusebius, at the
command of Consuutioe, It Is possible that be altered
the text to bring It Into agreement with the distance
of Emrosus-KlcopoUs, 'Amwds, from Jerusalem.
Digitized by
Google
EMMAUS
from Jerusalem to Emmaus in part of a day
(Lake uir. 28, 29), left the latter again after
the evening meal, and reached Jerusalem before
H was very late (cc. 33, 42, 43). Now, if we
take into account the distance, 20 miles, and the
nature of the road, leading up a steep and
difficult mountain, we most admit that such a
journey could not be accomplished in less than
from six to seven hours, so that they could not
bate arrived in Jerusalem till long past mid-
night. The expressions used by St. Luke, " a
Tillage named Emmaus," and by St. Mark,
"into the country," wonld hardly hare been
employed if the disciples had been going to the
well-known fortress-city of Kmmaus-Nicopolis
(Reland, pp. 427, 758; Thomson, L. and B.
p. 534).
2. Kwyet el-'Enab, about 66 stadia from
Jerusalem, on the road to Jaffa, has been pro-
posed by the Rev. G. Williams {Diet, of Gk: and
Bom. Geog.) and Thomson (£. and B. p. 666).
The arguments in its favour are, a not very
ancient Greek tradition, the distance from Jeru-
salem, and proximity to Kastul (Castellum) and
KulbnieK (ColonU). Kwyet, however, is an
ancient name, Kirjath, and is not likely to have
been also known as Emmaus.
3. Kvlinieh, about 36 stadia from Jerusalem,
on the road to Jaffa. In Josh, xviii. 26 men-
tion is made of a town Mozah, really ham-
Motsah ('A/uio-a), which is believed to be the
same place as the Motsah mentioned in the
Mishna (Succah, iv. § 5), which was also a
Cofania. Ham-Motsah is in all probability the
Ammaous which, according to the Latin copies
of Josephus, was 30 stadia from Jerusalem
(PEFQy. Stat. 1881, p. 237). It is identified
by Schwarz (D. heil. Land, p. 98) and Neubauer
(G(og. oh Talmud, pp. 152, 153) with Kulvnieh,
but is more probably the ruin Beit Mizxa, in
the immediate vicinity. The arguments in
favour of identifying Kuionieh with the Emmaus
of St. Luke are Tery fully given by Sepp (Jer.
«. d. heil. Land, i. 54-73), who identifies Kustul
with the Castellum Emmaus of the Crusaders,
sad by Ewald (Gesch. d. Volket Ur. vi. 675 so,.).
See also Furrer in Schenkel, B. L. s. v. Kulonieh
was, and still is, a place to which the inhabitants
of Jerusalem went out for recreation.
4. The claims of cl-Kubeibeh have been well set
forth by Zschokke (Das N. T. Emmaus), and are
maintained by Baedeker-Socin (Hdbk. p. 141),
the Franciscans, Schick, Riehm (BWB. s. v.), and
others. It is about 63 stadia N.W. of Jerusalem,
on an old Koroao road leading through Beit
lAia to Laid, I.ydda ; and at the head of one
branch of the valley in which Kvibnieh lies.
The tradition connecting E. with eUKubeSbch
*<»«» not appear to be earlier than the 14th
century, and cannot be considered trustworthy.
A monastery of Latin monks was established
there in 1862 (PEF. Mem. iii. 17, 131).
5. Etam ('Am 'Atan) and Urids, near " Solo-
mon's Pools," bare been proposed by Lightfoot
{Ckor. iv. § 3) and Mrs. Finn (PEFQy. Stat.
1SJ3, pp. 53-64). The distance from Jerusalem
is about 60 stadia ; but the place is not likely
to have been selected aa the site of a Roman
colony; and it may be inferred from Josephus
(Attuj riii. 7, § 3) that the name Etam had not
bwa superseded by Emmaus.
8. Kh. el-Khamasa, 72 stadia in a direct line,
EMMAUS
933
and 86 by road, from Jerusalem, and close to one
of the Roman roads leading to the plain near
Beit Jibrin. The argnments in its favour, of
which the principal is the name, are given by
Conder (PEF. Mem. iii. 36) and Geikie (Uoly
Land and the Bible, ii. 142, 143). The distance
from Jerusalem, however, is far too great, and
all tradition points to a site further north.
The indication of position is so slight that no
positive identification can be made : the choice
seems to lie between KulorUeh, or Beit Mizta,
and el-Kubeibeh. [W. ]
EMMAUS, or NICOP'OLIS ('E^uuis ;
Joseph. 'E/ifiaoi/s and 'Apftaois), a town on the
Maritime plain, at the foot of the mountains of
Judaea, 22 Roman miles from Jerusalem, and 10
from Lydda (/fin. Hieros.; Reland, pp. 306,427-
430; Jerome, Com. ad Dan. ch. xii.). The name
does not occur in the O. T. ; but the town rose
to importance during the later history of the
Jews, and was a place of note in the wars of the
Hasmoneans. In 164 B.C. Lysias, Governor-
general of Syria, sent an army under Ptolemy,
Nicanor, and Gorgias to invade Judaea. The
army encamped on the plain near Emmaus
(1 Mace. iii. 40); and in this position was
attacked by Judas Maccabaeus, who had moved
down from Jerusalem and pitched his camp on the
S. side of Emmaus (r. 57). The battle resulted in
the complete defeat of the Syrians (1 Mace. iv.
3-25). Emmaus was fortified, with other towns,
by Bacchides, the general of Antiochus Epiphanes
(1 Mace. ix. 50; Joseph. Ant. xiii. 1, § 3).
Under the Romans it was the chief town of a
toparchy (Joseph. B. J. iii. 3, § 5 ; Plin. //. N. v.
14). It was reduced by Cassius to a state of
slavery {Ant. xiv. 1 1, § 2 ; B. J. i. 1 1, § >) ; and
was afterwards (4 a.d.) burned by order of
Varus (B. J. ii. 5, § 1), as a punishment for an
attack made on a company of soldiers carrying
corn and weapons to the Roman army (4, § 3).
When the Jews divided the country into military
districts, after the defeat of Cestius, Emmaus
formed part of the district of John the Essene
(B. J. ii. 20, § 4). Vespasian, during the
Jewish war, established a fortified camp at
Emmaus, and occupied the passes leading thence
to Jerusalem (B. }. iv. 8, § 1); and, prior to the
siege >{ Jerusalem, the 5th Legion marched up
from Emmaus (B. J. v. 1, § 6), and joined Titus
at Gabaoth-Saul (2, § 3).
In 131 A.D. Emmaus was destroyed by an
earthquake ; and in the 3rd century, about 221
A.D., it was rebuilt, under the title Nicopolis,
iu consequence of the representations of a native
of the place, Sextus Julius Africanus, the
Christian historian, who went as an envoy to
the Emperor Heliogabalus (Chron. Pas. ad A.C.
223 ; Jerome, De Vir. ill. lxiii.). According
to Sozomen (v. 20) and Nicephorus (x. 21),
Emmaus was called Nicopolis after the capture
of Jerusalem, and to commemorate that event.
To Eusebius and Jerome, Emmaus-Nicopolis was
the Emmaus of Luke xxiv. 13 (Onom., and Jerome,
Per. S. Paulae, v.), and such was the general
belief to the 14th century. Sozomen (v. 20)
mentions a spring endowed with miraculous
powers which it owed to the touch of Christ.
This spring was closed by order of the Emperor
Julian to suppress the Christian belief attached
to it (Theophanes, Chron. 41) ; but it appears to
Digitized by
Google
934
EMMER
hare been open again in the 8th centurv (Ttm.
S. Willibaldi, xiii.); and at a later period (Will,
of Tyre, vii. 24).
It is now 'Arnicas, a snail village, near the
foot of the mountains, to the left of the road
from Jaffa to Jerusalem. There are the ruins
of a Byzantine church, rock-hewn tombs, u
spring, 'ili« Nini, and a well, iSlr et-Tddun,
" Well of the Plague," which probably derives
its name from the plague of Emmaus which
desolated the Moslem army after the conquest
of Syria. The church was excavated by the
French in 1881, and an account published in
Les Missions Catholiqucs, 3rd March, 1882. For
a description of the ruins, see PEF. Mem.
iii. 14, 63 ; Sepp, Das hail. Land, i. 42 ; Guerin,
Judge, i. 29 sq. ; and Clermont-Ganneau in
PEFQy. Stat. 1874, pp. 149, 160, 162 ; 1882,
pp. 24-37.
The later Jewish legends are given by Neu-
bauer (Giog. du Talmud, pp. 101, 102). Bishops
of Emmaus attended the Council of Nicaea, the
second Council of Constantinople, and the
meeting at Jerusalem in 536 a.d.
The name Emmaus was also borne by a village
of Galilee close to Tiberias ; probably the ancient
Hahmatii, i.e. hot springs. The springs are
mentioned by Josephus, Ant. xviii. 2, § 3 ;
B. J. iv. 1, § 3. [W.]
EM'MER (B. 'E^p, A. 'E«iV ; Semmeri),
1 Esd. ix. 21. [Imher.]
EMTHOR ('Ewufys Westcott and • Hort ;
Emmor), the father of Sychem (Acts vii. 16).
[Hamor.]
ENA'JIM, more correctly as in R. V. Ekaim
(O^yS), is the marginal reading of the A. V. for
" an open place " (Gen. xxxviii. 14), and "openl v "
(». 21). The LXX. have Au-dV. The Vulgate
renders it by in birio. The Talmudists con-
sidered it to be the name of a place (Tal. Bab.
Sotah, 10 a), and identical with Enam in the
neighbourhood of Adullam. In Pesik. rah. 23
mention is made of a Kefar F.naim. Philo and
Eusebius also regard it as a place, and modem
commentators consider it the same as Enam
(see Delitzsch and Dillmann* in loco). [W.]
E'NAM (with the article, DJ'ffn = the
double spring, Ges. Thes. p. 1019 a; B. Matavcf,
A. 'Hvattp ; Enaim), one of the cities of Judah
in the Shefelah or lowland (Josh. xv. 34). From
its mention with towns (Jarmuth and Eshtuol,
for instance) which are known to have been
near Timnath, this is very probably the place
in the " gate " of which Tamnr sat before her
interview with her father-in-law (Gen. xxxviii.
14). In the A. V. the words Pathach enayim
{0)VV nnB) are not taken as a proper name,
but are rendered "an open place" (see Enajim);
but " the gate of Enaim " (or the double spring)
is the translation adopted by the LXX. (rats
iri\ais AiVdV), R. V., and now generally accepted.
In Josh. xv. 34, for "Tappuah and Enam," the
Peshitto has " Pathuch-Elam," which supports
the identification suggested above. Mtiller (in
Riehm, HWB. s. n.) suggests Beit 'Anan, but
this place is far to the N. and not on the road
from Adullam to Timnath. Schwarz (p. 73)
identifies it with the village Beth Ant, perhaps
ENCAMPMENT
Beit 'Anan ; Conder (Hdbk. to Bible, p. 410) more
probably with Kh, Wddy 'Alin near 'Am Shems,
Bethshemesh. [Aw.] [G.] [W.]
E'NAN (l)'ff; AimtV; Enan). Ahira ben-
Enan was " prince " of the tribe of Naphtali at
the time of the numbering of Israel in the
wilderness of Sinai (Num. i. 15, ii. 29, vii. 78,
83, x. 27). [G.]
ENA'SIBUS (B.'ExdVfifloj; Eliasib), 1 Esd.
ix. 34. [ELIASHIB.]
ENCAMPMENT (DinD, machSneh, in all
places except 2 K. vi. 8, where flijnFI, tach¬h,
is used). The word primarily denoted the
resting-place of an army or company of travel-
lers at night* (Ex. xvi. 13; Gen. xxiii. 21), and
was hence applied to the army or caravan when
on its march (Ex. xiv. 19; Josh. x. 5, xi. 4;
Gen. xxxii. 7, 8). Among nomadic tribes war
never attained to the dignity of a science, and
their encampments were consequently devoid of
all the appliances of more systematic warfare.
The description of the camp of the Israelites,
on their march from Egypt (Num. ii., iii.),
supplies the greatest amount of information on
the subject: whatever else may be gleaned is
from scattered hints. The Tabernacle, corre-
sponding to the chieftain's tent of an ordinary
encampment, was placed in the centre ; and
around and facing it (Num. ii. 1),* arranged in
four grand divisions, corresponding to the four
points of the compass, lay the host of Israel,
according to their standards (Num. i. 52, ii. 2).
On the east the post of honour was assigned to
the tribe of Judah, and round its standard rallied
the tribes of Issachar and Zebulun, descendants
of the sons of Leah. On the south lay Reuben
and Simeon, the representatives of Leah, and
the children of Gad, the son of her handmaid.
Rachel's descendants were encamped on the
western side of the Tabernacle, the chief place
being assigned to the tribe of Ephraim. To this
position of Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin,
allusions are made in Judg. v. 14 and Ps. lxxx.
2. On the north were the tribes of Dan and
Naphtali, the children of Bilhah, and the tribe
of Asher, Gad's younger brother. All these
were encamped around their standards, each
according to the ensign of the house of his
fathers. In the centre round the Tabernacle,
and with no standard but the cloudy or riery
pillar which rested over it, were the tents of the
priests and Levites. The former, with Moses
and Aaron at their head, were encamped on the
eastern side. On the south were the Kohathites,
who had charge of the Ark, the table of shew-
bread, the altars and vessels of the sanctuary.
The Gershonites were on the west, and when on
the march carried the Tabernacle and its lighter
furniture; while the Meraritcs, who were en-
camped on the north, had charge of its heavier
appurtenances. The order of encampment was
preserved on the march (Num. ii. 17), the signal
for which was given by a blast of the two silver
trumpets (Num. x. 5). The details of this
* Whence Dl»i1 ni3*l (cMndth AoyyOm), "the
camping-time of day," i.e.' the evening, Judg. xtx. 9.
b The form of the encampment was probably circular,
and not square, as it Is generally represented.
Digitized by
Google
ENCAMPMENT
account supply Prof. Blunt with some striking
illustrations of the undesigned coincidences of
the Books of Moses ( Undea. Coincid. pp. 75-86).
In this description of the order of the encamp-
ment no mention is made of sentinels, who, it is
reasonable to suppose, were placed at the gates
(ti. xxxii. 26, 27) in the four quarters of the
tamp. This was evidently the case in the catnn
«f the Levites (cp. 1 Ch. ix. 18, 24; '2 Ch.
mi. 2).
The sanitary regulations of the camp of the
Israelites were* enacted for the twofold purpose
if preserving the health of the vast multitude
sod the purity of the camp as the dwelling-place
of God (Num. v. 3; Deut. xxiii. 14). With this
object the dead were buried without the camp
(her. i. 4, 5): lepers were excluded till their
leprosy departed from them (Lev. xiii. 46, xiv.
3; Num. xii. 14, 15), as were all who were
visited with loathsome diseases (Lev. xiv. 3).
All who were defiled by contact with the dead,
whether these were slain in battle or not, were
kept without the camp for seven days (Num. xxxi.
19). Captives taken in war were compelled to
remain for a while outside (Num. xxxi. 19 ;
Josh. vi. 23). The ashes from the sacrifices
were poured out without the camp at an ap-
pointed place, whither all uncleanness was re-
moved (Deut. xxiii. 10, 12), and where the
entrails, skins, horns, &c, and all that was not
offered in sacrifice, were bnrnt (Lev. iv. 11, 12;
vi. 11; viii. 17).
The execution of criminals took place without
the camp (Lev. xxiv. 14; Num. xv. 35, 36;
Josh. vii. 24% as did the burning of the young
bnllock for the sin-offering (Lev. iv. 12). These
circumstances combined explain Heb. xiii. 12,
and John iix. 17, 20.
The encampment of the Israelites in the desert
left its traces in their subsequent history. The
Temple, so late as the time of Hezekiah, was
still "the camp of Jehovah" (2 Ch. xxxi. 2;
ep. Ps. lxxviii. 23); and the multitudes who
nocked to David were " a great camp, like the
camp of God" (1 Ch. xii. 22; R. V. "host"
[twice]).
High ground appears to have been uniformly
selected for the position of a camp, whether it
were on a hill or mountain side, or in an in-
accessible pass (Judg. vii. 18). So, in Judg. x.
17. the Ammonites encamped in Gilead, while
Israel pitched in Mizpeh. The very names are
significant. The camps of Saul and* the Philis-
tines were alternately in Gibeah, the " height " of
Benjamin, and the pass of Michmash (1 Sam. xiii.
2, 3, 16, 23). When Goliath defied the host of
Israel, the contending armies were encamped
on hills on either side of the valley of Elah
Sam. xvii. 3) ; and in the fatal battle of Gilboa
■Saul's position on the mountain was stormed
»r the Philistines who had pitched in Shunem
(1 Sam. xxriii. 4), on the other side of the valley
of Jezreel. The carelessness of the Midianites
ia encamping in the plain exposed them to the
light surprise by Gideon, and resulted in their
consequent discomfiture (Judg. vi. 33 ; vii. 8, 12).
Another important consideration in fixing
opon a position for a camp was the propinquity
of water : hence it is found that in most instances
camps were pitched near a spring or well
(Jndg. vii. 3; 1 Mace ix. 33). The Israelites
at Mount Gilboa pitched by the fountain in
ENCAMPMENT
935
Jezreel (1 Sam. xxix. 1), while the Philistines
encamped at Aphek, the name of which indicates
the existence of ft stream of water in the
neighbourhood, which rendered it a favourite
place of encampment (1 Sam. iv. 1 ; 1 K. xx. 26 ;
2 K. xiii. 17). In his pursuit of the Amalekites,
David halted his men by the brook Besor, and
there left a detachment with the camp furniture
(1 Sam. xxx. 9). One of Joshua's decisive en-
gagements with the nations of Canaan was
fought at the waters of Moroni, where he sur-
prised the confederate camp (Josh. xi. 5, 7 ; cp.
Judg. v. 19, 21). Gideon, before attacking the
Midianites, encamped beside the well of Harod
(Judg. vii. 1), and it was to draw water from
the well at Bethlehem that David's three
mighty men cnt their way through the host of
the Philistines (2 Sam. xxiii. 16). ,
The camp was surrounded by the iwiVD, ma'-
gdldh (1 Sam. xvii. 20), or 7iVO, ma' gal (1 Sam.
xxvi. 5, 7), which some, and Thenius among
them, explain as an earthwork thrown up round
the encampment, others as the barrier formed
by the baggage-waggons. The etymology of
the word points merely to the circular shape of
the enclosure formed by the tents of the soldiers
pitched around their chief, whose spear marked
his resting-place (1 Sam. xxvi. 5, 7), and it
might with propriety be used in either of the
above senses, according as the camp was fixed or
temporary. We know that, in the case of a
siege, the attacking army, if possible, surrounded
the place attacked (I Mace. xiii. 43), and drew
about it a line of circumvallation (p* 1 !, dayek,
2 K. xxv. 1), which was marked by a breastwork
of earth (fTJDP, m'siltdh, Is. lxii. 10; iT^b,
soTlah, Ezek.' xxi. 27 [22]; cp. Job xix. 12), for
the double purpose of preventing the escape of
the besieged and of protecting the besiegers from
their sallies.* But there was not so much need
of a formal entrenchment, as but few instances
occur in which engagements were fought in the
camps themselves, and these only when the
attack was made at night. Gideon's expedition
against the Midianites took place in the early
morning (Judg. vii. 19), the time selected by Saul
for his attack upon Nahash (1 Sam. xi. 11), and
by David for surprising the Amalekites (1 Sam.
xxx. 17 ; cp. Judg. ix. 33). To guard against
these night attacks, sentinels (D'HOlf, ihim'riin)
were posted (Judg. rii. 20; 1 Mace. xii. 27)
round the onmp, and the neglect of this pre-
caution by Zebah anil Zalmunna probably led
to their capture by Gideon and the ultimate
defeat of their army (Judg. vii. 19).
The valley which separated the hostile camps
was generally selected as the fighting ground
(iTlb', sadeh, " the battle-field," 1 Sam. iv. 2,
xiv. 15 : 2 Sam. xviii. 6), upon which the contest
was decided, and hence the valleys of Palestine
have plaved so conspicuous a part in its historv
(Josh. viii. 13 : Judg. vi. 33 ; 2 Sam. v. 22, viii.
13, tee.). When the fightinj men went forth to
the place of marshalling (fl3"llfp, ma'tfrdcoVi,
« The Chsidee renders rV?3IJO O Sam. xvll. 20) and
t t : - t
p*Tf (2 K. xxv. 1) by the name word, D1p")3» or
XtJ'lpnS, the Greek xapaxupo.
Digitized by
Google
936
ENCHANTMENTS
1 Sam. xvii. 20), a detachment was left to
protect thecamp and baggage (1 Sam. xvii. 22,
xxx. 24). The beasts of burden were probably
tethered to the tent pegs (2 K. vii. 10 ; Zech
xiv. 15).
The njnO, macMneh, or movable encamp-
ment, is distinguished i'rom the 3-VD, matstmb,
or 3'V3, "'*"'* (2 Sam. xxiii. 14 ; 1 Ch. xi. 16),
which appear to have been standing camps, like
those which Jehoshaphat established throughout
Judah (2 Ch. xvii. 2), or advanced posts Tn an
enemy's country (1 Sam. xiii. 17; 2 Sam. viii.
b"), from which skirmishing parties made their
predatory excursions and ravaged the crops. It
was in resisting one of these expeditions that
Shammah won himself a name among David's
heroes (2 Sam. xxiii. 12). Mac/uineh is still
further distinguished from "IV39, mibtmr, " a
fortress " or " walled town " (Num. xiii. 19).
Camjn left behind them a memorial in the
name of the place where they were situated, as
among ourselves (cp. Cheater, Grantchester, Sec).
Mahaneh-Dan (Judg. xiii. 25) was so called from
the encampment of the Danites mentioned in
Judg. xviii. 12. [Mahanaim.] The more
important camps at Gilgal (Josh. v. 10, ix. 6)
and Shiloh (Josh, xviii. 9; Judg. xxi. 12, 19)
left no such impress ; the military traditions of
these places were eclipsed by the greater splen-
dour of the religious associations which sur-
rounded them. [W. A. W.]
ENCHANTMENTS. 1. D'0^> or D'pr£,
Ex. vii. 11, 22, viii. 7; ^ap/uucflai, LXx!
(Grotius compares the word with the Greek
Airof) ; secret arts, from 0-17, to cover ; though
others incorrectly connect it with D£l?, a flame
or the glittering blade of a sword, as though it
implied a sort of dazzling cheironomy which
deceives spectators. Several Versions render the
word by " whisperings," inntisurrationes ; but it
seems to be a more general word, and hence is
used of the various means (some of them no
doubt of a quasi-scientific character) by which
the Egyptian Chartummim (R. V. " magicians ")
imposed on the credulity of Pharaoh.
2. D'5^3 ; tpaptuuettat, ipdpiiaxa, LXX (2 K.
ix. 22; Mic. vi. 12; Nah. iii. 4); veneficia, male-
Jicia, Vulg. ; " maleficae artes," " praestigiae,"
*' muttered spells." Hence it is sometimes ren-
dered by ivaoiSat, as in Is. xlvii. 9, 12. The belief
in the power of certain formulae was universal
in the ancient world. Thus there were carmina
to evoke the tutelary gods out of a city (Macrob.
Saturn, iii. 9), others to devote hostile armies
(Id.), others to raise the dead (Maimon. de Idol.
xi. 15 ; Senec. Ocdip. 547), or bind the gods
(SC0710I Btuv) and men 'Aesch. Far. 331), and
even influence the heavenly bodies (Ov. Met. vii.
207 sq., xii. 263 ; " Tc quoque Luna traho,"
Virg. Eel. viii., Aen. iv. 489 ; Hor. Epod. v. 45).
They were a recognised part of ancient medicine,
even among the Jews, who regarded certain
sentences of the Law as efficacious for healing.
The Greeks used thorn as one of the five chief
resources of pharmacy (Pind. Pyth. iii. 8, 9 ;
Soph. Aj. 562), especially in obstetrics (Plat.
Theact. p. 145) and mental diseases (Galen, de
Sanitat. tuenda, i. 8). Homer mentions them as
ENCHANTMENTS
used to check the flow of blood (Od. xix. 456),
and Cato even gives a charm to cure a disjointed
limb (de He Sunt. 160; cp. Plin. H. S. xxviii. 2).
The belief in charms is still all but universal in
uncivilised nations : see Lane's Mt,d. Egypt, i. 300,
306, &c, ii. 177, Sic. ; Beeckman's Voyage to
Borneo, ch. ii. ; Meroller's Congo (in Pinkertons
Voyages, xvi. pp. 221, 273); Hue's China, i.
223, ii. 326 ; Taylor's New Zealand, and Living-
stone's Africa, passim, &c; and hundreds of
such remedies still exist, and are considered
efficacious among the uneducated.
3. D^!^>, Eccles. x. 11 ; ^,$vp,^,, LXX.,
from Ct6. This word is especially used of the
charming of serpents, Jer. viii. 17 (cp. Ps. lviii.
5; Lcclus. xii. 13, Eccles. x. 11, Luc. ix. 891 a
parallel to "cantando rumpitur anguis," an J
" Vipereas rumpo verbis et carmine fauces," Ov.
Met. 1. c). Maimonides (de Idol. xi. 2) ex-
pressly defines an enchanter as one "who use*
strange and meaningless words, by which he im-
poses on the folly of the credulous. They sav,
lor instance, that if one utter the words before
a serpent or scorpion it will do no harm "
(Carpzov, Annot. m Godainum, iv. 11). An.
account of the Marsi who excelled in this art is
given by Augustin (ad (Sen. ix. 28), and of t he-
Isylli by Arnobius (ad Xat. ii. 32); and tliev
are alluded to by a host of other authorities
({ lm. vii. 2, xxviii. 6 ; Aeliau, H. A. i. 57 ;
Virg. Aen. vii. 740; Sil. Ital. viii. 495. Th-v
were called "O^ioJi^ktoi). The secret is Mii'i
understood in the East (Lane, ii. 106).
4. The word D'BTU is used of the enchant-
ments sought by Balaam, Num. xxiv. 1. It pro-
perly alludes to ophiomancy, but in this place has.
a general meaning of endeavouring to gain omens
(«« <ruvhnr,aai to7s oiuvoTs, LXX.).
5. "130 is used for magic, Is. xlvii. 9, 12. It
comes from 1311, to6ind(cp. Karatiu, f8oo-«aiV»,
banncn), and means generally the process of ac-
quiring power over some distant object or
person ; but this word seems also to have beers
sometimes used specifically of serpent charmers,
for Kashi on Deut. xviii. 11 defines the lain
"I3n to be one " who congregates serpents and
scorpions into one place."
Any resort to these methods of imposture was
strictly forbidden in Scripture (Lev. xix. lit! -
Is. xlvii. 9, be), but to eradicate the Undent v
is almost impossible (2 K. xvii. 17 • 2 < 'h
xxiii. 6), and we find it still flourishing at the
Christian era (Acts xiii. 6, 8, viii. 9, 11, yonrtia -
Gal. v. 20; Rev. ix. 21). All kinds of magic ]lr< I
frequently alluded to in the Talmudic writings,
(see Berachoth, f. 53. 1, f. 62. 1 ; Pcsachim. f. 1 10
1, 2 ; Soteh, f. 48. 1 ; Baba Bathra, f. 58. 1, and
multitudes of other passages collected by SI y
Hershon in his Talmudic Miscellany, pp. 2:*JO-I
The chief sacramenta daemoniaca were sup-
posed to be a rod, a magic circle, dragon's ee'cT
certain herbs, or " insane roots," like the hen *
bane, &c. The fancy of poets both ancient and
modern has been exerted in giving lists of
them (Ovid and Hor. II. cc. ; Shakspeare's Mac
beth, Act iv. 1 ; Southey's Cmse of Kehama
Cant. IV. ,&c). [WlTCHCRA!TS ; Amulkpr I
Divination.] £ F w j,?»
Digitized by
Google
EXDOE
EN-DOB CfTfS = spring of Dor; Endor),
i place which with it* " daughter-towns "
(J1133) was in the territory of lssachar, and
yet possessed by Manasseh (Josh. xvii. 11 ;
LXX. oid.). This was the case with five other
plscts which lay ]>artly in Asher, partly in
lssachar, and seem to hare formed a kind of
district of their own called " the three, or the
triple, Sepheth."
Endor was long held in memory by the Jewish
people as connected with the great victory over
Sisera and Jabin. Taanach, Megiddo, and the
u<rrent Kishon all witnessed the discomfiture of
the huge host, but it was emphatically to Endor
that the tradition of the death of the two chiefs
attached itself (Ps. IxxxiiL 9, 10), Possibly it
was some recollection of this, some fame of
sanctity or good omen in Endor, which drew the
unhappy Saul thither on the eve of his last
<-ngagement with the Philistines (1 Sam. xxviii.
7 ; B. 'AcAioip, A. NjjrfWp). Endor is not again
mentioned in the Scriptures; but it was known
to Eusebius, who describes it as u large village
* miles S. of Tabor. Here to the north of Jebel
biky (the " Little Hennon " of travellers), and
at the foot of the volcanic Tell el-'Ajjul, the
name still lingers, attached to a considerable but
dow deserted village. The rock of the mountain,
on the slope of which Endir stands, is hollowed
into caves, one of which may well have been
the scene of the incantation of the witch (Van
de VeUe, ii. 383 ; Rob. ii. 360 ; Stanley, p. 345).
There are a few rock-hewn tombs, and from
• Be of the caverns issues a small spring. From
the slopes of Gilboa to Endor is 7 or 8 miles,
partly over difficult ground. [G.] [W.]
EXEAS. [Aeseas.]
EN-EGLATM (DJ^TPff = spring of two
infers ; *EivyaAAc(/t ; Engallim), a place named
cnly by Ezekiel (xlvii. 10), apparently as on the
Dead Sea; but whether near to or far from
EngedL on the west or east side of the Sea, it is
impossible to ascertain from the text. In his
rorament on the passage, Jerome locates it at
the embouchure of the Jordan ; but this is not
supported by other evidence. By some (e.g.
•stseaitut, Tfies. p. 1019) it is thought to be
•ientkaU with Eglai*. but the two words are
Merest, En-eglaim containing the Am, which
is rarely changed for any other aspirate. The
LXX. B. by reading BaifferyAo&p (Josh. xv. 6)
seems to identify Betii-HOGLAH with En-eglaim.
Tristram (Bib. Places, p. 93) identifies it with
Beth-hoglah, 'Ain Hajiah ; Riehm (H WB.) with
-li* Peskkhah, both near the N. end of the Dead
Sea. There is an 'Ain 'Ajjul, " calf's spring,"
sear Lake fliieh, in the northern portion of the
Jordan vallev, but this would appear to be too
fir from the'Dead Sea. * [G.] [W.]
EXEMES'SAB CEr«jt«re-ct>, 'Eyt/xeaaapis)
is the name by which the well-known king
SWmaneser (IV.) of Assyria is designated in
t»» book of Tobit (i. 2, 15, 4c). This book is
set of any historical authority, being simply a
work of imagination composed probably by an
Alexandrian Jew between the years 300 and
ISO a a The author of Tobit represents Ene-
•euar as the king who carried the children of
Unel into captivity (i. 2, 10) to Nineveh (where
ENGANNIM
937
Tobit became purveyor to Enemessar), having
followed closely the narrative of the Book of
Kings (2 K. xvii. 3-6, xviii. 9-11), where it is
related that Hoshea rebelled against Shalmaneser,
who besieged Samaria and " carried Israel away
unto Assyria." [Assyria ; Shalmaneser.]
He likewise mentions Sennacherib not only as
the successor, but also as the son of Enemessar
(Tobit i. 15), and in this he has evidently fol-
lowed his own interpretation of the Book of
Kings. As we know from the Assyrian inscrip-
tions, Sennacherib was the son of Sargon, the
first king of a new Assyrian dynasty, and pro-
bably, therefore, wholly unrelated to Shal-
maneser IV., so that Sennacherib cannot by any
means be regarded as being descended from him.
The form Enemessar for Shalmaneser is a cor-
ruption, being apparently put for Senemessar
(sh changed to s and then to the light breathing,
as in Aikeanos ['Apstt'avof] for Sargon), / being
dropped, and the m and n transposed. The
Hebrew Shalmaneser is itself a corruption or
shortening of the Assyrian Sulman-atarid or
Salmauu-asarid. [T. G. P.]
ENE'NIUS (B. 'Ek»jmo! ; Emmanius), one
of the leaders who returned with Zorobabel from
the Captivity (1 Esd. v. 8). There is no name
corresponding to it in the lists of Ezra and
Nehemiah. [K.]
EN'GADDI (B. iy cuVoAoTs, «'•• *Es-yo«»o7j ;
in Cades), Ecclus. xxiv. 14. [t.s'OEDl.]
EN-GAN'NIM (O^J-J'ff = spring of gar-
dens). 1. A city in the low country of Judah,
named between Zanoah and Tappuah (Josh. xr.
34). The LXX. in this place is no different from
the Hebrew that the name is not recognisable.
Vulg. Aen-Qannim. It is now probably Umm
Jina, 3 miles N.W. of Zunu'a, Zanoah (PEE.
Mem. iii. 42).
2. A city on the border of lssachar (Josh. xix.
21 ; B. 'liiiy xal ToiitutV, A. 'Hvyayytfi ; En-
Gannim); allotted with its "suburbs" to the
Gershonite Levites (xxi. 29 ; niry»> ypafiiUruy ;
En-Oannim). These notices contain no indication
of the position of En-gannim with reference to
any known place, but there is great probability
in the conjecture of Robinson (ii. 315) that it is
identical with the Ginaia of Joseph us (Ant. xx.
6, § 1), which again, there can be little doubt,
survives in the modern Jenin, the first village
encountered on the ascent from the great plain
of Esdraelon into the hills of the central country.
Jenin is still surrounded by the " orchards " or
" gardens " which interpret its ancient name,
and the " spring " is to this day the characteristic
object in the place (Rob. ii. 315 ; Stanley, p. 349,
note ; Van de Velde, p. 359 ; PEF. Mem. ii. 44 ;
Guerin, Samarie, i. 327). The position of Jenin
is also in striking agreement with the require-
ments of Beth-hag-Gan (A. V. "the garden-
house ; " BcuOyir), in the direction of which
Ahaziah fled from Jehu (2 K. ix. 27). The
rough road of the ascent was probably too much
for his chariot, and keeping the more level
ground he made for Megiddo, where he died
(see Stanley, p. 349).
In the lists of Levitical cities in 1 Ch. vi.
Anem is substituted for En-gannim. Possibly it
is merely a contraction. [G.] [W.}
Digitized by
Google
938
ENGEDI
EN'GEDI C71. r» = »P r »'V »f tt* *«*•
The Arabic ^jj^. ,,jifi preserves the same
meaning ; 'RyyaXtil and 'ETyoJSaf), the present
'Ain Jidy on the western shore of the Dead Sea.
The old name appears to have been TOFrpfXn.
Hazazon Tamar (see Gen. xiv. 7 ; 2 Ch. xx. 2)
In the latter passage (r. 16) the " ascent of Ziz "
(PXll) is also mentioned as near Engedi (perhaps
we should read f'Vn). The old name is usually
rendered "palm prunings," and Engedi was once
famous for its palms, but the root also gives the
word pyn, « gravel," and north of Engedi there
is stili an important valley called llasdsa, ig&\,
LoLfta-, " the valley of gravel." When" first
mentioned, this place was held by the Amorites.
It appears under its name Engedi as a town of
Judah " in the wilderness " (Josh. xv. 62). Euse-
bius (Onom. s. v. Gadda) supposes Hazar Gaddah
(Josh. xv. 27) to be perhaps the same, but this
is clearly inadmissible. The Samaritan Version
(Gen. xiv. 71) renders Hazazon Tamar H3 Jl^B,
"the ravine of Cadi," probably for HJ {i.e.
Engedi). In Ezekiel (xlvii. 10) it is mentioned
apparently as near the shores of the Dead Sea.
In the Song of Solomon (i. 14) the vineyards
of Engedi are mentioned, and in Ecclesiasticus
(xxiv. 14) the palms of Engedi. Pliny, speaking
of the Essene hermits, says that they lived at
Engadda, and notices groves of palms (H. N. v.
17). In the Talmud (Tal. Bab. Sabb. 26 a) the
balm which was gathered between Engedi and
Iiamatha (perhaps llameh, in the Ghor es Seis-
aban, east of the Jordan, opposite Jericho) is
noticed. The name is also found in Ptolemy
(quoted by Reland, Pal. p. 462), and in Josephus
(Antiq. ix. 1, § 2), but these authors add little to
our information as to the site. Josephus places
it 300 stadia (37 J Roman miles) from Jerusalem,
the true distance being about 25 English miles,
In later ages the place seems to hare been little
known. Jerome gives no clear account of its
position, though he represents St. Paula looking
from Caphar Barucha (now Bent N'aim) towards
the balm gardens and vines of Engcdi(fipit. Paulac
xii.). From the site in question, on a hill over-
looking the desert of Judah, south of Hebron,
the vicinity of Engedi can be seen.
The desert of Engedi was the hiding-place of
David (1 Sam. xxiv. 1-4), and the " rocks of the
wild goats " are the cliffs round this site where
the ibex is still found. The Crusading chronicles do
not mention the place, but according to Ludolph
of Suchen {Key Colonies Franques, p. 250) the
best vineyards in Palestine were here found in the
12th century, and the Templars took thence
slips which they planted in Cyprus at Baffb.
These vineyards seem to have existed in the 15th
century, and, according to Hasselquist, even as
late as 1739, A.D. There are neither palms nor
vines at Engedi now, but the local Arabs believe
that the Christians once had vineyards in this
desert, which is no doubt a tradition of
Crusading cultivation. The place is mentioned
by Mejr ed Din in 1495 A.D., and by Seetzen in
1806. It seems to have been first visitel and
recovered by Robinson in 1838, and two years
later by Lynch, since which time several travellers
have visited the spot.
ENGINE
The site of Engedi presents some of the finest
wild scenery west of the Dead Sea. [See the
drawing under Sea, the Salt.] The great
valley (Wady el-Ghdr) here forms a deep
gorge with precipitous sides, called Wady el-
'Areijeh ("valley of ascent "). The cliff* north
of the spring present a sheer wall of rock nearly
2,000 feet high, above which is a barren plateau
660 feet above the Mediterranean ; and front it,
a little further north, rises a solitary peak
(Ras esh Shukf, 1227 feet above same level). A
very narrow winding descent, partly cut in the
face of the cliff, leads down 1340' feet to the
bank or undercliff, where the spring issues from
under a great boulder. The water is sweet, and
has been found at various times to be from 81° to
95° F., or less than the air temperature. A
jungle of canes marks the line of the brook or
cascade which flows down a deep descent to the
Dead Sea — 600 feet beneath. The 'Oshir tree
(Calotropis procera) or apple of Sodom grows
beside the water, and the Solanum or egg plant.
The Sidr or Zizyphus, and the tamarisks (T.
tenuifolius), with alkali plants (Hubeihih) and
other desert shrubs, are also found, but the sur-
rounding cliffs and slopes are very barren. There
is a tine view of the Dead Sea and of the western
cliffs, and on the east side of the lake the castle
of Kerak is well seen. The hopping thrashes,
black grackle, bulbul, and other birds of the
Jordan valley here haunt the spring. There are
traces of ruined terraces just below it, perhaps
remains of the former vineyards, and a curious
sort of platform of large rudely-shaped stones,
measuring 15 ft. square and 3 ft high. To the
south is a mined tower (A'mst el-'Areijek),
apparently not very ancient, but perhaps of
Crusading date : it was supplied by an aqueduct
from the spring, and resembles the ruined mediae-
val sugar mills near Jericho. In the gorge are
ancient rock-cut tombs or chambers, perhaps the
hermitages of the Essenes, or of later Christian
Eremites. There is another spring in this gorge.
The salt brought from Jebel (Jsdum is carried
up by the ascent, and the path may be very-
ancient, as it would appear that by it the
Idumaeansand their allies reached the plateau of
the Judaean desert when advancing to attack
Jehoshaphat (2 Ch. xx.). [C. R. C]
ENGINE, a term exclusively applied to
military affairs in the Bible. 'The Hebrew
liatSTI (2 Ch. xx vi. 15) is its counterpart in
etymological meaning, each referring to the
injenuity (engine, from ingenium) displayed in
the contrivance. The engines to which the
term is applied in 2 Ch. were designed to
propel various missiles from the walls of a
besieged town : one, like the balista, was for
stones, consisting probably of a strong spring
and a tube to give the right direction to the
stone; another, like the cataptilta, for arrows,
an enormous stationary bow. The invention of
these is assigned to Uzziah's time — a statement
which is supported both by the absence of such
contrivances in the representations of Egyptian
and Assyrian warfare, and by the traditional
belief that the balista was invented in Syria
(Pliny, vii. 56). Luther gives SrttstaeAren, i.e.
"parapets," as the meaning of the term. Another
war-engine, with which the Hebrews were ac-
quainted, was the battering-ram, described in
Digitized by
Google
ENGRAVER
tuk. tin. 9 as i?J|p \1D, lit. a beating of that
thxk a in front, hence a ram for striking walls ;
and still more precisely in Ezek. iv. 2, zxi. 22, as
12, a ram. The use of this instrument was
till known both to the Egyptians (Wilkinson,
i. 3*t7 [1878]) and the Assyrians. The references
iu fcjekiel are to that used by the latter people,
ansUtiog of a high and stoutly built framework
oil four wheels, covered in at the sides in order
to protect the men moving it, and armed with
<m or two pointed weapons. Their appearance
EN-MISHPAT
939
w
(TtomBotu, pL
vn ray different from that of the Roman aries
with which the Jews afterwards became ac-
<puiated (Joseph. B. J. iii. 7, § 19). No notice
is taken of the testudo or the vinea (cp. Ezek. xxvi.
S, Vnlg.); bat it is not improbable that the
Hebrews were acquainted with them (cp.
Wilkinson, L 387 [1878]). The A. V. marginal
Rtdering engines of that (Jer. vi. 6, xixii. 24 ;
Ezek. xrri. 8) is incorrect. [W. L. B.]
EXGEAVEB. The term Bnn, so translated
ut toe A. V., applies broadly to any artificer,
»hether in wood, stone, or metal : to restrict it
to the engrater in Ex. xxxv. 35, xxxviii. 23, is
improper (R. V. marg. craftsman): a similar
Utitode must be given to the term IVI9> which
eipmtes the operation of the artificer : in Zech.
iii. S, ordinary stone-cutting is evidently in-
tended- The specific description of an engraver
**> }5K EHfl (Ex. xxriii. 11), and his chief
outness was cutting names or devices on rings
«d seals ; the only notices of engraving are in
wtneiion with the high- priest's dress — the two
cni-stoats, the twelve jewels, and the mitre-
ibte hiring inscriptions on them (Ex. xxviii
11, 21, :W). The previous notices of signets
(Gen. mviii. 18, xli. 42) imply engraving
ft* art was widely spread throughout the
nations of antiquity, particularly among the
!-?n*ians (Diod. i. 78 ; Wilkinson, ii. 337
!>'*]), the Aetbiopians (Her. vii. 69), and
'He Imiisns (Von Bohlen, Indien, ii. 122).
[W. L. B.]
EX-HADDAH (iHnTJr* = sharp or sicift
'F™) [Oesea.]; B. ASfuxp^K, A. 'HroJW; i'n-
"•^X °ne of the cities on the border of Issachar
*«»d next to En-zannim (Josh. xix. 21). Van
* »«Ue(i. 315) would identify it with 'Ain Haucl
« the western side of Carmel, and about 2 miles
<alr from the sea. But this is surely out of
tat limits f tDe tr jbo of Issachar, and rather
V£J
ISO.)
in Asher or Manasseh. Conder, with moro pro-
bability, has suggested (PEK item. ii. 45) Kefr
Addn, near Jenin, En-gaunim. See other sug-
gestions in Dillmanu' in loco. [G.] [W.j
EN-HAK-KOTJE, A. V. En-hakkorc (J»r/
Knipn = the spring of the crier ; wiry)) toS
(ViKaAovficVov ;fon> intocantis), the spring which
burst out in answer to the " cry " of Samson
after his exploit with the jawbone (Judg. xv.
19). The name involves a play on the word
in v. 18, yikera (JOp\
A. V. " he called "). The
word maktesh, which iu
the story denotes the
" hollow place " (liter-
ally, the "mortar") in
the jaw, and also that for
the "jaw" itself, fecAi,
are both names of places.
The spring was in I.EHI,
in the territory of Judah,
and apparently at a
higher level than the
rock Etah (Judg. xv
9-19); but the position
of neither of these places
has yet been identified.
Aquila and Symmachus
translate Lehi by Sicrytiv, and Josephua knew
the place by the same name (Ant. v. 8, §§ 8, 9).
Glycas (Ann. ii. 164) states that, in his time,
the spring was shown at Eleutheropolis under
the name mryh XuryoVoi. The spring is alluded
to by Jerome (Ep. S. Paulac, 18), and it is
mentioned as being at Eleutheropolis by An-
toninus Martyr (p. 32). The spring intended
by these writers is apparently the B\r Umm
JudeCa, at Beit Jibrin, Eleutheropolis. Conder
connects Kh. es-Siagh, E. of 'Ain Shems, with
ZuryoV, and En-hakkore with 'Ayun Kara, N.W.
of Zoreah (7«nr Work, i. 277). Van deVelde
(Memoir, p. 343) endeavours to identify Lechi
with Tell el-Leklyeh, 4 miles N. of Becrsheba,
and En-hakkore with the large spring between
the Tell and Khuueilfeh. But Samson's adven-
tures appear to have been confined to a narrow
circle, and there is no ground for extending
them to a distance of some 30 miles from Gaza,
which Lekhieh is, even in a straight line. A
more probable position is in the neighbourhood
of Wady Urt&s, and 'Am Atan, Etam (2), near
Bethlehem. [Etam, the Rock.] [G.J [W.]
EN-HA'ZOR ("flXPI }'l? = spring of the
village ; mryJl 'Koip ; Enhasor), one of the
" fenced cities " in the inheritance of Kaphtali,
distinct from Hazor, named between Edrei and
Iron, and apparently not far from Kedesh (Josh,
xix. 37). Rennn, Mission de Phfnicie, identifies
it with Kh. Haiireh, where there is a remark-
able tomb called JIntzur. Conder (PF.F. Mem.
i. 204, 223, 239) follows Renan. Gucrin (Gali-
lee, ii. 118) raises the objection that there is
no spring at Hazireh, to represent the En of
Enhazor, but does not suggest any other identi-
fication. [G.] [W.]
EN-MISHPAT (QBEi? flf, fountain of
judgment ; ri irnyii Tij» Kpiatas ; fons Misphat),
Gen. xiv. 7. [Kadesh.]
Digitized by
Google
940
ENOCH
E'NOCH, and once HENOCH (ipjn =
dedication : Philo, dc Post. Caini, §11, ipfcnnut-
toI 'Ev&x Xty'* aav > 'Ef«4x t Joseph. *Ak«x * :
Henoch). 1. The eldest son of Cain (Gen. it.
17), who called the city which he built after
his name (r. 18). Ewald (Gesch. i. 356, note)
fancies that there is a reference to the Phrygian
lconium, in which city a legend of one 'Avvoucot
was preserved; tut the legend is evidently
derived from Biblical and Jewish accounts of
the father of Methuselah (Steph. Byz. s. v.
'\k6viov, Suid. s. v. NoWokos), and owes much of
its existence to the similarity of name (Riehm,
II WB. s. n. "Henoch"). Other places have
been identified with the site of Enoch, but with
little probability ; e.g. Anuchta in Susiana, the
Heniochi in the Caucasus, &c. (see Dillmann,*
Delitzsch [1887] in loco).
2. The son of Jared Q\y = a descent, cp.
Jordna), and father of Methuselah (PPg'irMJ =
a man of arms; Philo, I. c. § 12, Mo9ou<rctAcp
^faxooToA^ BavAxov; Gen. v. 21 sq. ; Luke iii.
28). In the Epistle of Jude (p. 14, cp. Enoch
lx. 8) he is described as "the seventh from
Adam ; " and the number is probably noticed as
conveying the idea of divine completion and rest
(cp. August, c. Faust, xii. 14), while Enoch was
himself a type of perfected humanity, " a man
raised to heaven by pleasing God, while angels
fell to earth by transgression" (Iren. iv. 16, 2).
The other numbers connected with his history
appear too symmetrical to be without meaning.
He was born when Jared was 162 (9x6x3)
years old, and after the birth of his eldest son in
his 65th (5x6 + 7) year he lived 300 years.
From the period of 365 years assigned to his
life, Ewald (i. 356), with very little probability,
regards him as " the god of the new year," but
the number may have been not without influence
on the later traditions which assigned to Enoch
the discovery of the science of astronomy
(iarpoXoyia, Eupolemus ap. Euseb. Praep. En.
ix. 17, where he is identified with Atlas).
After the birth of Methuselah it is said (Gen. v.
22-24) that Enoch " walked with God three hun-
dred years . . . and he was not ; for God took him "
(J\ip, lutifHiKtr, LXX. [here only]; tulit,
Vulg.). The phrase "walked with God"
(O'lipNiTn^ ipnnri) is elsewhere only used of
Noah (Gen. vi. 9 ; cp. Gen. ivii. 1, Sic), and is
to be explained of a prophetic life spent in im-
mediate converse with the spiritual world
(Enoch xii. 2, " All his action was with the holy
ones, and tcith the watchers during his life ").
There is no further mention of Enoch in the
0. T., but in Ecclesiasticus (xlix. 14) he is
brought forward as one of the peculiar glories
(oiiSi fts cWWirfif ofoj 'E.) of the Jews, tor he
was taken up (brt\-ti<p(h), A. peT<rV0i)) from the
earth. " He pleased the Lord and was trans-
lated [into Paradise, Vulg.], being a pattern of
repentance " (Ecclus. xliv. 14). In the Epistle
to the Hebrews the spring and issue of Enoch's
life are clearly marked. " By faith Enoch was
translated (jitrtrifhi, translatus est, Vulg.) that
he should not see death ... for before his trans-
lation (jMTaBiattn) he hath had witness borne
to him that he had been well-pleasing to God "
(xi. 5, R. V. ; cp. Riehm, /. c). The contrast to
ENOCH
this Divine judgment is found in the constrained
words of Josephus : " Enoch departed to the
Deity (ay<x a PW" »pos to Btiov), whence [the
sacred writers] have not recorded his death "
(Ant. i. 3, § 4). A further contrast is sometimes
drawn between the translation of Enoch and the
apotheosis of a Hercules, a Ganymede, Sec. (see
Riehm, I. c). It is more interesting to refer to
the Chaldaean tradition of the apotheosis of
Xisuthros, the tenth of the antediluvian Patri-
archs (see Smith's Chaldaean Genesis, pp. 42—6).
The comparative sobriety of the Biblical narra-
tive will be, in all these cases, apparent.
The Biblical notices of Enoch were a fruitful
source of speculation in later times (for Talmud i-
cal views, see Hamburger, RE.* ' Henochsage *).
Some theologians disputed with subtilty as to
the place to which he was removed ; whether it
was to Paradise or to the immediate Presence of
God (cp. Feuardentius ad Iren. v. 5), though
others more wisely declined to discuss the-
question (Thilo, Cod. Apocr. N. T., p. 758). On
other points there was greater unanimity.
Both the Latin and Greek Fathers commonly
coupled Enoch and Elijah as historic witnesses
to the possibility of a resurrection of the body
and of a true human existence in glory (Iren.
iv. 5, 1 ; TertulL de Resurr. Cam. 58 ; Hieron.
c. Jean. Bierosol. §§ 29, 32, pp. 437, 440); and
the voice of early ecclesiastical tradition is
almost unanimous in regarding them as "the
two witnesses " (Rev. xi. 3 sq.) who should fall
before " the beast," and afterwards be raised to
heaven before the great judgment (Hippol. Fray.
in Dan. xxii. ; de Antichr. xliii. Cosmas Indie,
p. 75, ap. Thilo, koto tJm» 4>tK\riauuTTuti)f
TopcCoWiv ; Tertull. de Anima, 29 ; Ambros. in
Psalm, xlv. 4; Etxmg. Nicotl. c. xxv. on which
Thilo has almost exhausted the question: Goti.
Apoc. N. T. pp. 765 sq.). This belief removed a
serious difficulty which was supposed to attach
to their translation ; for thus it was made clear
that they would at last discharge the common
debt of a sinful humanity, from which they
were not exempted by their glorious removal
from the earth (Tertull. de Aainid, 1. c. ; August.
Op. imp. c. Jut. vi. 30).
In later times Enoch was celebrated as the
inventor of writing, arithmetic, and astronomy
(Euseb. Praep. Er. ix. 17. Cp. Schurer, Gesch.
d. Jiid. Voices im Zeitalter Jesu Christi,* ii.
p. 627). He is said to have filled 300 books
with the revelations which he received, and
is commonly identified with Idris (i.e. the
learned), who is commemorated in the Koran
(ch. 19) as one "exalted [by God] to a high
place " (cp. Sale, 1. c. ; Hottinger, Hist. Orient.
pp. 30 sq.). But these traditions were pro-'
bably due to the apocryphal book which hem's
his name (cp. Fabric. Cod. Pseudep. F. T. i.
215 sq.).
Some writers (e.g. Ewald), arguing from the
meaning of the name (" dedicator " or " be-
ginner ") and the length of his life (365 years),
have considered Enoch a sun-god, a good spirit
to whom men would appeal to bless any fresti
undertaking. Baethgen (BeitrSge x. Ssmit.
Religionsgeschichte, pp. 152-3) has well shown
the untrustworthiness of such conjectures.
Some (Buttm. Mythol. i. 176 sq. ; Ewald, 1. c.)
have found a trace of the history of Enoch in
the Phrygian legend of Annacus ("AvramK,
Digitized by
Google
ENOCH, THE BOOK OF
NaVrcucoj), who was distinguished for his piety,
lived 300 years, and predicted the deluge of
Denes! ion. [Enoch, 1.] In the A. V. of
I Ch. L 3, the name is given as Henoch.
3. The third son of Midian, the son of
Abraham by Keturah (Gen. nv. 4, A. V. and
R. V. Hanoch ; 1 Ch. i. 33, A. V. Henoch, K. V.
Hmock).
4. The eldest son of Reuben (A. V. and R. V.
Hmoch ; Gen. xlvi. 9 ; Ex. vi. 14 ; 1 Ch. v. 3),
from whom came " the family of the Hanoch-
ites " (Knm. xxvi. 5).
5. In 2 Esd. vi. 49, 51, Enoch sUnds in the
Lit in (and Eng.) Version for Behemoth in the
Aethiopic [B. F. W.] [K.]
ENOCH, THE BOOK OF, is one of the
most important remains of that early apocalyptic
literature of which the Book of Daniel is the
great prototype. From it* vigorous style and
vide range of speculation the book is well
worthy of the attention which it received in the
rirat ages, and recent investigations have still
left many points for further inquiry.
L History. — The history of the book is re-
markable. The first trace of its existence is
generally found in the Epistle of St. Jude(re. 14,
i5 : cp. Enoch i. 9), bat the words of the Apostle
leave it uncertain whether he derived his quota-
tion from tradition (Hofmann, Schriftbetceis, i.
420) or from writing (brpoftfriww . . . 'Er&x
xiywr), though the wide spread of the book in
the second century seems almost decisive in
tavour of the Utter supposition. It appears to
have been known to Justin (Apol. ii. 5),
Irenaens {Adv. Haer. iv. 16, 2), and Anatolius
(Euseb. H. E. vii. 32). Clement of Alexandria
(Ector, p. 801) and Origen (yet cp. c. Cels. v.
52. The patristic references are collected by
Schfirer, ii. 628) both make use of it, and
numerous references occur to the "writing,"
*■ books," and " words " of Enoch, the Book of
Jubilees, and in the Testament of the XII.
Patriarchs, which present more or less re-
semblance to passages in the present book (Fabr.
Cud. Pteudep. V. T. i. 161 sq. ; Gfrbrer, Proph.
Pxudep. 273 sq. ; Schurer, ii. 627). Tertullian
(De Cult. Fern. i. 3 ; cp. Be Idol. 4) expressly
qaotes the book as one which was " not received
ly some, nor admitted into the Jewish canon "
(n armarium Jvdaicum), but defends it on
account of its reference to Christ (legimus
tmuum tcriptnram aedificationi habilem divini-
<t» uapirari). Augustine (De Civ. xv. 23, 4)
sad an anonymous writer whose work is printed
with Jerome's (Brer, in Psalm, cxxxii. 2; cp.
HiL ad Psalm. 1. c.) were both acquainted with
it ; bat from their time till the revival of
tetters it was known in the Western Church
«ly by the quotation in St. Jude (Dillmann,
EM. Ivi.). In the Eastern Church it was
known some centuries later. Considerable frag-
ments are preserved in the Chronographia (ed.
Dindorf. i. 20-3, 42-7) of Georgius Syncellus
(c 792 A.D.), and these, with the scanty notices
of earlier writers, constituted the sole remains
of the book known in Europe till the close of
the last century. Meanwhile, however, a
report was current that the entire book was
preserved in Abyssinia ; and at length, in 1773,
Brace brought with him on his return from
Egypt three MS&, containing the complete
ENOCH, THE BOOK OF 941
Aethiopic translation. Notwithstanding the
interest which the discovery excited, the first
detailed notice of this translation was only
given by Silvestre de Sacy in 1800, and it was
not published till the edition of Archbishop
Lawrence in 1838 (Libri Enoch versio Aethiopica
. . . Oxon.). But in the interval Lawrence
published an English translation, with an in-
troduction and notes, which passed through
three editions (The Book of Enoch, tic. bv K.
Lawrence. Oxford, 1821, 1833, 1838). "The
translation of Lawrence formed the basis of
the German edition of Hoffmann (Das Buck
Henoch, Jena, 1833-38); and Gfrttrer, in 1840,
gave a Latin translation constructed from the
translations of Lawrence and Hoffmann (Pro-
phetae veteres Pseudepigraphi, Stuttgart., 1840).
All these editions were superseded by those of
Dillmann, who edited the Aethiopic text from
five MSS. (Liber Henoch, Aethiopice, Lipsiae,
1851), and afterwards gave a German transla-
tion of the book, with a good introduction and
commentary (Das Bttch Henoch, . . . von Dr. A.
Dillmann, Leipzig, 1853). The discovery of a
small Greek fragment (ch. 89, 42-9) in the
Vatican, published by Mai in facsimile (Palrmn
nova Biblioth. ii.), and deciphered by Gilder-
meister (ZDMQ. for 1855, pp. 621-4), led to
the hope that more might be found, but this
hope has been disappointed (cp. Merx, ArcAi'tr,
ii. 243). In 1882 an English translation from
the original Ethiopic, with introduction and
notes, was published by Dr. Schodde. The
work of Dillmann gave a fresh impulse to the
study of the book (cp. also his article on the
subject in Herzog, BE.'). Among the essays
which were called out by it, the most important
were those of Ewald (Ueber des Aethiopischen
Buches Henoch EnUtehung, &c, Gsttingen,
1856) and Hilgenfeld (I). Jiidische Apokalyptik,
Jena, 1857). The older literature on the sub-
ject is reviewed by Fabricius (Cod. Pseudep.
V. T. i. 199 sq.).
2. Original Language. — The Aethiopic trans-
lation was made from the Greek, and it was
probably made about the same time as the
translation of tho Bible, with which it was
afterwards connected, or, in other words, to-
wards the middle or close of the fourth
century. The general coincidence of the trans-
lation with the patristic quotations of corre-
sponding passages shows satisfactorily that the
text from which it was derived was the same
as that current in the early Church, though one
considerable passage quoted by Georg. Syncell.
is wanting in the present book (Dillm. p. 85).
But it is still uncertain whether the Greek text
was the original (Volkmar in ZDMG. 1860,
p. 131; Philippi, Das Buch Henoch, p. 126,
1868), or itself a translation. One of the
earliest references to the book occurs in the
Hebrew Book of Jubilees (Dillm. in Ewald's
Jahrb. 1850, p. 90), and the names of the Angels
and winds are derived from Aramaic roots (cp.
Dillm. pp. 236 sq.). In addition to this a
Hebrew book of Enoch was known and used by
Jewish writers till the thirteenth century
(Dillm. Einl. lvii.), so that on these grounds,
among others, many (J. Scaliger, Lawrence,
Hoffmann, Dillmann, and Schiirer, who refers
especially to Halevy, Journ. Asiat. 1867,
pp. 352-95) hare considered it very probable
Digitized by
Google
942 EN-OCH, THE BOOK OF
that the book was first composed in Hebrew
(Aramaean). In such a case no stress can be
laid upon the Hebraizing style, which may
be found as well in an author as in a translator ;
and in the absence of direct evidence it is
difficult to weigh mere conjectures. On the
one hand, if the book had been originally
written in Hebrew, it might seem likely that it
would hare been more used by Kabbinical
teachers ; but, on the other hand, the writer
certainly appears to have been a native of
Palestine,* and therefore likely to have em-
ployed the popular dialect. If the hypothesis
of a Hebrew original be accepted, which as a
hypothesis seems to be the more plausible, the
history of the original and the version finds a
good parallel in that of the Wisdom of Sirach.
[ECCLBSIASTICUS.]
3. Contents. — In its present shape the book
consists of a series of revelations supposed to
have been given to Enoch and Noah, which
extend to the most varied aspects of nature and
life, and are designed to offer a comprehensive
vindication of the action of Providence. [Enoch.]
It is divided into five parts. The first part (chs.
1-36, Dilim.), after a general introduction, con-
tains an account of the fall of the angels (Gen.
vi. 1) and of the judgment to come upon them
and upon the giants, their offspring (chs. 6-16) ;
and this is followed by the description of the
journey of Enoch through the earth and lower
heaven in company with an Angel, who showed
to him many of the great mysteries of nature,
the treasure-houses of the storms and winds,
the fires of heaven, the prison of the fallen, and
the land of the blessed (chs. 17-36). The
second part (chs. 37-71) is styled "a vision of
wisdom," and consists of three "parables," in
which Enoch relates the revelations of the higher
secrets of heaven and of the spiritual world
which were given to him. The first parable
(chs. 38-44) gives chieflya picture of the future
blessings and manifestation of the righteous,
with further details as to the heavenly bodies :
the second (chs. 45-57) describes In splendid
imagery the coming of Messiah and the results
which it should work among " the elect " and
the gainsayers : the third (chs. 58-69) draws
out at further length the blessedness of "the
elect and holy," and the confusion and wretched-
ness of the siuful rulers of the world. The
third part (chs. 72-82) is styled " the book of
the course of the lights of heaven," and deals
with the motions of the sun and moon, and the
changes of the seasons; and with this the
narrative of the journey of Enoch closes. The
fourth part (chs. 83-91) is not distinguished by
any special name, but contains the record of a
dream which was granted to Enoch in his youth,
in which he saw the history of the kingdoms of
God and of the world up to the final establish-
ment of the throne of Messiah. The fifth part
(chs. 92-105) contains the last addresses of
Enoch to his children, in which the teaching of
the former chapters is made the groundwork of
earnest exhortation. The signs which attended
the birth of Noah arc next noticed (chs. 106-7) ;
• The astronomical calculations by which Lawrence
endeavoured to fix the locality of the writer In the
neighbourhood of the Caspian are Inconclusive. Cp.
Dillmann, p. 11.
ENOCH, THE BOOK OF
and another short " writing of Enoch " (ch. 108J
forms the close to the whole book (cp. Dillm
EM. i. sq. ; Liicke, Versuch einer tollstand.
EM. &c, i. 93 sq. ; Schoddc, pp. 17-19 ; Schiirer,
ii. 617-9).
4. Integrity and Date. — If a certain general
unity marks the book in its present form,
yet internal coincidence shows clearly that
different fragments are incorporated into the
work, and some additions have been probably-
made afterwards. Different " books " are men-
tioned in early times, and variations in style
and language are discernible in the present
book. The belief, once prevalent, that the work
is the work of one man written at one time, is
entirely given up by modem critics (Schiirer, ii.
620). To distinguish the original elements and
later interpolations is the great problem which
so many hare set themselves to solve. Hofmann.
Weisse, and I'hilippi place the composition of
the whole work alter the Christian era; the
first and the last think that St. Jude could not
have quoted an apocryphal book (Hofmann,
Schriftbeiceis, i. 420 sq.), and Weisse seeks to
detach Christianity altogether from a Jewish
foundation (Weisse, Evatujelienfrage, p. 214 sq.).
It seems to be now generally acknowledged that
the second part (chs. 37-71) was the work of one
compiler, whose date is variously placed in
Christian times (Hilgenfeld and Vol k mar agree-
ing here with Hofmann, Weisse, and Philippi) or
in pre-Christian (the date ranging from B.C.
144-64; see Schiirer, ii. 621). The rest or
groundwork of the whole (chs. 1-36, 72-108)
is with great unanimity (Volkmar excepted)
placed in the second century B.C. Thus Ewald
places the composition of the groundwork of the
book at various intervals between 144 B.C. and
c. 120 B.c, and supposes that the whole assumed
its present form in the first half of the century
before Christ. Liicke (2nd ed.) distinguishes
two great parts, an older part including chs.
1-36 and chs. 72-105, which he dates from the
beginning of the Maccabaean struggle, and a
later, chs. 37-71, which he assigns to the period
of the rise of Herod the Great (B.C. 141). He
supposes, however, that later interpolations
were made without attempting to ascertain their
date. Dillmann upholds more decidedly the
unity of the book, and assigns the chief part or
it to an Aramaean writer of the time of John
Hyrcanus (e. 110 «.c). To this, according to
him, "historical" and "Noachian additions"
were made, probably in Greek translation
(EM. lii.). Kostlin (quoted by Hilgenfeld, p. 96,
&c.) assigns chs. 1-16, 21-36, 72-105, to about
110 B.C.; chs. 37-71 toe. B.C. 100-64; and the
" Noachian additions " and ch. 108 to the time of
Herod the Great. Hilgenfeld himself places the
original book (chs. 1-16; 20-36; 72-90; 91,
1-19; 93; 94-105) about the beginning of the
first century before Christ (a. a. O. p. 145, u.).
This book he supposes to have passed through
the hands of a Christian writer who lived
between the times " of Satnrninus and Marcton "
(p. 181), who added the chief remaining portions,
including the great Messianic section, chs. 37-71.
In the face of these conflicting theories (see them
and others collected in Schodde, pp. 20-6) it is
evidently impossible to dogmatize, and the
evidence is insufficient for conclusive reasoning.
The interpretation of the Apocalyptic histories
Digitized by
Google
ENOCH. THE BOOK OF
(chs. 56, 57 ; 85-90), on which the chief stress
b laid for fixing the date of the book, involves
necessarily minute criticism of details, which
belongs rather to a commentary than to a general
introduction. Some inconsiderable interpolations
hare been made, and large fragments of a much
earlier date were undoubtedly incorporated into
the work ; bat as a whole, a work thus gradually
created may be regarded as describing an im-
portant phase of Jewish opinion shortly before
the coming of Christ."
5. Doctrine.— In doctrine the book of Enoch
exhibits a great advance of thought within the
limits of revelation in each of the great divisions
of knowledge. The teaching on nature is a curious
attempt to reduce the scattered images of the
0. T. to a physical system. The view of society
and man, of the temporary triumph and final
discomfiture of the oppressors of God's people,
carries ont into elaborate detail the pregnant
image* of Daniel. The figure of the Messiah is
invested with majestic dignity as " the Son of
God " (ch. 105, 2 only), " Whose Name was
named before the sun was made " (ch. 48, 3),
and Who existed " aforetime in the Presence of
God " (ch. 62, 6 ; cp. Lawrence, Prel. Diss. li. f.).
And at the same time His human attributes as
"the son of man," "the son of woman" (ch.
62. 5 only), " the elect one," " the righteous
one," "the anointed," are brought into con-
spicuous notice. The mysteries of the spiritual
world, the connexion of Angels and men, the
classes and ministries of the hosts of heaven,
the power of Satan (ch. 40, 7 ; ch. 65, 6), and
the legions of darkness, the doctrines of resur-
rection, retribution, and eternal punishment
(ch. 22 ; cp. Dillm. p. xix.), are dwelt upon with
growing earnestness as the horizon of speculation
was extended by intercourse with Greece. Bnt
the message of the book is emphatically one of
"faith and truth " (cp. Dillm. p. 32); and while
the writer combines and repeats the thoughts of
Scripture, he adds no new element to the teach-
ing of the Prophets. His errors spring from an
undisciplined attempt to explain their words,
and from a proud exultation in present success.
For the great characteristic by which the book
» distinguished from the later apocalypse of
Exra [Esdbas, 2nd Book] is the tone of trium-
phant expectation by which it is pervaded. It
seem* to repeat in every form the great principle
tflat the world, natural, moral, and spiritual, is
onier the immediate government of God. Hence
it follows that there is a terrible retribution re-
served for sinners, and a glorious kingdom pre-
pared for the righteous, and Messiah is regarded
*» the Divine Mediator of this double issue (chs.
SO, 91). J>or is it without a striking fitness
that a patriarch translated from earth, and
admitted to look upon the Divine Majesty, is
chosen as the " herald of wisdom, righteousness,
* ScfcSrer's examination of chs. 85-90, as the only
F*Mge which is helpful In fixing a date of com-
fodtloo, lad* him to agree as to points of interpreta-
tica (* .g. the shepherds = Angels) and exposition of the
raartra with Hofhunn, Ewald, and Dlllmann ; and he
•sgges at the date the third quarter of the second
«tWT t-c. Further, he concludes that era. 31-11 are
<1 CarfsUan origin, the "Noachian sections " and chs.
*H betag interpolations whose date eannot be fixed
(ita-T).
EN-ROGEL
943
and judgment to a people who, even in suffering,
saw in their tyrants only the victims of a
coming vengeance."
6. Reception. — Notwithstanding the quotation
in St. Jude, and the wide circulation of the
book itself, the apocalypse of Enoch was uni-
formily aud distinctly separated from the
canonical Scriptures. Tcrtullian alone main-
tained its authority {I.e.), while he admitted
that it was not received by the Jews. Origen,
on the other hand (e. Cels. v. p. 267, ed.
Spenc), and Augustine (de Cic. xv. 23, 4),
definitively mark it as apocryphal, and it is
reckoned among the apocryphal books in the
Apostolic Constitutions (vi. 16), and in the
catalogues of the Synopsis S. Scripturae, Nice-
phorus (Credner, Zur Gesch. d. Kan. p. 145),
and Montfaucon {Bibl. Coislin. p. 193).
7. Literature. — The literature of the subject
is very voluminous. The English edition of
Schodde places within the reach of the student
the most important materials for the study of
the book ; and notices of all the important
works which hare been published since the first
edition of this Dictionary will be found in his
book, in Schurer, ii. 629-30, and in ZSckler,
in Strack u. Ziickler's Kgf. Komm. xu d. heil.
Sclirijten A. u. N. T., ' Die Apokryphen des A.
T.'s nebst einem Anhang iib. die Pseud-epi-
graphenlitteratur,' p. 430. [B. F. W.] [F.]
ENOCH, CITY. [Enoch, No. 1.]
ENON. [Aekos.]
ENOS (C'iJS = ""to <w teeak, not etymo-
logically but in accordance with usage, see
MV."; 'Emus; Ems), son of Seth the son of
Adam (Gen. iv. 26). Kenan was his firstborn
(Gen. v. 9). His length of life is given as 905
years. The R. V. gives the name under the
form Enosh in the 0. T. reft', (see also 1 Ch. i. 1),
but reads Enos in Luke iii. 38. [F.J
ENOSH (A. V. and R. V. in 1 Ch. i. 1).
[Enos.]
EN-BIM'MON fliB"! \"<P= fountain of pome-
granates ; B. omits, A. iv 'Ptfi/ubv ; et in Rim-
mon), one of the places which the men of
Judah re-inhabited after their return from the
Captivity (Neh. xi. 29). From the towns in
company with which it is mentioned, it seems
very probable that the name is the same which
in the earlier Books is given in the Hebrew and
A. V. in the separate form of " Ain and Rim-
mon " (Josh. xv. 32 ; see Dillmann in loco),
" Ain, Remmon " (xix. 7 ; and see 1 Ch. iv. 32),
but in the I.XX. combined, as in Nehemiah
[Ain, 2]. Van de Velde {Mem. p. 344) identities
it with Umm er-Rumamin between Beit Jibrin
and Bir es-Seb'a. See also PEF. Mem. iii. 392,
398. [G.] [W.]
EN-BO'GEL (Vl H?= fountain of tlte fuller-,
mryh 'P«7^A; Fans Rogef), a spring which
formed one of the landmarks on the boundary-
line between Judah (Josh. xv. 7) and Benjamin
(xviii. 16). It was the point next to Jerusalem,
and at a lower level, as is evident from the use
of the words "ascended" and "descended" in
these two passages. Here, apparently concealed
Digitized by
Google
944
EN-ROGEL
from the view of the city, Jonathan and Ahimanz
remained, after the flight of David, awaiting in-
telligence from within the walls (2 Sam. xvii.
17), and here, " by the stone Zoheleth, which
is close to (yVN) En-rogel," Adonijah held the
feast, which was the first and last act of his
attempt on the crown (I K. i. 9). These are all
the occurrences of the name in the Bible. By
Josepbns on the last incident (Ant. vii. 14, § 4)
its situation is given as " without the city, in the
royal garden," and it is without doubt referred to
by him in the same connexion, in his description
of the earthquake which accompanied the sacri-
lege of Uzziah (Ant. ix. 10, § 4), and which " at
the place called Eroge"* shook down a part of
the eastern hill, "so as to obstruct the roads,
and the royal gardens."
In the Targum, and the Arabic and Syriac
Versions, the name is commonly given as '* the
spring of the fuller" (tOVp, jl»S). and this is
generally accepted as the signification of the
Hebrew name — Rogel being derived from ?3~\
in the sense of " to tread," in allusion to the
practice of the Orientals in washing linen.
En-rogel has been identified with (a) the
present " Fountain of the Virgin," 'Ain Umm
ed-Deraj = spring of the mother of steps — the
perennial source from which the Pool of Siloam
is supplied ; and (6) with Bir Eyub, the " well
of Job," 125 ft. deep, below the junction of the
valleys of Kedron and Hinnom, and south of the
Pool of Siloam. The arguments in favour of
the " Fountain of the Virgin " are briefly as
follows : —
1. The " Fountain of the Virgin " is the only
real spring close to Jerusalem. Bir Eyub is a
well, not a spring (En) ; and, except after heavy
rain, the water in it is generally 70 ft. or 80 ft.
below the level of the ground. Thus, if the
former be not En-rogel, the single spring of this
locality has escaped mention in the Bible.
2. Exactly opposite the '■ Fountain of the
Virgin," and only separated from it by the
breadth of the valley, there is a rude flight of
rock-hewn steps which leads, up the precipitous
face of a ledge of rock, directly to the village of
Siloam. This place, called by the villagers ez-
Zehvseileh, a name identical with Zoheleth, is
supposed by M. Clermont-Ganneau (PEFQy.
Stat. 1869-70, p. 253) to mark the position of
-" the stone Zoheleth which is close to En-rogel."
[Zoheleth.]
3. The " Fountain of the Virgin " must always
have been a well-known spring, and as such a
suitable landmark on the boundary between
Judah and Benjamin. The date of Bir Eyub
is unknown ; it is very possibly later than the
time of Joshua.
4. Bir Eyub does not suit the requirements of
■2 Sam. xvii. 17. It is too far off both from the
•city and from the direct road over Olivet to the
Jordan ; and is in full view of the city, which
the other spot is not.
5. The martyrdom of St. James was effected
by casting him down from the Temple wall into
• This natural Interpretation of a name only slightly
corrupt appears to have first suggested Itself to Stanley
(S. <* P. p. 184).
EX-SHEMESH
the valley of Kedron, where he was finally
killed by a fuller with his washing-stick. The
natural inference is that St. James fell near
where the fullers were at work. b Now Bir Eyub
is too far off from the site of the Temple to allow
of this, but it might very well have happened at
the Fountain of the Virgin (see Stanley's Ser-
mons on the Apost. Age, pp. 333-4).
6. Deraj and Rogel are both from the same
root, and therefore the modern name may be
derived from the ancient one, even though at
present it is taken to allude to the " steps "
by which the reservoir of the Fountain is
reached.
Add to these considerations (what will have
more significance when the permanence of
Eastern habits is recollected) — 7. That the
Fountain of the Virgin is still the great resort
of the women of Jerusalem for washing and
treading their clothes : aud also— 8. That the
king's gardens must have been above Bir Eyub
and below the Fountain of the Virgin, which
thus might be used without difficulty to irrigate
them. A reminiscence of these gardens perhaps
lingers in the name Wady Fer'aun, " Pharaoh's
valley," equivalent to " valley of the king,"
which the fellahin of Siloam apply to the section
of the Kedron valley between the S.E. angle of
the Haram wall and the junction of the Kedron
and Hinnom valleys.
The tradition that Bir Eyub is En-rogel is
apparently first recorded by Brocardus. In an
early Jewish Itinerary (CJri of Biel in Hottinger's
Cippi Hebraic!) the name is given as " Well of
Joab,"as if retaining the memory of Joab's con-
nexion with Adonijah — a name which it still retains
in the traditions of the Greek Christians. The
chief arguments in its favour are, that being below
the junction of the two valleys its situation agrees
better with the common boundary of Judah and
Benjamin than the " Fountain of the Virgin,"
but see above (3) ; and that in the Arabic ver-
sion of Josh. xv. 7, 'Ain Eyub, or " Spring of
Job," is given for En-rogel. Neither of these
arguments is of much weight.
For descriptions of the " Fountain of the
Virgin " and Btr Eyub, see Robinson, i. 331-334 ;
Williams, Holy City, ii. 489-495 ; Notes to O. S.
of Jerusalem, p. 84; and PEF. Mem., "Jeru-
salem," pp. 365-375. [Jerusalem.] [O.] [W.]
EN-SHETIESH (Efe^TJ? = spring of the
sun; fi irnyi) rod ri\tov, irny^i BaiOtrapis ; En-
semes, id est % Fans Solis), a spring which formed
one of the landmarks on the north boundary of
Judah (Josh. xv. 7) and the south boundary of
Benjamin (xviii. 17). From these notices it
appears to have been between the "ascent of
Adummin " — the road leading up from the
Jordan valley south of the Wady Kelt —
and the spring of En-rogel, in the valley of
Kedron. It was therefore cast of Jerusalem and
of the Mount of Olives. The only spring at pre-
sent answering to this position is the 'Ain Hand
— the " Well of the Apostles," — about a mile below
Bethany, the traveller's first halting-place on
the road to Jericho. Accordingly this spring
is generally identified with En-Shemesh (see
► So Jerome, Qaaat. Heb. on 2 Sam. xvii. 20 : " An-
cUla quasi, lavandi gratia, cum panuis ad fontem Rogel
lent."
Digitized by
Google
ENSIGN
Dillmann on Josh. xv. 7). The aspect of 'Aia
\ Band is such that the rays of the sun are on it
• the whole day. This is not inappropriate in
ti a fountain dedicated to that luminary (PEF.
v ym.iii.42). [G.] [W.]
ENSIGN (Pj ; in the A. V. generally "en-
sign," sometimes " standard ; " s)% " standard,"
with the exception of Cant. ii. 4, " banner ; "
JlUt, * ensign "). The distinction between these
three Hebrew terms is sufficiently marked by
their respective uses: no its signal ; degel a
military standard for a large division of an army ;
ind oth, the same for a small one. Neither of
these latter words, however, expresses the idea
which " standard " conveys to our minds, viz. a
pig ; the standards in use among the Hebrews
probably resembled those of the Egyptians (see
below), (1.) The notices of the nes or " en-
j^£
ENSIGN
945
ZSTpUaa BUodnii. (From WHUimb.)
rign " are most frequent ; it consisted of some
well-understood signal which was exhibited
«n the top of a pole from a bare mountain
tap (Is. xiii. 2, xviii. 3) — the very emblem
of conspicuous isolation (Is. xxx. 17). Around
it the inhabitants mustered, whether for the
purpose of meeting an enemy (Is. v. 26, xviii.
3, xiii. 9% which w.h sometimes notified
»J the blast of a trumpet (Jer. iv. 21, li. 27);
«r at a token of rescue (Ps. lx. 4 ; Is. xi. 10 ; Jer.
'"■ 6); or for a public proclamation (Jer. I.
5); or simply as a gathering point (Is. xlix.
22, lrri. 10). What the nature of the signal
*», we have no means of stating ; it has been
snm: Bier. — vol. i.
inferred from Is. xxxiii. 23 and Ezek. xxvii. 7,
that it was a flag : we do not observe a ring
depicted either in Egyptian or Assyrian repre-
sentations of vessels (cp. Wilkinson, ii. 127
[1878] ; Bonomi, pp. 166, 167) ; but, in lieu of
a flag, certain devices, such as the phoenix,
flowers, &c, were embroidered on the sail ;
whence it appears that the device itself, and
perhaps also the sail bearing the device, was the
nes or " ensign." It may have been sometimes
the name of a leader, as implied in the title
which Moses gave to his altar, " Jehovah-nissi "
(Ex. xvii. 15). It may also have been, as
Michnelis (Suppl. p. 1648) suggests, a blazing
torch. The important point, however, to be
observed is, that the nes was an occasional signal,
and not a military standard, and that elevation
and conspiemty are implied in the use of the
term : hence it is appropriately applied to the
"pole" on which the brazen serpent hung
(Mum. xxi. 8), which was indeed an " ensign "
of deliverance to the pious Israelite ; and again
to the censers of Korah and his company, which
became a " sign " or beacon of warning to Israel 1
(Num. xvi. 38). (2.) The term degel is used to
describe the standards which were given to each
of the four divisions of the Israelite army at the
time of the Exodus (Num. i. 52, ii. 2 sq., x. 14
sq.). Some doubt indeed exists as to its meaning
in these passages, the LXX. and Vulgate re-
garding it not as the standard itself, but as a
certain military division annexed to a standard,
just as texillum is sometimes nsed for a body of
soldiers (Tac. Hist. i. 70 ; Liv. viii. 8). The
sense of compact and martial array does certainly
seem to lurk in the word ; for in Cant. ri. 4, 10,
the brilliant glances of the bride's eyes are
compared to the destructive advance of a well-
arrayed host, and a similar comparison is em-
ployed in reference to the bridegroom (Cant. v.
10); but on the other hand, in Cant. ii. 4, no
other sense than that of a " banner " will suit,
and we therefore think the rendering in the
A. V. and K. V. correct. In Ps. xx. 5 most
scholars accept the term "banners" (see De-
litzsch, Perowne, and Schultz in loco). A
standard implies, of course, a standard-bearer ;
but the supposed reference to that officer in
Is. x. 18 (A. V. and K. V. text) is probably
incorrect, the words meaning rather as when a
sick manpineth away (R. V. marg. Cp. Delitzsch,*
Dillmann 1 in loco) ; similarly, in a somewhat
parallel passage (Is. lis. 19) the marg. translation
of R. V., the Spirit of the Lord shall lift up a
standard, is not now so generally adopted as that
of the text. The character of the Hebrew military
standards is quite a matter of conjecture ; they
probably resembled the Egyptian, which con-
sisted of a sacred emblem, such as an animal, a
boat, or the king's name (Wilkinson, i. 342-3
[1878]). Rabbinical writers state the devices to-
nave been as follows : for the tribe of Judah, a
lion ; for Reuben, a man ; for Ephraim, an ox ;
and for Dan, an eagle (Carpzov. Crit. App.
p. 667) ; but no reliance can be placed on this.
As each of the four divisions, consisting of three
tribes, had its standard, so had each tribe its
" sign " (oth) or " ensign," probably in imitation
of the Egyptians, among whom not only each
battalion, but even each company, had its par-
ticular ensign (Wilkinson, /. ft). We know
nothing of its nature. The word occurs figura-
3 P
Digitized by
Google
946
ENSUE
tively in Pa. lxxiv. 4, as some think in reference
to the images of idol gods (but see Comm. in
loco). " [W. L. B.] [F.]
EN8UE (Fr. ensuivre, Lat. iruequor) = to
follow after (1 Pet. iii. 11, A. V. The R. V.
has " pursue." Cp. Ps. xxxiv. 14, Prayer Book
version). [F.]
EN-TANNIM. [Dbagoh Well.]
EN-TAP-PU'AH (n-IBFITP = 'Pring »/
apple or citron; B. mryi 0a<j>$M, A. 4 ?4
BaSpiie, &*". Na<p4e; Fons Taphuae). The
boundary of Manasseh went from facing Shechem
" to the inhabitants of £o-tappuah " (Josh. xvii.
7). It is probably identical with Tappuah, the
position of which will be elsewhere examined.
[Tappuah.] Conder (IIbk. to Bible, p. 263) iden-
tifies it, with some probability, with a spring
near 1'asuf, S. of Kablus, Shechem, and at the
head of a branch of the " brook Kanah," Wady
Kanah, which is the next point mentioned on the
boundary. Gucrin (Samarie, i. 259) would place
it at 'A~m el-Fardh, N.E. of Nablus, but this is
too far from W. Kanah. [G.] [W.]
ENTRANCE TO HAMATH. [Hamath.]
EPAENETUS ("Emm-pro's ; Epaenetus, Vulg.
Clem., but earlier spelling varies considerably),
a name meaning " praiseworthy." He is men-
tioned immediately after Prisca and Aquil.i in
Rom. xvi. 5. He is described (R. V.) as " the
firstfruits of Asia unto Christ." The A. V. gives
" Achaia " for " Asia." This is undoubtedly an
error, as the reading "Asia" has much better
documentary support, and the position of first-
fruits of Achaia is elsewhere (1 Cor. xvi. 15)
assigned to other persons ; namely, the house-
hold of Stephanas. Asia is the province of which
Ephesus was the capital (Asia) ; and Epaenetus
was probably an Kphesian converted by Prisca
and Aquila after they were left there by St. Paul
(Acts xviii. 19). When they departed to Rome
(implied in Rom. xvi. 3), Epaenetus may very
naturally have accompanied them. [E. K. B.]
EPAPHRAS CExafpas; Epaphras), a
Colossian (Col. iv. 12), who was with St. Paul
at the time of his writing his Epistle to that
Church. He had probably been the principal
instrument in the foundation of the Churches of
the Lycus — viz., Colossae, Laodicea, and Hiera-
polis, which had not as yet seen St. Paul's face
in the flesh (Col. ii. 1). Epaphras felt responsi-
ble for their spiritual welfare (Col. iv. 13), and
it is probable that his uneasiness about the
heresy wnich had shown itself in Colossae
was the cause of his visit to St. Paul, and the
occasion of the Epistle being written. St. Paul
implicitly contrasts the teaching which the
Colossians had originally received from Epaphras
with the speculations now rife among them
(Col. i. 7 and ii. 6, 7). The position of Epaphras
is much cleared by the reading adopted in the
R. V. (fifi&v for lifimv). He is described by
St. Paul as " a faithful minister of Christ on
our behalf" (see Lightfoot on Col. i. 7, note).
The Apostle regards him as his delegate in the
ministry of Christ to the Colossians. As
Epaphroditus represented the Philippians in his
ministry to the Apostle's personal needs, so con-
EPHAH
versely Epaphras represented the Apostle in his
ministry to the spiritual needs of the Colossians.
As we find Epaphras sending greeting in Coi.
iv. 12, we may conclude that he did not return
when the letter was despatched. The expression
"my fellow-captive" applied to him in Philem.
t>. 23 may possibly give the reason for this ; viz
that he had in some way become involved in
St. Paul's lot of imprisonment. But more pro-
bably he was voluntarily sharing it. The
objection taken to this sense of the Greek word.
o-vraiXjudAwrof (Lightfoot on Col. iv. 10, note),
may be met by regarding it as a continuation
of the metaphor implied in "fellow-soldier"
(avvrparurrns). They were engaged in warfare
for Christ, and therefore their captivity was
that of prisoners of war. [E. R. B.]
EPAPHRODITUS ^Zna^piSirot ; Epa-
phroditus). The name is a common one, and means
" attractive " or " charming." He is described
by St. Paul as " my brother and fellow-worker
and fellow-soldier, and your messenger and
minister to my need." He had come to St. Paul
in his captivity at Rome as the bearer of gift-
from the Philippians (Phil. iv. 18). He had
remained with him, both to do him personal
service and also to help him in "the work of
Christ" (Phil. ii. 30). His exertions in both
ways had led to or aggravated a dangerous
illness. He had risked his life to do all that his
brethren at Philippi would have desired to be
done for St. Paul on their behalf. Now his
affectionate nature was distressed on account of
the anxiety which his friends at Philippi were
feeling at the news of his illness. He desired
to return, and St. Paul was desirous to send
him. With his usual delicacy and sympathy.
he represents the mission of Epaphroditus as
being for his pleasure because it was for theirs
(" that I may be the less sorrowful," Phil. ii. 28).
On the title " messenger " (A*dWoAo») applied to
Epaphroditus, see art. Apostle. Epaphroditus
was almost certainly the bearer of the Epistle
to the Philippians (see Lightfoot 1 on Philippians,
p. 36), and may possibly be intended by the
expression " true yokefellow " (Phil. iv. 3).
Although Epaphras is merely a shortened form
of Epaphroditus, yet the longer form of the
name is always used of the Philippian delegate
and the shorter of the Colossian teacher. The
identity of the two is most improbable (see
Lightfoot' on Philip., p. 60, note). [E. R. B.]
EPENETU8 (Rom. xvi. 5). [Epaenetus.]
ETHAH (Wih A. r««>d>, DE. ra«pd>
[Gen.]; B. TaQip, A. Taupip [1 Ch.]; Epha),
placed first in order among the sons of Jlidiau
(Gen. xxv. 4 ; 1 Ch. i. 33), and connected by
Isaiah (Ix. 6, 7) with the Midianites, the Ke-
turahitc Sheba, and the Ishmaelites, both in
the position of their settlements and in their
wandering habits ; but no satisfactory identifica-
tion of the tribe has been discovered. The
Arabic word «A£P (Gheyfeh), which has been
supposed to be the same as Ephah, is the name
of a village near Cairo ; but this is far from the
Midianite settlements, and the tradition that
Ephah settled in Africa does not rest on suffi-
cient authority. [MlDLAN; Sheba.] Fried.
Digitized by
Google
EPHAH
Delitxsch (Wo lag dot Parodies 1 p. 304) and
Schroder (KAT* pp. 146 sq., 613) compare it
with the cuneiform Hajapa, a North Arabian
tribe, and Halevy believes that ilS'ff as a per-
sonal name is to be read in the Sat'a inscriptions
(«m Dillmann s on Gen. /. c). [E. S. P.] [F.]
ETHAH(nB'l?; B. Tai^x *aAA«d,, A.
TiueA. M iroAA. ; Epha). 1. Concubine of Caleb,
in the line of Jndah (1 Ch. ii. 46).
2. BA. Vaitpi. Son of Jahdai ; also in the
line of Jndah (1 Ch. ii. 47).
EPHAH. [MEAStTBES.]
ETHAI (following the Keri, *D , ff; but the
original text is »D1» = Ophai ; and so LXX. B.
'U^e, Sti^xfr; Opki), a Netophathite, whose
sons were among the " captains 0"IE>) of the
forces" left in Jndah after the deportation to
Babylon (Jer. xl. 8). They submitted them-
selves to Gedaliah, the Babylonian governor,
and were apparently massacred with him by
lshmael (xli. 3, cp. xl. 13). [W. A. W.] [F.]
ETHEB Cp ; 'A«Wp [Gen.], 'Oo>f> [1 Ch.] ;
Opher, Epker), named second in order among the
sons of Midiau (Gen. xxv. 4, 1 Ch. i. 33), but not
mentioned in the Bible except in these genea-
logical passages. His settlements have not been
identified with certainty. According to Gesenius,
the name U equivalent to the Arabic Ghifr,
jBP, signifying " the young of the cow " [pro-
bably meaning the boTine antelope called the
wild cow], and "a small beast or creeping
thing or an insect " (Lane, Ar. Lex. s. v.). Two
tribes bear a similar appellation, Ohifdr
but since one was a branch of the
(>*);
first Amalek, the other of the Ishmaelite Kinaneh
(«p. Caussin de Perceval, Essai sur Wist, des
Araies, i. 20, 297, 298; and Abulfedae JJist.
Antcislamica, ed. Fleischer, p. 196), we can only
identify one of them with the Biblical Epher by
assuming a confusion to have arisen in respect to
these nearly related tribes. The first settled
about Yethrib (Medina); the second, in the
Mighbourhood of Mekka. Delitxsch [1887] and
Dillmann 1 (on Gen. /. c.) adopt Wetzsiein's
new that the name corresponds with 'Ofr, a
place between the Tihama range and Aban, from
which that district of Arabia acquired the name
of the Xeg'd of 'Ofr. [E. S. P.] [F.]
ETHEB CQ8, a calf; B. "A«>.p, A. Tcupip ;
Epier).
L A son of Ezra, among the descendants of
■Jadah; possibly, though this is not clear, of
the family of the great Caleb (1 Ch. iv. 17).
8. 'OeWp. One of the heads of the families
cf Manasseh on the east of Jordan (1 Ch. v.
«> [G.] [W.]
EPHES-DAM'MTM (DW DBK ; 'tfeppiv,
B. -fun, A. 'KQmtouuelr ; in finSna Dommim),
a place between Socoh and Azekah, at which the
Pbnistincs were encamped before the affray in
*Ueh Goliath was killed (1 Sam. ivii. 1). The
*nio| of the word is uncertain, but it is
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE 947
generally explained as the " end " or " boundary
of blood," in that case probably derived from its
being the scene of frequent sanguinary encounters
between Israel and the Philistines. According to
Neubauer, Geogr. du Talmud, p. 158, the term
Maaleh Adumim is applied to Ephes-dammim in
the Talmud. Under the shorter form of Pas-
dammim it occurs once again in a similar con-
nexion (1 Ch. xi. 13). For the situation of the
place, see Klah, Valley op. [G.] [W.]
EPHE'SIAN 0E*«V<es; Ephesim), an in-
habitant of Ephesus. In the singular it is
applied to Troi'HIMUS (Acts xxi. 29), and in the
plural to the people of Ephesus (Acts xix. 28.
34,35). [F.]'
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE.
$ ). Titus, p. 947.
i 2. (a-c) CiaccvsTixcss, p. (47.
(d) Pukfose, p. »4».
(e) Structure, p. 950.
§ 3. Aethixticitt, p. 952 :—
(1) External evidence, p. 952.
(2) ffittory o/ (As enquiry, p. 952.
(3) A the Spittle genuine t p. 954. '
(o-d) Objections to genuineness, p. 954.
(«) Literary relations to Coloeslans and
other books, p. 957.
(/) Summary and conclusion, p. 963.
y 4. Text— Literature, p. 964.
§ 1. Title.
The title (with amplifications) itpbt 'E.<piarlovs
is attested by all extant MSS. and Versions. But
Marcion, and possibly others in his train (" haere-
tici," Tertull. c. Marc. v. 11X adopted the title
" ad Laodicenos." Tertullian's statement to this
effect is confirmed by Epiphanius (Haer. 42, vol.
i. p. 811, Migne), who makes Marcion quote
Ephes. iv. 5, 6, from his " Epistle to the Laodi-
ceans." It is true that in a previous passage (p.
708), when enumerating the Epistles in Marcion's
canon, he includes, as well as Ephesians, *al -n)s
wpot AaoS. KtyopArns utpn. But in the face of
the quotation just mentioned, and of Tertul-
lian's plain statement, this mnst be set down
to a confusion on the part of Epiphanius simi-
lar to that noticed by Bp. Lightfoot (Col. p. 292)
in the Muratorian Canon. To Marcion, then,
the title was " ad Laodicenos." But there is no
evidence (Bleek, EM. § 169, notwithstanding)
that this was due to anything but a critical
conjecture on Marcion's part. Tertullian's
language, moreover, is positive proof that the
usual title of our. Epistle was given to it on
grounds independent of the disputed reading.
He accuses Marcion of tampering with the title,
not with the words, of the Epistle, "titulian
ei aliqnando interpolare gestiit, quasi et in isto
diligentissimus explorator " (ibid. 17. The sug-
gestion of Davidson, Alford, &c, that " titulns "
may include the greeting of the Epistle, is lin-
guistically admissible, but far from likely).
Tertullian makes no allusion to the words
in dispute, and therefore cannot have read
them.
§ 2. CIRCUMSTANCES, PURPOSE, AND STRUCTURE.
(a.) For what readers t — The decision depends
upon the following considerations, which call
for a more extended discussion than is possible
here. We state results only.
3 P 2
Digitized by
Google
918 EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
(a) The genuineness of iv "Etploy (i. 1). The
evidence (collected by Tischendorf) goes to show
that from the first the Epistle was circulated
both with these words and withont them, but
that in cither case (supra, § 1) it was known as
an Epistle to the Ephesians.
(fi) The connexion of the Epistle with
Ephesus may accordingly be regarded as certain,
independently of the reading of ch. i. 1. The
readers are moreover
(7) Gentiles(i. 13 ; contrast v. 12 ; ii. 1, 11-13,
19; iii. 1 ; v. 8), and a definite group of persons
(i. 15 ; vi. 21).
But (J) the Epistle was not intended for
Ephesus only. This follows from the fact that
St. Paul is personally unknown to at any rate
the mass of his readers (i. 15, cp. iv. 21, iii. 2, 3).
Now the Apostle's labours at Ephesus, though
fruitful of result outside the city (1 Cor. xvi.
9 ; Acts xix. 10, 26), had been carried on entirely
in Ephesus itself (Acts xx. 18, rbyxiura xt^'ov);
he hal not visited even the Lycus valley (Col.
ii. 1).
(«) It is therefore as impossible to limit the
range of the letter to Ephesus as it is to exclude
Kphesus from it altogether. That the Epistle
was primarily addressed to Laodicea (greeted
through Colossae, Col. iv. 15), or that it was
purely catholic in its destination (see supra, y),
cannot be maintained. That it was addressed
merely to the Gentile element in the Asiatic
churches (Milligan in Encyel. Brit.) is an ap-
proximation to the view regarded by the writer
of this article as probable : but this view postu-
lates an explanation of rots olaw in i. 1 which
will not commend itself to all, and overlooks
St. Paul's frequent custom of addressing a Church
or Churches of mixed origin as if purely Gentile
(Rom. i. 13, xi. 13 sqq., and contrast 1 Thess. i. 9
with Acts xvii. 3, 4).
(r) The Epistle then was probably (1) ad-
dressed to Ephesus, but intended by St. Paul* to
circulate * among " the churches of Asia," and
(2) identical with the letter Ik AaoSuctlas of
Col. iv. 16. The latter identification is based on
the verse just cited, combined with the close
relation of our Epistle to Colossians (see below),
and the identity of the bearer, Tychicus. The
identification of our Epistle with that "from
Laodicea " is of course denied by those who
* The omission of iv 'E4«a<p would thus correspond in
purpose to that of iv 'Fiu/13 (Rom. L 7) in G, g (Cod.
Born.), an omission possibly (see article Romans, and
Llghtfoot In Journ. of Phil. ls70)'iiidicative of a circu-
lation of that Epistle (In a form abridged by the omis-
sion of xv., xvi.) is an encyclical letter.
» The "circular " destination of the Epistle has been
maintained, with numerous modifications and subsidiary
hypotheses, by a host of scholars from Besa, Usher, and
Bengel onwards, including Hug, Neanrier, Ruckert,
Credner, Harless, Anger, Olshausen, Klostermann,
Sabatier, Reuss, Elllcott, Holumann ("for choice,"
Sinl.'p. 286), Weiss (Herzog, RE.i Suppl. i. 481, &c).
Wold. Schmidt (In Herzog, Off.' xi. 373, and In 6th ed.
of Meyer). Schenkel (rhriitutbild dtr Jpott. ISM,
p. 88) was a convert to It, while Bishop Ughlfoot. who
had promised a full discussion of the two kindred
questions In his long-looked-for Introduction to Ephe-
sians, meanwhile expressed his belief that educated
opinion is tending, however slowly, in this direction.
(See also bis remark, Ign.> II. p. 63, that the Ephesians
were "the chief, though probably not the sole, re-
cipients " of the Epistle.)
EPHE8IANS, EPISTLE T O THE
maintain its exclusively Ephesian destination
(see supra, 8), and by those who reject its
authenticity while maintaining the genuine-
ness and integrity of the Epistle to the Colos-
sians (Davidson ; Renan, tit. Paul, xii. ; EwalJ,
S. S. p. 157 ; and Von Soden substantially).
Others, however, rejecting Ephesians entirely
and Colossians wholly or in part, see in Col.
iv. 16 a reference to our Epistle (Baur, Paulu%
ii. 47 ; Volkmar, Apoc. 67 ; Hitzig ; Hansratb,
Ap. Paulus; Holtzmann, Krit., passim, and
KM.* p. 294). The great mass of those critics wli >
accept both Epistles as genuine and regard Ephe-
sians as in any sense a circular letter take the
same view (Anger, Ueber den Laod.-brief, 1843;
Reuss, Hist. N. T. §§ 119, l'JO, in Eng. tr. ; and
especially Lightfoot, Col. p. 274 sq., where tiie
question is discussed in all its bearings and with
full references to the literature of the subject).
The objections (restated by Weiss, EM. p. 26:.')
turning on the difficulties as to the method of
circulation and the movements of Tychicus are
not generally regarded as very serious.
(b.) Place and Date of Composition. — The
Epistle was written at the same time as those
to Colossians and Philemon, and carried by
Tychicus (vi. 21), who, with Onesimus the bearer
of the letter to Philemon (Philem. r. 13), waa also
charged with the delivery of that to Colossae
(Col. iv.7). St. Paul was a prisoner at the time
(Ephes. iii. 1, iv. 1, vi. 20; Philem. t. 10); this
fixes us to the alternative • of either his twj
years' imprisonment at Caesarea (Acts xxiii. 3",
xxiv. 27), or his two years' imprisonment at
Rome (Acts xxviii. 30). The former has lieea
contended for by some modern scholars, but is
certainly to be rejected d [Colossians, Epistlc to
the]. The silence of St. Paul as to the earth-
quake which reduced Laodicea, as well as Hierr—
polis and Colossae according to Eusebius, to ruin;
in Nero's reign, is explained by the fact that th-j
disaster had taken place at least two yean pre-
viously (a.d. CO) if we follow Tacitus (A,. ■>.
xiv. 27), or else did not take place till at least
a year later (A.D. 64, Eus. Chron.).
Taking Rome then as the place of writing,
the date depends (1) on the date of St. Paul's
arrival there [see Kestus; Paul]; (2) on the
order of the Epistles written from Rome (<ee
Lightfoot, Phil. Introd., and articles Colos-
sians and Philippians). Assuming St. Paul
to hare reached Rome in the beginning of
a.d. 61, and the Philippians to be the first of
his Roman Epistles, our group would come at
the very end (Philem. v. 22) of the titrla (Acts
xxviii. 31), i.e. at the beginning of the year 63.
(c.) Occasion.— St. Paul when he wrote had
reason to hope for a speedy release, and intended
to visit Asia at once upon regaining his liberty
(Philem. v. 22). Bnt, in addition to the possibility
of his former disappointment (Philip, ii. 24) beinlj
repeated, there were strong motives for his
writing, and that without delay. (1) The rapid
• St. Paul's other Imprisonments (2 Cor. vi. 5, xi. 23 ;
cp. Acts xvi. 23) cannot have been of the duration
implied in the language of these Epistles (Col. iv. IS).
The "second " and rlnal imprisonment is of course not t->
be thought of (contrast 2 Tim. iv. 6 with Philem. v. 22).
•> See Lightfoot, CMou. p. 37 sq., and on the other
side Weiss, Binl. p. 280; Reuse, BUt. X. T. Script.,
Eng. Tr. p. 106.
Digitized by
Google
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
jrorfa of Gentile Christianity in proconsular Asii
had fur >ome time been filling him with eager
and increasing anxiety (Col. ii. 1 and Ephes.
throughout) for the healthy growth, and settle-
ment in the one true Israel of God (Gal. vi. 16 ;
iphes. ii. 12), of the converts from the un-
(ircanicUion. From Kpaphrns (Col. i. 7, iv. Vi),
who evidently entered into all that he felt, he
hsird of their love and faith, their difficulties
with the Jewish element in the Church (Ephes.
ii. 11, and iv. 3?), and longed to impart to them
<u he had done to the original Gentile Church
« I Antioch years before, Acts xi. 26) the special
xfyurpa (Rom. i. 11, 13 b) of his apostleship
<<U1. ii. 7, 8 ; Bom. xi. 13). (2) An equally
strong and even more urgently pressing motive
vis tU state of things in the Lycus valley [see
Coussiass]. It would seem indeed almost
I rotable that the (3) return of Onesimus to his
master at this particular time was suggested by
the opportunity of the mission of Tychicus, rather
than the converse: the desirability of sending him
K-ith all possible promptitude (Philem. t>c. 14,
15) would at any rate make the opportunity
thus offered one to be seized. [Philemon.]
It would appear (see below, § 3 e) that St.
Paul at first contemplated, in addition to the
private letter to Philemon, a single letter to the
1'b.urdws of Asia, embodying his anxiety for the
spiritual growth of the Gentile Christians ; for
their progressive realisation of their position in
the commonwealth of Christ's Body, of all that
that position meant, and of its claims upon their
practical life. But upon the arrival of Kpsphras
w ith the news from Colossae, it became impos-
>."j\e to meet the special requirements of that
Church and neighbourhood with on epistle fitted
for the widely-spread communities of proconsular
Asia. The Epistle ultimately took shape in two
forms:' a special letter for the Colossians, and
a general letter which the Apostle finally ad-
dressed to Ephesus, the metropolis in the faith
(Acts xix. 10. 26) of the entire province. The
relative priority of the two Epistles is on this
view unimportant: while it is psychologically
more natural for She general idea to precede its
special application, it is quite in harmony with
this that, when the time for writing came, the
acre special letter was written first. The ques-
tion cannot be decided, however, upon such a
priori grounds : nor is the relation between the
ifutles to the Galatians and Romans an exact
l^rallel. Bp. Lightfoot, numbering Philippians,
* olfosiaas, Philemon, 1, 2, and 3 respectively in
: lis group, evidently regards Ephesuns as writ ten
bst.
(J.) Main Purpose and leading Ideas. — The
tputle as finally drafted carries out the aim
ladirated above. Its object is accordingly
"much mere definite than it is often thought to
** . . . These views [of Meyer, Schenkel, Alford,
Barless, Gloag, Lightfoot] may be all partially
wrert, bat they are not enough. In this very
xttiag forth of the greatness of the Church,
is this description of her life, in this present-
ing of her to as in all the ideal glory of her
•*•*• at united to her Lord, the Apostle has
» fsrther and immediately practical aim — to
•So Wrusicker. Ap. ZeitaUer. p. 585 (rejecting both
^!**l»$, "Tb» two were probably composed, not
r - : «"siverr but sunuitsneously."
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE 940
show us that this ideal glory contemplated from
the first the union of both jews and Gentiles in
equal enjoyment of the privileges of God's cove-
nant, and that to the completeness of the body
of Christ the latter are as necessary as the
former, and that it is only when both are
together in Christ that His fulness is realised
and manifested" (Milligan, Encyc. Brit. p. 462;
the whole section should be consulted). The
Epistle is in fact Vie Gospel of the Gentiles, St.
Paul's own Gospel in its positive expression.
For his Apostleship of the Gentiles to be ui) fir
Ktv&v (Gal. ii. 2, and see Philip, ii. 16), it was not
enough to have vindicated their rights against
Judaising demands: they must realise and justify
their position as fellow-citizens of the saints
(Ephes. ii. 19), as living branches of the sacred
olive-tree (Rom. xi. 17), of the ancient and
renovated (Ephes. iv. 13, 24; v. 25, 26) congrega-
tion of God, into which, in consummation of God's
eternal purpose (iii. 5, 1 1, &c), they had been at
length engrafted. This central purpose' of the
Epistle is (1) immediately suggested by its
general character and by the Gentile origin of
its readers (supra, § 2, a y), and (2) brought out
with irresistible clearness by an examination of
its structure (in/ra, e).
Reserving for the present a general discussion
of the theological contents of the Epistle and its
relation to St. Paul's other writings (§ 3), we
will now point out how its central purpose is
worked out. St. Paul traces the calling of the
Gentiles to the eternal (i. 4) counsel of God, now
at last in the fulness of time made known to all
His creatures (i. 9, 10; iii. 9-11), to sum up all
things once again in Christ (4 vaic«<paAeu«»o-aer9ai,
i. 10: so Bengel ; Schenkel, Christusbild ; Weiss,
B. T. ; the sense of &va- is marked by Tertull.
Monog. 5, "admitium reciprocare ; " Pesh., Vulg.,
Goth.). This again carries us back to the
original cosmic mediation of the Son, a princi-
ple presupposed in all St. Paul's teaching
(1 Cor. viii. 6: cp. Weiss, B. T. § 79, c ; and
Lightfoot, Col. p. 116), and brought out pro-
minently in the companion Epistle (Col. i. 16),
but in our Epistle tacitly taken for granted.
The unity of all in Christ, involved both in His
original relation to creation and in the corre-
sponding eternal purpose of God to sum up again
(cp. awoKaraAAoVo-eu', Col. i. 20, 21) all things
in Him, is as a matter of fact in abeyance. The
reason of this, the great problem of the later
Gnostics, St. Paul does not discuss: but sin is
here, as in the earlier Epistles (Rom. i. 2 1 ; viii.
20), assumed as the cause (Ephes. ii. 1), while
an original personal source of the cosmic discord
(ii. 2, vi. 12) is pointed to. In relation to man,
this severance or estrangement has come (1) be-
tween man and his Creator (v. 18; cp. Col. i. 21),
involving the former in darkness (v. 8), death,
and the wrath of God (ii. 3-5, iv. 22) ; and (2)
between Jews and Gentiles, as a wall of division
' Baur, Ewald, HolUmanu, and others have pointed it
out, but their perception uf the truth has been embar-
rassed by assumptions as to date and authorship, and
consequently the doctrinal perspective of toe whole has
been missed. Especially, too much has been made of
the " conciliatory " (iv. 3) purpose of the letter, supposed
to be exemplified in the language applied to the Jew s
(II. 12, Baur). to the older Apostles (iyioi. 111. 5), and
to the author of the Apocalypse (irpo^rtu, HolUmann!),
and even In the use made of 1 Peter (Weiss).
Digitized by
Google
950 EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
(ii. 14) and a state of hoatility (ib. 15, 16). In
relation to this latter point, the case has a two-
fold aspect, only to be understood in relation to
the respective functions of Covenant and Law as
laid down in St. Paul's older Epistles (cp. Gal. iii.
0-29 ; Rom. iii. 1, 2, 9, &c. The paradox is
expressed Rom. xi. 28 ; cp. Rom. iii. 20). On
the one hand, the " commonwealth of Israel "
(Ephes. ii. 12) was founded by God (Gal. iii. 16 ;
Rom. iv. 13) as a first step in the reconciliation
of man to his Creator. Israel was united to
God by a covenant, and enjoyed the privilege of
hope, on the ground of Divine promises (Ephes. ii. ]
12). Moreover, this voXlrtut was to endure for
ever (Rom. iii. 3, xi. 29). It was as Abraham's
teed that the "many nations " (Rom. iv. 13, 17) |
were to be called : the Gentiles were in God's t
good time (Ephes. i. 10) to take their place within j
" the Israel of God" (Gal. vi. 16). The removal j
of the ntvoToixo* tou <ppayiu>i, visibly embodied |
in the ordinances (ii. 15; cp. r. 11) which '
sharply severed Jew from Gentile, was not to •
destroy the " household of God," but to bring I
within its bounds those who had previously been ■
excluded. The continuity of the Church thus
lies at the very root of St. Paul's conception of
it (cp. Pfleiderer, Pautinism, ii. 40 sq.). But, on
the other hand, the Israelite stood in no less j
need of redemption than the Gentile: " JVewere [
by nature children of wrath as well as the rest " j
(ii. 3). The "ordinances" set an txtpa not
only between them and the rest of mankind, but
between them and God (cp. Rom. iv. 15 ; Col.
ii. 14). They that were '• near," not less than
they that were " afar off," needed " peace " and
*< access to the Father " (Ephes. ii. 17, 18). Both
in being reunited to God were reunited to one
another (cp. Rom. iii. 30) by the death of Christ
(Ephes. i. 7 ; ii. 16). It follows from this that,
great as were the privileges of the ttaKWtia toS
'lapa^K, they were provisional and prospective,
awaiting completion with the fulfilment of the
Promises. In other words, the restoration of
the individual involres that of the Church. In
Christ, she receives (i. 23) a Head, a new princi-
ple of life an4 organic nnity (iv. 16) ; in Him
she is redeemed, saved, cleansed (vt>. 23-27), she
is His body ; in Him she realises the highest and
tenderest Old Testament ideal (Hos. ii. 16, 19 ;
Is. liv. 5, &c.) of the relation of God to His People
(Ephes. v. 25); in her His function in relation i
to the Universe finds its complete realisation |
(i. 23). Until the Church has grown into one |
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
(iv. 13 sqq.; cp. Col. i. 28, iii. 11), until all ex
elusive distinctions are effaced within her, God's
eternal purpose in Christ is unsatisfied (i. 10,
Ac). It is this, then, that St. Paul " agonises "
(Col. ii. 1) to impress upon the Gentile Christians
of Asia, praying again and again (Ephes. i. 15 ;
iii. 1, 14) that they may learn more and more
to what they have been called, until they grow-
to the measure of the stature of the fulness of
Christ. The key-note to the Epistle is struck
in the word itrlytmtris (i. 17), progressive en-
lightenment, not merely intellectual, bat of a
kind that will be fully realised only hereafter
(1 Cor. xiii. 12 ; on the word, see Lightfoot on
Col. i. 9 and Phil. i. 9). With this growth in
spiritual wisdom will come mutual toleration
(iv. 2) and forgiveness, the fruit of Christ's
redemptive grace (iv. 32 ; cp. ii. 15), and a life
worthy of their calling.
(c.) Structure. — The analysis given below aims,
not at following the sequence of ideas into
every detail, which in the case of this Epistle
would involve a commentary, but nt bringing out
the main flow of the thought. The Epistle is
characterised by great simplicity in this respect,
coupled with extraordinary complexity and
length in it* parenthetic matter. Its lack of
argumentative sequence is compensated by the
intense unity of purpose which runs through it,
compelling the writer back to a thread which is
constantly dropped, but never lost sight of from
beginning to end. St. Paul, after blessing God for
the privileges bestowed in Christ (i. 3), prays for
the progress of his readers in knowledge of what
these privileges imply (i. 15-18). This prayer,
after a reminder of the great change from their
past to their present condition (ii. 1, 5, 8, 1 1-1 3\
he reiterates (iii. 1, 14) with deeper fervency and
significance, the climax culminating in a dox-
ology. He exhorts them to carry out their
privileges to their normal practical issues, unity,
renunciation of Gentile vices, fidelity to social
and moral obligations, the armour of God,
prayer. Such is the outline of the Epistle, the
expression of St. Panl's burning anxiety that the
Gentiles should understand, and justify, their
fellow-citizenship with the saints and Israel of
God. But the peculiar distinction of the Epistle
is due to the fulness of substance which the
simple theme draws up at every joint and turn
from the underlying springs of the unsearchable
riches of Christ. The following table will make
this plain : —
1. 1-2. Apostolic salutation.
I. I. 3-14. Biased be God for the bUssingt bestowed in Christ upon all Christians.
[These blessings involve —
4-0. God's eternal purpose of our adoption in Christ.
1-1*. Our redemption and forgiveness through Ills Blood, by virtue of the riches of His
grace, to which also we owe —
8-10. Knowledge of Sod's purpose to sum up all things in Christ.
31. This purpose includes us all, both
12. Jews, rot* irpoijAwixdrac (who had previously hoped In the Christ),
13, 14. Yon Gentiles also who accepted the good tidlugs and were accordingly sealed
with the Spirit to the destiny in store for the Israelites (,« in. i^t eoi ,v
avrov repeated).]}
11. I. 16-23. for this reason (God's calling of toe Gentiles) I also (i.e . ss corresponding to God's purpose) pray
for your enlightenment by God, that you may grow in knowledge of Him.
[IS, 19. This Involves enlightenment concerning the hope and heritage to which you are
called, and particularly concerning
20-23. The Power of God exerted In Christ, and shown
{Resurrection,
Exaltation.
Consequent relation to the ChurcK.y
Digitized by
Google
EPHESIAXS, EPISTLE TO THE . 951
DX IJL 1-10. To* too, met dead in Gentile tint, or rather
[since ire Jews were in no better case]
w (few, ee. 4, &, Including vfiac , v. 1, and wav, v. 3), God raised to lift in Chritt.
[7-10. Import of this (1) as demonstrating God's grace for all future ages, 7,
(2) aw the foundation of Christian ethics. 8-10.]
11-22. Bear in mind, then, tkii momentous change in your state ; once aliens, nowfellow-citisens of the
Mints (1*).
[13-18. This effected by the blood-shedding of Christ, which has removed the barrier (jucrir.
rev t\p>) and made both one.
20-22. Von are now being bnilt into God's habitation, reared upon the Apostles and Prophets,
and upon Christ as corner-stone. J
IV. in. 1-10. To this end (Tour complete incorporation into the Edifice of the Church) / Paul, in virtue of my
special charge over you Gentiles, of which my bonds (1) and tribulations (13) are the pledge,
[2-0. This charge, of which you have beard, or may learn from what 1 have written, is a
stewardship, or gift entrusted to me, namely the revelation of a secret, to be made
known at last, of the inclusion of the Gentiles in the promise,
7-0. Which secret I am to proclaim to the Gentiles,
10-12. In order that to Powers unseen may be revealed God's manifold Wisdom, correspond-
ing to His eternal purpose in Christ,]
bow my knees to the one father that He may inwardly confirm and enlighten you, to comprehend
the tone of Christ (18 b, 10 a), that you may be brought to Christian perfection.
20, 21. Dozology : climax of the foregoing description of God's unlooked-for bounty, of which
the Church Is the eternal monument.
T. tv. 1-tL 0. Therefore, walk worthily of your calling,
[2, 3. General characteristics of this: J
It. 3b-16. Endeavouring to realise TTxrrx :
[■MS. Principles of Unity: One Lord, Ire
7-12. Means divinely provided for Its maintenance :
7, 8. Indlvldusls variously gifted by the exalted Christ (0, 10, a point
in reference to lib Exaltation),
9-13. And specially, for various offices, all subserving the progress of
the Church toward (unifying) completeness.
14-16. This completeness characterised—
(1) negatively, in relation to their old life,
(2) positively, in relation to Christ the Head and source of life, to the
Body.}
0. iv. 17-v. 14. Renouncing heathen habits and conduct, and, in general, exchanging the old
self for the new :
L lv. 26-v. 4. Various details to be avoided.
(Iv. 30-v. 1, 2. Counter-principles Interjected—
(1) The Spirit not to be grieved.
(2) Filial imitation of God.
(3) Response to the Love shown in Christ's
sacrifice.)
v. 5, 6. Warning as to consequences.
v. 7-14. Contrast of Light and Darkness.]
x, 16-tL 9. Walking wisely and redeeming the time, especially with regard to
(1) v. 18-21. Sobriety In body and mind (Spiritual Songs').
(2) t. 22-vl. ». Family and social relations.
[a. v. 22-33. Wives snd husbands.
[[24-32. CnaisT axs the Cbusch.TJ
b. vl. 1-4. Children and parents,
c. vl. 5-0. Slaves and masters.]
VL vL 10-24. Conclusion.
a. 10-20. Final Exhortation .' (1) Be strong In the Lord.
[The whole armour of God.1
(2) Prayer, generally (18) ;
specially for St. Paul (10, 20).
p. 21-24. epistolary matter.
Tycblcns and bis mission.
Final peace and benediction.
It will be observed, firstly, that with every , contains no systematic exposition of doctrine : its
desire to steer clear of exegetical assumptions on doctrinal richness is subsidiary to and illustrative
debated points in analysing the Epistle, it is im- of the practical purpose which binds the entire
possible to do «o entirely'; secondly, that the Epistle into one (for instance, the cardinal
commonly made division into a " doctrinal
(a.— ni-> and " practical " (iv.-vi.) portion is
•careely indicative of the main lines of cleavage
(iraisst Holtzm. A'rit. pp. 191, 218). The Epistle
• '4- tie dose connexion of ill. 1 and in. 14 is assumed
*aa amy of the very best authorities, in the face of
«aeri (Cbrysostom, Meyer, ax.), who mike r. 1 into a
ntf-cflnt&ined clause by what must be called the arbitrary
•as rogatory insertion of a verb neither expressed nor
•"sUe* ra the Greek.
doctrine of Christ as Head of the Church appears
in i. 23, iv. 16, and not least in v. 24-32), while
the practical precepts (iv.-vi.) come under the
general head of ijlair weonraTTJo-eu (iv. 1), and so
fall into the main current of the Epistle. Full
enlightenment, and a life worthy of their calling,
were not to be thought of as separable ; each was
equally necessary on the part of the Gentile
Church, if St. Paul was not to " hare run in
vain " (Philip, it 16).
Digitized by
Google
952 EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
§ 3. Authenticity-.
If the above view of the purpose of the Epistle
be correct, it establishes a presumption in favour
of its Pauline origin. It is dilficult for us to put
ourselves into St. Paul's position with reference
to the admission of the Gentiles to the Divine king-
dom. To us this admission is :i truism. To him
"this amazing Gospel was always fresh: there
was a touch of strangeness in it to the last " (Dale,
Lect.* xii. p. 202). Nor is it easy to believe that
anyone even in the generation which immediately
succeeded St. Paul, and which entered upon his
labours, could hare felt the novelty of this reve-
lation with its first freshness. To the writer of
this Epistle, not indeed the existence, but the
full naturalisation within the Churches of Gentile
Christendom, is still on its trial; it is a great
task, a matter demanding fervent prayer and
full of aniiety, to show them their rightful place
as heirs to God's promises and fellow-citizens of
the saints. Now after the fall of Jerusalem the
Church no longer had a Jewish metropolis; Jewish
Christianity fell more and more into the back-
ground (cp. Lightfoot, Gal,* pp. 300 sqq. ; Har-
nack, Dogmg. 1 pp. 97, 215 sqq. ; also Schenkel,
ChristusbiVl, p. vii. sqq.) ; after 70 A.D. the composi-
tion of such a letteras ours would be improbable ;
by 100 A.D. almost impossible. Such a presump-
tion, however, might be outweighed by strong
contrary evidence ; and contrary evidence has in
this case convinced critics of weighty authority.
(1.) External evidence. The apostolic author-
ship of the Epistle was fully recognised in the
«arlier decades of the 2nd century (Mangold in
Week, Einl.* p. 28S ; Holtzm. A'rir. p. 278). Of
writers who show reminiscences of its language
may be mentioned Clement or Rome [see in-
dex of passages in Lightfoot or Gebhardt; no
single instance is decisive, but taken all together
they fairly imply a knowledge of the Epistle] ;
Polycarp, Ep. ad Phil, i., cp. Ephes. ii. 8, 9, and
xii. [quotes Ephes. iv. 26 as from the " Scrip-
tures ; the chapter has with others been re-
garded as the work of an interpolator, on grounds
which Lightfoot (Ign. i. 586) has shown to be
arbitrary ; there is, however, the possibility that
Poljvarp is directly quoting two separate " Scrip-
tures " (Ps. iv. 5, Dcut. xxiv. 13, 15), especially as
he couples the two clauses by an et; but the
combination would in that case be an extraordi-
nary coincidence with Ephes. iv. 25 (yet the
composite quotation might be from a common
source ; see Hatch, Essays in Bib. Greek, pp. 203
sqq.)]; Hermas [Stand, x. 2 = Ephes. iv. 30,
Sim. ix. 13 = Ephes. iv. 4]; Letter to Dioqnetls
[c. ii., cp. Ephes. iv. 21-24?]; Justix [Dial. 39,
87 (from Ps. Ixviii. 18) = Ephes. iv. 8, Dial. 120
= Ephes. i. 21]. A direct reference to the Epistle
is made by Ignatius, who, in writing to the
Kphcsians (§ 12), addresses them as XlaiXou
cvuuwrrat, 6» ir wdVj) ivivr 4\n h utrnuovtin
* The phrase iv trian inurrikn Is open to some doubt.
The translation (of Kicnc. St. Kr. 1S69, p. 296) "in an
entire letter" Is scarcely tenable. We must choose
between (I) "In every letter " (Lightfoot, Ign. 2, p. 60),
who relies on Rom. xvl, 6, 1 Cor. xv. 32, xvl. 9, 19,
2 Cor. 1. B sq., 1 and 2 Tim. — passages which scarcely
satisfy the language of Ignatius, as they none of them
refer to the Epheslan Church ; and (2) " In every part
of his letter" (Westcott, Can* p. 47) : this use of «•£«
without the article Is borne oat by sneb passages as Acts
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
iftiy. Setting aside Meyer's arbitrary explana-
tion of vfiuy as not referring to the Ephesians
at all (but " to Pauline Christians as such " !), it
is difficult not to see in <rvp/ivo°T<u a reference to
the language of our Epistle (e.g. iii. 4, v. 32),
especially as the Epistle of Ignatius bears other
traces of its language ; compare Ign. Ephes. i.
with Ephes. i. 3-6, 9, 11, and cp. Ephes. r. 1, 2
(also other letters of Ign. : e.g. Polyc. 5, cp.
Ephes. v. 25 ; Smyrn. 6, cp. Ephes. i. 21 ;
Tra I. 11, cp. Ephes. iv. 25, v. 30). Ignatius,
then, regarded our Epistle as written by St. Paul.
To this body of evidence we must add that
of the Gnostic sectaries. From the Ophites
downward, the quotations from their writings
in Hippolytus show that our Epistle was known
to them. It is not, indeed, always certain
whether this or that individual heresiarch
(Basilides, Valentinus; cp. Westcott, Gin. 4 pp.
291, 295 sq.), or merely his followers, are stated
by Hippolytus to have used the language quoted,
for he uses the words Qacrl, pnal convertibly,
and that even when speaking of a sect as
distinct from a person (see Salmon, Introd. 1
pp. 69,73; Holtzm. Einl.' p. 136, n.). But when
we find the Epistle commonly acknowledged
among these schools, it is unreasonable to ex-
clude their founders, especially as the case of
Sfarcion at least is beyond all doubt. The
Valeatinians (and, as Westcott, uW supra, shows
ground for believing, Valentinus himself) quoted
Ephes. iii. 4-1 8 as ypa<t>-fi (Hipp. Phil. vi. 34), and
Heinrici (Die Vol. Gnosis «. die h. Schrift, pp. 184,
192, Berl. 1871) has further shown grounds for
believing that they actually commented upon it.
By the close of the second century our Epistle was
universally received as St. Paul's : Irenaeus, the
Muratorian Canon, Tertullian, Clement of Alex-
andria, unite the testimony of widely separated
Churches: it is unnecessary to do more than
mention their names, or to refer to evidence
later in date. Thus strongly attested by un-
contradicted tradition, the Pauline authorship
of the Epistle was unquestioned until the third
decade of the present century.
(2.) Modern Enquiries — (a.) Kegatiee cri-
ticism. Doubts as to the authenticity of the
Epistle were first expressed by listen (Paul.
Lehrbcgriff, 1824), but purely on the ground
of its relation to Colossians. He regarded the
character of the Epistle as thoroughly Pauline,
and uses it throughout his book as a standard
for St. Paul's doctrine. He derived his doubts
from Schleiermacher's lectures, which however,
as published, merely express the opinion (" very
improbable," Bleek) that Tychicus, the bearer
of Colossians, was charged by St. Paul with
the composition of this as a companion Epist le
(pp. 165 sq., 194). De Wette (Introduction * and
Commentary, 1843) rejected the Epistle on in-
ternal grounds also, as un-Pauline in language
and ideas, and a mere " verbose amplification "
xvll. 26, ca*t wturoe rpovHffov r$c yijc (according to the
correct reading), Arlst. JKth. .Vie. 1. xlll. 7, «<u iriv ewpa,
passages which can hardly be brought under the rebut-
ting principle laid down by Lightfoot in loco. The great
exaggeration Involved In the former alternative almost
vanishes with the adoption of the latter, aa the Epistle
to the Ephesians, In spite of Its lack of local or personal
references. Is throughout closely addressed to the par-
ticular spiritual needs of Its readers.
Digitized by
Google
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
<•! Colossians. He ascribed the Epistle to s
disciple of St. Paul and to the sub-Apostolic age,
is also did Ewald (Sieben Sendschr. da N. B.
I'p. 153 sqq. ; Hist, of Isr. 1 viii. 190 sqq., E.
Tr.X who dated it aboat A.D. 75. A similarly
negative Attitude toward the Epistle is taken np
Ir Kenan, Davidson, Hausrath (Apost. Paul, and
Mst. of A'. T. limes), Ritschl (Sechtfert. u.
Vtnihn* ii. p. 244, &c), WeizsKcker (Apost.
ZHalter, 1886, pp. 330, 561, &c), and others,
in addition to those to be mentioned presently.
f>e Wette's objections were answered by Liine-
wann (dc Ep. ad E/>h. authentic, Gott. 1853),
aad among others who hare defended the Epistle
may be mentioned here Bleek (Lectures, and
fntrod. to 2f. T.\ Schcnkel (in the 1st ed. of
Lange'i A". T. and elsewhere), Klbpper (de origme
Epp. ad Eph. et Co/^ Greifsw., 1853), Meyer,
W. Schmidt, Reuss, and Weiss.
(!•.) Merely negative criticism was incomplete
v- it hoot some attempt to give a positive account
t :' the origin of the Epistle. This attempt was
rrst made by Schwegler (in the 1'heol. Jahrb.
I *44) and Baur (Paalus,' 1845), who found in
tne Epistle traces of Gnostic and eren Montanist
I inguage and ideas, and assigned it, along with
that to the Colossians, to the middle of the 2nd
tentnry; the main theme and underlying idea of
the " twin " letters being the reconciliation, in
Chri»t ai Head of the Universe and of the Church,
of all opposing principles, and more especially
<f Judaism and Gentilism ; the author a Pauline
Christian writing in order to conciliate the
Jewish element in the Church, and ottering "as
concessions" the recognition of the earlier pre-
rogative of the Jews (Ephes. ii. 12), and of
rood work* as on a par with faith (ii. 8 sqq.).
This construction was adopted by the Tubingen
School generally (Zeller, Volkmar, Ac), and is
maintained in a modified form by Hilgenfeld
sod by Pfleiderer, who deny, however, the single
authorship of the two letters ; the former (Einl.
pp. 666, 677) regarding the two as successive
editions by distinct hands, at an interval of
wme twenty years, of a work designed by a
jnosticbing Pauline Christian to re-assert the
diminished authority of St. Paul against the
opposite extremes of Gnosticism and Jewish
Christianity which had thrust it into the back-
croind in the Asiatic Churches (against this
uturoption cp. Lightfoot, Col. pp. 50-62) ; while
PHeiderer regards our Epistle as quite distinct
■a aim from that to the Colossians, and as the
work of a Pauline Jewish Christian, aiming at
ta» reconciliation of opposing parties in the
Chorea, and as chiefly directed against a hyper-
fialine or rather Asiatic and Gnostic ( Urchristcn-
t*m. pp. 384 sq., 693) Antinomianism coupled
with practical licence (Paulinism, ii. 162). Lastly,
Weiaieker (Ap. Zeitalter, 1886, p. 561) sees in
tee two Epistles the work of one hand, and
«> attempt to rehabilitate in Asia Minor the
'"gotten authority of St. Pani. It may fairly
** said that the " tendency criticism " of the
Tubingen School, whether in its original shape
w in its later modifications, has failed to reach
ear consistent result as to the origin of the
<"» Epistles.
(c) More definite results were to be expected
fr-fli toe method of literary analysis, especially
*'th regard to the mutual relations of Epbesians
ud Colossians. If the genuineness of either is
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE 953
called in question, their relative priority (to-
gether with their literary relation to other N.T.
writings) becomes a vital problem. Mayerhoff
(1338) had decided the question of priority in
favour of Ephesians, while questioning the
genuineness of either Epistle. Bat the majority
of critics decided in favour of Colossians until a
new departure was made by Hitzig (Zur Kritik
paulin. Briefe, 1870), who suggested (following
a hint of Weisse in his Philos. Dogmatik, 1855)
the possibility of mutual priority, the wholly
spurious Epistle to the Ephesians having been
written in the time of Trajan, and then used by
its composer in order to interpolate a genuine
Epistle of St. Paul to the Colossians. This sug-
gestion was followed up by Honig, who however
made the " Interpolator " a third person (Zeitschr.
f. viss. Theol. 1872), and by Holtzmann, whose
elaborate essay (Kritik da Epheser- und Kolosser-
briefe auf Orund finer Analyse ihrer Verwand-
schaftsterhaltnisse, 1872) presents the problem
with a thoroughness which leaves nothing to be
desired. (His theory will be discussed below : it
is conveniently summarised in his Einleitung,*
pp. 291 sq. ; but for its thorough appreciation
the original work is indispensable.) While Holtz-
mann's general idea has been endorsed, bat
with deviations in detail, by Hausrath, Pflei-
derer, Mangold (in Bleek, EM.*) and others,
no one critic has so far adopted the theory
in its original and most consistent form. His
most recent and able follower, Von Soden
(" Colosserbrief," in Jahrb. Prot. Theol. 1885 ;
" Epheserbrief," ibid. 1887), has reduced Holtz-
mann's theory almost to a vanishing point, by
re-asserting the genuineness of Colossians with
the exception of nine verses, and the spurious-
ness and dependence of Ephesians only. With a
remarkable reservation as to the latter (to be
noticed below), he thus brings back the ques-
tion to the status quo ante, and leaves it where
Weisse and Hitzig found it. His theory may be
summarised as follows: — The Epistle to the
Ephesians is un-Pauline in many of its ideas
and in much of its language (cp. infra, (3) c),
and is the work of an imitator thoroughly
familiar with the writings of St. Paul (worked
out by Von Soden in an elaborate criticism
of "reminiscences," with little or no proof
that the resemblances are due to anything but
identity of authorship). The main interest
of the writer is in the ultimate destiny of the
Christian (p. 460) in relation to the glorified
Christ, and in connexion with His cosmic function.
In this cosmic redemptive process, of which the
Church (p. 463) is the instrument, there are two
stages: (1) Peace between Jews and Gentiles
(formation of the Church) ; (2) perfect realisa-
tion of the Church as the w\jpufxa of Christ,
with whom the Church is thus quasi-identified,
occupying the place which St. Paul himself
assigns rather to the individual (1 Cor. xi. 3, 5 ;
Gal. ii. 20). The letter accordingly is an attempt
to further the fusion of Jewish and Gentile
Christians after the fall of Jerusalem by an
appeal as from St. Paul in view of the peculiar
circumstances of the time, and is in fact (p. 495)
much what St. Paul would have written had he
lived till then.
The problem of the relation of Ephesians to
Colossians is got rid of by the denial of any
special relation between them (except in the
Digitized by
Google
954 EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
8} rejected verses of Colossians and the " practical
portion " of Ephesians). Of this contention, to
which Von Soden devotes several pages (109-121)
of laboured proof, it is enough to say rots
(patvofiipois ap<pt<r$TiTii ivapySs (e.g. he will
not allow any marked parallelism between
Ephes. iii. 2, 5-7, and Col. i. 25-27 !). The dis-
cussion below [(3) e, a] will therefore take
account of Holtzmann rather than of Vou Soden.
(3) Is the Epistle genuine i The purely
negative points will be considered first, then
evidence supposed to point to some positive date
later than St. Paul, lastly the literary relations
of the Epistle to other New Testament books,
especially to Colossians. The latter relation,
however, enters into so many problems belong-
ing to our Epistle that in discussing the author-
ship of the one it is seldom possible to exclude
all reference to the other.
(a.) The historical situation. — The points urged
are (1) absence of local or personal references ;
(2) absence of personal acquaintance 1 between
St. Paul and his readers. These objections,
pointedly summed up by Kamphansen in
his verdict that the Epistle was "either not
written by Paul or not written to the Ephe-
sians," fall to the ground with the result of
our discussion (§ 2, a) of the destination of the
Epistle. (3) That it is unworthy of St. Paul to
have copied himself, as he must have done if
both Colossians and Ephesians are genuine
(against this, see above, § 2, c, and below). It
may be added here that the Epistle to Philemon,
the genuineness of which has not been seriously
questioned, lends a historical context and corro-
boration to its two companions, so much so that
Baur, condemning the two latter, rejected Phile-
mon on that ground alone ; his highly fanciful
explanation of its origin will be found in Paulus,
ii. p. 93.' The remark of Holtzmann (Aril. p. 14 ;
more smartly put by Von Soden, p. 473) that
if the Epistle is genuine its traditional inscrip-
tion is a standing puzzle (against this see above,
§ 2, a) suggests the reply that this is still more
the case if it be spurious. If the imitator of
St. Paul wrote in 'Zipiatp (i. IX he must have
been singularly lacking in ingenuity to have
avoided all reference to St. Paul's intercourse
with the Ephesian Church. If he did not, how
are wc to explain such a daring deviation from
his model ? Holtzmann's answer to this ques-
tion (p. 131) will scarcely satisfy anyone but
himself. Von Soden's (p. 479) is ingenious, but
does not meet the difficulty.
(h.) Absence of characteristic Pauline ideas. —
It must be remembered in limine that it is one
thing to take the Pauline " homologumena "
(Galatians, Corinthians, Romans) as the standard
of Pauline doctrine and language, but quite
another thing to demand that St. Paul shall
i Holtzmann insists on the contrast between the
colourlessness of our Epistle in this respect and the
richness of personal details In Acts xx. 17-38. or in Rom.
xvl. 3-16, where '* we have a genuine greeting from the
Apostle to Ephesian Christians." For the reasons which
have led a number of scholars (Reoan, Reass, Farrar.
Ac, first suggested by Keggennann, 1767) to see In
Rom. xvl. 1-20 the fragments of a lost letter to the
Ephesians, sec Romans. Epistle to tbb.
I Baurt view Is revived by WeUascker, Ap. Ztttr.
1886, p. S65 : see Kenan (St. Paul, p. xl.).
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
never be permitted to step beyond their special
vocabulary or special mental horizon, never be
supposed to be occupied with any problems or
controversies other than those of the period of
his life to which they belong, nor to give to
conceptions developed in the conflicts of that
critical epoch a more positive and final expres-
sion. The same caution applies in some measure
to the attempt to compare such an Epistle as
ours with the four earlier ones in concentration,
power, and intensity. Such a psychological
crisis as marks the period of those letters does
not come twice in n man's life, nor does it last
long " (see also the remarks in article on Colos-
si A.\8). It leaves its mark behind; but while
it lasts, it must draw from depths of the spirit
which less stirring conditions fail to sound.
Since the last Epistle of the main group was
written, nearly rive years had passed, aud much
had happened. The Epistle to the Romans was
St. Paul's last word on the question of principle
between himself and the Jndaisers. If the latter
were still at work, St. Paul did not think it
necessary to re-open against them a question
which had been argued out (see Philip, i. 17,
iii. 2). The Gentile Churches were growing,
and new difficulties and dangers were threaten-
ing them.
The main Pauline characteristics missed by
the critics of our Epistle are: (1) Polemic against
Judaism. This is met by what has been said.
Our Epistle is probably at least a year later than
Philippinns, where no such doctrinal polemic is
entered npon. The Asiatic Churches were now
exposed to a new Judaising influence (Col. ii. 16,
&c), not to be met in the old way. (2) Justifica-
tion by faith. It is certainly true that this EpUtle.
like that to Colossians, contains no mention of
this doctrine. "The word 'justification' does
not occur ; the specific idea for which the word
stands does not occur" (Dale). But "to St.
Paul the doctrine of justification by faith was
not a final statement of Christian truth : " the
idea of justification had been the common ground
between St. Paul and his Judaising opponents ;
he had met their insistancc upon the authority
of law by the doctrine of justification by faith,
"a conception of the Christian redemption ex-
pressed in terms of law:" this particular
expression of i belonged, then, to a controversy
of which already in the Epistle to the Philip-
pians (iii. 9) we catch merely the echo. "The
Fact which his account of Justification by Faith
represented in one form is represented here in
another. His mind and heart are filled with
the Divine Grace" (Dale, Lect* x., pp. 170-177).
While xfoTij, the human factor in salvation, is
not lost sight of (ii. 8, iii. 17, vi. 23), it is over-
shadowed by the Divine and Creative (Ephes.
ii. 10, iv. 22-24; 2 Cor. v. 17) factor x°>",
conceived in a manner admittedly Pauline
(Holtzm. Krit. p. 213). Hence the "catholic
synthesis of faith and works" (id.), a rock of
offence to hostile critics, but here (ii. 10), as in
the older Epistles (Rom. vi. 4, 14 ; viii. 3, 4-),
regarded as the work of the Spirit, resulting
k Against the view (current in Germany) that tbe
Epistle to tbe Galatians was written not less than three
years before those to the Corinthians and Romans, see
Galatians, and Llghtfoot, Gal. Inlrod. ill. (especially
on the close relation between UaL and 2 Cor.).
Digitized by
Google
EPHESIANS. EPISTLE TO THE
from onion with God through and in Christ. '
(Toe transition to the Ephesian form of this !
doctrine it to be found in Philip, ii. 1 2, 13.) We ]
may add that the psychological and anthropo-
logical assumptions of the older Epistles are also
to be found here [eg. the conception of <r«p{ as
toe teat of lust and sin (ii. 3, Col. ii. 11), and
toe intermediate position of the rovs, needing,
yet susceptible of, renewal (Col. ii. 18 ; Ephes.
it. £i ; cp. Rom. vii. 23, 25). The use of wvevita
(ir. 23) is not more surprising than that in
'i Cor. vii. 1]. On the identity of the teaching
of this Epistle with that of the main Epistles on
the previous position of Jews and Gentiles, see
above, § 2 d (and on this part of the subject
generally, Weiss, Biol. Tkeol. §§ 100, 101, the
general validity of whose results is allowed by
Holtzm. Krit. p. 205). So far, then, as ideas
characteristic of the " homologumena " are absent
from our Epistle, there is nothing in the fact
inconsistent with the genuineness of the latter.
But there remains the more crucial inquiry,
whether the Epistle contains ideas inconsistent
with the known mind of St. Paul, or wholly
foreign to it, or to anything in his historical
environment, and whether its form betrays the
work of another hand.
(c) Definitely un-Pauline Features. — i. Vo-
cabulary, 1 Style, and Constructions. It is an easy
method of impugning the genuineness of any
book to ascribe divergencies of language to
diversity of authorship, and coincidences to
imitation. Holtzmann, in his elaborate verbal
analysis (pp. 113-120, 131-148) of the Epistle,
has not always kept clear of this method,
although he is of course alive to its fallacy.
His test (correspondence of idea) is satisfactory
» far as it goes, but diversity of idea, even
where the language is strikingly alike, does not
demonstrate unintelligent imitation (compare
uj. the similar passages, Rom. iv. 15, v. 13,
rii. 8, each distinct from the others in idea and
connexion). Peculiar expressions there certainly
are in our Epistle, such as vi. 11, puSottia rov
tiaBiXm (St. Paul always says o-aravas, not
fcdSoAoj, except in 1 and 2 Tim.); v. 5, tart
TvaVxarro ; iii. 21, tit wiaas rot ytt>4as tov
•mm r£n> auwirow, and others: but many are
objected to with no show of fairness: e.g. St.
Paul may imply (Rom. vi. 21), but may not
expressly state (Ephes, v. 11), that Gentile sins
are facopwa; he may combine (Rom. r. 21)
ipoprla and vopdw-rviux in the singular, but not
in the plural, at least not with nat (Ephes. ii. 1) ;
he may give two lists of church officers (1 Cor.
1 As to the vocabulary, the facts are tbew. The
tfUle contain* about 2,400 words, that to the Colosslans
•■tat 1,6*0. Of the former, 36 are i»of Aey6><ra (in
tte 5. T. Bat this is nothing unusual ; the Second
fyUle to the Corinthians, with something more than
W»» words, has loo ira( Ai-^ura, i.e. nearly 2 per
o»i, ** against l r per cent. In our Epistle). The
fyiaue to the G,l»»L.u» has 33, Jost 3 per cent. Our
EpWe bm 18 words (Colosslans has 11) peculiar to St.
tui (omitting the Epistles to Colossians, Timothy, and
fitos from the argument), 39 New Testament words
>ot elsewhere need by 8c. Paul (Coloesians has IS) ; while
<t the (nearly) toe words common to both Epistles, 10
■» peculiar to them In the N. T. , S peculiar to St. Paul,
• S. T. words not elsewhere used by St. Paul (see
Miimim, Krit. pp. loo, HI, and the Appendix to
Tlaref ■ Ltxiam e/ 2f. T. Oretky
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE 955
xii. 28 ; Rom. xii. 5), but must not give a third
(Ephes. iv. 11); he may speak of ayaray rov
dtbv (Rom. viii. 28) and iptKttr rov Kiptov
(1 Cor. xvi. 21), but on no account of ayaray
The Kiiptor (Ephes. vi. 24); he may call his
converts " beloved children " of his oven (1 Cor.
ir. 14, 17), but not " beloved children" of Gud
(v. 1 ; Holtzmann, p. 102, singles out this as
"a speaking example"). Dittuseness, tauto-
logy, catchwords and tricks of style (such
as fondness for indirect questions after verbs
of knowledge, tparrtfaiy rl to hKovtos and
the like, i. 18, iii. 9), combination of cognate
words (i. 6, ii. 4, iii. li,, strings of genitives
(i. 6, 10, 18, 19, &c), the use of war, especially
to intensify abstract nouns, are more or less
decided peculiarities of this Epistle and that to
the Colossians, many of which, however, are
found (with less frequency) elsewhere in St.
Paul. But when we are told (Holtzm. Krit.
p. 139) that the occurrence of a word
(avc{ix>dao-TO<) only in Rom. xi. 33 and Ephes.
iii. 8 is a proof that one place borrows from the
other, or that the writer of Ephes. iii. 14 can
only have derived the idea of bowing his knees
to God from the study of Rom. xi. 4 or xiv. 1 1,
we realise the deceptiveness of verbal coinci-
dences. The style of the Epistle is further
objected to at lacking the syllogistic structure,
the sharp dialectical spring, the nerve and sjion-
taneity of the acknowledged writings of St.
Paul. This criterion is to some extent subjec-
tive : so far as it rests on tangible data (such as
the infrequency of yip, so characteristic of Rom.,
Gal., Cor. ; Upa olv, once only Ephes. ii. 19,
eight times in Koin., but only once in Gal.,
1 These., not in Cor.; tii, live times in our
Epistle, quite as frequent as elsewhere), it is
amply explained by the fact that St. Paul is
not here engaged in argument. Nor is it
reasonable to look for uniformity or equality of
style in the letters of a man of action (see the
interesting parallel case of Xeuophon, in Salmon,
lutrod.* p. 419, note).
ii. Ideas.— (1) Christology. The relation of
Christ's Redemptive Work to the Universe (" the
mere presence of which shows the later point of
view," Holtzm.) is certainly a prominent thought
in our Epistle (i. 10 ; Col. i. 20), but it cannot
surprise us in the writer of Rom. viii. 18-23.
His original mediation in creation (Col. i. 18) is
admitted to be already expressed in 1 Cor. viii. 6.
From 1 Cor. xv. 27 the transition (through
Philip ii. 9, 10, as Holtzmann admits in Zeitschr.
•pus. Theol. 1881, p. 102, n.) to the doctrine of
our Epistles is not great, nor in any way incon-
sistent with the final inrorcifij of the Son to the
Father as expressed in 1 Cor. xv. 28 (see also
Colossians). Von Soden has made a very re-
markable discovery in this connexion (pp. 440
sqq.). After drawing out (most admirably) the
way in which Christ pervades the Epistle from
end to end, standing always m the Centre of
Christian faith and hope, conduct and life, as
the bond of all Christian relations, as the
Source of all Christian graces, he appeals to this
leading characteristic of the letter, not indeed
as decisive proof, but as a confirmation of the
other proofs, of its un-Pauline authorship ! To
realise the contrast, he bids us read Colossians
or Philippians, and note the difference of atmo-
sphere. It it certainly a novel test of an un-
Digitized by
Google
t»56 EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
Pauline work — thnt it is too full of Christ!
But Von Soden goes on to suggest (p. 443)
thnt the author is reacting against a post-
apostolic and failed grasp of Christ as the
Centre of life and thought. The importance
of this admission is to be carefully noted.
Von Soden cannot refuse to see the gulf
between our Epistle with its energetic grasp
of a living Christ, and the whole group of
Apostolic Fathers and apologists to which he
supposes it to belong. Von Soden goes on to
remark that the Christology of the Epistle is
its most Pauline characteristic. (2) Anjelology.
The addition of 8f6voi (Col. i. 16) and «ti/pioVirr«
(Ephes. i. 21) to the terms applied in the earlier
Epistles (Rom. viii. 38 ; 1 Cor. jr. 24) to augelic
beings (cp. Ephes. iii. 10) cannot reasonably be
objected to: their mention in connexion with
the exaltation of Christ (Ephes. i. 20) reminds
us of Philip, ii. 10, which also supplies a point of
contact for the iwovpirta of our Epistle, which
term, however, is here used in a more definitely
local sense (i. 3, 20; ii. 6 ; iii. 10; vi. 12). The
demonology (Ephes. ii. 2 ; iv. 27 ; vi. 11, 12, lti)
is paralleled by 1 Cor. x. 20, and elsewhere, save
that i Sii0o\ot or A Tornpbt (Ephes. vi. 16) is
here substituted for the older aaravus. (3) The
Church, and Christ as Head of the Church. It is
objected that whereas St. Paul knows of local
churches (e.g. xi. 16). we here for the first time
rind the idea of the Church (but see Gal. i. 3 ;
1 Cor. x. 32) ; and further, that whereas in the
older Epistles the many members of Christ stand
in organic relations with one another through
Him (Rom. xii. 5; 1 Cor. xii. 13, 27). Christ
bsing the vital principle uniting (1 Cor. vi. 17)
and pervading the whole (1 Cor. xii. 12), in
those to Ephesians nnd Colossians (Ephes. i. 23,
iv. 15 ; Col. ii. 19. &c.) Christ is the " Head,"
».c. a member of the organic whole, the Church
as such being reduced to a trunk ! (Holtzm. Krit.
p. 240.) As this criticism has been gravely
adopted by several German scholars (e.g. Von
Soden, Col. p. 514, also Eplies. p. 467), it may
not be superfluous to point out that although
the former metaphor may be the more adequate,
either metaphor is perfectly natural, and ex-
pressive of part of the truth (cp. 1 Cor. xi. 3),
but that any metaphor may be pressed too far.
It should be further remarked that as the head
is incomplete without its body, so the Church is
the *\4ipupa of Christ, its Head (i. 23), inasmuch
as it is only in the Church that God's purpose in
the Kivaxns of his Son is completed (Ephes. i. 10 :
cp. Philip, ii. 7, 9, 10; Rom. viii. 21 ; 1 Cor. xv.
25). (4) Intellectualism. It is certainly true
that ttriyrmris and its cognate ideas (i. 17, iv.
U> : cp. niveau, iii. 4 ; <pp6yjiais, aoipla, i. 8, 17 ;
diro>c«[Atn|>i>, i. 17, iii. 3, 5, 10; yvuplfaiv,
ipartfaiy, i. 18, iii. 9 : see a more complete list in
Holtzm. Krit. 217) play a very prominent part
in onr Epistle, the key-note to which (see above,
§ 2, d sub fin.) is the earnest desire of St. Paul
for the increase in spiritual enlightenment of the
Gentile Christians. It should be noted that here
again the Epistle to the Philippians comes to our
aid (Philip, i. 9, 10), opening in the same strain,
and revealing the same desire on St. Paul's part
on behalf of another Gentile community at a
slightly earlier date (cp. also Philip, iii. 15,
<paov*iv, ixoKoKiwrtty, and Philip, iv. 8, also
1 Cor. i. 5 sqq.). That St. Paul shonld recognise
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
wisdom as a factor in Christian perfection (cp.
1 Cor. ii. 6, iii. 1 sqq., xiv. 20, &c.) is not
surprising : to see a " theosophiral " tinge in the
enlightenment which he desires for his readers
is purely arbitrary. The thought (of 1 Cor. ii.
6-16, &c.) that the revelation of Christ is the
deepest wisdom satisfies even such passages as
Col. i. 26, 27, ii. 2, 3 ; Ephes. iii. 3 sqq. The
rivarliptov of these Epistles is no esoteric or
abstruse doctrine, but St. Paul's " gospel " of
the calling of the Gentiles (the use of the word
in Ephes. r. 32 stands by itself. On the word
/wo-rtyMor in these Epistles, see Lightfoot on
Col. i. 26, 28; on Myruiris, see his note on
Philip, i. 9). The prominence given to Mynttxis
and its cognates in this Epistle is quite explicable,
therefore, in view of the phenomena of Philip-
pians on the one hand, and of St. Paul's earlier
teaching on the other. For a more thorough
discussion, see Weiss, B.T., § 102; also cp. Von
Soden, p. 456 sq.
(d.) Indications of post-Apostolic date. — (1)
General. To this head belongs the alleged
"studied assumption of St. Paul's personality"
(iii. 1-3, 7 ; iv. 1 ; vi. 20); the expressions Sr/un
iwovroKot, iii. 5 ; iKaxiariripos, iii. 8 (" an
extravagant imitation of 1 Cor. xv. 9 ") ; the
enumeration of church-officers, iv. 11 (voifUrtt
koI SiSoVkoAoi, " union of the two offices late :
the gifts of miracles and tongues have ceased, as
is shown by comparison with 1 Cor. xii. 28 ") ;
" the destruction of Jerusalem has taken place."
(Holtzmann, Krit. p. 160, infers this from Col.
iii. 1, 2 ; Ephes. ii. 6, comparing Heb. xii. 22, bnt
why not Gal. iv. 26 ?) Lastly, the age is one of
many sects (iv. 13, 14; Baitr, Ewald, Holtz-
mann, Sic., importing too much into the Greek).
It is not necessary to examine at length all
of the above and some other lesser objections,
urged by almost every adverse critic of the
Epistle ; but those founded on the difficult passage
iii. 3, 4, and on the phrase cited above from iii.
5, are not so easy to meet. Of the last no very
satisfactory explanation has been given— see
Meyer in loco and Schmidt — and taken alone
it would certainly appear to reveal a writer who
looked upon the Apostles and Prophets with the
distant veneration of a later date rather than as
one of their number. But it must be remarked
that the epithet fiyioi stands in close connexion
with the parallel passage in Colossians (i. 26),
in which rots ayiois airrov corresponds to the
toij ieytois awoar6\ois airrov nal wpinp^rais of
our present passage. The Sr/wi in general are
the mediate or general (iipayeptien), the e*. «•
vpof. the immediate or special (awfKaXtxpSv),
recipients of the revelation. Is it not possible,
then, that the word 07(015 was meant to have
the same sense in our passage as it had in
Col. i. 26, but that the words as they stand
have in some way been dislocated ? Reoss
(Gesch. -V. r.« p. 166) suggests that this is due
to a gloss. But even leaving the passage as it
stands, this difficulty alone will only turn the
scale if the other evidence is more nicciy balanced
than the writer of this article can regard it as
being. The problem is not unlike that involved
in Rev. xii. 14, where the twelve Apostles seem
to be looked at by the writer 06 extra.
(2) Gnosticism. — Baur (Partita, ii. pp. 10-25)
regarded the two Epistles as belonging to the
earlier stages of the Gnostic development, " »'
Digitized by
Google
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
which the Gnostic idea* still passed as unobjec-
tionable Christian speculation." (His arguments
to prove that they also bear traces of early
MonUnist ideas — Tpodnrrcu, progressive maturity
of the Church, the Spirit, holiness of the Church,
it— need no longer be examined : they break
dews in the face of Marcioo's possession of our
Epistle, and "would prove almost any Epistle
of St. Paul to be MonUnist," Holtz. Ant
p. 276.) His main arguments, in which he was
followed by the Tubingen School generally, and
in part by Holtzmann and others, are the use of
the term aAtfymtta — but in these Epistles it is
always, except Col. i. 19 (where the context
suggests rqx 8tor.\ a relative term, sA^papd
rivet, whereas in the Gnostic systems it is used
absolutely, as a term with a fixed denotation :
see also Lightfoot's discussion (Coloss. p. 257
«iq.)— the use of alAm (" personified as the
vehicles of divine ideas," a conception wholly
foreign to this Epistle), ytyiat (not " spiritual
existences," but human generations ; cp. Ephes.
iii. o\ and, in connexion with this, the Christo-
logy and Angelology (on which see above), the
"Srxvgia"of Christ and the Church — the descent
into hades, Ephes. ir. 8 (not peculiar to Gnostics,
cp, 1 Pet. iii. 18 ; but the reference is disputed) —
the •• iateUectualiam " of the Epistles (the anti-
poles of esoteric Gnosis : see above). Doubtless
there are coincidences with Gnostic terminology,
but they are most simply explained by Gnostic
borrowings from St. Paul. Moreover, if it be
contended that our Epistle, without betraying
traces of any particular Gnostic system, yet
tnticipates Gnosticism in its glances into tran-
scendent and mystical regions, this may be
allowed, in the sense in which we can trace " a
Gnostic element in Paulinism " itself (Holtz.
£■*£* p. 134). For a fuller discussion of the
question, the article of Dr. Milligan (tit supra)
osy be consulted.
(3) Faded Paulinism. — The adequate discus-
*• of this note of time would involve a dis-
cussion of current theories of the history of the
snb-Apostolic age, and of the manner in which
the various elements which the Church included
from the first (Jewish, Gentile, Pauline, &c.)
became assimilated. That this was on a basis
common to all follows from the nature of the
problem. That this again involved mutual ap-
proximation and the formation of a common or
»<r«rage presentment of doctrine, in which much
of the individuality of such a teacher as St.
Pasl would be missed, is no more than may
Wrly be gathered from the character of (say)
the Epistle of Clement. To show that the
Mental and moving faith of the Gospel was not
involved in any such process would be possible
in the proper place. But what concerns us here
•s the question whether we have before us a
Moct of the peculiar mind of St. Paul (Paul-
>wm in the strictest sense), or merely the
renex of his teaching in a mind other than his
own, inkier the influence of later circumstances,
«*i able to enter only into the general forms,
** into the inmost personal spirit, of the I
»P«tle of the Gentiles. What has been pointed I
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE 957
out above (§ 2, d, and preliminary remarks to
the present §; see also § 3, b) goes far, it is
submitted, to decide for the former alternative.
It may be admitted that the sharp outlines of
the conflict which colours the earlier Epistles
hare faded in that to the Ephesians: but this
was already the case in Philippians (see above,
§ 3, b). The general character of the post-
Apostolic age is found (see e.g. Holtzmann,
Kinl? p. 106) in a " Christian legalism," a co-
ordination of faith and works, a tendency to
translate Pauline ideas into ethical generalities.
Now, as far as onr Epistle is concerned, the main
example of this tendency is found in ii. 8-10, a
passage wholly similar in idea to Philip, ii. 12, 13 ;
nor can it be justly said that Christian ethics
are in either passage placed on a foundation
different from that of Rom. vi. 1 sqq. (see Weiss,
Bib. Thai. § 101 b.and note 5; also Pfleiderer's
admissions as to " successful harmonising," &c. ;
Paulinism, ii. p. 189). To take one more ex-
ample, Pfleiderer (». p. 181) objects that the
Epistle gives an ethical turn (i. 7, ii. 4, v. £5,
but especially v. 2) to the Death of Christ, thus
showing that the writer " was not familiar with
the idea of an expiatory death." This, again,
is a charge which might equally be brought
against the Epistle to the Philippians (ii. 8,
iii. 10); but is not the distinction between
Smrta (Ephes. v. 2) and IXatrrtmor (Rom. iii.
27) rather a precarious support for so sweeping
a conclusion? As a matter of fact, in speaking
of the Death of Christ St. Paul goes back inva-
riably to the ultimate moral ideas upon which
the compound and symbolic idea of sacrifice rests :
only in Ephes. v. 2 is the term rpoa<p6pa or
Smrta expressly applied to it. (See Weiss, B. T.
§ 80 c, notes 8-10 ; on the relation of Christ's
death to the reconciliation of Jews and Gentiles,
a point also objected to by Pfleiderer, see above,
§ 2, d.)
We are unable, therefore, to regard as suc-
cessful any attempt to identify the date of our
Epistle with some definite period of the post-
Apostolic age. But can we not, by an analysis
of its relations to other X. T. writings, trace it
definitely to an imitator of St. Paul?
(e.) Literary genesis of the Epistle. — a. Relation
to Colossians. This is the touchstone of the
entire question of authorship: it was the first
ground that raised the question (supra, § 3. (2)
a), and upon it depends almost every problem
relating to the Epistle. It is necessary first to
show the extent of the correspondence between
the two Epistles. It may be said that with the
exception of the Christological passages (Col. i.
15 sq. ; ii. 3, 9, 10, 14, 15), the passages relating
to the Colossian heresy, certain personal matter
(Epaphras, Onesimus, &c.),and one or two lesser
features (e.g. Col. i. 24 ; iii. 1-4 ; iv. 6), the
vrhot'v of the JCpistle to Colossians is more or less
directly reproduced in that to the Ephesians. The
table™ of strictly parallel passages does not
do full justice to the facts: many passages
which at first appear peculiar to Colossians cor-
respond, though not verbally, to passages of the
sister Epistle. To take an example unpromising
* The following list of parallelisms is fairly complete : for the convenience of the discussion in the text it is
*"**, in accordance with Holtzmann's hypothesis. Into two classes. It Is impossible to denote the exact degree
tf nwIarUJ In each place j K varies from entire paragraphs to single words or expressions. This also explains
ft* ha that portions of the same verse in some cases appear In both chases of parallelisms. For other table*, see
Digitized by
Google
958 EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
at first sight, compare Col. iii. 11 with Ephes. ii.
15, i. 23, iv. 13 (unity of Church in Christ, who
is all in. all, in context Kith the idea of the
corporate nea or perfect man, effacing pre-existing
lines of division). To show it in detail would
involve a comparative analysis of the two
Epistles: but the converse might also be shown,
that, excepting the topics of the relations of
Jew and Gentile, the unity of the Church as
including both, the marriage of the Church to
Christ, the Spirit, the contrast of darkness and
light, and the armour of God, there is little in
our Epistle that is not also to be fonnd in
Colossians.
Starting from the argument that literal
simultaneity is impossible, Holtzmann lays stress
on the cul de sac in which both critics and
defenders of the EpUtles find themselves, in
face of the qnestion which of the twin Epistles
came first into the world. (In particular
he poises the koI 6/uTs of Ephes. vi. 21 — no
no! in Col. iv. 7 — against the *a! ificTs of
Col. iii. 8— no ncd in Ephes. iv. 22 — the iral
in either case appearing to presuppose a similar
message already penned for other readers.)
Assuming that this holds good (against the view
takeu above, § 2, c), he proceeds to his first
main step, the proof that neither Epistle can
claim priority t/iruug/i-ut (as had been assumed
in earlier discussions). While in many passages
Colossians shows indisputable originality, the
same can be shown of Ephesians in other cases.
He then propounds the explanation of a common
original in the shape of a short Pauline Epistle
to Colossians, used (with other genuine Epistles
of St. Paul) by the composer of Ephesians. The
latter Epistle is then used 6;/ tl« composer to fill
out the original Epistle, which also receives
C'hristoiogical and polemical additions, directed
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
against an early form of Gnosticism ; the result
! being our present, " half-Panline, half-Ephesian,"
Epistle to Colossians. The theory is then further
corroborated (p. 13U), first by the fact that the
parallelisms which are due to the original Pau-
line letter occur in different order in the two
Epistles, while those due to the " Autor ad
Ephesios " proceed pari passu, owing to the
systematic use of his own work made by the
latter in his interpolations (a glance at the
list given in note " will show that this is not
everywhere the case): secondly, by a most
minute analysis of the Epistles, with the aim of
showing (1) the dependence of Ephesians through-
out upon St. Paul's admitted Epistles, but
especially upon the alleged original Epistle to
Colossians ; (2) that the latter is unmistakably
Pauline and original, in addition to banging
better together than the existing Epistle to
Colossians ; (3) that the latter is marked by
repetitions corresponding to the double use
alleged to have been made of it (" doublets "),
and that it has in every way a double look, —
style, theology, the heresy combated, all in
some respects like what we know of St. Paul,
while in others they present features of a later
date. Finally, after a glance at analogous cases
of interpolation (successive forms of apocryphal
acts, &c, Epistle of Polvcarp, but especially
Ignatian Epistles), and an examination of the
doctrinal characteristics of the two Epistles,
their relation to the rest of the N. T. literature
is estimated, and the date, motives, and historical
circumstances of their production hypothetically
determined.
In order to estimate the force of this indict-
ment against our Epistle, we must remember
that Holtzmann relies throughout on the
validity of the negative criticism (see above, a-d),
Meyer, Introd. to this Ep. -, Holtzm. Krit. p.
passages about which Holtzmann appears now
(1) AUtged priority on
Col. 1. 1, 2 = Ephes.
Col. 1. 3, 4 = Ephes.
Col. i. 6 = Ephes.
CoL I. 9 = Ephes.
Col. 1. 10 = Ephes.
Col. 1. 13 = Ephes.
Col. 1. 21 = Ephes.
Cot. t. 32 = Ephes.
Cot. I. 23 = Ephes.
Col. i. 25 = Ephes.
Col. 1. 2> = Ephes.
Col. II. 4 = Ephes.
Col. U. 6, »•> = Ephes.
Col. IL 8" = Epbes.
CoL 11. 12 = Epbes.
CoL U. 13 = Ephes.
Col. 11. 14, 20 = Ephes.
CoL lit. 3* = Ephes.
Col. UL 12, 13 = Epbes.
CoL Iii. 1? = Ephes.
CoL iv. 2, 3», 4»= Ephes.
CoL iv. S = Ephes.
Col. iv. 6 = Ephes.
CoL lv. 7, 8 = Ephes.
tide of Cbloaiani.
I. 1, 2.
1. 16, 15.
I. 3, 12, 13, 15.
I. 15, IS.
IV. 1.
II. 2, 3.
II. 1, 2, 10, 13, 15.
Ii. 13, 16.
III. 1.
iii. 2, 7, 8.
111. 7, 20.
lv. 17; V. 6.
Iv. 17, 20. 21.
Iv. 14.
I. 20; ii. 6.
ii. 1, 4, 5.
II. 15.
ill. 9.
iv. 2, 32; V. 1,2.
V. 20.
vi. 18-20<>.
V. 16, 16.
lv. 29.
vl. 21, 22.
26, and (more complete) JR'nl. 5 p. 291. The asterisks (*) denote
(JKnf. 5 ) to have changed his mind.
(2) Alleged priority on tide of Epheiians.
Ephes. I. 4
Ephes. I. 6, 7
Ephes. I. 7-11
Ephes. I. 17
Epbes. 1. 18
Epbes. i. 19, 20
Ephes, I. 21-23
Ephes. II. 2, 3
Ephes. 11. 16
Ephes. Ii. 11
Ephes. II. 12, 13-17
Ephes. II. 20
Ephes. III. 1
= Col. I. 22.1
= Col. I. 13 (t. iv.), 14.
= Col. I. 9, 16, 17, 19, 20.
= CoL I. 9, 10.
= CoL I. 27 ; cp. ill. 4.
-.Col. L 11 ; U. 12 (trier.); Iii. 1.
= Col. I. 16, 18, 19; IL 10.
= CoL til. 7.
= CoL 1. 10.
= Col. it. 11, 13.
= Col. I. 20, 21 (in part); ? IL 14 (Soy.).
= Col. ill. 7 (trout.).
= Col. I. 24.
Ephes. IU. 3, 4, 5, 9, 16 = Col. I. 26, 27, 28 (cp. Iv. 3).»
Kphes. 111. 10
Epbes. ill. 13
Kphes. 111. 17
Ephes. ill. 18
Ephes. iv. 3, 4
Epbes. Iv. 13
Epbes. iv. IS, 16
Epbes. Iv. 18
Epbes. lv. 19
Ephes. Iv. 21-24
Ephes. lv. 25-31
Epbes. v. 3-«
Epbes. v. 19
Epbes. v. 22-26, 28
Ephes. v. 23
Ephes. vi. 1, 4-9
Ephes. vl. 20*
= Col. 1. 16; cp. II. 15.
= Col. I. 24.
= CoL II. 7.
= Col. I. 23.27; U.2.»
= Col. 111. 14, IS.
J. COI. L 28 (JTOFT.).
■= CoL I. 18* ; ii. 1» ;• cp. ii. 2.
= Col. L 21.
= Col. III. 5.»
= Col. iii. 9, 10.»
= Col. 111.8, 9" •?
= CoL lit. S, «,*8(cp. ii. 8»).
= CoL Hi. 16.»
= CoL 111. 18, 19.»
= CoL 1. 18.
= Ool. 111. 20-lv. l.«
= CoL lv. 3», 4".
Digitized by
Google
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
■thick he re-«tates with the greatest lucidity and
bckiTeness, and seeks to supplement by a positive
ixount of the phenomena. If the negative
criticism holds good, some theory of the kind is
needed: if what has been alleged in reply has
jar weight, and if the account (supra, 2, c, d)
of the Pauline origin of the Epistle is natural and
probable, the hypothesis becomes unnecessary
sad artificial. Remembering this, we proceed to
tat it on its merits.
BoiUmann's hypothesis examined. — So far as
the hypothesis depends on phenomena peculiar
to the Colossian Epistle, we may refer to the
article npon it, and to Ughtfoot's commentary,
There the essential homogeneity of that Epistle
snd the consistency of its ideas and notes of time
EPHESIAN8, EPISTLE TO THE 959
(especially with reference to the heresy combated
and the internal unity of the composition) are
clearly shown. It may be added that many of
the phenomena relied on by Holtzmann have
been shown by Von Soden (see infra) to warrant
no such inference as Holtzmann supposed. This
latter fact also destroys what at first seems a
strong recommendation of the hypothesis, viz. the
coincidence in support of it of so many indepen-
dent tests (Krit. pp. 99, 130). The facts in
reality yield no such certain sound ns is taken
for granted : the hypothesis is ready before their
investigation is begun, and all that they hare to
do is to fall, whether they will or no, into their
assigned place. This stares us in the face, so
soon as we examine Iloltzmann's case in detail.
(L) Instances of prioritij.
Christ the Bead of the Church.
Eptaes. ir. 16.
Sc iffrty if *ct«Aij. Xptorov,
i( oi war to o~«ua
avrapaoAoyovtiCKOr «ai avpfiifsa£6furor
Sil vaonr? a^n« Tift iwix°onyia(
■at' rriayrutr ir fUrfrnp irbt eJcaOTOV
r*pt*K Tfjr ai(t)trtr row awftaror
votftrat fit ounoopip' marrow ir iyawn.
Col. II: 19.
Tijr xe^aAijr,
«f ot war to vitfia
2iot twk a^Mc xat evrotaiimr
wtxopqyovpsror ko! ewfiifia£6r\tror
avfet ritr av^no-tr rov ©«ov.
Here the passage in Colossians has the ad-
vsntage in point of conciseness and perspicuity,
gained however at the expense of the idea of
mutui interdependence among the members,
vhich the language in the Ephesian parallel
liboars to bring out. On this ground, coupled
*ith the greater fitness of <*{ ov after the
masculine Xpurris, the naturalness of the passage
in its Ephesian rather than in its Colossian
nontext, the " un-Pauline " sense of iwixoprrytir
(cp. Gal. iii. 5 ; 2 Cor. ix. 10), and of af{«i»
(avfaVeu' only transitive in St. Paul), Holtzmann
(Krit. pp. 51, 142, 158) regards the Ephesian
passage as the original. The precariousness ol
every one of these numerous tests is sufficiently
shown by the fact that, in spite of them all, he
now regards the Colossian passage as original
and genuine (Einl.* p. 296, line 25, so also Von
Sodeu), while PnViderer regards it as spurious,
but as the original of the other (ii. pp. 100, 103).
Hymns and Spiritual Songs
Epbea. v. It.
JflAsvrrtv iovraic ipaAaote mat vprotc ttu ySatc
!mvistuiit] ffiorres ««i ^paAAorre* r-§ KapSt'a i/aStr
Col. Ul. 16.
6toacncoiT«v col rov9 v rowm cavrovc tpaApotc
vurotc tpHa.lt wmfJMTiKait ir [Try] xaptrt f6orrf<c if
rate aapfitats vp\mr r*/ fl f T .
Here the Colossian passage is the more ex-
pensed of the two : the XaXoSrrts of Ephesians
* replaced by a more definite phrase : on these
fronds and on that of the more obvious con-
k«ob in Ephesians, the latter is regarded by
Holtzmann as the original. But, in spite of the
"un-Pauline" (Krit. p. 164) language of the
passage, it is now (Einl.* ubi supra, and Von
Soden, Col. p. 528) restored to the Apostle, and
the priority previously inferred is inverted.
Col. i. JO-IB.
■*» *V ami awoaaraX-
*•(*• r« rarraetc avroV, ttpir-
►•vot^aaf ota raw ataarof
'« rrittti ami, [»V ami]
•^•TSmTTj yyjc tire t* ir vols
m P*r**' vtu vptac «vt« orrac
K3 W*TrT~P*r*nK *at «x0povc
*S *w*ia €► t*U cpyotc roU
f wvw t. m n ii avoaarifA-
*•(<» i>t»ir.|HTi rfe o-«p-
•* «mi lia rov fwarov. 1
The question of priority as between these
tor* passages (see Holtzmann, Krit. pp. 63 sq.,
»•«,, 137, 151 ; Pfleid. ii. p. 179 sq.) is highly
"■fucated. The Ephesian passage is connected
"•*■ CoL i. by the ideas of an enmity reconciled,
•etet being made, and that through the Cross,
"4 by the phrases ir . . . ereitiari and rijs
"M» (tj rssstf)— with Col. ii. by the references
** tat abolition of od-yiurro, to the removal of n
f***% U the Cross, and by the supplementary
The Reconciliation wrought by Christ.
Ephes. U. 14-16.
ovrof yap cartr i| eipifrn hpitr 6 wotrjffac
Td ap^ortpa ir Kal to fitaoTOixor too
Qpaynov Avo~ac, -njr ixOpar iffji aapict
avrov, TO** votior Ttir irraXMr ir o'oyuao't
iraTapyjffac, tra rove ovo KT w <rn ir aimf etc
tra rawer arBpwwor, toihp ctprjrrtr,
oat airoicaTaAAa£r) rove dp$orf*povc ir
«ri rwftaTi Ty 9vf ota rov a-ravpov,
atroarctraf rqr «x*P ar *** avrtp.
Col. il. H.
«f aAti^far to «a9* ijat**' X fl PO"
ypa^of rote fioy^taat 6 i}?
vtrcfarrtof ^Mtf • *at avrb jjpiccr
«K too u«o*ov rrpoo-tjXwaat
avrbry trr av p^- awttSiMrdfitvot
. ... if avrf.
statement as to something accomplished by the
instrumentality of the latter (ir airrf following
an aorist participle in both places). The Ephesian
passage, thus closely connected with the others
by its wording, yet embraces quite a distinct
idea. Common to all three is the thought of the
Cross as the instrument of man's reconciliation
to God ; but while in Col. 1. this is deduced from
the idea of its cosmic efficacy, and in Col. ii. is
connected with that of cancelling a bond or
Digitized by
Google
9G0 EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
indictment (and while in each of the two
Colossian passages the process has reference also
to superhuman beings), in Ephes. ii. the common
reconciliation of Jew and Gentile to God (c. 16)
is in close relation {supra, § 2, d, e) with the re-
moval of the ancient barrier between the two ; the
ideas (%9pa, 'I'H'Vt nioov, iiy/ia, are adapted to
this specific reference ; and lastly the Colossian
phrase iv r$ o&iia/rt rqt crapitbs aurov assumes
a new colour, the verbally parallel iv M ad/iari
(cp. Col. iii. 15) referring to the (mystical) body
of Christ regarded as embracing all reconciled
mankind without distinction, while iv rjj ffaywcl
airrov (v. 15) preserves the idea of the literal
body of the Crucified, but with the secondary
instrumental reference. The Ephesian passage
is therefore regarded by both Holtzmann and
PBeiderer as, at least mainly, modelled upon its
parallels, the writer having thrown his subject
(the reconciliation of Jew and Gentile in Christ)
into confusion by borrowing from the passages
in Colossians language there used to express a
different idea. Hence the changed sense of
o-u/ia, and the irrelevant iv rij trapxl aurov,
irrelevant because " the slain body of Christ can-
not well be regarded as a means of reconciliation
. . . between Jew and Gentile " (Pfleiderer, p. 180).
This extravagant criticism comes strangely from
Pfleiderer, who has so clearly drawn out the
significance of Christ's death to St. Paul in this
respect 'i. p. 7, ii. p. 44). The whole argument,
in fact, for the priority of Colossians in this
parallelism is open to the charge of ignoring,
firstly, the main idea of the Epistle to the
Ephesians (supra, § 2, d); secondly, the fact
that, of the leading thoughts respectively dis-
tinctive of the three passages (cosmic efficacy of
Christ's death, abolition of the law and consequent
unification of all in Christ, abolition of the law
as a hostile bond), that of Ephes. ii. 14 is in most
immediate contact with the earlier teaching of
St. Paul, — whence Holtzmann expunges, inter
alia, all cosmic references from the first passage,
while Von Soden also condemns part of the
third ; — thirdly, the extremely plain and
straightforward connexion of the whole passage
in Ephesians (ii. 11-20), the spontaneous flow
of which absolutely forbids the idea of such
laboured and unintelligent compilation as its
Kpbee. It. 23-24.
awoBivvai uftav Kara ttjk irporipav ava.<nfio$\\v tov
waXativ aVOpwirop rbv QOtipontvov Kara rat ijrt$v
Ilul* rift airanjf , avayeovtr&u ii nj> ffpevpart row rob«
itfuuv, Ka't ivivffavBai TOr xatv'ov iyBfiaiwov rbv
Kara Oihr «Tt<r0cpra iv iucatoevvn Jcat oo-tonrri
T% iXifhiat. *
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
supposed genesis involves. — The above is on the
whole the strongest case of supposed priority ;
and if the result of a careful examination is so
indecisive, may we not reasonably say that the
method itself is open to suspicion? (Cp. Von
Soden, Col. p. 328, " But who does not know
how precarious are all conjectures, in literary
criticism, as to the relative priority of parall- I
passages ? ")
ii. Critical Analysis of Ephesians. This test
is supposed to bring to light a more or less
studied "literary dependence" on St. Paul's
earlier Epistles. The " auctor ad Ephesios,**
while borrowing most directly from the genuine
Colossians, the whole of which, with the excep-
tion of its personal and polemic matter, he care-
fully uses up, has also shown himself a careful
student of the rest of the Pauline literature.
Of course, in applying this test, everything
depends on distinguishing such resemblances and
differences as naturally follow from the identity
of the writer from such as betray the imitator.
But this is exactly the weakest port of Holtz-
mann's discussion. To substantiate this, in
addition to the few instance.-, given above (c \.\
it may be well to examine one or two cases in
detail. (1) The parallelism last given (Ephes.
ii. 14, &c.) is a case in point. The words Ixtyn
(Rom. xi. 28), iatOKaraWdaffav (kotoAX. Rom.
xi. 15, 2 Cor. v. 18 sq.), crw/ut (Rom. vii. 4),
aTOOT-sfrfiy (Rom. vii. 11, 2 Cor. ii. 6), are, it
is argued, borrowed from St. Paul to express
ideas foreign to their original place in his vo-
cabulary. But St. Paul's mind was more elastic
than that of his critics : the ideas of slaying
and enmity lend themselves to more metaphors
than one ; while the word trapa is admittedly
used by him of the Church, and the transition
from the literal to the mystic sense of it (Col. i.
22 ; Ephes. ii. 16) has a strict parallel in 1 Cor.
x. 16, 17. To take another example: (2) the
alleged imitation of 1 Cor. xv. 20, 23-2.'>, 27.
28, in Ephes. i. 20-23, is clearly due to the
natural connexion of ideas, which in a subject so
habitually on the Apostle's lips would inevitably
bring with it a standing collocation of term?.
Once more (3) let us examine the passages
Ephes. iv. 22 sqq., Col. iii. 8-10, together with
their parallels in other Epistles.
Col. 111. 8-10.
vw\ Of airo0f<r0< jrat vpetc to wavra .... acrcx-
iverdfitvtn top a-aAatop ivBpuwov wnif wpa£c«rte
avrov, Kai c'p6vcrap«poi top vtbv top •Hxatvev-
fuvw eic ivtyvutriv tear 1 aurora tov xTto-cfrof avro*,
arov ova in ic.tA.
Cp. Rom. vl. 6. o s-aAaioc w*wp apOpwiroc.
2 Cor. tv. 16. « xat o tf» wu»r ivtpantK <uu£0<4»tiu, iiX 4 ««*> ipmv anravotrru . . .
v. IT, Kitri) (rum (and Gal. vl. 15).
Rom. Xiit. 12, 14. aro9»fM0a ovV . . . aAAa iv6vaaa$* rbv tvpiov 'T»jat>vp Xptorop .
2 Cor.
In 1872 the latter passages were supposed to
have been laid under contribution by the com-
piler of Ephesians, who subsequently abridged
his patchwork in the passage Col. iii. In 1886
the latter is supposed to be from the hand of
St. Paul (Holtzm. Einl?; Von Soden, Col.
p. 253), the borrowing from the older Epistles
on the part of Ephesians being, as a consequence,
restricted to the least obvious points of resem-
blance (fBtipifitvor?). Resemblances which
were formerly proofs of the " dependence " cf
Ephesians are now allowed to prove the Pauline
authorship of Colossians. If we further recollect
that (although Pfleiderer, ii. 188. sees in Ephe-s.
iv. 24 an unintelligent reproduction of Col. iii.
10) the words xal iutts, Col. iii. 8 (of which
Von Soden is therefore anxious to get rid),
strongly suggest that the writer had in his
mind a similar summons addressed to other
readers, — a fact which, taken with Ephes. iv.
Digitized by
Google
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
'3, 25, makes it far more natural to assume
t&it tie priority, if any, is here on the side of
tpoenans, — the examination of this single in-
stance will have sufficed to show the precarious
cluncter of Holtzmann's canon of dependence.
One more example shall be given, this time
in his own words, and without comment (Krit.
p. 141). " What is said of lore, iv. 3, has its
double in Rom. xiii. 10, the reference to tr
amfui sal tr wvsCfta, ir. 4, in 1 Cor. x. 17, xii.
4, Bom. xii. 5. That KaAeir is constructed with
ir, in preference to the favourite tit, follows the
example of 1 Cor. vii. 15," Ik. Holtzmann has
certainly collected an admirable mass of illus-
trative matter for our Epistle (even if not
always quite fairly selected), but what evidence
does be offer that furnishes solid ground for his
theory?
iii. The " original Epistle to the Colossians."
As the result of the comparative and critical
processes which we have described (parturiunt
monies . . .), Holtzmann arrives at a supposed
geuoine relic of St. Paul, — in reality a cento of
words and phrases from the Colossian Epistle, in
oonnexioos of his own. He analyses it verse by
verse with the aim of showing the conformity
■of its language to the Pauline standard, and
does so, we may admit, with success. But,
with every wish on his part to avoid the pitfall
(Krit. p. 184), it strikes the reader at everv
turn that the very same phenomena which
betray imitation elsewhere are here the cre-
dentials of authenticity. For example, while
Holtzmann is unable to approve " the kingdom
of Christ and of God " (Ephes. v. 5), the phrase
in Col. i. 13, tV fkur. tou vi'oii . . . cuVrov (ri>t
e-y usi'li is condemned), is in his eyes " an in-
disputable trace of the Apostle's hand" (p. 172);
to Ptleiderer (ii. 112) it is the very reverse. In
its reduced form the letter is supposed to gain
in clearness, unity of purpose, consecutiveness,
sad compactness of structure. The two latter
are more than doubtful : the " purpose " is the
very general one Ttpurarfttrcu S/iSj inlets rov
*)*sv (Col. i. 10); the whole '•* a laboriously
dovetailed piece-work, without colour, point, or
iv. Improbability of Holtzmann's hypothesis.
We now come to an unanswerable objection to
the hypothesis, quite independent of the fore-
going strictures. Could such a process of inter-
polation have been carried out without leaving
its traces upon the textual evidence ? It is no
answer to appeal to admitted interpolations
such as those of the Ignatian letters, for the
latter have survived in their earlier form as
well. Nor is the appeal to interpolations in
classical writers legitimate: for in the case of
X. T. writings the evidence is abundant enough
to bear traces even of very early alterations in
the text [Colossiass], The most elementary
principles of evidence, then, are fatal to such a
theory as Holtzmann's. He has, it is true,
siede some concession to the force of this objec-
tion, in his assumption of the identity of the
Efoesian compiler and the interpolator of
CiWians. Every addition to the dramatis
pcrnue aggravates the unlikelihood of the plot
W widening the circle of persons acquainted
vita the original Pauline letter, and so adds to
tat force of the demand for evidence of its
having ever existed. But the necessity of
MBU DICT.— V01» I.
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE 961
assuming that the interpolator " rescued " this
precious relic " from oblivion * (Krit. p. 305)
only to relegate it thither again, — in other
words, that its existence was known to one
person alone, — is in its turn a sufficient reductio
ad abswdum. Accordingly the tendency now is
to reduce the number of interpolated passages
to such limits as leave the relation between
Ephesians and Colossians exactly where Holtz-
mann found it. Under his guidance we find
ourselves as much in a cut de sac as ever.
v. Probable Solution. It is fetal to the theory
of reciprocral priority to give up the identity
of compiler and interpolator, as has been done
by most of those critics who have expressed
partial * approval of Holtzmann's scheme. We
have then to choose between complete depend-
ence on one side or the other, and simultaneous
composition by a single author. The former
alternative Holtzmann's analysis has shown to
be inadmissible. His instances of " priority of
Ephesians," for example, may be shown (as by
Von Soden) to fall short of proving their case :
but the same may be shown of the instances
alleged in favour of the converse relation. To
both classes of instances, however, we can con-
sistently allow an equal negative validity, as
disproving that, the contrary of which they fail
to establish. Holtzmann, as is so commonly the
case, succeeds in pulling down the assumptions
of others, but fails in proving his own. A con-
tinuous survey of the language and thought* of
the two Epistles shows the impossibility of
carrying out any hypothesis of simple depend-
ence on either side, while the only consistently
worked out attempt at a more complex solution
breaks down, both from the indecisiveness of the
internal evidence, from the absolute lack of
external proof, and from the improbability of its
historical presuppositions.
There is, then, on the assumption of literary
dependence, no consistent hypothesis in the field.
What then prevents our accepting as true that
account of the origin of these letters which they
bear upon their face, — that they were simul-
taneously composed by St. Paul, and sent by
him to the same province by the same mes-
senger ? Simply the supposed impossibility of
simultaneous composition on the one hand ; the
improbability, on the other, of St. Paul copying
his own letters. But this objection must be
regarded as altogether unreal. Are not the
phenomena of our Epistles such as we should
■ The principal names are Hausrsth (Jp. Paulus,'
and Zeitgtteh* vol. ill. • diners in details")! Pneiderer
(we above) ; Ton Soden fin JahrbBcherfarpnt. Theot.
1885, 1887), who merely expunges eight and a half
verses of Colossians, and except as to these substantially
goes back to the old view of De Wette, ke. ; Schmiedel
(In Erecb and Oruber, 1888) ; Mangold (Bleek,' p. 602).
These critics generally reject Holtzmann's distinctive
hypothesis (reciprocity of relations), but approve the
Idea of interpolations In Colossians, and dependence of
Ephesians, ascribing the latter to a third hand.
• The contention (Honlg. Xtitsckr. wist. TkeoL 1872 ;
Pflelderer, 11. 99, 186, ke.) that the two Epistles betray
diversities of thought Incompatible with unity of author,
ship has been incidentally anticipated (}} 1, a ; 3, c).
But on the special points of supposed difference, a
reference to Ligtatfoot's notes and Excursus, and often
to Holtzmann's discussions, win show the inconclusive-
ness of the reasons alleged.
3Q
Digitized by
Google
962 EPHESIANS, EPISTLE XO THE
expect in letters written to different persons,
btit on partially identical subjects, by the same
writer, and possibly on the same day ?
$. Relation to the First Epistle of St. Peter.
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
The resemblances between the two Epistles are
such in number 1 * and in kind as to exclude the
idea of accidental coincidence. One instance
may be discussed in full : —
Epbea. i. 20-22.
Descent and Exaltation of Christ.
1 Pet. ill. 19,21.
19. iv *f» Ktu rote iv ^tvXcucjf vvtii-
luufk vop«v6et« exijpvf < ....
fyci'paf ainov Kai moBurat iv
5ef cij avrov iv mv ivovpavioa
inrtpavm waxrrv; *PXVt *ai «£ov~
o-tas Kai ftvyaucwf .... sal
wavra vwira^tv wro rov« irooaf
avrov.
What attracts our attention here is the
correspondence of the ideas with which the
exaltation of Christ is associated in the two
Epistles. On the one hand the subjection, to
the risen Christ at the right hand of God in
heaven, of Angels and powers (passages 1 and 2),
on the other the exaltation (here only in N. T.)
coupled with the descent into hades (passages 2
and 3 : the reference to the latter doctrine is
disputed, but probably correct, in the Ephesians,
and overwhelmingly probable in 1 Peter : the
latter passage at any rate appears to be founded
upon the other, so much so that Holtzmann calls
it the first known commentary upon it). The two
Epistles are moreover linked by several marked
words and expressions applied by either writer
in the same way, e.g. wph Kara$o\fis koVjuov,
ivairroot^i, uyvoia,' oucpoyavtaTos, tidfjo\os ; — by
the similarity of their opening, — by the scheme
of household relations and duties, — by the en-
cyclical character of either, — by the reproduction
of the idea of Ephes. iii. 10 in 1 Pet. i. 12
(Angels spectators of the work of Redemption),
&c. It is impossible to resist the conclusion
that the writer of one Epistle was directly in-
fluenced by his knowledge of the other, if the
Epistle of Peter is regarded as prior in date, and
spurious — so Pfleiderer, Hilgenfeld, &c. — our
Epistle of course is condemned also. If 1 Peter
is prior but genuine, we have to suppose that
St. Paul borrowed from St. Peter. This is the
hypothesis of Weiss (Petr. Lehrbegriff, v. 5 ;
Introd. § 25, 6), which is at once obliged to face
the fact that 1 Peter shows equally striking
correspondences with other Epistles of St. Paul
(notably Romans, e.g. Rom. vi. 10, 1 Pet. iv. 1 ;
Rom. ii. 28, 1 Pet. iii. 4, and above all Rom. xii.,
xiii.). Weiss accepts the challenge by assuming
that there also St. Paul is the borrower, a con-
tention (connected with an elaborate theory as to
the diffusion of Christianity in Asia Minor at a
very early date, and with a special view as to
date and readers of 1 Peter) which cannot be
discussed here [Peter, First Epistle op;
Romans, Epistle to], but which, in common
21. . . . . 6V apaorao-cMC 'Iqcov
XfHOTOV, ©C COTl? iv 6«£if 0COV
vopmOtit «'f ovparor vvoray
ivrav airy ayyiXuv xai tfov-
vtmv ical 6vrau«w>>.
Ephes. iv. 8-10.
rb tt ait'/Ji} ri iartv «i pq brt
«ai «aW0q w ra canmpa nVp* Wj t
•fys\ a turofiat avros «<rru> aato
avufSat vrtpayw irarrur tw ov«a-
with almost every one whose opinion is entitled
to respect, we regard as untenable. (It is sup-
ported by Kiihl in the last issue of Meyer's Com-
mentary on 1 Peter. Holtzmann, EM.* p. 517,
calls it "the most desperate step upon which
modern apologetics hare ventured." Weiss' last
restatement of his case, Introd. to 2V. T. § 40.)
The other alternative, that 1 Peter borrows
from Ephesians, does not affect the genuineness
of the latter, and the questions involved in it
will be discussed in the art. Peter, Fibbt
Epistle of. It is necessary, however, to men-
tion the attempt of Seufert (Zeitsch. rciss.
Theol. 1881, pp. 178, 832) to show that both
Epistles are the work of a single author, pro-
bably the compiler of the Third Gospel and the
Acts. It should in fairness be observed that
Seufert only follows up a hint thrown out bv
Holtzmann (Krit. p. 265, 1. 24), without,
however, securing even his master's agreement
with the result. That the order of ideas in
the two Epistles is " on the whole (Krit.
ibid., and Seufert repeatedly) similar," is a
generalisation which will not bear statement in
detail.
y. Relation to other New Testament writings.
The points of contact with the Synoptic Gospels
(Holtim. Krit. p. 248) are numerous though
slight : they prove nothing more than that the
writer of our Epistle was acquainted with the
■xr*kTipo<pofn\jj.iva of the Apostolic preaching.
The connexion with the Third Gospel (xaptroOr,
iravo-r\la, iffiirns, &c.) is slightly more marked :
that with the Acts (cp. supra, § 2, a, /3) is not
peculiar to our Epistle (cp. e.g. Acts xxvi. 18
with Col. i. 12-14) and forms part of the larger
question of the Pauline affinities of the third
Evangelist [Acts; Gospels]. The like applies
to the coincidences with Hebrews (e.g. Ephes.
v. 26, Heb. xiii. 12, and the Christology), which,
it may be added (in agreement with Von Soden,
pp. 483-486), are not such as to suggest the
dependence of our Epistle (against Holtim.
p. 255, and passim). With regard to the
Johannine writings, while Dr. Salmon's remark
» The following are among the most striking : a fuller list In Weiss (Einl. } 27, «, note 2, snd Petr. Lehrbegriff.
p. 42*>sq.):
1 Tet. i. 3 ' = Ephrs. I. 3.
1 Pet. I. 11 = Eph<?». v. 11 (and II. 3).
1 Pet. I. 16-18 = Ephes. Iv. 22.
1 Pet. I. 18-20 = Ephes. I. 4, 7 ; iv. 17.
1 Pet. II. 1 = Ephes. Iv. 21, 25, 31.
1 Pet. II. 4-6 = Ephes. II. 20 sq.
1 Pet. II. 9 = Ephes. v. 8.
1 Pet. ii. 16 = Ephes. vi. 6.
1 Pet. II. 18 = Ephes. vl S.
1 Tet. ill. 1 = Ephes. v. 22.
1 Pet ill. 18 = Epbes. II. 18.
1 Pot. HI. 19, 21, 22 = Ephes. iv. 8, 9 ; I. 20-22.
1 Pet iv. S = Ephes. v. 7-14.
1 Pet. Iv. 10 = Kphes. 111. 10 ; Iv. 12 ?
1 Pet. v. 2 =Ephes. iv. 11 («»fu).
1 Pet. v. 8, 9 = Ephes. vi. II.
Digitized by
Google
EPHES1ANS, EPISTLE TO THE
(p. 487, note) that " St. John read and valued
M. Paul's writings " is on any theory a sufficient
erplasation of the few but striking resemblances
between the Gospel and our Epistle (those in
1 John are very faint), the relations of the
latter to the Apocalypse require a little more
liiscunion. Holtzmann confidently includes the
Apocalypse among the materials used by the
compiler of Ephesians, and even sees in Rom.
rri. 26 (-ftxvp- xfxxp. — see below), Ephes. ii. '20,
iii. 5, iv. 11, an express reference to the prophetic
(Rev. xiii. 9) author of the former ! In this, as
»hen he derives the phrase £7101 favor. (Ephes.
iii. 5) from the indisputably wrong reading of
Rev. iviii. 30, and refers Ephes. iii. 18 to
the dimensions of the heavenly city in Rev.
ui. 16, we recognise the old fallacy of
resiling into the phenomena more than they
really tell as. The undoubted resemblances
(Ephes. i. 15, T. R., and Rev. ii. 4, ii. 20, cp.
Her. xxi. 14 ; iii, 5, cp. Rev. x. 7 ; iii. 9, cp.
Rev. ir. 11 ; v. 11, cp. Rev. xviii. 4 ; v. 25
sq, cp. Rev. xix. 7, xxi., xxii., &c.) are partly
explicable (as in the last instance mentioned) by
amnion dm of O. T. symbolism, and partly lend
themselves at least as easily to Dr. Salmon's
eiplanation as to that of Holtzmann.
It remains to add a few supplementary remarks
a to the relation of our Epistle to St. Paul's
undoubted writings. Rejecting the idea of
literary dependence, as the result of an arbitrary
method of investigation (as shown by its now
centrally admitted failure as applied to the
jrester portion of Colossians), and taking as
admitted the general conformity of our Epistle
to the Pauline theology, we remark : (1) the
peculiar resemblance to it, in language and
Mess, of the doxology-in Rom. xvi. 25-27 (Ephes.
iii. 5, 20 sq., &c.). Holtzmann ascribes the
Anology to his " Autor ad Ephesios," and there
•re well-known textual grounds which warrant
the suggestion that the doxology may be nearer
in date to our Epistle than to that of which it
tow forms the conclusion (see Romans and
Gilford's Introduction to that Epistle). (2) Use
sade of tie Old Testament. To estimate the
influence of the LXX. upon the forms both of
thought snd of language in our Epistle, recourse
mast be had to the commentaries : a glance at
tie text as printed by Westcott and Sort will
thro the most conspicuous instances, but by no
means all. The quotations are mostly according
'• the LXX., but not in every case dependent
«p"a it: in particular, iv. 8 (Ps. lxviii. 19)
t *trays familiarity with rabbinical exegesis (cp.
r. 32 sad Meyer on both places) ; v. 31, iv. 25, 26,
*c are free quotations and combinations qnite
» St Psoi's manner, while v. 14 (cp. Is. xxvi. 19,
!i 17, Iii. 1, lx. 1, 2 ; Pa. xliv. 23) presents a
problem closely analogous to that of 1 Cor. ii. 9
'TvypnToi). Moreover the characteristic ideas
«" <m Epistle — Christ the Comer-stone, Peace
Cached to those far and near, the heavenly
""•or, the Church wedded to her Lord (see
***?<, S 2, d), fee. — find close points of contact
» ««« Old Testament.
&fefc» to Philippians. The use frequently
**3e «f that Epistle in the foregoing discus-
*a» brings the genuineness of Ephesians into
'"** reciprocal connexion with the order of
V* tptstles of the Imprisonment. The latter
W into two sub-groups, of which Philip-
EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE 963
pians by itself constitutes one. If our Epistle
is genuine, the sub-group to which it belongs
must be placed after, not as has usually been
supposed before, the other. If, again, there
are independent grounds for putting Philippians
earlier in the Roman imprisonment than has
been usually inferred, and as near as possible to
the great polemic group (Lightfoot, Philipp.,
Introd. ; Philippians), not only is a real psycho-
logical objection to the Pauline authorship of
our Epistle (ably put by Prleiderer, i. p. 31,
note) removed, but an important link is re-
covered between our Epistle and the " Pauline
homologumena." This is conspicuously true of
the Christology (allowed by Holtzmann, supra,
c. ii.), of the stress laid upon iwlyvttau and
cognate ideas, of the position assigned to good
works (Philip, ii. 12, 13), of the practical teaching
(Philip, i. 27, cp. Ephes. iv. 1, 4), of the " wealth "
of God in Christ (Philip, iv. 19 ; Ephes. i. 18, &c),
of the true and false moaofiM (Philip, iii. 3 ;
Ephes. ii. 11): cp. also Ephes. iii. 19 with Philip,
iii. 8, iv. 7 ; Ephes. ii. 6 with Philip, iii. 20 ;
Ephes. v. 21 with Philip, ii. 3 ; Ephes. v. 19 with
the tone of Philip, iv. 4, 6. Considering the short-
ness of the Epistle to Philippians and the great
proportion of it taken up with personal matter,
the instances given — and they might be multi-
plied—of its affinity in ideas and language with
our Epistle are striking enough. If it reaches
out one hand (see Lightfoot's parallel passages)
to the Pauline homologumena, it touches Ephe-
sians and Colossians with the other. (The
points of contact with Colossians are not limited
to the matter common to Ephes. Col., but make
in the same direction as those here given ; a list
is given by Von Soden, Col. p. 541.)
f. Summary of literary question and conclu-
sion of question of Authenticity. — An examination
of the relations between our Epistle and other New
Testament writings has shown the failure of all
attempts hitherto made to construct, upon that
basis, an account of its origin which can weigh in
the balance against that which the letter bears
upon its face. The ablest and only complete at-
tempt of the kind, that of Holtzmann, has been
adopted, in its essential points, by nobody, although
it has been before the world for nineteen years. An
examination of it upon its merits has not gained
us over to its side. On the contrary, the Epistle's
own account of itself has received incidental con-
firmation from more sources than one. Since,
then, literary and historical indications (supra, d)
alike fail to confront that account with any rival
or counter-theory, and since the purely negative
objections are, to say the least, indecisive (supra,
a-c), what is there to stay judgment in the case ?
True, it is easier to meet specific charges than
to prove positively the Pauline character of an
Epistle. If wc take as the tests of the " pectus
Paulinum " mystical depth, dogmatic firmness,
warmth of personal feeling, polemic incisiveness —
the last being excluded by the scope of our Epistle
— then the others, we venture to say, are all
there. Still, the appeal must be, from the nature
of the case, lectori cordato ; the matter is one of
taste and feeling, not one to be argued.
Without attempting, therefore, to prove what
is no subject for demonstration, we accept the
I Epistle's own account of its authorship, sup-
I ported as it is by the unanimous testimony of
antiquity, and uncontradicted bv any decisive
' 3 Q 2
Digitized by
Google
964 EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
test or by the claims of any equally probable
theory of its origin. We will only add, in the
words of Erasmus, to which modern investiga-
tions have only lent an added significance, " uon
est cuiusvis hominis Fauli pectus eth'ngere." If
the exact theological idiosyncrasy of St. Paul,
" so Jewish in its foundations, so anti-Jewish in
its results " (as in this Epistle, supra, § 2, d),
was so little understood by the generation which
succeeded him, — if, in fact, " Paulinism as a
living whole existed but once, and that in the
mind of its original exponent" (Holtzm. Einl.
p. 105 sq.), then the attempt to insert the Epistle
to the Ephesians in the sub-apostolic cycle, to
class it with the Epistles of Clement and Bar-
nabas, the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, and
the other literature of that singularly uiicrea-
tive period, is a historical paradox, and nothing
more.
§ 4. Text — Literature.
(1) The text of Ephesians has suffered less
from assimilation than that of Colossians: the
longer and more general would seem to have
somewhat overshadowed the shorter and more
special Epistle. But there are striking assimila-
tions of Ephesians to Colossians in such passages,
among others, as i. 15, t V byairftv, K C D., Vulg.,
Syr. Verss., many Fathers ( = Col. i. 4); om.
KAB., Orig., Hier., &c. (see WH); iii. 7, -H)*
to6*T<rav, U°E., &c., and Greek Fathers (=Col. i.
25) : rijr >o0«/<rqs, NBD.*, Vulg., &c. ; v. 22,
{ntoria<rto9t, KL., Syr., Chrys. (=Col. iii. 18,
but -oBaxrcw, NA. Verss., Greek Fathers, &c. =
its &y, Col. ?) : om. B. and MSS. seen by Jerome.
Among textual cruces may bo mentioned iii. 9,
nivras; iii. 11, i» r$ Xp'urrtf. while in iii. 5
the view of 07/011 suggested above is adopted by
Lachmann and Tregelles, who place a comma
after the word, — the suggestion of some primitive
disturbance in the text rinding support in a certain
confusion in the readings (Orig., Theodt. omit
07/01$ ; B, Ambrst omit Airoo-r. ; several MSS.
and Fathers put avroi before iwoar.), coupled
with the fact that in early times the difficulty
of the words as they stand would scarcely be
felt. On the materials for the text, see Colos-
sians, but add that with the exception of C,
which contains only ii. 18-iv. 16 of our Epistle,
the materials for Ephesians are slightly more
abundant (e.g. for the Old Lat. r. contains
Ephes. i. 16— ii. 16).
(2) Literature. — For general commentaries
on St. Paul's Epistles, see Romans, Epistle to
THE, and the Introd. to Meyer's Romans (E. Tr.).
For patristic commentaries on our Epistle, see
Colossians (and cp. Lightfoot in Galatians,
p. 223 sq.). For Ephesians, Cramer's Catena
preserves many valuable fragments of Origen's
commentary (see Diet. Christ. Biog. vol. iv.
p. 118). For a full list of modern commentaries,
see the Introd. to Meyer's Ephesians (Eng.
Tr.); another list in the last German edition
by Schmidt. Among the older special com-
mentaries on Ephesians (mentioned in the 1st
ed. of this Diet.), Harless (1834, 2nd ed., 1858)
stands pre-eminent for point and thoroughness,
and still well repays consultation. The roost
recent German commentaries (in addition to
Ewald's Scndschreiben des Ap. Pnulus, 1857;
Sieben Sendschr. det N. B. 1870) are those of
Schenkel in the 1st ed. of Lange's Bibelwcrk
EPHESUS
(2nd separate ed., 1867, when Braune's com-
mentary took the place of it in Lange), Bleek
(1867), and Woldemar Schmidt (6th German ed.
of Meyer, 1886, very judiciously retouched).
Ellicott (3rd ed. 1864) remains the standard
English edition; that of Llewelyn Davies (2nd
ed., 1884) is brief, but able, reverent, and often
suggestive ; while that by Moule (Comb. Mb.
Sc/i. 1886) is careful and concise, though the
exegesis is apt to be founded upon doctrinal
presuppositions. The doctrine and ethics of
the Epistle are the subject of the Lectures of
R. VV. Dale (3rd ed., 1887), a masterpiece
of insight and theological grasp, and the best
possible introduction to the thought of the
Epistle. Bishop Lightfoot's Colossians contains
much incidental matter relating to Ephesiaos:
his commentary on the latter, promised in the
Introduction to Colossians, was not completed.
Beet and Klopper have published editions
(1891), and one by Von Soden is announced.
Of works other than commentaries, Holt:-
mann's Kritik (1872), so often quoted above,
is, whatever may be thought of its method
and conclusions, a thorough and luminous
manual of almost everything bearing upon
the question of authorship; Von Soden, in
Jahrb. fir Prot. Theol. 1887, is most able, espe-
cially on the theology of the Epistle, although
the view taken by him is not that maintained
in the present article. It has been referred to
above as " Von Soden " simply. " Von Soden.
Cot." refers to his articles on Colossians, 188.V
Of articles on the Epistle, the most recent is by
Schmiedel in Ersch and Gruber's Encycl. (1886,
commended by Holtzmann) ; that in Herzog '
(under " Paulus ") is by Wold. Schmidt, and is
worth consulting (the article in Herzog ' by
Weiss has been referred to above). Nothing
new will be found in Riehm's HWB. (" Ephe-
sus "). In the BM-Lex. the article is Schenkel "»
own; that by Dr. Milligan in the Encycl. Brit?
is excellent. [A. R.]
EPHESUS fE0«ror), an illustrious city in
the district of Ionia (w6\ts 'ItrUa iruparf
ototi), Steph. Byz. «. v.), nearly opposite the
island of Samoa, and about the middle of the
western coast of the peninsula commonly called
Asia Minor. Not that this geographical term
was known in the 1st century. The Asia of
the N. T. was simply the Roman province which
embraced the western part of the peninsuls
(Conybeare and Howaon's Life and Epistles vf
St. Paul, ch. viii. See especially Marqnardt's
ltimische AlterthSmer, vol. iv.). Of this pro-
vince Ephesus was the capital.
Among the more marked physical features of
the peninsula are the two large rivers, Hermui
and Maeander, which flow from a remote part
of the interior westward to the Archipelsgo,
Smyrna (Rev. iL 8) being near the mouth of one
and Miletus (Acts xx. 17) of the other. Be-
tween the valleys drained by these two rivers is
the shorter stream and smaller basin of the
Cayster, called by the Turks Kuchuk Mend**'
or the Little Maeander. Its upper leTel (often
called the Caystrian meadows) was closed to the
westward by the gorge between Gallesus and
Pactyas, the latter of these mountains being *
prolongation of the range of Messogis which
bounds the vallev of the Maeander on the northi
Digitized by
Google
EPHESUS
EPHESUS
965
tie former more remotely connected with the
range of Tmolns which bounds the valley of the
Hennas on the south. Beyond the gorge and
towards the sea the Taller opens out again into
an alluvial flat (Herod, ii. 10), with hills rising
ibrnptly from it. The plain is now about fire
miles in breadth, bnt formerly it must have
been smaller ; and some of the hills were once
probably islands. Here Ephesus stood, partly
i>n the level ground and partly on the hills.
The early history of Ephesns was an oscillation
between the ascendency of the Greek city on
the hills and the old Asiatic temple on the
plain.
Of the hills, on which a large portion of the
city was built, the two most important were
Prion (or Pion) and Coressus, the latter on the
S. of the plain, and being in fact almost a con-
tinuation of Pactyas, the former being in front of
Coressus and near it, though separated by a deep
and definite valley. The height of the Acropolis
on Coressus is about 1250 ft. ; that of Prion,
about 500 ft. On the east side of Prion is a
church, cut in the solid rock, which is said to
have been dedicated to the Seven Sleepers of
Ephesus (J in Map, p. 970). Further to the N.E.
is another conspicuous eminence, about 250 ft.
high. It seems to be the hill mentioned by Pro-
Ephcrai from Um Theatre. (From Laborde.)
In the cwitre m tb* rnlM of ibe " Grant Oymnasinm." with tha " Civil Tort " beyond them, and
ft bill crowned »ltb the "PriaonofBt. Paul" In the middle distance. To the left of this hill are the
flotogjof Coieaim, and. to the right, the winding! of th« Cayrtroa.
topios (<fe Aedif. v. 1) as one on which a church '
dedicated to St. John was built ; and the present
««ae of the village on its slopes, Ayasoiuk, is
> corruption of "Ayu>s 8*o\6yos. Considerable I
remains of a church were found in excavations
en the hill : these may perhaps be identified
with St. John's church, which was in existence |
"ben the Council of Bishops assembled in
*31 A.D. Among the coins found under the
Turkish pavement on the site of the temple of
""ana were a number bearing the legend moneta
1**ftxn Theologo.
Ephesus is closely connected with St. John,
"A only as being the scene (Rev. i. 11 ; ii. 1)
•f 'he most prominent of the churches of the
Apocalypse, but also in the story of his later life
as given by Eusebius. Possibly his Gospel and
Epistles were written here. The so-called " Tomb
of St. Luke," S. of Prion (F in Map), is a Greek
polyandrion (Prof. W. M. Ramsay's Historical
Geography of Asia Minor, 1890, p. 110). "St.
Paul's Prison " is the name fancifully given to
the other ruins of an ancient fort on the crest
of a hill between the " Civil Port " and the sea
(L in Map). There is a tradition that the mother
of our Lord was buried at Ephesus, as also
Timothy and St. John : and Ignatius addressed
one of his epistles to the church of this place
(rf iKK\rjffla ttj a^iofiaucaplTT^, rij oftrr/ tv
'En>eV«» tt)j 'Ao-ios, Hefele, Pat. Apostol. p. 154 ;
Lightfoot's Tgnatins, p. 27), which held a con-
spicuous position during the early ages of
Digitized by
Google
uoo
EPHESUS
Christianity, and was in fact the metropolis of
the churches of this part of Asia. But for
direct Biblical illustration we must turn to
the life and writings of St. Paul, in following
which minutely it is remarkable how all the
most characteristic features of ancient Kphesns
come successively into view.
1. Geographical delations. — These may be
viewed in connexion, first with the sea and then
with the land.
Alt the cities of Ionis were remarkably well
situated for the growth of commercial pros-
perity (Herod, i. 142), and none more so than
Ephesus. With a fertile neighbourhood and an
excellent climate, it was also most conveniently
placed for traffic with all the neighbouring parts
of the Levant. In the time of Augustus it was '
the great emporium of all the regions of Asia
within the Taurus (Strabo, xiv. p. 950): its
harbour (named Panormus), at the month of the
Cayster, was injudiciously reconstructed in the
time of Attalus (t'6. p. 641), and the consequent
increase of alluvial matter caused serious hin-
drances, especially in St. Paul's own time (Tac.
Ann. xvi. 23). The Apostle's life alone furnishes
illustrations of its mercantile relations with
Achaia on the W., Macedonia on the N., and
Syria on the E. At the close of his second
missionary circuit, he sailed across from Corinth
to Ephesus (Acts xviii. 19) when on his way
to Syria (i'6. 21, 22) : aud there is some reason
for believing that he once made the same
short voyage over the Aegean in the opposite
direction at a later period [Corinthians, First
Epistle to]. On the third missionary circuit,
besides the notice of the journey from Ephesus
to Macedonia (xix. 21 ; xx. 1), we have the
coast voyage on the return to Syria given in
detail (xx. xxi.), and the geographical relations
of this city with the islands and neighbouring
parts of the coast minutely indicated (xx. 15-17).
To these passages we must add 1 Tim. i. 3,
2 Tim. iv. 12, 20 ; though it is difficult to say
confidently whether the journeys implied there
were by land or by water. See likewise Acts
xix. 27 ; xx. 1.
As to the relations of Ephesus to the inland
regions of the continent, these also are promi-
nently brought before us in the Apostle's travels.
The " upper coasts " (to avooreptKa pipit, Acts
xix. 1) through which he passed, when about to
take up his residence in the city, were the
Phrygian table-lands of the interior; and it
was probably in the same district that on a
previous occasion (Acts xvi. 6) he formed the
unsuccessful project of preaching the Gospel in
the district of Asia. Two great roads at least,
in the Roman times, led eastward from Ephesus ;
one through the passes of Tmolus to Sardis
(Rev. iii. 1) and thence to Galatia and the N.E.,
the other round the extremity of Pactyas to
Magnesia, and so up the valley of the Maeander
to Laodicea and Colossae, and thence to the
east as far as the Euphrates, with cross-roads
running south to Iconium, Tarsus, and the Syrian
Antioch (Prof. Ramsay, /. c. p. 49). There was
a-Magnesian gate on the E. side of Ephesus
(Wood's Ephesus, p. 79). There were also roads
leading northwards to Smyrna and southwards
to Miletus. By the latter of these it is probable
that the Ephesian elders travelled, when sum-
moned to meet Paul at the latter city (Acts xx.
EPHESUS
17, 18). Part of the pavement of the Sardian.
road has been noticed by travellers under the
cliHs of Mount Gallesus. AU these roads, and
others, are exhibited on the map in Leake's
Asia Minor. See also the Index Map in Prof.
Ramsay, I. o.
2. Temple and worship of Diana. — Conspicuous
among the buildings of Lphesus was the great
temple of Diana or Artemis, the tutelary divinity
of the city. The earlier temple, which had
been begun by Chersiphron before the Persian
war, and afterwards enlarged, or even rebuilt,
by Pueonius in the 5th century (Vitruv. »ii.
praef. 16 ; iii. 2, § 7), constituted an epoch in
the history of Greek art; since it was here first
that the graceful Ionic order was perfected
(Vitruv. iv. 1, 7). This temple was burnt down
by Herostratus, D.C. 356, in the night when
Alexander the Great was born (Strabo, xiv. 1);
■and another structure, raised by the enthusiastic
co-operation of all the inhabitants of "Asia,**
took its place (Greet Inscriptions in the British
Museum, iii., 1890, Nos. 518, 519, ed. Hicks).
This building was raised on immense substruc-
tions, in consequence of the swampy nature
of the ground (Pliny, xxxvi. § 95). The
architect was Dinocrates, a Macedonian, and
among the sculptors employed in its decoration
was Scopas. Its dimensions as given by Pliny.
/. c, were very great. In length it was
425 feet, and in breadth 220. The columns
were 127 in number, and each of them was
60 feet high. The magnificence of this sanctuary
was a proverb throughout the civilised world
('O rijs 'ApriuiSos yabi iv "E.$(<rtt /uivos «Vt1
$tvv oUos, PhHo Byz. Sped. Mund. 7). All
these circumstances give increased force to the
architectural allegory in the great Epistle which
St. Paul wrote in this place (1 Cor. iii. 9—17),
to the passages where imagery of this kind is
used in the Epistles addressed to Ephesus (Eph.
ii. 19-22; 1 Tim. iii. 15, vi. 19; 2 Tim.
ii. 19, 20), and to the words spoken to the
Ephesian elders at Miletus (Acts xx. 32).
The site of the famous temple remained long
unknown. In 1824 Colonel Leake appears to
have been the first to make any sensible sug-
gestion as to the place where it should be
sought. In 1863, Mr. J. T. Wood excavated the
Odeum on the S. side of Mount Prion. In the
Odeum he discovered several inscriptions con-
taining mention of Publius Vedius Antoninus,
•fpafifiaTtvs of the city. One of these is a copv
of a letter from Antoninus Pius to the magis-
trates and council of Ephesus (between 140 and
144 A.D.), dealing with a dispute between Ephe-
sus and Smyrna on matters of titular prece-
dence (Greek Inscriptions in the British Museum,
iii., 1890, No. 489, p. 154, ed. Hicks). Ii,
1866-8, Mr. Wood explored the Great Theatre (A)
on the western slope of Prion. Among the in-
scriptions here discovered was a series of decrees,
chiefiy relating to more than thirty gold and
silver images (artMoriiruttra'), being figures of
Artemis with two stags, and a variety of emble-
matical objects, weighing from three to seven
pounds each, dedicated to Artemis and ordered
to be placed in her temple by a wealthy Roman.
C. Vibius Salutaris. On May 25, the birthday of
the goddess, these images were to be carried from
the temple past the Magnesian Gate to the
theatre, and thence to the Coressian Gate, before
Digitized by
Google
EPHESUS
being taken back to the temple. The date of
the decrees, which are now in the British Mu-
seum (ib. iii. No. 481, pp. 83, 135, 140, 145), is
not much later than a.d. 104. They are thus
nearly contemporaneous with Pliny's corre-
spondence with Trajan (about 112 a.d.), and
may be regarded as marking a reaction against
Christianity, which shows no sign of abatement
until perhaps half a century later (a.d. 161).*
The theatre in which these inscriptions were
EPHESUS
967
FtaoflbeTompIoaf Dl»n»»tlpb«raa. (FromWoud.)
foand is undoubtedly the same as that mentioned
m the Acts as the scene of the uproar caused by
* Tata b the date of an Important Inscription which
»«w surly be interpreted " as an Involuntary confession
<■< the nbmqorat decline of the Artemis-worship under
*e growing infiuence of the new faith " (is. No. 482,
>■ Its). The speech of Demetrius in Acts six. 27-28
tail • parallel m part of this document, B (1): [M)of«*
»W **wfltt «<u fufyumrr )it(rp]o»oAm« r^t 'Ao-iat *<u
«f nwcfora ™» •UfUyrmr «ol +tAoot0*<rmi *B4*[a(uv
<««KTJa>>>AgiuaTyiVy'<np> ireiffTyCr""— A W _
fm'ifiros ilitvffatrm. & vpaw>[arrsv TOV XMiMV
in^itnr t) <i crrfr>TTryoi Tic *OA«tK ^iA«rtSao-TX)f
t«»a*> i »>o«Ti<r« iHjv woX««« ifiiv ««* "hpnfjiK oil
•sW] <f tj i«vrrc xmrpiti arifurriu, V i[XAj»r airaow
*"»«») M^orepw JtA Tijt iiuw BVuSrwrtM wesJstjaw,
•lUAcai npd ["EWksw re •>! C0]«P0*PM«. "tore
MkAjtgo* «i>tai avnrt i«0>d re «ai Tibiae]' K.T.A. (*.
VMM, St).
the manufacturers of silver shrines for the
Temple of Artemis (Wood's Discoveries at
Ephesus, pp. 73-4). Its diameter was 495 feet,
nnd it has been estimated that it was capable
of seating 24,500 persons. Some of the columns
in St. Sophia at Constantinople, said to have
been taken from the temple at Ephesus, possibly
came from this theatre.
Mr. Wood next ascertained the position of the
Magnesian Gate to the S.E. of Prion." In 1869
he came upon a massive wall, proved
to have belonged to the precincts of the
temple by an inscription stating that
they had been rebuilt by Augustus
(Inscr. in Brit. Museum, iii. No. 522 ;
B.C. 6). This wall was built to
restrict the limits of the sacred
precinct, which had approached too
near the city, and had thus unduly
facilitated the escape of criminals who
claimed the privilege of sanctuary
within the precinct (Strabo, p. 641,
and Tacitus, Ann. iii. 61). Further,
in 1870, he lighted on a marble
pavement, 19 feet below the alluvial
soil, with drums of columns, 6 feet
high, one base being still attached to
its plinth. The site of the temple
was thus reached, and its style was
at once seen to have been similar
to that of the temple of Athene
Polias at Priene, and of Apollo at
Branchidae. The largest and best
preserved of the drums was found
in 1871, and is now in the British
Museum. From the figures carved
on it, one of which represents Hermes,
it may fairly be presumed that it
was one of the 36 columnae caelatae
recorded by Pliny, xxxvi. 95. In the
subsequent course of the excavations,
Mr. Wood discovered the remains of
three distinct temples, the earliest of
them being that built 500 B.C., for
which the solid foundations described
by Pliny and Vitruvius were laid.
Between 5 nnd 6 feet below the
pavement, and under the foundations
of the walls of the cella, he found the
layer of charcoal, 3 inches thick,
described by Pliny (Wood, I. c. p. 259 ;
Vaux, Greek Cities of Asia Minor,
p. 45). The dimensions of the temple
were ascertained to be 163 feet 9} inches by
342 feet 6$ inches, with eight columns in front
and two ranks of columns all round the cella.
This agrees with the description in Vitruvius.
The columns of the peristyle were 100 in number
(Wood, /. c. pp. 264-5). He also found iu
massive pieces beneath the site of the cella a
number of archaic fragments of sculpture and
» Mr. Wood placed the Coresslan gate on the U.K. of
the city near the Stadium, and was thus led to Buppoae
that the hill on the E. was Coressus, and the range on
the 8., Prion. As regards the names of the two hills,
the converse Is the view now generally accepted ; while
the Coresslan gate may be Identified with a gate leading
towards the sea and situated near the western extremity
of the range of Coressus (see Map, and Weber's mono-
graph in Mov<retoK ««u Bt0Ato0i)*i| rips EvayyfAtcijc
2*o*>7«> 1884, pp. 4-11 ; cp. note by Mr. Hicks on Gk.
laser, in British Museum, ill. p. 140).
Digitized by
Google
968
EPHESUS
EPHESUS
architecture which hare been identified as
remains of the cornice of the archaic temple
(A. S. Murray, Journal of Hellenic Studies,
x. 1-10, 1889). One or more canals, formed
by diverting the waters of the Cayster, and its
tributaries, afforded a water-way to the temple,
which thus became accessible from the sea
{Ok. Inter, in British Museum, iii. p. 179). An
inscription belonging to A.o. 160-1, and partly
quoted in note * on p. 967, states that "the
Ephesian goddess, whose worship had hitherto
been universally recognised, was now being set
at nought (&Ttiurrai) in her own native city"
(ib. p. 145). The Goths are credited with the
partial destruction of the last of the several
successive temples, a.d. 262 ; and some twenty
years later its total destruction was accom-
plished by the early Christians.
The chief points connected with the uproar at
Ephesns (Acts xix. 23-41) are mentioned in the
i article Diana ; but the following details must
be added, in consequence of this devotion the
I city of Ephesus was called vtvicipos (v. 35),
" temple-keeper "(R.V.)or " warden" of Artemis.
This was a recognised title applied in such cases,
not only to individuals, but to communities. In
the instance of Ephesus, the term is frequently
found both on coins {Transactions of the Numis-
matic Society, 1841) and on inscription* (see
below). Its neocorate was, in fact, as the
" town-clerk " (4 ypcuifuiTft/s) said, proverbial
(Gubl's Ephesiaca, pp. 114, 115). Another coo-
sequence of the celebrity of the worship of
Artemis at Ephesus was, that a large manu-
factory grew up there of small silver shrines
(raol, e. 24), which strangers purchased and
devotees carried with them on journeys or set
up in their houses. [See Diana, p. 782]] Of the
manufacturers engaged in this business, perhaps
Alexander the "coppersmith" (o x a * JC " t >
•r-tL> r * j -
temple of Diana et Epbenu reatored. (From WouJ a .'( ■*!• r» Jtoroc.-r.ca vm bW MU </ Amcient XpAcaur.)
In Uw background the highest point It the Aeropolli on Cortumi (1280 ft.), with part of the clty-wella running along the
ridge ; and, below It, toward! the left, the elope* of Ltpt* (eboot 600 ft.). To the extreme left of the dt7-wa.ll acroet the plain
la the Xaantrian Gat*. To the right of Lepra and the Acropolis, la the commit of Prion (about 000 ft.). To the extreme right
U a hill (260 ft.), crowned with the " Prison of St. Peal." The preclncta of the temple are approached by two routes: — (1) to
toe left, leering the wall near the tomb of Androclnj : and (2) to the right, leering It near the Stadlnm (i-e Jfcf op).
2 Tim. iv. 14) was one. The case of Demetrius ' The uproar mentioned in the Acts possiblv took
the "silversmith " (apyvporoibs in the Acts) is place at this season. St. Paul was certainly
explicit. He was alarmed for his trade, when at Ephesus about that time of the year (1 Cor.
he saw the Gospel, under the preaching of St. j xvi. 8); and Demetrius might well be pecu-
Paul, gaining ground upon idolatry and super- j liarly sensitive, if he found his trade failing at
stition ; and he spread a panic among the | the time of greatest concourse. However this
craftsmen of various grades, the Ttx^'vat | may be, the Asiarchs {'Koiipxat, R. V. " chief
(r. 24) or designers, and the ipydrai (e. 25) or officers of Asia ") were present (Acts xix. 31).
common workmen, if this is the distinction J These were wealthy persons appointed as officers,
between them. Lastly, as an illustration of the j after the manner of the acdiles at Rome, to
cry " Great is Diana of the Ephesians," we have preside over the games which were held in
an inscription in C. I. G. 2963, describing her ! honour of the Caesars in different parts of the
statue outside Ephesus as "the great goddess • province of Asia, just as other provinces had
Artemis." ; their Galatarchs, Lyciarclis, Sec. Various cities
3. The Asiarchs. — Public games were con- ' would require the presence of these officers in
nected with the worship of Artemis at Ephesus. ' turn. In the account of Polycirp's martyrdom
They were held in the month of ' hprtinaiiiv, I at Smyrna (chap. 12, — Hcfele, Pat. Apost.
partly corresponding to our Mnrch and April.' | p. 286) an important part is played by the
■ | Asjarch Philip (Lightfoot's linatius, p. 967).
• Sec Hicks In Gk. Inter, in Britiih Xuttum, ill. « is a remarkable proof of the influence which
p. ?9. St. Paul had gained at Ephesus, that the Asiarchs
Digitized by
Google
EPHESUS
t»k his side in the disturbance. See Dr.
Wordsworth's note on Acts xix. 31 ; Conybeare
and Howson, chap, xvi., ii. p. 90, ed. 1865 ;
Hitks in (Jk. Inscr. in British Museum, iii. p. 87 ;
and especially Lightfoot's Ignatius, ii. p. 987 sq.
[ASIAECHAE.]
4. Study and practise of mrujic. — Not uncon-
nected with the preceding subject was the re-
markable prevalence of magical arts at Ephesus.
This also conies conspicuously into view in St.
Lake's narrative. The peculiar character of
St. Paul's miracles (owo/mis ov toj rvxoiffas,
t. 11) would seem to have been intended as
antagonistic to the prevalent superstition. In
illustration of the magical books which were
publicly burnt (r. 19) under the influence of
&. Paul's preaching, it is enough here to refer
to the 'Etptaia ypd/tiura (mentioned in Plu-
tarch's Symposium, vii. 5, 4; Athenaeus, p. 548;
Clem. Alex. Str. i. 73 ; and elsewhere),
which were regarded as a charm when
pronounced, and when written down were
carried about as amulets. The faith in /^
these mystic syllables continued, more f««,
or less, till the 6th century. See Cony- ICTf
bean and Howson, chap, xiv., ii. p. 16; ■*■?.
Falkener's Ephesus, chap. vi. ; and the
Life of Alexander of Tralles in the Diet,
of Biog. There is a terracotta tablet with
'Zfiea. ypdnnara in the museum at
Syracuse. [Diana, p. 781.]
5. Provincial and municipal government. — It
is well known that Asia was a proconsular pro-
vince; and in harmony with this fact we find
brtmrtH (" proconsuls," E. V. ; " deputies,"
A. V.) specially mentioned (r. 38). Nor is it
necessary to inquire here whether the plural
in this passage is generic, or whether the
governors of other provinces were present in
Ephesus at the time. Again we learn from
Pliny (N. B. v. § 120) that Ephesus was an
assize-town (Jorum or conventus); and in the
sacred narrative (r. 38) we find the court-days
siluded to as actually being held (ayipawi
frjnrrai, R. V. " the courts are open ") during
the uproar ; though perhaps it is not absolutely
necessary to give the expression this exact
reference as to time (see Wordsworth). Ephe-
sus itself was a " free city," and had its own
assemblies and its own magistrates. The 0ov\t]
u mentioned by Josephus (Ant. xiv. 10, §25;
rri. 6, §§ 4, 7); and St. Luke, in the nar-
rative before us, speaks of the Srjpos (rr. 30,
33; A. V. "the people") and of its custom-
uy assemblies (tjj iryi/tcf lKK\nai<f, v. 39 ;
R. V. «'tbe regular assembly"). That the tu-
multuary meeting which was gathered on the
'teasion in question should take place in the
theatre (re. 29, 31) was nothing extraordinary.
It sis at a meeting in the theatre at Caesarea
tiat Agrippa I. received his death-stroke (Acts
ru. 23), and in Greek cities this was often the
F^ace for large assemblies (Tac. Hist. ii. 80 ;
\*aL Max. ii. 2). We even find conspicuous
•Motion made of one of the most important
■unricipal officers of Ephesus, the "Town-
Clerk" (Tpop/xarefc), or keeper of the records,
•isflm we know from other sources to have been
» I*non of great influence and responsibility.
It is remarkable how all these political and
fKsjeas characteristics of Ephesus, which
*?f« in the sacred narrative, are illustrated
EPHESUS
•J09
by inscriptions and coins. An upx'lov or state-
paper office is mentioned on an inscription in
Chishull's Trarels in Turkey, p. 20. The ypafi-
/taTcifr frequently appears; so also the 'Atrtapxcu
and avSiraroi. Sometimes these words are
combined in the same inscription: see for in-
stance Boeckh, Corp. Inscr. 2999, 2994. The
following is worth quoting at length, as con-
taining also the words trows and vta>K6pos : —
'H (pihoaifiaoTOi 'EQcoriwv 0av\ij (to! i rtu-
x6pos typos KaBiipwauv iwi &v8vr&rov Tlttov-
Ktuov TlpfifjKtivov uVqaWa/if kou T»jB. KA. 'IraAi-
kov rov ypafifidrews rov Hiftov, 2966 (about
127 A.D.). See also 2968, 2977, 2972. Among
the inscriptions discovered by Mr. Wood we
have some early in the 2nd century of our era,
including phrases such as y rtoxipas 'E<p«o-iW
*<fAir, and i vfomSpos SJj/wt. 4 (For further
illustrations, sec article by E. L. Hicks in the
Coin of fcpheauit, exhiblUug the Temple ol l>i*i*.
Expositor, June 1890, No. 6.) The coins of
Ephesus are full of allusions to the worship
of Artemis in various aspects. The word ««-
xipos is of frequent occurrence. That which is
given above has also the word iriiwaTos '• it
exhibits an image of the temple, and, bearing
as it does the name and head of Nero, it
must have been struck about the time of St.
Paul's stay at Ephesus.
In the inscriptions of Ephesus we find fre-
quent mention of a board of ytorou>l who had
charge of the fabric of the temple of Artemis
(Hicks, Ok. Inscr. in British Museum, iii.
p. 80 o). .In the inscription recording the bequest
by Salutaris (ib. No. 481) two of the ytoirotol
are directed to accompany the procession of
images from the pronaos of the temple, and to
see that they were brought back safely (to.
p. 81 a). By the side of the civic jSovA^ and
Sfjfios, there was founded in the time of Lysi-
machus, about 300 B.C. (Strabo, p. 640), an im-
portant body called the ytpovala, which wn>
probably engaged, from the very first, with
matters of religion (Hicks, to. pp. 71-78, 105.
where it is conjectured that the ytpovola of tho
Roman time was a continuation of the ytpovtrlu.
of Lysimachus).
Each of these three bodies had a ypaiifiartis,
and it was the ypau/iartiis rov Sifjioi/ that, in
Roman times, was the most prominent of the
three. "As the real vigour of the iicKKnola.
declined in the atmosphere of imperial rule,
while at the same time the forms of the free
republic were retained, it was more and more
left to the ypapnartvs to arrange the business
of the public assembly." The importance of
this official is proved by the extant inscriptions
of Ephesus. " It is therefore one example the
more of St. Luke's accuracy in speaking of
o Gk. Inter, in British Museum, ill. p. 164.
Digitized by
Google
070
EPHESUS
titles, when in Acts xix. 35 sq. he describes the
•ypaii/tartbt as possessed of great influence with
the assembly and keenly sensible of his own
responsibility " (ib. p. 82 a).
We should enter on doubtful ground if we
were to speculate on the Gnostic and other
errors which grew up at Ephesus in the later
Apostolic age, and which are foretold in the
EPHESUS
address at Miletus, and indicated in the Epistle
to the Ephesians, and more distinctly in the
Epistles to Timothy. It is more to our purpose
if we briefly put down the actual facts recorded
in the N. T. as connected with the rise and
early progress of Christianity in this city.
That Jews were established there in consider-
able numbers is known from Josephus (II. c\
Map of Epfaanu. (After 0. W*ber.)
A. Theatre.
D. Great Qyn.nai.iim.
0. Smalt Gymnasium.
K. AeropoUa
B. Forum.
E. Double Church.
H, Tomb of Androclnf.
L. "Prl»nafSt,P»ul.
0. Agora.
F. "Tomb of St Luke."
J. Church of the Seven Sleepers.
and might be inferred from its mercantile
eminence ; but it is also evident from Acts ii. 9,
In harmony with the character of Ephe-
,9.
sus as a place of concourse and commerce, it
is here, and here only, that we find disciples of
John the Baptist explicitly mentioned after the
Ascension of Christ (Acts xviii. 25 ; xix. 3).
The case of Apollos (xviii. 24) is an exemplifica-
tion further of the intercourse between this
place and Alexandria. The first seeds of Chris-
tian truth were possibly sown at Ephesus im-
mediately after the Great Pentecost (Acts ii-)-
Whatever previous plans St. Paul may have
entertained (xvi. 6), his first visit was on his
return from the second missionary circuit (xviii.
19-21); and his stay on that occasion was very
short : nor is there any proof that he found any
Christians at Ephesus ; but he left there Aquila
Digitized by
Google
EPHESUS
EPHOD
971
and Pristilla (v. 19), who both then and at a
later period (2 Tim. iv. 19) were of signal
service. In St. Paul's own stay of more than
two years (xix. 8, 10 ; xz. 31), which formed the
most important passage of hit third circuit, and
during which he laboured, first in the synagogue
(xix. 8), and then in the school of Tyraunus
(c 9), and also in private houses (xx. 20), and
during which he wrote the First Epistle to the
Corinthians, we have the period of the chief
evangelization of this shore of the Aegean. The
direct narrative in Acts xix. receives but little
elucidation from the Epistle to the Ephesiana,
which was written after several years from
Rome: but it is supplemented in some important
particulars (especially as regards the Apostle's
personal habits of self-denial, xx. 34) by the
address at Miletus. This address shows that the
church at Ephesus was thoroughly organised
under its presbyters. At a later period Timothy
was set over them, as we learn from the two
epistles addressed to him. Among St. Paul's
other companions, two, Trophimus and Tychicus,
were natives of Asia (xx. 4), and the latter pro-
bably (2 Tim. iv. 12), the former certainly
(Acts xxi. 29), natives of Ephesus. In the same
connexion we ought to mention Onesiphorus
(2 Tim. i. 16-18) and his household (iv. 19).
On the other hand must be noticed certain
specified Ephesian antagonists of the Apostle,
the sons of Sceva and his party (Acts xix. 14),
Hymenaeus and Alexander (IVTim. i. 20 ; 2 Tim.
iv. 14), and Phvgelus and Hermogenes (2 Tim.
i. 15).
The site of ancient Ephesus has been visited
and examined by many travellers during the last
200 years ; and descriptions, more or less co-
pious, hare been given by Pococke, Tournefort,
Span and Wheler, Chandler, Poujoulat, Prokesch,
lieiojour, Schubert, Arundel], Fellows, and
Hamilton. The fullest accounts are, among the
older travellers, in Chandler, and, among the
more recent, in Hamilton. Some views are
given in the second volume of the /onion An-
tiquities, published by the Dilettanti Society.
Leake, in his Asia Minor, has a discussion on the
dimensions and style of the Temple. Falkener
published in 1862 an elaborate work on Ephesus,
with numerous sketches taken on the spot during
a fortnight's visit seventeen years before. Finally,
in 1877, appeared Mr. Wood's important volume
entitled Discoveries at Ephesus, including the Site
and Remains of the great Temple of Diana; a
popular account of Modern Discoveries on the
Site of Ancient Ephesus by the same author was
published by the Religious Tract Society in
1890. The rains are of vast extent, both on
the hills and on the plain : the map on the
opposite page, drawn nnder the superintendence
of Sir Charles Wilson, explains most of the
topographical details.
To the works above referred to must be added,
Gronov. Antiq. Oraec. vii. 387-401 ; Perry, De
rebus Ephesiorum (G9tt. 1837), a slight sketch ;
Guhl, Epkesiaca (Berl. 1843), a very elaborate
work; Hetnsen't Paulus (Gott. 1830% which
contains a good chapter on Ephesus ; Biscoe On
the Acts (Oxf. 1829), pp. 274-285 ; an article by
Ampere in the Rev. des Deux Mondes for Jan.
1842; Mr. Akerman's paper on the Coins of
Ephesus in the Trans, of the Numismatic Soc.
1841 ; Head's History of the Coinage of Ephesus
(ending with the Christian era), 1880; E.
Curtius, in Beitrdge zur Qeschichte und Topo-
graphie Kleinasiens, Abh. der Akademie der
Wiss. (Diimmler, 1872), and in Alterthum und
Gegenwart (1874), ed. 2, 1886, ii. 98-128 ; and
Newton's mEssays on Art and Arcliaeolo<iy,
pp. 210-245; also Zimmerman n, Ephesos im
ersten Christlichen Jahrhundert, 1 874 ; Menadier,
Qua condicione Ephesii usi sint inde ab Asia in
formam provinciae redacta, 1880 ; Bp. Lightfoot's
Essay on the Discoveries at Ephesus as illustra-
tive of the narrative in the Acts, reprinted at
the end of his collected Essays on Supernatural
Religion ; and . Greek Inscriptions in British
Museum, iii. 1890, with Prolegomena to the in-
scriptions of Ephesus by E. L. Hicks, pp. 67-87,
and list of recent authorities on p. 68. G. Weber
has published a useful study of Ephesus, with
a good map of the city and surroundings (see
Mouo-crib* Kal Bi/SAioO^Ki) rijr Ebayyt\iicfis
2xoXi)*i Smyrna, 1880-4, wtptotos iv. pp. 1-44).
[J. S. H.] [J. E. S.]
EP1TLAI, (^BK; B. 'AofcxunA, B». -nvS,
A. 'Oiphit ; Ophlat), a descendant of Judah, of the
family of Hezron and of Jerahmeel (1 Ch. ii. 37).
EPHOD CTtaN), » sacred vestment origin-
ally appropriate to the high-priest (Ezra xxviii.
4), but afterwards worn by ordinary priests
(1 Sam. xxii. 18), and deemed characteristic of
the office (1 Sam. ii. 28, xiv. 3 ; Hos. iii. 4).
For a description and illustration of the robe
itself, see High-priest. A kind of ephod was
worn by Samuel (1 Sam. ii. 18), and by
David, when he brought the Ark to Jerusalem
(2 Sam. vi. 14 ; 1 Ch. xv. 27) ; it differed from
the priestly ephod in material, being made of
ordinary linen (bad), whereas the other was of
fine linen (sAesA. See Dress 1); it is notice-
able that the LXX. does not give eiro/xls or
'E<pouo° in the passages last quoted, but terms of
more general import, o-toaJ) ?{aAAor, aroAi)
fivo-alvT). Attached to the ephod of the high-
priest was the breast-plate with the Urim and
Thummim: this was the ephod kot' iioxfa,
which Abiathar carried off (1 Sam. xxiii. 6)
from the Tabernacle at Nob (1 Sam. xxi. 9), and
which David consulted (I Sam. xxiii. 9, xxx. 7).
The importance of the ephod as the receptacle
of the breast-plate led to its adoption in the
idolatrous forms of worship instituted in the
time of the Judges (Judg. viii. 27, xvii. 5, xviii.
14 sq.). The amount of gold used by Gideon in
making his ephod (Judg. viii. 26) has led
Gesenius (Thesaur. p. 135), Bertheau and others,
following the Peshitto Version, to give the word
the meaning of an idol-image, as though that
and not the priest was clothed with the ephod :
but there is no evidence that the idol was so in-
vested, nor is the opinion supported by modern
critics (see Keil, Riehm, Kleinert, and Buddc
[1890]). The ephod itself would require a con-
i siderable amount of gold (Ex. xxviii. 6 sq.,
xxxix. 2 sq.), and, with the jewels necessary,
may well have required the large sum stated to
have been used by Gideon. The meaning and
consequences of his act are considered under
Gideon. [W. L B.] [F.]
E'PHOD ("IBS; B. Zotxpl, AF. OlnpiS;
Ephod). Hanniel the son of Ephod, as head of
Digitized by
Google
972
EPHRAIM
the tribe of Manasseh, was one of the men
appointed to assist Joshua and Eleazar in the
apportionment of the land of Canaan (Nam.
xxxiv. 23).
EPHRAIM, Heb. EPH-RA'IM (DnB$;
'Etppatp ; Joseph. 'Erfipaf/tns 1 : Ephrabn), the
second son of Joseph by his wife Asenath. He
was born during the seven years of plenteons-
ness, and an allusion to this is possibly latent
in the name, though it may also allude to
Joseph's increasing family : " The name of the
second he called Ephraim (i.e. double fruitful-
ness), for God hath caused me to be fruitful
('i'lDH, AipArani) in the land of my affliction "
(Ge~n. xli. 52 ; xlvi. 20).*
The first indication we hare of that ascend-
ency over his elder brother Manasseh, which at
a later period the tribe of Ephraim so unmis-
takably possessed, is in the blessing of the chil-
dren by Jacob, Gen. xlviii. (see Delitzsch [1887]
and Dillmann* in loco). Like his own father,
on an occasion not dissimilar, Jacob's eyes were
dim so that he could not see (xlviii. 10 ; cp.
xxvii. 1). The intention of Joseph was evidently
that the right hand of Jacob should convey its
ampler blessing to the head of Manasseh, his
tirst-born, and he had so arranged the young
men. But the result was otherwise ordained.
Jacob had been himself a yonnger brother, and
his words show plainly that he had not for-
gotten this, and that his sympathies were still
with the younger of his two grandchildren.
He recalls the time when he was flying with
the birthright from the vengeance of Esau ; the
day when, still a wanderer, God Almighty had
appeared to him at "Luz in the land of
Canaan," and blessed him in words which fore-
shadowed the name of* Ephraim ; the still
later day when the name of Ephrath* became
bound up with the sorest trial of his life
(xlviii. 7 ; xxxv. 16). And thus, notwithstand-
ing the pre-arrangement and the remonstrance
of Joseph, for the second time in that family,
the younger brother was made greater than the
elder — Ephraim was set before Manasseh (xlviii.
19, 20).
Ephraim would appear at that time to have
been about 21 years old. He was born before
the beginning of the seven years of famine,
• Josephus {Ant. 11. 6, $ 1) gives the derivation of
the name somewhat differently — " restorer, because
lie was restored to the freedom of bis forefathers;"
airoo'ioovv . . . SiA to awoiotfjvat k.t.A.
» •• 1 will make thee fruitful," TpQD (Gen. xlviii. 4) j
"Be thou fruitful," ,"nj) (xxxv. 11); both from the
same root as the name ephraim.
• There seems to have been some connexion between
Ephrath, or Bethlehem, and Ephraim, the clue to which
is now lost (Ewsld, Gach. I. 493, note). The expression
•• Kphratblte " is generally npplied to a native of
Ephrath, ie. Bethlehem ; but there are some instances
r>f its meaning an Ephraimite. These are 1 Sam. i. 1 (see
Driver In loco), 1 K. xl. 36 ; in both of which the Heb.
word is accurately transferred to A. V., but Is rendered
Ephraimite in B. V. But In Judg. xil. 6, where the
Hebrew word is the same, and with the definite article
OmBNil), it is Incorrectly rendered '• an Ephraimite."
• t : v T
In the other occurrences of the word " Ephraimite " in
or. 4, 5, 6 of the same chapter, and in Joan, xvl. 10,
the Hebrew is •• Epbrnlm."
EPHRAIM
towards the latter part of which Jacob had
come to Egypt, 17 years before his death (Gen.
xlrii. 28). Before Joseph's death EphrninA
family had reached the third generation (Gen. I.
•23), and it mast have been about this time that
the affray mentioned in 1 Ch. vii. 21 occurred.
when some of the sons were killed on a plun-
dering expedition along the sea-coast to rob tin-
cattle of the men of Gath, and when Ephraim
named a son Beriah, to perpetuate the memory
of the disaster which had fallen on his hour.
[Beriah.] Obscure as is the interpretation of
this fragment, it enables us to catch our hsi
glimpse of the Patriarch, mourning inconsolable
in the midst of the circle of his brethren, anJ
at last commemorating his loss in the name of
the new child, who, unknown to him, was to be
the progenitor of the most illustrious of all his
descendants — Jehoshua, or Joshua, the son of
Nun (1 Ch. vii. 27; see Ewald, i. 491). To
this early period too must probably be referred
the circumstance alluded to in rs. lxxviii. I 1 ,
when the "children of Ephraim, carrying slack
bows, d turned back in the day of battle." Cer-
tainly no instance of such behaviour is recordeJ
in the later history.
The numbers of the tribe do not at once
fulfil the promise of the blessing of Jacob. At
the census in the wilderness of Sinai (Num. i.
32, 33 ; ii. 19) its numbers were 40,500, placin*
it at the head of the children of Rachel —
Manasseh's number being 32,200 and Benjamin'-
35,400. Bnt forty years later, on the eve of
the conquest (Num. xxvi. 37), without any
apparent cause, while Manasseh had advance!
to 52,700 and Benjamin to 45,600, Ephraim hai
decreased to 32,500, the only smaller number
being that of Simeon, 22,200. At this periul
the families of both the brother tribes are
enumerated, and Manasseh has precedence over
Ephraim in order of mention. Daring the
march through the wilderness the position of
the sons of Joseph and Benjamin was on the
west side of the Tabernacle (Num. ii. 18-24),
and the prince of Ephraim was Elishama the
son of Ammihud (Num. i. 10).
It is at the time of the sending of the spies
that we are first introduced to the gre.it hero t<>
whom the tribe owed much of its subsequent
greatness. The representative of Ephraim on
this occasion was " Oshea the son of Nun," whose
namewaa at the termination of the affair changed
by Moses to the more distinguished form in
which it is familiar to us. As among the
founders of the nation Abram had acquired the
name of Abraham, and Jacob of Israel, so Oshea,
" help," became Jehoshua or Joshua, " the help
of Jehovah " (Ewald, ii. 306).
Under this great leader, and in spite of the
smallness of its numbers, the tribe must hare
taken a high position in the nation, to judge
from the tone which the Ephraimites assumed
on occasions shortly subsequent to the conquest.
These will be referred to in their turn.
According to the present arrangement of the
records of the Book of Joshua — the " Domesday-
book of Palestine " — the two great tribes of
Judah and Joseph (Ephraim and Manasseh) first
took their inheritance ; and after them, the seven
other tribes entered on theirs (Josh, xv., xvi.,
* This Is the rendering of Ewald.
Digitized by
Google
EPHKADI
EPHBA1M
973
iriL, iviii. 5). The boundaries of the portion
or' Ephraim are given in xri. 1-10. They include
tiic territory that was afterwards allotted to
Lua ; bat the passage (cp. Dillmann* in loco) is
rrideotly in some disorder, and in our ignorance
of the force of many of the almost technical
terms with which these descriptions abound, it
is unfortunately impossible to arrive at more
than an approximation to the case. The south
boandary was coincident for part of its length
with the north boundary of Benjamin. It
probably left the Jordan at the mouth of W.
Siriaaek, and, passing N. of Jericho to 'Ain
Pit, went up through the hill-country to
Bethel, Btitin, and Luz. It then went down
by the border of the Archites, 'Ain Arti;
Ataroth, KL Ddrieh, on the S. side of the
Lower Beth-boron, Beit' Drel-tahta; and Gezer,
Tell Juar, to the Mediterranean. This agrees
with the enumeration in 1 Oh. vii. 28, in
which Bethel is given as the eastern, and
(Jeter as the western, limit. The general direc-
tion of this line is N.E. by E. The common
border of Ephraim and Alanasseh is defined
in Josh. xvi. 6-8 ; nnd partially in ivii. 7-10.
From Asher ham Michmethah, E. of Shecheui,
and probably in the plain of ituihna, it ran,
on the one hand, southward to En-tappuah,
1'asuf, and thence along the course of the river
Kanah, W. Kanah, to the sea : and, on the ot her,
eastward to Taanath-Shiloh, Tana; Janoah,
Vanun ; Ataroth ; N&arah, el-'Aujeh, to Jericho
and Jordan. The boundary between Ephraim
and Dan, on the west, is not defined ; but its
approximate position can be ascertained from the
notice of certain towns belonging to Dan, and of
others in Mount Ephraim. It appears to have
run along the crests of the spurs above the low
hills of the Shephelah, or u low-land." Josephus
{Ant. T. 1, § 22) makes the territory of Ephraim
extend from the Jordan to Gezer, and from
Bethel northwards to the " Great Plain," by
which he perhaps means the plain of hfukhna,
and not Esdraelon, which was the limit of
Map of Ephraim.
Humeri. It is very possible that at first there
was no definite subdivision of the territory
•signed to the two brother-tribes. Such is
«rtaialy the inference to be drawn from the
tot old fragment preserved in Josh. xvii. 14-18,
o which the two are represented as complaining
•Jut only one portion had been allotted to them.
Tr* territory allotted to the " house of Joseph "
»njbe roughly estimated at 55 miles from E.
to W. by 70 from N. to S., a portion about equal
n extent to the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk
aa haed- But though similar in size, nothing
<*> be more different in its nature from those
Irrd counties than this broken and hilly tract.
C«tral Palestine consists of an elevated district
which rises from the flat ranges of the wilder-
*■ on the south of Judah, and terminates on
«• north with the slopes which descend into
*j» peat plain of Esdraelon. On the west a
** rtnp separates it from the sea, and on the
art another fiat strip forms the valley of the
Jortaa. Of this district the northern half was
va 't>i. by the gre.it tribe we are now con-
sidering. This was the Har-Ephraim, the
" Mount Ephraim," a district which seems to
extend as far south as Ramah and Bethel
(1 Sam. i. 1, vii. 17 ; 2 Ch. xiii. 4, 19, compared
with xv. 8), places but a few miles north of
Jerusalem, and within the limits of Benjamin.
In structure it is limestone — rounded hills
separated by valleys of denudation, but much
less regular and monotonous than the part more
to the south, about and below Jerusalem ; with
" wide plains in the heart of the mountains,
streams of running water, and continuous tracts
of vegetation " (Stanley, p. 229). All travellers
bear testimony to the " general growing rich-
ness " and beauty of the country in going north-
wards from Jerusalem, the " innumerable foun-
tains " and streamlets, the villages more thickly-
scattered than anywhere in the south, the
continuous cornfields and orchards, the moist,
vapoury atmosphere (Martineau, pp. 516, 521 ;
Van de Velde, i. 386-8 ; Stanley, pp. 234-5).
These are the " precious things of the earth, and
U>a fulness thereof," which are invoked on the
Digitized by
Google
974
EPHEA1M
"ten thousands of Ephrsim " and the " thousands
of Manasseh " in the blessing of Moses. These
it is which, while Dan, Judah, and Benjamin are
personified as lions and wolves, making their lair
and tearing their prey among the barren rocks
of the south, suggested to the Lawgiver, as they
had done to the Patriarch before him, the patient
" bullock " and the "bough by the spring, whose
branches ran over the wall," a* fitter images
for Ephraim (Gen. xlix. 22; Dent, xxxiii. 17).
And centuries alter, when its great disaster had
fallen on the kingdom of Israel, the same images
recur to the prophets. The " flowers " are still
there in the " olive valleys," " faded " though
they be (Is. xxviii. 1). The vine is an empty
unprofitable vine, whose very abundance is evil
(Hos. x. 1); Ephraim is still the "bullock,"
now " unaccustomed to the yoke," but waiting
a restoration to the " pleasant places " of his
former " pasture " (Jer. xxxi. 18 ; Hos. ix. 13,
iv. 16)—" the heifer that is taught and loveth
to tread out the com," the heifer with the
" beautiful neck " (Hos. x. 11), or the " kine of
Bashan on the mountain of Samaria" (Amos
iv. 1).
The wealth of their possession had not the
same immediately degrading effect on this tribe
that it had on some of its northern brethren.
[Asheb.] Various causes may have helped to
avert this evil. 1. The central situation of
Ephraim, in the highway of all communications
from one part of the country to another. From
north to south, from Jordan to the Sea — from
Galilee, or still more distant Damascus, to
Philistia and Egypt — these roads all lay more
or less through Ephraim, and the constant traffic
along them must have always tended to keep
t he district from sinking into stagnation. 2. The
position of Shechem, the original settlement of
Jacob, with his well and his " parcel of ground,"
with the two sacred mountains of Ebal and
Gerizim, the scene of the impressive and signifi-
cant ceremonial of blessing and cursing ; and of
Shiloh, from whence the division of the land was
made, and where the Ark remained from the time
of Joshua to that of Eli ; and farther of the
tomb and patrimony of Joshua, the great hero
not only of Ephraim but of the nation — the fact
that all these localities were deep in the heart
of the tribe, must have made it always the
resort of large numbers from all parts of the
country— of larger numbers than any other
place, until the establishment of Jerusalem by
David. 3. But there was a spirit about the
tribe itself which may have been both a cause
and a consequence of these advantages of
position. That spirit, though sometimes taking
the form of noble remonstrance and reparation
(2 Oh. xxviii. 9-15), usually manifests itself in
jealous complaint at some enterprise undertaken
or advantage gained in which they had not a
chief share. To Gideon (Judg. viii. 1), to Jeph-
thah (xii. 1), and to David (2 Sam. xix. 41-43),
the cry is still the same in effect — almost the
same in words — "Why did ye despise us that
our advice should not have been first had ? "
"Why hast thou served us thus that thou
calledst us not ? " The unsettled state of the
country in general, and of the interior of
Kphraim in particular (Judg. ix.), and the
continual incursions of foreigners, prevented the
power of the tribe from manifesting itself in a
EPHBAIM
more formidable manner than by these murmur*,
during the time of the Judges and the first
stage of the monarchy. Samuel, though a
Levite, was a native of Raman in Mount Ephraim,
and Saul belonged to a tribe closely allied to the
family of Joseph, so that during the priesthood
of the former and the reign of the latter the
supremacy of Ephraim may be said to have been
practically maintained. Certainly in neither
case had any advantage been gained by their
great rival in the south. Again, the brilliant
successes of David and his wide influence and
religious zeal, kept matters smooth for another
period, even in the face of the blow given to
both Shechem and Shiloh by the concentration
of the civil and ecclesiastical capitals at Jerusa-
lem. When Saul fell on Mount Gilboa, Ephraim,
in common with all the tribes except Jodah,
acknowledged Ishbosheth as king (2 Sam. ii. 9).
But after the murder of the latter, 20,800
of the choice warriors of the tribe, " men of
name throughout the house of their father,"
went as far as Hebron to make David
king over Israel (1 Ch. xii. 30). Among the
officers of his court we find more than one
Ephraimite (1 Ch. xxvii. 10, 14), and the
attachment of the tribe to his person seems to
have been great (2 Sam. xix. 41-43). But this
could not last much longer, and the reign of
Solomon, splendid in appearance but oppressive
to the people, developed both the circumstances
of revolt, and the leader who was to tarn them
to account. Solomon saw through the crisis;
and if he could have succeeded in killing Je-
roboam as he tried to do (1 K. xi. 40), the
disruption might have been postponed for another
century. As it was, the outbreak was deterred
for a time, but the irritation was not allayed,
and the insane folly of his son brought the
mischief to a head. Rehoboam probably selected
Shechem — the old capital of the country —
for his coronation, in the hope that his presence
and the ceremonial might make a favourable
impression, but in this he failed utterly, and the
tumult which followed shows how complete was
the breach — " To your tents, Israel ! now see
to thine own house, David 1 " Rehoboam was
certainly not the last king of Judah whose
chariot went as far north as Shechem, but he
was the last who visited it as a part of his own
dominion, and he was the last who, having come
so far, returned unmolested to his own capital.
Jehoshaphat escaped, in a manner little short of
miraculous, from the risks of the battle of
Ramoth-Gilead, and it was the fate of two of his
successors, Ahaziah and Josiah— differing in
everything else, and agreeing only in this — that
they were both carried dead in their chariots from
the plain of Esdraelon to Jerusalem.
Henceforward in two senses the history of
Ephraim is the history of the kingdom of Israel,
since not only did the tribe become a kingdom,
but the kingdom embraced little besides the
tribe. This is not surprising, and quite sus-
ceptible of explanation. North of Ephraim the
country appears never to have been really taken
possession of by the Israelites. Whether from
want of energy on their part, or great stubborn-
ness of resistance on that of the Canaanites,
j certain it is that of the list of towns from which
| the original inhabitants were not expelled, the
I great majority belong to the northern tribes,
Digitized by
Google
EPHHATM
Htnasseh, Asher, Issachar, and Naphtali. And
in sddition to this original defect there is much
in the physical formation and circumstances of
the upper portion of Palestine to explain why
those tribes never took any active part in the
kingdom. They were exposed to the inroads
and seductions of their surrounding heathen
neighbours — on one side the luxurious Phoeni-
cians, on the other the plundering Bedouins of
Uidian ; they were open to the attacks of Syria
and Assyria from the north, and £gypt from the
•oath ; the great plain of Esdraelon, which com-
municated more or less with all the northern
tribes, was the natural ontlet of the no less
natural high roads of the maritime plain from
Egypt, and the Jordan valley for the tribes of
the East, and formed an admirable base of
operations for an invading army.
But on the other hand the position of Ephraim
was altogether different. It was one of very
great richness and great security. Her fertile
plains and well-watered valleys could only be
reached by a laborious ascent through steep and
narrow ravines, all bot impassable for an army.
There is no record of any attack on the central
kingdom, either from the Jordan valley or the
maritime plain. On the north side, from the
plain of Esdraelon, it was more accessible, and
it was from this side that the final invasion
appears to hare been made. But even on that
side the entrance was so difficult and so easily
defensible — as we learn from the description in
the Book of Judith (iv. 6, 7>— that, had the
kingdom of Samaria been less weakened by
internal dissensions, the attacks even of the
great Shalmaneser might hare been resisted, as
at a later date were those of Holofernes. How
that kingdom originated, how it progressed, and
bow it fell, will be elsewhere considered. [Is-
rael, Kisgdom or.] There are few things
mote mournful in the sacred story than the
descent of this haughty and jealous tribe, from
the culminating point at which it stood when it
entered on the fairest portion of the Land of
Promise — the chief sanctuary and the chief
settlement of the nation within its limits, its
leader the leader of the whole people — through
the distrust which marked its intercourse with
its fellows while it was a member of the con-
federacy, and the tnmult, dissension, and un-
godliness which characterised its independent
existence, down to the sudden captivity and
total oblivion which closed its career. Judah
had her times of revival and of recurring pros-
perity, bnt here the course is uniformly down-
ward— a sad picture of opportunities wasted
a»a personal gifts abused. " When Israel was
a child, then I loved him, and called my son out
™ Egypt- • • • I taught Ephraim also to go,
taking them by their arms; but they knew not
Out 1 healed them. I drew them with cords of
» nan, with bands of love . . . but the Assyrian
5 &a!l be their king, because they refused to
return. . . . How shall I give thee up, Ephraim?
how shall I deliver thee, Israel? how shall I
make thee as Adman? how shall I set thee as
Zeboim?" (Hos. xi. 1-8.) [G.] [W.]
EPH-BATM (DHDK; 'E«VaV, Ephraim)
h * Beal-hazor which is ' by ' Ephraim " was
Absalom's sheep-farm, at which took place the
Rmrdejr of Amnon, one of the earliest precursors
EPHBAIM, MOUKT
'J 7
of the great revolt (2 Sam. xiii. 23). The
Hebrew particle DV, rendered above "by " (R. V.
"beside"), always seems to imply actual
proximity, and therefore we should conclude
that Ephraim was not the tribe of that name,
but a town. Ewald conjectures that it is identical
with Ephrain, Ephron, and Ophrah of the
O. T., and also with the Ephraim which was
for a time the residence of our Lord (Qesch. iii.
219, note). But with regard to the first three
names there is the difficulty that they are spelt
with the guttural letter ain, which is very
rarely exchanged for the aleph, which commences
the name before us. The only clue to its situa-
tion is its proximity to Baal-hazor, which has
been identified with Tell 'Astir, 2J miles N.W.
of et-Taiyibeh, Ephraim. The LXX. make the
following addition to verse 34: — "And the
watchman went and told the king, and said, I
hare seen men on the road of the Oronen (B.
T7JJ 'tlpuvrjr, A.* 1 *- rSv tptuirfl) by the side of
the mountain." Ewald considers this to be a
genuine addition, and to refer to Bcth-Aoron,
N.W. of Jerusalem, off the Nablfts road, but the
indication is surely too slight for such an
inference. Any force it may have is against
the identity of this Ephraim with that in John
xi. 54, which was probably in the direction N.E.
of Jerusalem. [G.] [W.]
EPH-BA'IM Q^patfi; Ephron; Cod. Amiat.
Efrem), a city (*E. Ktyofiivriv w6\ir) " in the
district near the wilderness" to which our
Lord retired with His disciples when threatened
with violence by the priests (John xi. 54). By
the "wilderness" (itf/toi) is probably meant
the wild uncultivated hill-country N.E. of
Jerusalem, lying between the central towns and
the Jordan valley. In this case the conjecture
of Dr. Robinson is very admissible that Ophrah
and Ephraim are identical, and that their
modern representation is et-Taiyibeh, a village
on a conspicuous conical hill, commanding a
view " orer the whole eastern slope, the valley
of the Jordan and the Dead Sea" (Rob. i. 444).
It is situated 4 miles N.E. of Bethel, and 14
from Jerusalem; a position agreeing tolerably
with the indications of Jerome in the Ono-
masticon (Efraim, Efrori), and is too con-
spicuous to hare escaped mention in the Bible.
It is probably also the Ephraim mentioned by
Josephus (B. J. ir. 9, § 9) as baring, with
Bethel, been taken by Vespasian ; and the place
which gare its name to the toparchy of Apha-
rema (1 Mace. xi. 34). Guerin, Judee, iii.
45—51, gives a good description of et-Taiyibeh,
with a summary of the arguments in favour of
its identification with Ephraim. [G.] [W."|
EPH-RA'IM, GATE OF (D?1B(< Tl*>;
riKri 'Eippatfi ; porta Ephraim), one of the gates
of the city of Jerusalem (2 K. xir. 13; 2 Ch.
xxr. 23; Neh. riii. 16, xii. 39), doubtless,
according to the Oriental practice, on the sid»
looking towards the locality from which i*
derived its name, and therefore at the north,
perhaps at or near the position of the present
" Damascus gate." [Jerusalem.] [G.] [W.]
EPH-HA'IM, MOUNT, more correctly, as
in R, V., " the hill country of Ephraim." In Jer.
iv. 15, xxxi. 6, 1. 19, R. V. reads « the hills of
Digitized by
Google
976 EPHBAIM, THE WOOD OF
Ephraira." The name by which the territory
allotted to the children of Joseph (Josh. xvii.
15) was apparently known. In its widest sense
it included part of Benjamin (Judg. iv. 5) ; and it
was also known as the mountain of Israel (Josh,
xi. 16, 21), and as the Mount of the Amalekites
(Judg. xii. 15). It is frequently mentioned in
the O. T. (Judg. iii. 27, vii. 24, xvii. 1, 8, xviii.
2, 13, xix. 1, 16, 18 ; 1 Sam. ix. 4, xiv. 22 ;
2 Sam. xx. 21 ; 2 K. v. 22 ; 2 Ch. xt. 8, xix.
4) : and within its limits were, Timnath-serah,
or Timnath-heres, Joshua's inheritance, and the
place of his burial (Josh. xix. 50, xxiT. 30 ;
judg. ii. 9); Gibeah of Phinehas (Josh. i»t.
33) ; Shechem (Josh. xx. 7, xxi. 21 ; 1 K. xii.
25; 1 Ch. vi. 67); Shamir (Judg. x. 1); Kama-
thainvzophim (1 Sam. i. 1) ; and Mount Zema-
raim (2 Ch. xiii. 4). It was one of the twelre
districts into which Solomon divided the
country for commissariat purposes (1 K. iv. 8) ;
and was very fruitful and in places covered with
forest. The general character of the hill-
country allotted to Ephraim has already been
described. [Ephraim.] The highest points are
Mount Gerizim, 2848 feet; Mount Ebal,
3076 feet; and Tell 'Asur, 3376 feet. The
deeply-cut valleys that descend on the west, to
the plain of Sharon, are fertile and cultivated,
whilst those that descend on the east to the
Jordan Valley are barren and waste. [W.]
EPHRA'IM, the WOOD of (DnSK TIP;
tyvpos 'E<ppat)i ; saltus Ephraim), a wood, or
rather, as in R. V., a forest (the word yafar
implying dense growth*), in which the fatal
battle was fought between the armies of David
and of Absalom (2 Sam. xviii. 6), and the en-
tanglement in which added greatly to the
slaughter of the latter (v. 8). It would be very
tempting to believe that the forest derived its
name from the place near which Absalom's
sheep- farm was situate! (2 Sam. xiii. 23), and
which would have been a natural spot for his
head-quarters before the battle, especially
associated as it was with the murder of Amnon.
But the statements of xvii. 24, 26, and also the
■expression of xviii. 3, " that thou succour us out
of the city," ix. Mahanaim, not to speak of the
statement of Josephus (Ant. vii. 10, § 1), that
Absalom crossed the Jordan and camped not far
from Mahanaim, in the country of Gilead, allow
no escape from the conclusion that the locality
was on the east side of Jordan, though it is
impossible to account satisfactorily for the
presence of the name of Ephraim (the Luc. Rec.
reads here MaairdV = D'jnD) on that side of
the river. The suggestion is due to Grotius
that the name was derived from the slaughter
of Ephraim at the fords of Jordan by the
Gileadites under Jephthah (Judg. xii. 1, 4, 5) ;
and this is in accord with the statement of
Josephus {Ant. vii. 10, § 2), that the battle took
place in the " Great Plain," or Jordan Valley.
But is it not at least equally probable that the
forest derived its name from this very battle ?
The great tribe of Ephraim, though not specially
mentioned in the transactions of Absalom's
* The low thorny brushwood or scrub which covers
many rocky and barren spots In the uplands of the
Bible Is still called moor by the /«Ua»» (Gelkie, Zfeiy
land and the Bible, 1. 49).
EPHBATAH
revolt, cannot fail to have taken the most
conspicuous part in the affair, and the reverse
was a more serious one than had overtaken the
tribe for a very long time, and possibly com-
bined with other circumstances to retard ma-
terially their rising into an independent king-
dom. Ephron, the strong city between Camaim
and Bethshean, is too far distant to admit of
any connexion between it and the forest of
Ephraim. [G.] [W.]
EPH-BA'IMITE CrOO^; B. •Eeypeldnh
A. 4k tov 'Ea>pcu> ; Ephrathaeus). Of the tribe
of Ephraim (Judg. xii. 5), elsewhere called
"Ephrathite." [W. A. W.]
ETPHRAIN (jnBtf, R. V. Ephron; Keri,
JJT&P; 'EQptir; Ephron), a city of Israel, which
with its dependent hamlets (1*1132 = "daugh-
ters," A. V. " towns ") Abijah and the army of
Jndah captured from Jeroboam (2 Ch. xiii. 19).
Jerome (Q. Neb.) on this passage says, Ephrm
ipse est Sichem. So fruitful was Ephrain that
it was a proverb not to carry straw to Ephrain
(Otho, Lex. 172). It is mentioned with Bethel
and Jeshanah, 'Ain Sinia, 34, miles north of
Beitin, and was apparently not far from them.
It has been conjectured that this Ephrain or
Ephron is identical with the Ephraim by which
Absalom's sheep-farm of Baal-hazor was situ-
ated ; with the city called Ephraim near the
wilderness in which our Lord lived for some
time (John xi. 54) ; and with Ophrah (niBT)i
a city of Benjamin, apparently not far from
Bethel (Josh, xviii. 23 ; cp. Joseph. B. J. iv. 9,
§ 9), and which has been located by Dr. Robin-
son (i. 447), with some probability, at the
modern village of et-Taiyiieh. But nothing
more than conjecture can be arrived at on these
points (see Ewald, Oeschichte, iii. 219, 466, T.
365 ; Stanley, p. 214). [Ephraim.] [G.] ["'•]
EPH-RA'TAH (R. V. EPHRATHAH), or
EPH-RATH(nrnSt*, or JTIBtt; 'E«yo8« anJ
'E(ppd8 ; Ephratha, Jerome). " 1. Second wife
of Caleb the son of Hezron, mother of Her.
and grandmother of Caleb the apv, according to
1 Ch. ii. 19, 50, and probably v. 24, and iv. 4.
[Caleb-Ephratah.]
2. The ancient name of Bethlehem-Jndah, as
is manifest from Gen. xxxv. 16, 19, xlviii. 7.
both which passages distinctly prove that it fas
called Ephrath or Ephratah in Jacob's time, anJ
use the regular formula for adding the modern
name, DrT^-JV?. K'il, which is Bethlehem, cp. e.g.
Gen. xxiii. 2, xxxv. 27 ; Josh. xv. 10. It can»»'
therefore have derived its name from Ephratah.
the mother of Hur, as the author of 0««»-
Hebr. in Paraleip. says, and as one might other-
wise have supposed from the connexion of her
descendants, Salma and Hur, with Bethlehem,
which is somewhat obscurely intimated in 1 Ch.
ii. 50, 51, iv. 4. It seems obvious therefore to
infer that, on the contrary, Ephratah the motner
of Hur was so called from the town of her birth,
and that she probably was the owner ot the
town and district. In fact, that her name w«
really gentilitious. But if this be so, it wouia
-indicate more communication between t
Israelites in Egypt and the Canaanites than i>
commonly supposed. When, however, *
Digitized by
Google
EPHRATHITE
recollect that the land of Goshen was the
border country on the Palestine side ; that the
Israelites in Goshen were a tribe of sheep- and
cittle-drorers (Gen. xlvii. 3); that there was
so easy communication between Palestine and
i.jfps from the earliest times (Gen. xii. 10,
iri. 1, xii. 21, &c.) ; that there are indications
of communications between the Israelites in
£gypt and the Canaanites, caused by their trade
u keepers of cattle (1 On. vii. 21), and that in
the nature of things the owners or keepers of
iirge herds and Hocks in Goshen would have
•tilings with the nomad tribes in Palestine, it
nill perhaps seem not impossible that a son of
H«ron may have married a woman having
l>roperty in Ephratah. Another way of account-
ing for the connexion between Ephratah's de-
fendants and Bethlehem is to suppose that the
elder Caleb was not really the son of liezron, but
merely so reckoned as the head of a Hezronite
noose. He may in this case have been one of
.id Edomitish or Horite tribe, an idea which is
'.mured by the name of his son Hur [Caleb],
uvl have married an Ephrathite. Caleb the spy
m» have been their grandson. It is singular
that "Salma the lather of Bethlehem" should
hire married a Canaanitish woman. Could she
nave been of the kindred of Caleb in any way ?
If she were, and if Salma obtained Bethlehem,
i portion of Hur's inheritance, in consequence,
this would account for both Hur and Salma
Mag called "father of Bethlehem." Another
ixfcdble explanation is, that Ephratah may have
hem the name given to some daughter of
Benjamin to commemorate the circumstance of
l&hel his mother having died close to Ephrath.
ThU would receive some support from the son
'f Rachel's other aon Joseph being called
Ephraim, a word of identical etymology, as
sppears from the fact that 'HISX means in-
differently an Ephrathite, i.e. Bethlemite (Ruth
i. 1, 2), or an Ephraimite (1 Sam. i. 1). But it
ic-ald not account for Ephratah's descendants
t-rhig settled at Bethlehem. The author of the
>jvat. Hebr. in Paraleip. derives Ephrata from
EpbwH, "Ephrath, quia de Ephrnim fuit."
tat this is not consistent with the appearance
•f the name in Genesis. It is perhaps impossible
to come to any certainty on the subject. It
matt suffice therefore to note, that in Gen.,
*■-.« perhaps in Chron., it is called Ephrath or
EfArata; in Ruth, Bethlehem-Judah, but the
inhabitants, Ephrathites; in Micah (v. 2), Beth-
'them-Ephratah ; in Matt. ii. 6, Bethlehem in
He land of Jvda. Jerome, and after him
Ssliseh, observe that Ephratah, fruitful, has the
«aw meaning as Bethlehem, Aouse of bread ; a
**» which is favoured by Stanley's description
•f the neighbouring corn-fields {Sinai $ Pales-
fee, p. 164). [Bethlehem.]
8. Gesenins thinks that in Ps. exxxii. 6
Efintah means Ephraim (so R. V. marg.).
[A. C. H.]
EPHRATHITE OTVTSK ; 'EfyoAws ; Eph-
r ^am\ 1. An inhabitant of Bethlehem
i wta i. 2). 2. An Ephraimite (1 Sam. i. 1 ;
H- ««. *, *&). [A. C. H.]
BPH-RON()inar; = t»r«/inus; 'EQoAv, Eph-
"H the son of Zochar, a Hittite ; the owner of a
*» »hieh lay facing Harare or Hebron, and of
•au Dicr.— vol. i.
EPICUREANS, THE
977
the cave therein contained, which Abraham
bought from him for 400 shekels of silver (Gen.
xxiii. 8-17, xxv. 9, xlix. 29, 30, 1. 13). By Josephus
(Ant. i. 14) the name is given as Ephraim ; and
the purchase-money 40 shekels. On the simi-
larity of the negotiations to those of the present
day in Syria and Palestine, see Thomson, L.
and B. ii. 381-4. [G.] [W.]
EPH-RON ('Ktppuy ; Ephron), a very strong
city (xciXij ntyd\Ti ix v P& aipitpa) on the east of
Jordan between Carnaim (Ashteroth-Karnaim)
and Bethshean, attacked and demolished by
Judas Maccabaeus (1 Mace. v. 46-52 ; 2 Mace,
xii. 27). From the description in the former of
these two passages, it appears to have been
situated in a defile or valley, and to have com-
pletely occupied the pass. (See Josephus, Ant.
xii. 8, § 5.) Its site has not yet been discovered.
[G.] [W.]
EPH-RON, MOUNT (tf-|BIT"in; rb 6pos
'ZQfxiv ; Minis Ephron). The " cities of Mount
Ephron " formed one of the landmarks on the
northern boundary of the tribe of Judah (Josh,
xv. 9), between the " water of Nephtoah " and
Kirjath-jearim. If these latter are identified
with 'Ain Lifta and Kurt/et cl-'Enab, Mount
Ephron is probably the range of hills on the
west side of the Wddy Beit Hannina (traditional
valley of the Terebinth), opposite Lifta, which
stands on the eastern side. If, on the other
hand, they are identified with Etam, 'Ain "Atan
and Kh. 'Erma, Mount Ephron is probably the
long ridge or spur down which the road runs
from Solomon's Pools, near Bethlehem, to 'Am
Shems, Bethshemesh. In this case it may
possibly be the same place as the Ephrathah or
Ephraim of Ps. exxxii. 6. [G.] [W.]
EPICURE' AN8, THECEwwovpt »<), derived
their name from Epicurus (342-271 B.C.), a
philosopher of Attic descent, whose " Garden "
at Athens rivalled in popularity the " Porch "
and the " Academy." The doctrines of Epicurus
found wide acceptance in Asia Minor (Lampsa-
cuf, Mitylene, Tarsus, Diog. L. x. 1, 11 sq.) and
Alexandria (Diog. L. /. c), and they gained a
brilliant advocate at Rome in Lucretius (95-
50 B.C.). The object of Epicurus was to find
in philosophy a practical guide to happiness
(ivipyeia. . . . rov (i/Saifiova filov xcpiwoiouo'cv
Sext. Emp. adv. Math. xi. 169). True pleasure
and not absolute truth was the end at which he
aimed ; experience and not reason the test on
which he relied. He necessarily cast aside dia-
lectics as a profitless science (Diog. L. x. 30, 31),
and substituted in its place (as to Karovutiv,
Diog. L. x. 19) an assertion of the right of the
senses, in the widest acceptation of the term, to
be considered as the criterion of truth (xprr^pia
T7Js aXnifias thai tAj aiVMcretj xal rks xpo-
\fytts [general notions] *al va Tcffrj). He made
the study of physics subservient to the uses of
life, and especially to the removal of supersti-
tious fears (Lucr. i. 146 sq.) ; and maintained
that ethics are the proper study of man, as lead-
ing him to that supreme and lasting pleasure
which is the common object of all.
It is obvious that a system thus framed would
degenerate by a natural descent into mere mate-
rialism ; and in this form Epicurism was the
popular philosophy at the beginning of the
3 R
Digitized by
Google
978
EPIPHANES
Christian era (cp. Diog. I., x. , r «, 9). When St.
Paul addressed "Epicureans and Stoics" (Acts
xvii. 18) at Athens, the philosophy of life was
practically reduced to the teaching of those two
antagonistic schools, which represented in their
final separation the distinct and complementary
elements which the Gospel reconciled. For it is
unjust to regard Epicurism as a mere sensual
opposition to religion. It was a necessary step
in the development of thought, and prepared the
way for the reception of Christianity, not only
negatively but positively. It not only weakened
the hold which polytheism retained on the mass
of men by daring criticism, but it maintained
with resolute energy the claims of the body to
be considered a necessary part of man's nature
co-ordinate with the sopl, and affirmed the
existence of individual freedom against the Stoic
doctrines of pure spiritualism and absolute fate.
Yet outwardly Epicurism appears further re-
moved from Christianity than Stoicism, though
essentially it is at least as near; and in the
address of St. Paul (Acts xvii. 22 sq.) the affirma-
tion of the doctrines of creation (». 24), provi-
dence (». 26), inspiration (t>. 28), resurrection,
and judgment (v. 31), appears to be directed
against the cardinal errors which it involved.
The tendency which produced Greek Epicur-
ism, when carried out to its fullest development,
is peculiar to no age or country. Among the
Jews it led to Sadduceeism [Sadduoees], and
Joseph us appears to have drawn his picture of the
sect with a distinct regard to the Greek prototype
(Joseph. Ant. xviii. 1, § 4; deB.J. ii. 8, § 14;
cp. Ant. x. 11, § 7, da Epiaureis). In modern
times the essay of Gassendi {Syntagma Philoso-
phiac Epicuri, Hag. Com. 1659) was a significant
symptom of the restoration of sensationalism.
The chief original authority for the philosophy
of Epicurus is Diogenes Laertius (lib. x.\ who
has preserved some of his letters and a list of
his principal writings. The poem of Lucretius
must be used with caution, and the notices in
Cicero, Seneca, and Plutarch are undis<;uisedly
hostile. [B.~F. W.j
EPIPH'ANES (1 Mace. i. 10 ; x. 1). [Aoti-
ochus Epiphanes.]
EPI-PHI CEiTi^f, 3 Mace. vi. 38), name of
the eleventh month of the Egyptian Vague year,
and the Alexandrian or Egyptian Julian year:
Copt. eriHri; Arab.
}■ In ancient
Egyptian it is called " the third month [of] the
season of the waters." [Egypt.] The name
Epiphi is derived from that of the goddess of the
month, Apap-t (Lepsius, CAron. d. Aeg. i. 141).
The supposed derivation of the Hebrew month-
name Abib from Epiphi is discussed in other
articles. [Chronology ; Mouths.] [B. S. P.]
EPISTLE (eVicrroA.^). The Epistles of the
N. T. are described under the names of the
Apostles by whom, or the Churches to whom,
they were addressed. It is proposed in the
present article to speak of the epistle or letter
as a means of communication. The use of
written letters implies, it need hardly be said,
a considerable progress in the development of
civilised life. There must be a recognised
system of notation, phonetic or symbolic ; men
EPISTLE
must be taught to write, and hare writin;
materials at hand. In the early nomadic stagi »
of society accordingly, like those which mart
the period of the Patriarchs of the O. T., we
find no traces of any but oral communications.
Messengers are sent instructed what to say from
Jacob to Esau (Gen. xxxii. 3), from Balak to
Balaam (Num. xxii. 5, 7, 16), bringing back in
like manner a verbal, not a written answer
(Num. xxiv. 12). The negotiations between
Jephthah and the king of the Ammonites (Judy.
xi. 12, 13) are conducted in the same way. It
is still the received practice in the time of Saul
(1 Sam. xi. 7, 9). The reign of David, bringing
the Israelites, as it did, into contact with the
higher civilisation of the Phoenicians, witnessed
a change in this respect. The first record*!
letter OJpP, LXX. 0i0\lov: cp. the use of the
same word in Herod, i. 123) in the history of
the 0. T. was that which " David wrote to Joab.
and sent by the hand of Uriah " (2 Sam. xi. 14);
and this must obviously, like the letters (D^BD,
LXX. 0i/3aW) that came into another history
of crime (in this case also in traceable con-
nexion with Phoenician influence, 1 K. xxi. 8, 9),
have been "sealed with the king's seal," as at
once the guarantee of their authority, and a
safeguard against their being read by any bot
the persons to whom they were addressed. Thf
material used for the impression of the seal was
probably the "clay" of Job xxxviii. 14. The
act of sending such a letter i», however, pre-
eminently, if not exclusively, a kingly act,
where authority and secrecy were necessary.
Joab, e.g., answers the letter which David had
sent him after the old plan, and receives a verbal
message iu return. The demand of Benhadad
and Ahab's answer to it are conveyed in the
same way (1 K. xx. 2, 5). Written communi-
cations, however, become much more frequent
in the later history. The king of Svria sends a
letter (1£P) to the king of Israel (2'K. v. 5, G)
A " writing " (3FI3D, LXX. iv ypcupjj) comes to
Jehoram from Elijah the prophet (2 Ch. xxi. li>
Hezekiah ou one occasion makes use of a system
of couriers like that afterwards so fully organ-
ized under the Persian kings (2 Ch. xxx. 6, 10,
nn|X, LXX. twiaroKii ; cp. Herod, viii. 98, and
Esth. iii. 13, viii. 10, 14), and receives from
Sennacherib the letter (DnSD, LXX. Ta/3i*3X4>)
which he "spreads before the Lord " (2 K. xi*.
14). Jeremiah writes a letter 09P> /W£Aot) to
the exiles in Babylon (Jer. xxix. 1, 3, the pro-
totype of the apocryphal Epistle of Jeremiah,
placed as Baruch vi. in the A. V. ; on which see
Bajhjch, the Book of). The Books of Rira
and Nehemiah contain or refer to many such
documents (Ezra iv. 6 sq., v. 6, vii. 11 ; Neh.
ii. 7, 9, vi. 5). The influence of Persian, and
yet more, perhaps, that of Greek civilisation,
led to the more frequent use of letters as a
means of intercourse. Whatever doubts may be
entertained as to the genuineness of the epistles
themselves, their occurrence in 1 Mace xL 30,
xii. 6, 20, xv. 1, 16 ; 2 Mace. xi. 16, 34, together
with the allusions to them in 1 Mace. v. 10,
ix. 60, x. 3, indicates that they were recognised
as having mainly (yet not entirely : see 1 Mace,
vii. 10, xv. 32) superseded the older plan of
messages orally delivered. The two stages of
the history of the N. T. present in this respect a
Digitized by VjOOQlC
EPISTLE
sailing contrast. The list of the canonical
Boots shorn how largely epistles were used in
tie expansion sad organization of the Church.
Those which hare survived may be regarded as
the representatives of many others that are lost.
Tie mention o( " every epistle " and the warn-
ing of 2 Thess. iii. 17 indicate that St. Paul
hid already written more than the two Epistles
to iheThestalonians — the only ones of that early
liite still preserved. 1 Cor. v. 9, but probably
not CoL iv. 16 (cp. Lightfoot in loco), alludes to
» lest epistle, at does 3 John 9. We are perhaps
too ranch in the habit of forgetting that quite
is noticeable is the absence of all mention of
written letters from the Gospel history. With
the exception of the spurious letter to Abgarus
of Edessa (Enseb. H. E. i. 13), no epistles have
been attributed to Jesus. The explanation of
this is to be found partly in the circumstances
of one who, known as the " carpenter's son,"
wis training as His disciples those who, like
Himself, belonged to the class of labourers and
pesuati; partly in the fact that it was by
personal rather than by written teaching that
the work of the prophetic office, which He re-
prodnted and perfected, had to be accomplished.
The Epistles of the N. T. in their outward form
are inch as might be expected from men who
were brought into contact with Greek and
Roman customs, themselves belonging to a
different race, and so reproducing the imported
style with only partial accuracy. They fall
in to two main groups: (1) the "Pauline "Epistles,
including the Epistle to the Hebrews, and (2) the
'Catholic Epistles," viz, James, 1 and 2 Peter,
J. 2, and 3 John, and Jade. The title given to
lois second group is not in strictness of speech
applicable to all of those contained in it. 2 Peter
ai Jode are indeed perfectly general in their
kUress. James, 1 Peter, and 1 John are general
ia their application, and are not (like St. Paul's
Epstles) addressed to the Church in a single
otj or country. Hence the term was applied
to them also; and afterwards, though less
•onratelT, its range was extended so as to
arlnde 2 and 3 John as well (cp. Westcott, The
IfMa of St. John, p. xxviii.). The Epistles in
•"a group begin (the Epistle to the Hebrews
**i 1 John excepted) with the names of the
writer and those to whom the Epistle is addressed.
Tun follows the formula of salutation (analogous
'•» the ,1 Tfbrrta of Greek ; the 8., S. D., or
S- D. It, ao/yfem, tatutem (licit, aalutem dicit
*&m, of latin correspondence), generally in
Kae combination of the words x&pu, thtos,
"ft**: occasionally, as in Acts xv. 23, Jew. i. I,
**« the closer equivalent x<tfo«u' (cp. Acts
uin. 26). Then the letter itself commences, in
"• ant person, the singular and plural being
""lias in the letters of Cicero, indiscriminately
(f-lCsr. ii; 2 Cor. L 8, 15 ; 1 Thess. iii. 1, 2 ;
*j astusi). Then when the substance of the
"*» has been completed, questions answered,
trtths enforced, come the individual messages,
™"*teristie, in St. Paul's Epistles especially,
i* "k° seTtT allowed his personal affections
*j» wallowed up in the greatness of his work.
**J ondosion in this case was probably modi-
j*» »y the tact that the letters were dictated
•B amanuensis. When he had done his
**j4e Apostle took up the pen or reed, and
"M in his own large characters (Gal. vi. 11)
ERANITES. THE
979
the authenticating autograph, sometimes with
special stress on the fact that this was his
writing (1 Cor. xvi. 21 ; Gal. vi. 11 ; Col. iv.
18 ; 2 Thess. iii. 17), always with one of the
closing formulae of salutation, " Grace be with
thee " — " the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be
with your spirit." In one instance, Rom. xvi.
22, the amanuensis in his own name adds his
salutation, in the tppwrBt of Acts xv. 29, and
(pfmira of the received text in xxiii. 30, we have
the equivalents of the valete, vale, which formed
the customary conclusion of Roman letters. It
need hardly be said that the fact that St. Paul's
Epistles were dictated in this way accounts for
many of their most striking peculiarities, — the
frequent digressions, the long parentheses, the
vehemence and energy as of a man who is
speaking strongly as his feelings prompt him
rather than writing calmly. For the autho-
rities on which the text of the two groups of
Epistles rest, see Mew Testament.
An allusion in 2 Cor. iii. 1 brings before us
another class of letters which must have been
in frequent use in the early ages of the Christian
Church, the eWrroAal ovarariKai, by which
travellers or teachers were commended by one
Church to the good offices of others. Other
persons had come to the Church of Corinth
relying on these. St. Paul appeals to his con-
verts as the ivio-ToKi) XpioToC (2 Cor. iii. 3),
written " not with ink, but with the Spirit of
the living God." Another instance of this kind
of letter is found in Acts xviii. 27 ; and cp. the
mention of Zenas and Apollos in Titus iii. 13.
On the later history of (wioToAal o-vararuraf, see
Saicer. Thea. ii. 1194, and Diet, of Christ. Antiq.,
art. " Commendatory Letters."
For other particulars as to the material and
implements used for epistles, see Wrtttno.
[E.H. P.] [E.C. S. G.]
EB (TV = watchful ; "Hp ; Her). 1. First-
born of Judah. His mother was Bath-Shuah
(daughter of Shuah), a Canaanite. His wife was
Tamar, the mother, after his death, of Pharez
and Zarah, by Judah. Er "was wicked in the
sight of the Lord ; and the Lord slew him." It
does not appear what the nature of his sin was ;
but, from his Canaanitish birth on the mother's
side, it was probably connected with the abomi-
nable idolatries of Canaan (Gen. xxxviii. 3-7 ;
Num. xxvi. 19).
2. Descendant of Shelah the son of Judah
(1 Ch. iv. 21).
3. With a final yod, Em, perhaps designating
a family, son of Gad (Gen. xlvi. 16; LXX. 'AijSli)-
4. Son of Jose, and father of Elmodam, in our
Lord's genealogy (Luke iii. 28), about con-
temporary with TJzziah king of Judah.
[A. C. H.]
EUAN Q"^, but Sam. and Syr. \TD, Edan ;
'Eo«V ; Heran), son of Shuthelah, eldest son of
Ephraim (Num. xxvi. 36). The name does not
occur in the genealogies of Ephraim in 1 Ch. vii.
20-29, though a name, Ezeb ("UN), is found
which may possibly be a corruption of it. Eran
was the head of the family of
E'RANITES, THE QVWn-, Sam. »i*wri;
'EoeW ; Heranitae), Num. xxvi. 36.
3 R 2
Digitized by
Google
980
ERASTUS
ERAS'TUS ("Epoorot ; Erastus). 1. One of
the attendants or deacons of St. Paul at Ephcsus,
who with Timothy was sent forward into Mace-
donia while the Apostle himself remained in Asia
( \cts xix. 22). He is probably the same as
hrastus who is again mentioned in the salutations
to Timothy (2 Tim. iv. 20), though not, as Meyer
maintains, the same as Erastus the chamberlain
of Corinth (Rom. xvi. 23).
2. Erastus the chamberlain, or rather the
public treasurer (oiW<J,uos, arcarius) of Corinth,
who was one of the early converts to Christianity
(Rom. xvi. 23). According to the traditions of
the Greek Church (Menot. Graecum, i. p. 179), he
was first oeconomus to the Church at Jerusalem,
and afterwards Bishop of Paneas. He is probably
not the same as Erastus who was with St. Paul
at Ephesus, for in this case we should be com-
pelled to assume that he is mentioned in the
Epistle to the Romans by the title of an office
which he had once held and afterwards re-
signed. [W. A. W.]
E'RECH 0118; 'Optx\ ■<*««*) " the second
city of the list of four given in Gen. x. 10 as the
beginning of Nimrod's kingdom in the land of
Shinar; the others being Babel, Accad, and
(.'alneh. This important city, supposed at first
to be Edessa or Calirrhoe - (Urfah) in the N.W. of
Mesopotamia (so St. Ephrem, Jerome, and the
Targumists), is now known to be the site called
by the Arabs Warka, which lies halfway between
Hilla and Korna on the left bank of the Eu-
phrates, having on its eastern side the Nile
canal. This town was called Urttb (or Arku) by
the Babylonians and Assyrians, whence the Heb.
Krech and the Arab. Warka. The original
Akkadian name was Unu, Unwjf or Unuga,
which is translated in the Bilingual lists by
iubtu, " seat," " dwelling." Other native (Ak-
kadian) names for the city were Tllag (or IllaK) ;
Xamerxm ; Tir-ana, " the heavenly grove ; " Ara-
hnina (or Unt-bnina) and Da-imina, "district
seven " (or " the seven districts "), Gipar-imina,
" enclosure seven " (or " the seven enclosures ") ;
A'i-nd-ana, "the heavenly resting-place," &c,
&c. As may be supposed from this, the Baby-
lonians thought a great deal of this city, which,
in ancient days, must have been a much more
delightful place than the present scene of
desolation which the ruins present would lead
one to suppose. That this was the case is also
indicated by the ruins themselves, which show
remains of large and elegant buildings with the
usual recessed or fluted walls, in some cases
decorated with patterns formed with the circular
ends of cones imbedded in mortar, and coloured
various hues. At the time when the Babylonian
empire was at the height of its power, it is
probable that the country around the city was
well drained, and properly fertilised by the
numerous canals. The dwellings of the people
seem, at one time, to have extended some three
miles beyond the walls of the city, which was
itself nearly six miles in circumference.
• It Is from this form that, by change of n Into r, the
Bab.-Assyr. form Vruk comes. The Greek form of the
name of the city is 'Opgoi) ; and the inhabitants are
mentioned In Esra Iv. 9 under the name of Arcbevltes
(Hp, N'WIK ; !13TR> Compare the Assyr. Arkda,
fem. Arkdaitu, •• Erecbltc."
ERECH
Krech seems to have been used as a necropolis,
large numbers of glaxed earthenware coffins toil
other receptacles, used for the burial of the dead,
having been found there. These coffins are
mostly of the Parthian period, though the city
had probably been used as a burial-place long
before then.
That it was a very ancient city is proved by
the Babylonian and Assyrian inscriptions. It
seems to have been the capital of the semi-
mythical hero-king Gilgames (Gilgamos), in the
wonderful legend concerning whom it is con-
stantly mentioned under the name of Uruk or
Uruk supuri, "Erech of the enclosure"' (so
above). From time to time it was attacked by
enemies, and devastated, as the following extract
from a hymn of an unknown and probably pre-
historic period will show : —
" How long, O my lady, shall the strong enemy boll
thy sanctuary?
In thy primeval city, Erech, famine exisleth ;
In E-ulbar, the bouse of thine oracle, blood like
water floweth ;
He hatb set Are In all thy lands, and pound it out
like date-frail.
My lady, greatly am I bound up with misfortune.
II y lady, thou hast hemmed me in, and entreated roe
evilly.
The mighty enemy hatb smitten me down Use »
slogle reed.
1 take not counsel, myself I am not wise.
Like the fields, day and night I mourn.
I, tby servant, pray to thee —
Let tby heart take rest ; let thy mood be softened."
During the historical period many king*
reigned in Erech, and some of them — such at
Dungi, Ur-Bau, and Gudea, about 2500 B.c.r
Sin-gaiid, at a little later date ; and Merodach-
baladan I., about 1325 B.C. — have left records of
their having done so on the many inscribed and
stamped bricks which are found in the rains.
In the year 2280 B.C., Kudnr-Nanhundi, king of
Elam, invaded this part of Babylonia, captured
Erech, and carried away the image of the goddesj
Nana, which was restored to its place 1635
years later by Assur-bani-apli, king of Assyria.
Tablets of the reigns of Nabopolassar, Nebuchad-
nezzar, Nabonidus, Cyrus, Darius, and some of
the Seleucidae have also been found, on the site.
This city contained two great temples, the
abodes of the patron divinities of the place. One
was called E-ulbar (" the house of the oracle : *
see the hymn above), and was dedicated to
the goddess IStar (Venus as evening star} ; the
other E-ana (" the house of heaven "), dedicated
to Nana (the goddess whose image was carried
off by the Elamite king), and now represented
by the Buwarii/a mound. It is argued by Prof.
Fried. Delitzsch that in former times the river
Euphrates must have flowed much nearer to the
city than at present, because, in the legend of
Gilgames, it is related that Gilgamei and Et-
han!, after they had killed, in Erech, the bull
sent by the goddess Istar, washed their hands in
the stream. See Loftus, Travels, &c. ; Oppert,
Expedition en Mesopotamie, vol. i. ; Smith,
Chaldean Genesis, p. 194; Delitzsch, Wo la}
das Parodies f and Records of the Past, vol. i- F
N.S., pp. 78-85. [T- 0. P]
» Supuru (or Subaru) means "ring" (round U»
moon), "halo," and "fold," "sheep-fold."
Digitized by
Google
EBI
ETUCW; 'Anils in Gen., B. *ASJ«f, AF. -«i
in Sum. [t. 25] ; Heri, Her), son of Gad (Gen.
xlri. 16 ; Num. xxvi. 16, LXX. c. 25).
ETUTB8, THE Cygn ; i 'AJ«1 or -8i ; Heri-
tat). A branch of the tribe of Gad, descended
from Eri (Num. xxvi. 16).
ESAIAS [3 syll.] (Westcott and Hort,
*H«Im; Isttios; Cod. Amiat. Esaias), Hatt. iii.
•3, iv. 14, Tiii. 17, xii. 17, xiii. 14, xy. 7 ; Mark
rii. 6 j Lake iii. 4, ir. 17 ; John i. 23. xii. 38, 39,
41 ; Acts Tiii. 28, 30, xxviii. 25 ; Rom. ix. 27,
•29, x. 16, 20, xv. 12. [Isaiah.]
B«AB-HAD-DON Q^rrnDK; 'AaopSw;
OX Xax*pSop6s ; Ptol. 'AvaplSayoi ; Assyr.
.iiBtr-AXa-iddina, Aimr-dJtu-iddina, " Asshur has
jiven a brother " ; Asar-liaddon), the name of one
"f the greatest and also the mildest of the kings of
Assyria. He was the son of Sennacherib (2 K.
xii. 37), and grandson of Sargon of Assyria, sur-
nsnHd u the later " [Sargon], who succeeded Shal-
maaeaer IV. Esarhaddon was not the eldest
son of Sennacherib ; the unfortunate Aisur-uadin-
snm, who was made king of Babylon by his
father, having been the firstborn. Judging
from the meaning of his name, "Aashur has
gifts a brother," he was possibly the second
son of Sennacherib. The others were Aiiur-
mnnik (or Atiur-molik) [ADRA.MMKr.BCH] and
Shsrexer (= Sarra-usur ?).
Esarhaddon ascended the throne of Assyria on
the 18th day of Adar (Feb.-March), in the year
660 B.C., after, as is supposed, he had defeated
tie army of his brothers in the land of Hani-
rsbbe, near the Upper Euphrates, and his brothers
had taken refuge in Armenia. Esarhaddon at once
turned his attention to Babylonia, where Nabu-
iSr-napilti-Uiir, son of Merodach-baladan, had
taken possession of the city of Ur. On the
Assyrian armv marching against him, he fled to
Elam, where, however, the king of the country,
Cmmanaldas. put him to denth. Na'id-Marduk,
brother of Nabu-zSr-napisti-lisir, threw himself
on the mercy of Esarhaddon, who restored him
to the dominions of his brother on the sea-coast
(called mat Tomtit). Esarhaddon now restored
those portions of Babylon which had been de-
stroyed by Sennacherib, his father, and returned
the images of the gods which had been carried
a»ay, thus conciliating the people. He also
defeated and put to death the chief of the
Oiildean tribe of Dakkuri, Samai-ibnt, who had
'■alien possession of the fields of the people of
Babylon and Borsippa. Having restored the
land to its rightful owners, he placed Nabu-
iallhn on the throne as king of the tribe of
Wtkaii.
Affairs in Babylonia being thus satisfactorily
settled, Esarhaddon, in the fourth year of his
xifn, captured the cities Sidon and Bazza, and
executed Abdi-Milkutti, king of Sidon, together
*ith Sanduarri, king of Kundu and Sisu. He
&o built a new town near Sidon, peopling it
^nh the captives from the old city, and placing
it under the control of an Assyrian governor.
This sru apparently an attempt to divert the
tade of Sidon to the new settlement, but the
•wosjerce lost at the destruction of Sidon went
to the sister-city, Tyre. At this time the whole
4 Palestine and the surrounding district made
ESARHADDON
981
submission to Esarhaddon, who gives us a list of
twelve kings of the mainland (including Baal of
Tyre, Manasseh of Judah, and the kings of Edom,
Moab, Gaza, Askelon, Ekron, &c.) and ten kings
of the island of Cyprus, all of whom sent pre-
sents, and were directed by Esarhaddon to
supply him with building materials for his new
palace at Nineveh.
In bis sixth year, Esarhaddon began to turn
his attention to Egypt, and seems to have made
some slight conquests there. Operations were
continued in his seventh year, when there was n
battle on the 5th day of Adar ; but it was not a
vigorous campaign, as a part of the Assyrian
army was engaged in Hupuskia, against the
Cimmerians, who were now beginning to make
inroads. Checked in the south, the Cimmerians
turned to the west and overran part of Asia
Minor. Cilicia and Du'ua, in the neighbourhood
of Tubal, were also invaded, and thirty-one cities
taken ; and Barnaki, " a powerful enemy dwell-
ing in Til-Aasuri " (Tel-Assar — cp. Is. xxxvii.
12), was overrun by the Assyrian army. The
Medesa, the Mannaa (Minni or Armenians), and
other tribes on the north and east of Assyria,
were next attacked, the result being that three
Median chiefs journeyed in person to Nineveh
and made submission to Esarhaddon.
Esarhaddon's next move was in the direction
of Arabia, whither, after having returned to the
king, Haza-tlu or Hazael, the images of the gods
which Sennacherib had carried away, with his
own name written upon them (a common custom
with the Assyrian kings), Esarhaddon conducted
an expedition to subdue the country. He tra-
velled 900 miles, and reached two districts,
called Hazu and Bazu (Hazo and Buz), where he
subdued seven kings. An eighth, Lale, king of
Yadi', who had fled, afterwards made submission
at Nineveh, when Esarhaddon returned to him
the images of his gods, inscribed with " the
power of Assur," and conferred upon him the
land of Bazu or Buz. After the death of Haza-
Slu, king of Arabia, Esarhaddon placed his son,
Ya'-ilu, on the throne. He was unpopular with
the tribes, however, and Esarhaddon had to send
an army to quell the insurrection which took
place. The Assyrians were successful, and
Wabu, a pretender, was captured and taken to
Nineveh.
In his eighth year Esarhaddon invaded and
plundered the land of the Rurisaa, the spoilt of
which were taken to Erech in Babylonia. In
this year Esarhaddon lost his queen, who died on
the 5th day of Adar (Feb.-March).
In Nisan (March-April) of the tenth year of
his reign, Esarhaddon began the conquest of
Egypt. Battles were fought there on the 3rd,
16th, and 18th of Tammuz (June-July), result-
ing in the capture of Memphis on the 22nd.
Tirhakah, who was then king of Egypt, fled ;
but his sons and nephews were captured, and the
city spoiled. Esarhaddon now divided Egypt into
twenty provinces, placing the majority of them
under Egyptian princes, who submitted to his
Tule. Those not under native government — and
these were probably the more important posts —
he garrisoned with Assyrian troops under As-
syrian governors. A complete list of these pro-
vinces, with the names of their governors, has
come down to us.
In the eleventh year several of the great
Digitized by
Google
982
ESABHADDON
men of Assyria were, for some reason unknown,
jiccuted by Esarhaddon.
Esarhaddon's last expedition was again against
Egypt, but he fell ill on the road, and died on
the 10th of Marcheswan, in the twelfth year of
his reign, according to the Babylonian Chronicle,
and in the thirteenth, according to the Babylonian
Canon (667 or 668 B.C.).
Besides setting on foot the campaigns men-
tioned in his inscriptions, Esarhaddon carried
away captive Manasseh, king of Judah, who was
seized at Jerusalem by his captains on a charge
of rebellion, and taken to Babylon (2 Ch. zxziii.
11), where Esarhaddon held his court. The
Jewish king was, however, afterwards pardoned
and restored to his kingdom. As has already
been mentioned above, Manasseh is given in his
inscriptions as a tributary of Esarhaddon.
Esarhaddon rebuilt the walls of Babylon and
the temple of Bel in that city, as well as many
temples in Assyria and Akkad. He also built a
palace at Nineveh, on an old site which he en-
larged, and for which twenty-two kings of Hit,
the seacoast, and the middle of the sea (Cyprus),
furnished the materials. It was adorned with
winged bulls and colossi, nnd decorated with
rare and valuable stones. The doors were made
of sweetly-smelling wood overlaid with silver
Mid bronze. The south-west palace at Nimroud
is the best-preserved of his constructions. This
building, which was excavated by Sir A. H.
Layard, is remarkable for the peculiarity of its
plan as well as for the scale on which it is con-
structed, and the Rev. G. Rawlinson says that
it corresponds in its general design almost exactly
with the palace of Solomon (1 K. vii. 1-12), but
is of larger dimensions, the great hall being
220 feet long by 1 00 broad (Layard's JVt'n. J
Bah., p. 634), and the porch or antechamber
160 feet by 60. It had the usual adornments of
winged balls, colossi, and sculptured slabs, but
it has suffered so severely from fire, that the
stones and alabaster slabs, &c, were all split
and calcined. This is all the more to be re-
gretted, as, from what has been said above, there
is reason to believe that Hittite, Phoenician,
and Cypriote artificers took part in the work.
Portions of very fine winged bulls from Esar-
haddon's palace at Nineveh are now in the
British Museum.
Esarhaddon was probably one of the most
energetic of a very energetic race of kings, and
carried his conquests farther than any of his
predecessors, leaving his kingdom, at his un-
expected death, in a very prosperous condition.
Although many acts of severity mark his reign,
he must nevertheless be regarded as one of the
most clement rulers of his time in the East — as
witness his treatment of Manasseh, Na'id-
Marduk, Haza-tlu of Arabia, and others. On
the whole, his was a wise and common-sense
reign (as things went at that time in the East),
and must have had the effect of reconciling the
diverse elements under his sway. At his death,
the kingdom was divided between his two sons,
Aksurbantpal (see Asnapper) becoming king of
Assyria and its dependencies, and Samas-sum-
ukin (Saosduchinos) king of Babylon under him.
Both princes had probably not yet reached man-
hood when this took place. Esarhaddon's third
son, Aisur-mukin-palia, was raised to the priest-
hood, with the title of urigallu, probably at
ESAU
Nineveh; and his fourth and youngest, Asinr-
etil-samg-irsiti-bullit-su, became urigailu "be-
fore the god Sin " in Harran.
See G. Smith's History of Assyria, and T. G.
Piaches's " Babylonian Chronicle " in the Jam.
Soy. Asiat. Soc., vol. zix., part 4. [T. G. P.]
ESAU, the eldest son of Isaac, and twin-
brother of Jacob. The singular appearance of
the child at his birth originated the name : " And
the first came out red ('JID'IK, indicative of the
colour of the skin), all over like an hairy gar-
ment, and they called his name Esau " Q&D, i.e.
" hairy," " rough," Gen. xxv. 25 ; see Delitzsch
[1887]). This was not the only remarkable
circumstance connected with the birth of the
infant. Esau was the first-born ; but as he was
issuing into life Jacob's hand grasped his heeL
The after enmity of two brothers, and the in-
creasing strife of two great nations, were thus
foreshadowed (xxv. 23, 26. Cp. Dillmann,*
p. 310 sq.). Esau's robust flume and " rough "
aspect were the types of a wild and daring nature
(cp. the Phoenician legends about 0£o~<ms in
IHllinann,* p. 7). The peculiarities of his
character soon began to develop themselves.
Scorning the peaceful and commonplace occupa-
tions of the shepherd, he revelled in the excite-
ment of the chase, and in the martial ezercises
of the Canaanites (xxv. 27). He was, in fact,
a thorough fieilawy, a " son of the desert," who
delighted to roam free as the wind of heaven,
and who was impatient of the restraints of
civilised or settled life. His old father, by a
caprice of affection not uncommon, loved his
wilful, vagrant boy ; and his keen relish for
savoury food being gratified by Esau's venison,
he liked him all the better for his skill in hunt-
ing (xxv. 28). An event occurred which ex-
hibited the reckless character of Esau on the one
hand, and the selfish, grasping nature of his
brother on the other. The former returned from
the field, exhausted by the exercise of the chase,
and faint with hunger. Seeing some pottage of
lentiles which Jacob had prepared, he asked for
it. Jacob only consented to give the food on
Esau's swearing to him that he would in return
give up his birthright. There is something
revolting in the whole transaction. Jacob takes
advantage of his brother's distress to rob him of
that which was dear as life itself to an Eastern
patriarch. The birthright not only gave him
the headship of the tribe, both sacerdotal and
temporal, and the possession of the great bulk
of the family property, but it carried with it the
covenant blessing (xxvii. 28, 29, 36 ; Heb. xii. 16.
17). Then again whilst Esau, under the pressure
of temporary suffering, despises his birthright
by selling it for a mess of pottage (Gen. xxv. 34).
he afterwards attempts to secure that which
he had deliberately sold (xxvii. 4, 34, 38 ; Heb.
xii. 17).
It is evident that the whole transaction war
public, for it resulted in a new name being given
to Esau. He said to Jacob (cp. R. V.), " Feed me
with that same red (DIKil) . . . ; therefore was
his name called Edom " (Qn$, Gen. xxv. 30).
It is worthy of note, however, that this name is
seldom applied to Esau himself, though almost
universally given to the country he settled in,
and to his posterity. [Edoh ; Edomites.] The
Digitized by
Google
ESAU
name " diildren of Esau " is in a few cases ap-
plied to the Edomites (Dent, ii. 4; Jer. xlix. 8 ;
Ukd. 1. 18) ; but it is rather a poetical expression.
tsau married at the age of forty, and contrary
to the wish of his parents. His wires were both
Caaaanites ; and they " were bitterness of spirit
onto Isaac and to Rebekah " (Gen. xxri. 34, 35).'
The next episode in the history of Esau and
boob is still more painful than the former, as
it brings out fully those bitter family rivalries
tad divisions which were all but universal in
indent times, and which are still a disgrace to
Fjjtern society. Isaac, conceiving himself near
death, wished to bless Esau before he died ;
but Jacob, co-operating with the craft of his
mother. U again successful, and secures ir-
revocably the covenant blessing. Esau vows
resgeasce. Bnt fearing his aged father's patri-
archal authority, he secretly congratulates him-
self: "Tat day* of mourning for my father are
at and; then will 1 slay my brother Jacob"
(Gea. irrii.41). Thus he imagined that by one
Moody deed he would regain all that had been
taiia from him by artifice. But he knew not a
mother's watchful care. Not a sinister glance
of hit eyes, not a hasty expression of his tongue,
«eaped'l:ebekah. She felt that the life of her
Jarlinr, son, whose gentle nature and domestic
lahita had won her heart's affections, was now
in imminent peril ; and she advised him to flee
i«r a tine to her relations in Mesopotamia. The
•ins of both mother and child were visited upon
them by a long and painful separation, and all
the attendant anxieties and dangers. By a
ditracicristic piece of domestic policy Rebekah
succeeded both in exciting Isaac's anger against
fean, and obtaining his consent to Jacob's de-
parture — ''and Rebekah said to Isaac, I am
rary of my life because of the daughters of
Ueth; if Jacob take a wife such as these, what
tool shall my life do me?" Her object was
jttained at once. The blessing was renewed to
Jacob, and he received his father's commands to
50 to Padan-aram (Gen. xxvii. 40 ; xxviii. 1-5).
When Eaau heard that his father had com-
manded Jacob to take a wife of the daughters
of hit kinsman Laban, he also resolved to try
•better by a new alliance he could propitiate
& parents. He accordingly married his cousin
iUhalath, the daughter of Ishmael (xxviii 8, 9).
This marriage appears to have brought him into
emaexkm with the lshmaelitish tribes beyond
lie valley of Arabah. He soon afterwards
«tahUshed himself in Mount Seir, still retain-
ing, however, some interest in his father's pro-
perty is Southern Palestine. It is probable that
its own habits, and the idolatrous practices of
in wires and rising family, continued to excite
"A even increase the anger of his parents ; and
'■^a'-he, consequently, considered it more prudent
'■» remove hit household to a distance. He was
adding in Mount Seir when Jacob returned
ireo Padan-aram, and had then become so rich
ud powerful that the im pressions of his brother's
«ri» offences seem to have been almost com-
ESCHATOLOGY
983
' The opinion that this nUntliance was tbe original
,a *fai maud wnteh tbe other Biblical events con-
**** with Easa were made to centre la too hypothetical
■■ tasqpported to secure acceptance. Not less imagl-
■*"• » the opinion that Esau and Edom are but names
*** * tramfemd to men who have nomas biographies
lhem.-rF.]
pletely effaced. His reception of Jacob was
cordial and honest ; though doubts and fears still
lurked in the mind of the latter, and betrayed
him into something of his old duplicity ; for
while be promises to go to Seir, he carefully
declines his brother's escort, and, immediately
after his departure, turns westward across the
Jordan (Gen. xxxii. 7, 8, 11 ; xxxiii. 4, 12, 17).
It does not appear that the brothers again
met until the death of their rather, about twenty
years afterwards. Mutual interests and mutua/
fear seem to have constrained them to act
honestly, and even generously, towards each
other at this solemn interview. They united in
laying Isaac's body in the cave of Machpelah.
Then " Esau took all his cattle, and all his sub-
stance, which he had got in the land of Canaan "
— such, doubtless, as his father with Jacob's
consent had assigned to him — "and went into
the country from the face of his brother Jacob "
(xxxv. 29 ; xxxvi. 6). He now saw clearly that
the covenant blessing was Jacob's ; that God had
inalienably allotted the land of Canaan to Jacob's
posterity ; and that it would be folly to strive
against the Divine will. He knew also that as
Canaan was given to Jacob, Mount Seir was
given to himself (cp. xxvii. 39, xxxii. 3; and
Dent. ii. 5) ; and he was, therefore, desirous with
his increased wealth and power to enter into full
possession of his country, and drive ont its old
inhabitants (Dent. ii. 12). Another circumstance
may have influenced him in leaving Canaan. He
" lived by his sword " (Gen. xxvii. 40) ; and he
felt that the rocky fastnesses of Edom would be
a safer and more suitable abode for such as by
their habits provoked the hostilities of neigh-
bouring tribes, than the open plains of Southern
Palestine.
There is a difficulty connected with the names
of Esau's wives, which is discussed under Ahoij-
HAKAii and Bashemath. Of his subsequent his-
tory nothing is known ; for that of his descend-
ants, see Edom and Edomites. [J. L. P.]
E'SAU ('HW ; SO), 1 Esd. v. 29. [Ziba.]
ESAT ('H<rafas ; Isaia, Tsaias), Ecclus. xlviii.
20, 22 ; 2 Esd. ii. 18. [ISAIAH.J
E8CHATOLOGY. Eschatology, or the
Doctrine of the Last Things, is the name which
of late has become common for doctrine con-
cerning both the future state of the individual
and the consummation of the present dispensa-
tion, qr end of the world, with its accompanying
events; and a complete view cannot be obtained
of the way in which either of these reached its
final form, apart from a consideration of the
other. The present article will necessarily be
confined to a review of Biblical Eschatology.
An attempt will be made to trace the progress
of thought and Revelation on the Last Things in
the Old and New Testaments, though this also
can be done only in bare outline, while other
articles will be referred to for information on
particular points. (1) It will be convenient to
speak first of belief in fh« future of the indi-
vidual. As regards actual knowledge and clear
ideas on this subject, the Israelites, during the
greater part of that period to which the 01«l
Testament refers and belongs, are not in advance
of other nations. Indeed, their very superiority
consists in part in the severe restraint under
Digitized by
Google
984
ESCHATOLOGY"
which their thoughts are kept in this region,
where they have no sure light to guide them.
They hare no mythology in regard to it, and
give but little the reins to imagination. The
bareness of their conceptions necessarily makes
their words few, and may explain how it has
been possible to doubt whether they believed in
any continued existence of the soul after death
at all.
Such passages as Job xxxiv. 14, 13, and Eccles.
xii. 7, with which also Pss. civ. 29 and cxlvi. 4
may be compared, might possibly, taken by
themselves, be supposed to imply a pantheistic
conception: the spirit in man, which animates
his frame, seems to be regarded as an effluence
from an original Divine Source, with which it is
to be reunited at death. But the strong sense
of man's personality and relationship of re-
sponsibility and love to a personal God which
distinguishes the Old Testament, negatives this
idea.
Expressions like those in Pss. xxxix. 13, cxv.
17, cxlvi. 4 ; Is. xxxviii. 18, 19, depict the loss
of all the interests and hopes and joys, the
warmth and light, of this present scene. They
do not necessarily exclude the notion of con-
tinued existence of the soul in another world.
Indeed such an expression as "going down into
silence" (Ps. cxv. 17) seems to imply it.
Among such slight indications of belief in a
continuance of existence may be reckoned the
phrase " gathered unto his people " or " to his
fathers," which clearly, from some passages in
which it is used, cannot mean " buried in the
family burying-place." See, for example, Gen.
xxv. 8 (of Abraham, far away from his ancestral
home), xlix. 33 (where it is used not of Jacob's
burial, but of his death); Num. xx. 24 (of
Aaron's death on Mount Hor) ; Judg. ii. 10 (of
the passing away of a whole generation). As
showing a similar view of death, compare
David's language, 2 Sam. i. 23. A still clearer
proof of belief in existence after death is the
practice of necromancy (Deut. xviii. 11; Is. viii.
19; 1 Sam. xxviii. 9 sq.). Is. xiv. 9 sq. and
Ezek. xxxii. 31 give fuller pictures of the
realms of the dead. In all this, however — and
the same holds of the language of the Old
Testament generally, with but few exceptions —
the state after death is contemplated as one of
gloom, sadness, enervation; while no clear
distinction is made between the condition of the
righteous and the wicked, and no doctrine of
retribution is associated with it. Compare
especially the Book of Job, chaps, vii. and xiv.
To the same effect is the name by which the
dead are in some places described, the Rephaim,
translated by the Revisers " the Shades," which
gives well the general sense of the word, though
not agreeing strictly with its derivation. (On
Rephaim, see art. Giants, § 3. On Sheol, the
common name for the Under-world, see Hell,
and note also the name Abaddon, " destruction.")
These mournful forebodings were the utter-
ance of human misgiving and doubt, natural
even for the righteous when so little clear
knowledge of the future life had as yet beeu
vouchsafed. They are preserved in Holy Scrip-
ture, because it is a faithful record of human
experience, apart from which it would be im-
possible to understand the actual history of the
progress of Revelation. The prospect of gloomy
ESCHATOLOGY
death made the sorrows and injustices of life
harder to bear. The triumph of faith was as
yet most commonly seen in the confidence that,
in spite of all appearances to the contrary, God's
righteousness would be vindicated, even in this
life. The broad lesson of the Providential
ordering of this world had to be mastered
before men were allowed to dwell on recom-
pense in a life to come. Even such words i>
those of Balaam (Num. xxiii. 10), which seem
to us so naturally to speak of the hope of futam
bliss, must, on the ground of the prevailing
tenor and usage of Old Testament language,
be understood to refer to the long life and
peaceful end which were regarded as the fittinc
and appointed reward of godliness.
But now and again, especially while viewine
the incompleteness of the manifestation of
Divine justice here, the soul is permitted t»
nttnin to a confidence that even in and through
death it must be well with it, if it is reposinc
iu trust upon God (see Pss. xvi. 10, 11; xvii.
14, 15 ; xlix. 14, 15 ; Ixxiii. 24-26). Some inter-
preters hold that no hope of immortality i-
expressed even in these passages. But in Ps.
xlix. it seems clear that the reference must be
to the joy of the righteous after death, from the
fact that the contrast drawn is between their
lot and the lot of the ungodly who are pros-
perous even to the end of life. Such is also the
most natural sense, and, supported by Ps. xlix-
we may say is almost certainly the sense, of
Ps. xvii. In Pss. xvi. and Ixxiii. again no inter-
pretation which does not see in the language
the expression of the hope of eternal communiun
with God seems adequate. But it is particularly
to be noted that this confident hope of living
enjoyment of God hereafter springs from the
intense realisation of communion with God here.
These psalmists are sure that Death cannot hare
power to triumph over such a fellowship. "The
communion instituted by Revelation between
the living God and man imparts to human
personality an eternal importance" (Oehler).
Compare our Lord's argument with the Saddu-
cees, especially as recorded by St. Luke (xx. 37,
38). Another well-known passage (Job xix.
25 sq.) seems to hold out hope of satisfaction
after death for the righteous, while movinc
more than those lost considered in the plane oi
Old Testament ideas. The exact rendering «'
this passage does not favour the view that it
refers to a resurrection. And even if the render-
ing of the A. V. were right, the words would.
in the absence of all other intimations of belief
in a resurrection in the Book, have to be under-
stood of a vindication of the sufferer even in
this life. But the thought seems rather to be
that over his dust God would stand as his vindi-
cator, and that even in Sheol he would be
permitted to derive comfort from the pr°° !
given of his innocence and of God's favour.
The further development, however, of the
doctrine of immortality was not after the
manner of ordinary Theism. It did not consist
in attributing fuller life to the spirit apsrt
from the body, but in the growing expectation
of a resurrection. In the case both of Is. xxvi.
19 and Ezek. xxxvii. 1-14, it is difficult '"
decide whether a literal resurrection of the
dead, or a figurative representation of nations!
revival, is to be understood. There is roost to
Digitized by
Google
ESCHATOLOGY
be said for the former view in Ii. xxvi. ID,
where, at a much earlier passage, we should
!«ast expect it. Bat at all events, in Dan. xii.
2, a resurrection which, though not universal,
shoold comprise both godly and ungodly, is
plainly foretold. Cp. also v. 13. The doctrine
of the resurrection of the righteous is still more
clearly insisted on in 2 Mace. vii. 9, 11, 14, 23,
29 ; xii 43, 44. The oppressions to which the
:«ithful among the Jews were subjected under
Antiochus Epiphanes were peculiarly suited to
bring such a hope into prominence. It formed,
as we know, a definite article of the creed of the
Pharisees, and is fully recognised in the Jewish
Apocalyptic literature. The work of Christ
with respect to this doctrine was (1) to refine
and spiritualise it (Matt. xxii. 23-30, and
parallels: cp. also St. Paul's teaching concern-
ing the '-spiritual body," 1 Cor. xv. 35- end);
(2) to place it upon a sure foundation through
His revealing word and His own resurrection as
the "first-fruits" (1 Cor. xv. 20), the "first-
born from the dead " (Col. i. 18 ; Rev. i. 5).
2. But there is another hope more clearly
apprehended and largely dwelt upon in the Old
Testament than that of personal immortality;
it is that of the Redemption of Zion, the com-
plete peace, righteousness, and happiness of
Israel under their promised God-given King.
The doctrine of the resurrection of the dead,
when at length it arose, linked the hopes of the
individual to those of the nation. The righteous
would rise again in order to share in that
triumph of the Divine lore and righteousness
:a which, notwithstanding all seeming evidence
to the contrary, they had believed. The faith in
'bis glorious future for the nation had its foun-
dation in the knowledge of God's covenant with
Israel, to which He must prove faithful, and the
sense in every age that the ideal of their condi-
tion as the People of God had not as yet been
attained, either as regards their inward state or
their snrroondings. It rose ever clearer and
toiler in and through every period of adversity.
This is not the place in which to discuss the
justness of the language of the Seventh of the
Thirty-nine Articles of the English Church.
Bat the passing remark may be permitted, that
whatever may be thought of its fitness when we
an reviewing the uncertain hold upon the hope
<-■! bliss hereafter for the individual in the Old
Testament, yet at least when we turn to the
hope for Israel, as God's people, we see the in-
i ideqnacy of the theory that " the Old Fathers
cid look only for transitory promises." Though
the future bliss is no doubt conceived under
twthly forms and as taking place upon this
oth, yet the whole drift of Old Testament
hope sets towards a final and complete establish-
ment of the Kingdom of God.
The germ of the later Jewish and the Chris-
tian conceptions of the Last Things is to be
f«M4 in the imagery of the Prophets of the Old
Testament concerning the Redemption of Zion.
Jehovah's final judgment <>n the enemies of
''reel passed into the loftier conception of the
bar of Universal Judgment, and the picture of
> restored Jerusalem furnished the image of the
u * T en]j* eternal city. From the same imagery
*J* iwtrine of a Millennium, preceded and closed
<7 specially fierce onslaughts of the enemies of
**!, was also drawn. While, again, the valley
ESCHATOLOGY
985
near Jerusalem where the enemies were to be
slaughtered gave the name of the place of
torment in another world (see the arts. Hell
and Gciiexna).
Foremost among the conceptions prepared
under the Old Testament which in Christian
faith were to be associated with the future
coming of Christ as the Judge and heavenly
King, we have the expression " day of the Lord "
(i.e. of Jehovah), for a time of Divine judgment.
We find it used of times of Divine visitation
generally (Amos v. 18; Is. ii. 12, xiii. 6, 9;
Lam. ii. 22 ; Ezek. xiii. 6) ; but it had also
a special application to a final judgment upon
the enemies of Zion, and of the ungodly in the
midst of her, closely connected with her re-
demption (Is. xxxiv. 8 ; Obad. v. 15 ; Joel iii. 14 ;
Mai. iv. 5). The idea of such a " day " does
not seem to have been originally taken from a
judge holding court, but from a terrible tri-
umphant conqueror executing vengeance in a
day of battle and slaughter (cp. Is. xiii. 4.
Zeph. i. 8, 16 ; Ezek. xiii. 5, xxx. 3, 4 ; and Joel ii.
may also be compared). Touches are also added
to the descriptions, drawn from the terrors of
nature (is. xiii. 10; Zeph. i. 15). The Lord's
judgments were sometimes literally executed
through the sword of human warriors. But
in the visions of that last great judgment the
vengeance upon the heathen and the sinners in
Zion seems to be the work of powers of Nature,
or powers supernatural. In Joel iii. 12, an ad-
dition is made to the conception which was of
the greatest moment in the history of the
doctrine of judgment. The image of a great
slaughter is still employed in that passage, but
Jehovah is represented as sitting to judge while
it is taking place. The valley in the mind of
the Prophet here, when he speaks of " the valley
of decision," is most probably that same valley
of Hinnom where were seen in the vision of
Isaiah lxvi. the carcases of those who had been
slain in the great Divine visitation, and which
furnished the name Gehenna to after-times. This
term came eventually to be loosely used of the
place of punishment to which the wicked go at
death, as well aa of that connected with thi-
Messianic judgment; but originally it belonged
to the latter only.
After the destruction of the enemies of Zion,
and of the rebellious sinners among her own
people, there would follow a time of overflowing
prosperity and peace. All nations would ac-
knowledge the God of Israel and pay reverence
to His people. Nature herself would be rendered
newly propitious to man. All that is harsh and
cruel in her would be altered, and the fruitful-
ness of the earth would be multiplied many-
fold. So great would the change be that it
might be described as a renewal of heaven and
earth (Hos. ii. 18-23 ; Is. ii. 2-4, xi., lxv. 17, &c).
Similar descriptions, based upon these in the
Prophets, are found in the Jewish Sibylline
fragments, the pre-Christian portions of the Book
of Enoch, and the Psalms of Solomon, the figures
being sometimes grotesquely exaggerated {Sib.
Or. iii. 702-794 ; Enoch v. 6-9, x. 16— xi. 2 ;
Pss. of Sol. xvii. 23 sq.). We have not here, it i.-
to be observed, the doctrine of the Millennium in
its definite and ultimate form : for no indica-
tion is given of a limit to this period of bliss.
| and of another world to follow it. The first
Digitized by
Google
986 ESCHATOLOGY
trace of such a conception which we meet with
is in Enoch xci. 12-17. It comes out with far
greater distinctness in 4 Esdras vii. 26-31, and
in the Apocalypse of Baruch (lxxiii.-lxxxir. 2),
writings which most probably belong to the last
thirty years or so of the 1st century a.d. It
may be noted in passing that the duration of
this Messianic time according to 4 Esdras is
400 years, and that very various lengths are
assigned to it in Rabbinic writings. Into
Jerusalem or around it all the faithful were to
be gathered, and the difficulties attending such
an arrangement are quaintly dealt with. (Cor
Rabbinic doctrine on the subject, see GfrSrer,
Jahrhundert des Bcils, pt. ii. c. 10.)
For the conception of the Universal Judgment
as well as for that of a Millennium, properly so
called, we have to go beyond the Old Testament.
The doctrine, indeed, of man's personal responsi-
bility to God pervades the Old Testament ; but
we do not find there the representation of one
great future assize to which shall be brought
fallen spirits and all men living and dead. For
the earliest instances of this we must pass to
the portions of the Book of Enoch which are
generally admitted to be pre-Christian and to
belong to the last century or century and a half
before Christ (see chs. xvi. 1 ; xxii. 4, &c). It
is unnecessary to give particular references
to later books, — 4 Esdras, the Apocalypse of
Baruch, the Book of Jubilees. Isaiah xxiv.
21, 22, has been thought by some to refer to
a future judgment on spiritual beings and on
departed kings. But at any rate a universal
judgment is not there described.
There are differences in the representations of
the things of the end in different portions of the
Mew Testament. Language resembling that of
the Jewish Apocalypses is chiefly to be found in
the Synoptic Gospels, the Apocalypse of St. John,
the Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, and the
Epistles to the Thessalonians. Deeper and more
comprehensive teaching, more divested of such
imagery, is set before us in the remaining
writings of St. Paul and St. John. Bat besides
this broad distinction there are differences of
imagery even in the former group, corresponding
in a measure to varieties in Jewish ideas. It
will be most convenient to follow the order of
events in the Apocalypse and to compare other
descriptions by the way. The succession of
calamities in the gradually unfolding visions
of the Apocalypse may be compared with the
briefer and more general description of the
signs of the end in our Lord's Apocalyptic dis-
course in Matt. xxiv. (Mark xiii. ; Luke xxi.).
Then after the fall of the city mrstically called
Babylon, He Whose Name is " The Word of God "
is seen going forth to war followed by the
armies of heaven; and the enemies of God
assemble to make war with Him and are over-
thrown (Rev. xix. 11-21). Then follows a
reign of the Saints (xx. 1-7) for a thousand
years. This passage does not enter into details,
and it is not clear that what is ordinarily meant
by the Millennium is intended. Such a belief,
known as Chiliasm or Millenarianism, was,
indeed, very prevalent in the Christian Church
of the 2nd century, and they so interpreted
this passage of the Apocalypse. But their
ideas on the subject were evidently chiefly
drawn from Jewish sources (Justin M. Dial.
ESCHATOLOGY
cum Tnjph., 51, 80, 81; Irenaeus, v. 33-36).
If all ages of the Church and schools of inter-
preters be taken into account, it has been more
commonly held that this portion of the imagery
of the Apocalypse has been fulfilled in the
victory, partial as it is, which Christ and His
Church have already won. Elsewhere in the
New Testament there is no clear indication of a
finite period before the Judgment, like that of
the reign of the Messiah in the later Jewish
writings. In the Synoptic Gospels figures of
earthly felicity are drawn from the Old Testa-
ment and from current Jewish language to
describe the triumph of the kingdom of God,
such as that of the great banquet (Matt viii.
11, &c), and of abundant possessions, including
the reign of the Apostles with Christ (Matt,
xix. 28, 29, &c). But if the. language be con-
sidered as a whole, it will be seen that it agrees
rather with those earlier and simpler idea-
described above, according to which the Mes-
sianic times and the world to come were net
distinguished from one another. According t"
1 Thess. iv. 16, 17, the resurrection of those
that " sleep in Jesus " is to be a first incident of
His appearing, so that they will share in all it*
joy and glory. Thus far this passage accords
with Rev. xx. 7 ; but no room seems to be le't
for a reign on earth.
To return to the Apocalypse. After the
thousand years a renewed activity is permitted
to spiritual wickedness ; and the powers of this
world, under the names of Gog and Magog
(cp. Ezek. xxxviii., xxxix.), are again gathered
together. The result is that they are destroyed,
and the Devil, who deceived them, cast into the
lake of fire. According to the older type of
prophetic imagery, the judgment upon the
ungodly was, as we have seen, conceived not as
a formal process of judgment, bat as a great
slaughter. This view seems to be followed in
2 Thess. i. 7-10 ; but it is to be supcrnaturally
inflicted by the Christ Himself. In the more
fully developed ideas of the things of the end,
room was found for this ancient representation
of the judgment by placing an overthrow of
enemies (or even two, one at the beginning and
one at the close of the Messianic times) before
the final, universal forensic judgment upon
quick and dead. This more developed concep-
tion is presented to us in the Apocalypse.
We are thus brought to the Last Judgment,
and here we meet with the most significant point
of contrast between Christian and Jewish teach-
ing. It is that in the New Testament the Christ
appears as the Judge in the Universal Judgment
(Matt. xxv. 31 sq. ; 2 Cor. v. 10, and other allu-
sions in St. Paul's Epistles; James v. 7-9;
1 John ii. 28, with iv. 17; and perhaps also
1 Pet. iv. 5). This point does not ap|«ar q»' te
so clearly in the Apocalypse; it may, how-
ever, be inferred. The dead stand "before the
Throne" (right reading, xx. 12), and this Throne
is that " of God and of the Lnmb " (xxii. 1>
Compare also xxi. 27 with xx. 12; and see
ii. 23 and xxii. 12.
Just before the Judgment the Devil is cast
into the lake" of fire (xx. 10) to which the Beast
and the False Prophet have also been consign**
(xix. 20). Death and Hades, after they have given
up their dead, are also cast there (xx. 13, lv*
The binding of Satan during the thousand y«"*
Digitized by
Google
ESCHATOLOGY
and bis final consignment to the lake of fire
>boald be compared with the story in the Book
of Enoch and other Jewish Apocalypses of the
imprisonment, from the time of their fall, of the
asgels who fell by lust just before the Flood,
mi their removal at the Judgment Day to a
.•till worst place of torture (Enoch x. 4-6, 12,
13; Apoc of Baruch lvi. 10-13; Book of Jubi-
lees, eh. v.). But Satan and his angels are sot
deatical with the latter, though there must
tvideotly be some connexion between the ideas
about them both.
Wicked men are cast into the same lake of
fire (ii. 15, xxi. 8 ; cp. the other comparatively
speaking fall description of the Judgment in
Matt. in. 31-46). In the Book of Enoch, on
the other hand, the place of punishment to
which the wicked angels are to be sent is distinct
irem, though similar to, that for wicked men.
Other passages suggesting conscious suffering,
without end, or of which no end is indicated,
are Matt t. 30, xiii. 49, 50, iriii. 8, 9 (Mark ix.
43, 45, 47, 48), xii. 32 (Mark Hi. 29). More
ragw is the image of the " outer darkness,"
outside the lighted banqueting-hall, where the
Feast is held, which represents the Joy of the
triumphant kingdom of God (Matt. viii. 12,
inL 13, hit. 51, xxv. 30 ; Luke xiii. 28). On
the other band, we have language which recalls
rather the image of the destruction of God's
enemies, and suggests annihilation. This is true
especially of 2 Thess. i. 7-10; but with this
riew the following passages seem also best to
agree: Matt. Hi. 12; 1 Pet. iv. 17, 18 ; 2 Pet.
hi. 7; Jade 14, 15. Cp. also Heb. x. 27. Of
the four following it is difficult to say under
which of the preceding heads they should be
classed: Matt x. 28, xvi. 25; Luke xiii. 5,
«. 18. On the other band, Luke xii. 47, 48,
59, speaks of punishment limited in duration as
* ell as in severity ; for an unending hell, however
modified, could not be described as «' few stripes."
Eren the " many stripes " are scarcely consistent
with sach a thought. An end seems also sug-
gested in Matt. v. 25, 26, stem as the purpose
rf the passage is. Again, the very saying of our
Lord, which speaks of a sin that hath " never
forgrfeness, either in this world or in the world to
«xk," suggests that there are others which have
(Halt. xii. 32; Mark iii. 28, 29). Again, the
phrase "to every man according to his deeds,"
and similar expressions, regarding the Judgment
(Mttt. iri. 27; 2 Cor. v. 10; Rev. xx. 12),
•*** to imply a greater variety of award than
■uoplT the division into two great classes of
the saved and the damned. Moreover, these
t*s*ages all plainly refer not to the intermediate
*•*«, but to the Judgment Day. Cp. also 1 Cor.
"i- 13, 15. The doctrine of Purgatory, when
presented in a spiritual form, seems to commend
itself to the reason, bnt it must be allowed that
it has no basis in Holy Scripture.
All this language has its correspondences with
Jewish descriptions of future judgment and
pnashment. Yet there is in the New Testament
'F'ster simplicity and dignity; details are
"■dwelt upon; the moral and spiritual lessons
"•at for much more, while a curious imagina-
!* » l«s» gratified. In that other group of
uZ ^ !8tln " nt writings to which reference has
<w» made, glimpses are afforded into deeper
•wiring truths. All judgment has been
ESCHATOLOGY
987
committed to the Son of Man (John v. 22-27).
When He was on earth, the judgment of men of
all classes, and of the Evil One himself, was pro-
ceeding, and it is proceeding still (John xii. 31 ;
xvi. 8, 11). The word "eternal " is applied to a
state of life and death on earth, where we should
rather use the word " spiritual." In no mere
metaphorical sense there is a resurrection now,
as well as hereafter (John iii. 36, v. 24, xi. 25,
xvii. 3 ; 1 John iii. 14, v. 12, 18 ; Rom. vi. 1 sq.).
But this does not destroy the sense of the need
of future resurrection and judgment (John v.
25, 29 ; 1 John iii. 2 sq. ; Rom. viii. 16 sq.). Here
and there also a more sublime close seems to be
indicated than that of the Judgment Day itself,
a time when at last every rational will shall be
brought into obedience to Christ, and complete
harmony and happiness shall be established
through every realm of being (1 Cor. xv. 23-
27 ; Col. i. 20 ; Ephes. i. 20 ; Acts iii. 21 ; Rom.
xi. 32 ; Philip, ii. 10, 11). It is too much over-
looked how much of the most distinctive teach-
ing of the Christian Revelation is contained in
its eschatology ; in other words, in the new view
which it gives of God's ultimate purposes with
regard to mankind and His kingdom. For in-
stance, the real gist of St. Paul's great argument
in the Epistle to the Romans is to be found not
less in chs. viii.-xi. than in chs. ii.-vii.
We have attempted thus far to bring out
clearly the facts in regard to the language of
Holy Scripture on future judgment and punish-
ment. Any adequate consideration of the con-
clusions to be drawn in view of the modern con-
troversies on the subject would be impossible
here. We must confine ourselves to one or two
remarks : (a) The descriptions are figurative,
and the figures are not matter of Revelation.
They are neither derived, except in germ, from
the Old Testament, nor newly given by Christ,
but are taken from prevailing Jewish language,
for the purpose of enforcing certain great truths.
There are, moreover, variations in the imagery
employed which show that the precise form of
the representations is of small account. It is,
for example, impossible to fit together the pic-
ture of the servants beaten with few or many
stripes with that of the two classes of the
righteous and the wicked in the parable of the
sheep and the goats.
(6) We have as little right to explain away
the passages which speak of the final restitution
of all things as we have to destroy the force of
those which describe the doom of the wicked.
It may be that no thoroughly satisfactory way
of reconciling them will present itself. If so,
the apparently conflicting teaching should bring
home to us our own ignorance and the weakness
of our thought.
3. The subject of the Intermediate State is
treated — at least as regards the righteous — in
the article on Pabadise. It must suffice here
to note its connexion with the topics which
have been discussed in the present article. It
would seem probable that the effort to combine
the ideas respecting the Under-world to which
the soul would go at death, spoken of in 1, when
brought into comparison with those concerning
the great consummation referred to in 2, must
have helped to render definite the conception of
an intermediate state. The holy dead must, it
was felt, share in the future glory of Zion, and
Digitized by
Google
J)88
ESCHEW
;i term was thus set to their present state of
existence. The imagery on this subject also
underwent a development after the close of the
Old Testament Canon, as appears from the same
Apocalyptic and Rabbinic literature to which
reference has already been made. The most dis-
tinct use of such imagery in the New Testament
is in the picture of separate abodes for the
righteous and wicked in Hades in the parable of
Lazarus and Dives in Hades (Luke xvi. 22 sq.).
It is always to be remembered that we can
know nothing concerning either the future of the
individnal soul or the end of the world, except
in figurative language. But the figures which
we have noticed, albeit not first promulgated in
Holy Scripture, have received its sanction ; and,
taken in general outline, they shadow forth
truth to which our own minds and hearts give
a response. In spite of the part taken by the
body in all our thinking and acting, ineradic-
able instincts of the human heart and conscience
protest against the materialism which supposes
that there is no continued existence of the
human personality after death. At the same
time we see that an organism, such as that of
the resurrection-body, is necessary to the spirit
for the fulness of life ; while all* that we have
learnt and are learning concerning the manifold
ties that bind us together reconciles us to the
thought that the individual must wait for
perfect consummation and bliss in the final
regeneration.
Jewish Eschatology and its relation to Chris-
tian Faith is discussed, from various standpoints,
in many modern German works which deal
with the subject of Messianic doctrine. On the
doctrine of Future Life in the Old Testament,
Oehler's Theology of the Old Testament may
he consulted with advantage. Information
respecting Jewish doctrine later than the Old
Testament, and the critical questions connected
with the Jewish documents of the last one or
two centuries B.c, and the 1st century a.d.,
may be obtained in The Jewish Messiah, by
I. Drummond, or both on these points and their
relation to Christian doctrine in The Jewish and
Christian Messiah, by V. H. Stanton. A good
succinct account of Jewish belief in regard to
the things of the end will be found in Schiirer,
The Jewish People in the time nf Jesus Christ,
Div. ii. vol. ii. § 29, pp. 154-187, Eng. trans.
F. Weber's Altsynagogale Palastinische Tkeologie,
pp. 322-382, is also to be mentioned as spe-
cially useful for the Rabbinic doctrine on the
subject. [V. H. S/j
ESCHEW (Job i. 1, 8, ii. 3 ; 1 Pet. iii. 11)=
to flee from or shun. The word occurs in the
collect for the Third Sunday after Easter, and is
retained by the R. V. in the above 0. T. passages,
but replaced by "turn away" in 1 Pet. [F.]
ESDRAE'LON ('EoS/niArfr, B. 'ErfpoVlAw,
Judith iii. 9; B. 'Eo-pijAeV, A. 'E<r€pnx<br, Judith
iv. 6 ; 'E<r8y»jA<£/i, BN. -\*i,, Judith vii. 3 ; 'E<r-
tpnKin, K. -K&v, B. 'Eapfin, A. 'EaSpfa Judith
i. 8 ; Esdrelon). This name is merely the Greek
form of the Hebrew word Jezreel. It occurs
in this exact shape only twice in the A. V.
<Judith iii. 9, iv. 6). In Judith vii. 3, it is
Esdraelom (Esdraelon, ed. 1611); and in i. 8,
Esdrelom (Esdrelon, ed. 1611), with the
ESDRAELON
addition of "the great plain." The name is
derived from the old royal city of Jezrkei.
which occupied a commanding site at the
eastern extremity of the plain.
The " great plain of Esdraelon " is called in
the 0. T. the "valley of Megiddo " (2 Ch.
xxxv. 22), the "valley of Megeddon" (Zech.
xii. 11), and <l Jezreel " only in 2 Sam. ii. 9:
in the Apocrypha, "the plain of Megiddo"
(1 Esd. i. 29) and " the great plain " (1 Mace,
xii. 49); by Joseph us, "the great plain," t«
wtSlov niya (Ant. xii. 8,§5;A/. iii. 3, § 1.
&c.) ; and by Eusebius and Jerome, " the plain ot
Legio," TtSlov TTJt Atyturos, Campus Legionis,
from the Roman town Legio on its S. side. It
separates the hills of Samaria on the S. from
those of Galilee on the N. ; and is not only the
largest and most fertile plain in Palestine, but
one of the most remarkable features of the
country. " A glance at its situation wilt show
that to a certain extent, though not in an eqtul
degree, it formed the same kind of separation
between the mass of Central Palestine and the
tribes of the extreme north, as the valley of the
Jordan effected between that same mass and the
trans-Jordanic tribes on the east " (Stanley.
S. <jr P. p. 337). At its eastern extremity stooJ
Jezreel, Zerin, the royal residence of the kings
of Israel, whence the broad, open " valley of
Jezreel " (Josh. xvii. 16 ; Judg. vi. 33 ; Hos. i.
5) slopes gradually down to the Jordan valley ;
and at its western end was Jokneam of Carawi.
Tell Keimun. Its length from Zc-'m to Tell
Keimun is 15 miles, and its greatest breadth
from Jenin to JunjAr is 14 miles. On the XX.
the plain extends 3J miles further, to the foot
of Mount Tabor ; and on the S.E. it stretches,
eastward from Jenin, for 3J miles between
Mount Gilboa and the hills to the S. On the N.
the mountains of Galilee rise boldly from the
plain, and the " Mount of the Precipitation "
(1285 ft.), below Nazareth, is conspicuous;
whilst on the S. low olive-clad hills slope gently
upwards to the heights of Mount Ephraim. On
the N.E. are the ridge of J. Duhy (1690 ft.) an.l
the isolated hill of Tabor (1843 ft.), and on the
N.W. the Kishon runs out through a narrow
gorge, between Carmel and the Galilean hills, to
the plain of Acre and the sea.
The wide undulating plain, now called Merj
ibn 'Amir, is dotted with grey tells, and seamed
in every direction with small watercourses,
which convey the drainage of the surrounding
hills to the Kishon. The fall is slight; the
water parting near Jenin is only 260 ft. above
the sea, and during winter the central portion of
the plain becomes an impassable morass. The
Kishon at the same time becomes a deep, turbid
stream, and after heavy rain it rolls down in
flood as it did on the day when it swept away
the host of Sisera (Judg. v. 21). In summer
the rich, crumbling volcanic soil cracks, and
numerous fissures make riding off the beaten
tracks difficult. Wherever it is tilled the pUin
yields abundant crops of wheat, cotton, tobacco,
sesame, and millet, and everywhere flowers and
rank weeds attest the fertility of the soil. To
this richness there are allusions in Hos. >>•
21, 22; Gen. xlix. 14, 15; 1 Ch. xii. 40; and
in the modern name of the district, Selad
Haritheh, the "country of the ploughed land.
The plain is now fully cultivated, but thirty I*** 1
Digitized by
Google
ESDRAELON
ago it was the favourite resort of the Bedawin,
who, like the nomad Midianites and Amalekites,
— those " children of the east " who were " as
locusts for multitude," whose "camels were
without number as sand by the seaside/' —
devoured its rich pasture. Trees are rare
except round Tillages; but where there is an
abundance of water, as at Jenin, they grow
with great luxuriance. The whole plain is
watered by the numerous springs on the N.E.
and W. 'Between Tell Keim&n and Tell Abu
Kwkis there are from fifty to sixty springs, all
fresh and good, and some of them feeding
running streams. The three most remarkable
groups are those of Lejjun, W. ed-Dufleh, and
Kirek, from which even in the dry season con-
siderable streams run down. No important
town was ever situated in the plain itself, but
on its borders were places of high historic and
sacred interest. Such were Jokneam of Carmel,
commanding roads through the gorge of the
Khsbon to Accho, and over the ridge to the
plain of Sharon ; Megiddo, at the northern end
of the easiest pass through the hills that
separate Lsdraelon from the Maritime Plain;
Taanach; En-gannim, the Ginaia of Josephus
{B.J. iii. 3, § 4), which marked the boundary of
Samaria; Jezreel, the royal city, commanding
the great road down the Valley of Jezreel to
Bethshean and the country east of Jordan;
Shonem, Xain, and Endor, on the slopes of
/. Diky ; Daberath ; Chesulloth, the Xaloth of
Josephus (£. J. iii. 3,§ 1); Gaba "of the Horse-
men " (B. J. iii. 3, § 1) ; and Uarosheth of the
Gentiles.
The principal roads which cross the plain
sre: (1) the main road from HaUus to Jenin
and Nazareth ; (2) the great trade route from
'Aika and Haifa to Zerin, Beisan, and the
Haurdn, and to Tiberias and Damascus ; (3) the
main road from Lydda to Baka, and across
the ridge of Carmel to Jokneam {Tell Keim&n),
Haifa, and 'AJcha ; (4) the road which runs
from the Maritime Plain up the broad W. 'Aralt,
sad, crossing the ridge at 'Am Ibrahim, descends
to Megiddo {Lejjun), whence it branches off to
Xazareth, and Zerin, — this line is one of the
easiest across the country, and must always
hare been of great importance ; (5) the road
iron) Jenin, that passes along the plain of
'Arrabeh, N. of Dothan, and descends by W. el-
•'hmttt to the Plain of Sharon : this, which is
also an easy road, is probably the one that was
followed by the Midianite and Amalekite mer-
chant* who carried Joseph down with them to
Egypt Over these roads the caravans of
merchants and the armies of contending nations
crast always hare passed on their way from E. to
»_ or from N. to S. ; and the fact that the great
phis was such a common thoroughfare must
fcsve made it in peaceful times the most avail-
able and eligible possession of Palestine. "It
was the frontier of Zebulun — ' Rejoice,
Zebalun, hi thy goings out.' But it was the
special portion of Issachaf ; and in its condition,
tons exposed to the good and evil fate of the
!>eaten highway of Palestine, we read the
fartanes of the tribe which, for the sake of this
possession, consented to sink into the half-
asmadic state of the Bedouins who wandered
"« h, — into the condition of tributaries to the
Croaanjte tribes, whose iron chariots drove
ESDRAELON
«Jbt>
victoriously through it. ' Rejoice, Issnchar,
in thy tents . . . they shall suck of the abun-
dance of the seas [from Acre], and of the
[glassy] treasures hid in the sands [of the-
torrent Belus] . . . lssachar is a strong ass,
couching down between two 'troughs': and
he saw that rest was good, and the land that it
was pleasant ; and bowed his shoulder to bear,
and became a servant to tribute.' " (Stanley,
S. * P. p. 348.)
The plain was the scene of two of the greatest
victories, and of two of the saddest defeats, in
THE
i&o5vi—
L- /
^SDRAELOA'
learn
v W^Z
;T><235
ff\ Jp
^&f J
. H ada
. .Rn-Hr:
ash
ieh
11"' A
maion/-;^
^^%b'e.JatM
11 Of H.un.l .'■; -
'.'V'/ 1 Bi-th'-Sln'ti':
. - - • ~V '■ |
■ via
rfi ' B.-tl
-Sheah^^^p\\^
Ski <¥
Msln of Udraelon.
the history of the Jews. On the banks of the
Kishon, in Taanach by the waters of Megiddo,
the Lord delivered Sisera and his host into the
hands of Barak (Judg. iv. v.) ; and, in the Valley
of Jezreel, Gideon broke the "rod of the
oppressor " (Judg. vii.). On the " high places "
of Gilboa, Saul and Jonathan perished miserably
(1 Sam. xxxi. ; 2 Sam. i. 17-27) ; and in the
Valley of Megiddo, Josiah was sore wounded by
an arrow when attempting to stop the passage
of Necho's army northwards from the Maritime
Plain (2 Ch. xxxv. 20-27). To these battles
the plain probably owes its celebrity as the
Digitized by
Google
990
ESDRAS
battle-field of the world, " the place which is
culled in the Hebrew tongue, Armageddon ; "
that is, "the city or mountain of Megiddo."
It was across one portion of the plain, towards
Jenin, that Ahaziah fled from Jehu, and it was
to Megiddo that he was brought to die when
sore wounded at the ascent of Gur (2 E. ix.
27). Here too, spreading themselves out from
Bethulia to Cyamon, Tell Keimun, Holofernes
and his soldiers were encamped during the siege
of the former place (Judith vii. 3). At a later
period during the Jewish war the plain was the
scene of frequent skirmishes, and at the foot of
Mount Tabor the Jews were sharply defeated by
Placidas (B. J. iv. 1, § 8). Here Crusaders and
Saracens' met in conflict, and in 1799, at F&leh,
the Turks were conquered, by Bonaparte and
Kleber, at the battle of Mount Tabor. A
graphic sketch of Esdraelon is given in Stanley's
S. $ P. pp. 335 sq. See also PEF. Mem. ii. 36,
39,50; Robinson, ii. 315-30, iii. 139 sq.; Con-
der, Tent Work, i. Ill sq. ; Hbk. for S. 4- P.
pp. 351 sq. * [W.]
ES'DRAB ("Eo-Jpm i Esdras), 1 Esd. viii. 1,
3, 7, 8, 9, 19, 23, 25, 91, 92, 96 ; ix. 1, 7, 16,
39, 40, 42, 45, 46, 49 ; 2 Esd. i. 1 ; ii. 10, 33,
42 ; ri. 10 ; vii. 2, 25 ; viii. 2, 19 ; xiv. 1, 38.
[Ezra.]
ESTJBAS, FIBST BOOK OF.— I. Title.
This is the first in order of the apocryphal
books in the English Bible, which follows
Luther and the German Bibles in separating the
apocryphal from the Canonical Books, instead
of binding them up together according to his-
torical order (Walton's Prolegom. de vers. Graec.
§ 9). The classification of the four books which
have been named after Ezra is particularly
complicated. In the Vatican (B) edition of the
LXX., our 1st Esd. is called " Esdras A." or
the first Book of Esdras, in relation to the
canonical Book of Ezra which follows it and is
called " Esdras B." (i.e. our Ezra and Nehemiah)
or the second Esdras, the reason for this order
being probably due to the fact that the events
related in it precede in point of time, at least
partly, those related in the other two (see
Lupton, p. 5, n. 3). But in the Vulgate, 1st
Esd. means the canonical Book of Ezra, and
2nd Esd. means Nehemiah, according to the
primitive Hebrew arrangement, mentioned by
Jerome, in which Ezra and Nehemiah made up
two parts of the one Book of Ezra ; and 3rd
and 4th Esd. — placed after the N. T. — are what
we now call 1 and 2 Esdras. These last, with
the Prayer of Manasses, are the only apocry-
phal books admitted eo nomine into the Romish
Bibles, the other apocrypha being declared
canonical by the Council of Trent (1546). The
reason of the exclusion of 3rd Esdras from the
Canon seems to be either that the Tridentinc
fathers in 1546 were content to follow the
estimate passed upon the book by Jerome (§ II.
below), or that they were not aware, or did not
remember, that it then existed in Greek. For,
though it is not in the Complutensian edition
(1515), nor in the Biblia Regia, yet it is found
in the Aldine edition (1518), in the Strasburg
edition (1526), and in the Basle edition (1545.
See Lupton, p. 4). Vatablus (about 1540) had,
it would seem, never seen a Greek copy, and, in
ESDBAS, FIBST BOOK OF
the preface to the apocryphal books, speaks of
it as only existing in some MSS. and printed
Latin Bibles.* For reasons now unknown, it
was excluded from the Canon, though it has
certainly quite as good a title to be admitted
as Tobit, Judith, &c. It has indeed been stated
(Bp. Marsh, Comp. View, ap. Soames, Hist, oj
Kef. ii. 608) that the Council of Trent in
excluding the two books of Esdras followed
Augustine's Canon. But this is not so. Au-
gustine (de Doctr. Christ, lib. ii. 13) distinctly
mentions among the libri Canonici, Esdrae lioo;'
and that one of these was our 1st Esdras is
manifest from the quotation from it given below
from De Civit. Dei. Hence it is also sure that
it was included among those pronounced as
Canonical by the 3rd Council of Carthage (A.H.
397), where the same title is given, Esdru
libri duo. In all the earlier editions of the
English Bible the books of Esdras are numbered
as in the Vulgate. In the 6th Article of the
Church of England (first introduced in 1571)
the first and second books denote Ezra and Ne-
hemiah, and the 3rd and 4th, among the Apo-
crypha, are our present 1st and 2nd. In the list
of revisers or translators of the Bishops' Bible,
sent by Archbishop Parker to Sir WUliam Cecil,
with the portion revised by each, Ezra, Nehe-
miah, Esther, and the apocryphal books of
Esdras seem to be all comprised under the one
title of Esdras. Barlow, bishop of Chichester,
was the translator, as also of the books of
Judith, Tobias, and Sapitntin (Corresp. of Archip.
Parker, p. 335, Parker Soc. See Westoott, Bst.
of tie Engl. Bible, p. 115). The Geneva Bible
first adopted the classification used in our present
Bibles, in which Ezra and Neiikmiah give
their names to the two Canonical Books, and the
two apocryphal become 1 and 2 Esdras ; where
the Greek form of the name indicates that these
books do not exist in Hebrew or Chaldee.
II. Reception of the book. — As regards the
antiquity of this book and the rank assigned to
it in the early Church, it may suffice to mention
that Josephus quotes largely from it, and fol-
lows its authority, even in contradiction to the
canonical Ezra and Nehemiah, by which he has
been led into hopeless historical blunders ana
anachronisms. It is quoted also by Clemens
Alexandrinus(5(rom.i.); and the famous sentence
" Veritas manet, et invalescit in aeternnm, <"t
vivit et obtinet in saecnla saeculorum " (iv. 38)
is cited by Cyprian as from Esdras, and prefaced
by ut scriptum est (Epist. Ixxiv.). Augustine also
refers to the same passage (de Civit. Dei, xviii.
36), and suggests that it may be prophetical of
Christ, Who is the truth. He includes under the
name of Esdras our 1 Esd. and the canonical
Books of Ezra and Nehemiah. 1 Esd. i» a' 50
cited by Athnnasius and other fathers (see Pohl-
• "Oratfo Manuwae, necnon libri duo qui sub Ubri
tertU et quartl Esdrae nomine circumferuntor, hoc
in loco, extra scilicet seriem canonlcorum librorum,
quos eancta Tridentina eynodus suscepit, et pro ca-
nonicls snsciplendos decrevtt, scposttt sunt, ne proraos
interirent, qulppe qui a nonnullls Sanctis Fstrlbm
interdum citantur, et In aliqulbns Biblils Latinis, tim
manuscrtptfs quam impressts, reperluntur."
» Jerome, In his preface to his Latin Version of
Ears and Nehemiah, says, •• Vms a. nobis liber editua
est," fcc. ; though he implies that they were sometimes
called 1 and 2 Esdras.
Digitized by
Google
ESDBAS, FIBST BOOK OF
■nun in Tib. 'lluolog. Quartalschr. p. 263 sq.,
1859); and perhaps there is oo sentence that
ins been more widely divulged than that of
a. 41, " Magna est Veritas et praevalet." It is
rightly included by us among the Apocrypha,
cot only on the ground of its historical in-
accuracy, and contradiction of the true Ezra,
but also on the external evidence of the early
Church. That it was never known to exist in
Hebrew, and formed no part of the Hebrew
Canon, is admitted by all (see Bissell, § 4).
Jerome, in his preface to Ezra and Neh., speaks
contemptuously of the dreams (sornnia) of the
3rd and 4th Esdras, and says that they are to be
utterly rejected. In his Prolotjut Galeutus he
clearly defines the number of Books in the Canon,
im, corresponding to the xxii. letters of the
Hebrew alphabet, and says that all others are
apocryphal. This of course excludes 1 Esdras.
Melito, Origen, Eusebius, Athanasius, Gregory
^(azianzen. Hilar)' of Poitiers, Cyril of Jerusalem,
the Council of Laodicea, and many other fathers,
cipresily follow the same Canon, counting as
apocryphal whatever is not comprehended in it.
III. Content*. — As regards the contents of the
book, the first chapter is a transcript of the
last two chapters of 2 Ch., for the most part
verbatim, and only in one or two parts slightly
abridged and paraphrased, and showing some
corruptions of the text, the use of a different
Greek Version, and some various readings.
Chapters iii., iv., and v., to the end of v. 6, are
toe original portions of the book, containing
the legend of the three young Jews at the
court of Darius ; and the rest is a transcript
more or less exact of the Book of Ezra, with
the chapters transposed and quite otherwise
arranged, and of a portion of Nehemiah (cp.
Lupton, Schurer, and ZSckler). The central
subject of the book, now very commonly ac-
cepted, is that originated by the heading of the
OH Latin Version, " De restitution Templi : "
bat other and collateral designs are apparent
on the part of the compiler, such as his wish
to stimulate his countrymen to a more zealous
observance of the Law, and win the favour of a
Ptolemaic or other heathen power; or his
ilesire to introduce and give Scriptural sanction
to the legend about Zerubbabel, which may or
nay not have an historical base, and may have
existed as a separate work ; or to explain the
great obscurities of the Book of Ezra, and to
present the narrative, as the author understood
it, in historical order. In this latter point, how-
ever, he has signally tailed. For, not to advert
to innumerable other contradictions, the intro-
ducing the opposition of the heathen, as offered
to Zerubbabel after he had been sent to Jeru-
salem is such triumph by Darius, and the
describing that opposition as lasting " nntil the
reign of Darius " (v. 73), and as put down by
*a appeal to the decree of Cyrus, is such a pal-
pable inconsistency, as is alone quite sufficient
to discredit the authority of the book. It even
induces the suspicion that it is a farrago made
"V of scraps by several different hands. At all
'vests, attempts to reconcile the different por-
tions with each other, or with Scripture, is lost
labour (see Lupton, § iii.). The compiler him-
*lf is unknown.
V. Time and place. — As regards the time when
**d place where the compilation was made, the
ESDBAS, FIBST BOOK OF 991
original portion (iii. 1-v. 6)— original, that is,
in the sense that there is nothing to answer tu
it in the Canonical Books— does not afford much
clue. It may have come from a current Persian
court anecdote or from a Jewish tradition. The
conjecture (Fritzsche and Reuss) that not Zerub-
babel but his son Joachim is the hero of this
episode, and the deduction of date from this
change, is unsatisfactory, and does not remove
other difficulties (see Lupton and Zockler).
The writer was conversant with Hebrew,
though he did not write the book in that
language. He was well acquainted with the
Books of Esther and Daniel (1 Esd. iii. 1, 2 sq.),
and other Books of Scripture (ib. vv. 20, 21, 89,
41, &c, and v. 45 compared with Ps. exxxvii.
7) ; but that he did not live under the Persian
kings, and was not contemporary with the
events narrated, appears by the undiscrimi-
nating way in which he uses promiscuously the
phrase Medes and Pensians, or Persian! and
Medea, according as he happened to be imitating
the language of Daniel or of the Book of Esther.
The allusion in iv. 23 to " sailing upon the sea
and upon the rivers," for the purpose of " rob-
bing and stealing," seems to indicate residence
in Egypt, and acquaintance with the lawlessness
of Greek pirates there acquired. The phrase-
ology of v. 73 (of disputed meaning) savours
also strongly of Greek rather than Hebrew. If,
however, as seems very probable, the legend of
Zerubbabel appeared first as a separate piece,
and was afterwards incorporated into the narra-
tive made up from the Book of Ezra, this Greek
sentence from ch. v. would not prove anything
as to the language in which the original legend
was written. The expressions in iv. 40, " She
is the strength, kingdom, power, and majesty of
all ages," is very like the doxology found in
some copies of the Lord's Prayer, and retained
by us, " thine Is the kingdom, and the power
and the glory for ever;" but Lightfoot says
that the Jews in the Temple-service, instead of
saying Amen, used this antiphon, *' Blessed be
the Nnme of the Glory of His Kingdom for ever
and ever " (vi. 427). So that the resemblance
may be accounted for by their being both taken
from a common source. Indications, though
faint ones, seem to place the origin of the work
in the 1st, or at the latter end of the 2nd,
century B.C. Ewald finds traces of the story of
chs. iii. iv. in the earliest of the Sibylline books
(B.C. 181-143), and affirms that the " history "
of Aristeas (on the LXX. ; 1st century) must
have been known to the compiler. Lupton
argues that the building of a temple, or re-
storation and adaptation of an Egyptian temple,
for Jewish worship, such as is connected with
Onias in the time of Ptolemy Philometor,
suggested the production of 1 Esdras, and
furnishes other reasons for agreeing with Herz-
feld in assigning the work to a period preceding
the Maccabaean wars. The point cannot be said
to be conclusively settled.
For a further account of the history of the
times embraced in this book, see Ezra ; 2 Es-
dras ; Joseph. Antiq. Jvd. xi. ; Hervey's Gene-
alogy of our Lord Jesus Christ, ch. xi. ; Bp. Cosin
on the Canon of Scr. ; Fulke's Defence of Transl.
of Bible, p. 18 sq., Parker Soc.; Kitto, BM.
Cyclop., "Esdras." The works of Fritzsche
{Handb. x. d. Apokryphen, i. 11 sq.), Bissell
Digitized by
Google
992 ESDBAS, SECOND BOOK OP
(Lange's Comm. on the Apocrypha), Lupton
(Speaker's Comm. on the Apocrypha), and
ZBckler (' Die Apokryphen ' in Strack u. Zock-
ler's Kgf. Komm.) will supply the reader with
references to modern works. [A. C. H.] [F.]
ES'DBAS, SECOND BOOK OF, in
the English Version of the Apocrypha, and so
called by the author (2 Esd. i. 1), is more com-
monly known, according to the reckoning of
the Latin Version, as the fourth Book of Ezra
[see aboye, 1 Esdeas] ; bat the arrangement in
the Latin MSS. is not uniform (see that of the
Codex Sangermanensis quoted in Lupton, § i.),
and in the Arabic and Aethiopic Versions the
book is called the first of Ezra. The original
title, 'AmxcdAM^is "Bo-Spa (or wpotptrrtla'EffSpa),
"the Revelation of Ezra," which is preserved
in some old catalogues of the canonical and
apocryphal books (Kicephorus, ap. Fabric. Cod.
Psew.i. V. T., ii. 176; Montfaucon, JBiblioth.
Cvislin. p. 194), is far more appropriate, and it
were to be wished tiiat it could have been
restored, had it been possible to do so without
confusion with a later and inferior work, bear-
ing this title, and published by Tischendorf in
1866 (cp. Lupton, § i.)
I. Language and Versions. — The original lan-
guage of the book was Greek (cp. Van der
Vlis, Disputatio critica de Ezrae libro Apo-
crypha, &c, pp. 10-14, 1839), but for a long
time it was known only by an Old Latin
Version, which is preserved in some MSS. of
the Vulgate. This Version (3rd cent., Fritzsche)
was used by Ambrose (see the parallels in
Lupton, § ii.), and, like the other parts of
the Veins Latina, is probably older than the
time of Tertullian. The Arabic text was dis-
covered by Mr. Gregory about the middle of the
17th century in two Bodleian MSS., and an
English Version made from this by Simon
Ockley was inserted by Whiston in the last
volume of his Primitive Christianity (London,
1711). Fabricius added the various readings of
the Arabic text to his edition of the Latin in
1723 (Cod. Pseud. V. T. y ii. 174 sq.). The
Aethiopic text was published in 1820 by
[Archbp.] Laurence with English and Latin
translations, likewise from a Bodleian MS.
which had remained wholly disregarded, though
quoted by Ludolf in his Dictionary ("Primi
Esrae libri, versio Aethiopica. . .Latine Anglice-
que reddita ; " Oxon. 1820). The emendations
made by Van der Vlis (p. 77), the readings from
other MSS. collected by Dillmann (printed at
the end of Ewald's edition of the Arabic text),
and those subsequently made by Praetorius, are
necessary for the study of a text of great value.
The Latin translation has been reprinted by
Gfr&rer, with the various readings of the Latin
and Arabic (Praef. Pseud., Stuttg. 1840, p. 60
sq.); and the Bodleian Arabic text has been
published by Ewald (1863), who dates it A.D.
1354, and another version of it, also of the
14th cent., by Gildemeister (1877). The Ar-
menian Version, published in 1666, and trans-
lated in Hilgenfeld's Messias Judaeorum, diverges
very widely from the rest.
Of the five existing Versions, four (the
Syriac, Arabic, Aethiopic, and Latin) are thought
to have been made from a Greek text ; the Arme-
nian Version was not. This is certainly the case
ESDBAS, SECOND BOOK OF
with regard to the Latin, the oldest and moit
important of all, which bears everywhere traces
of Greek idiom (Lucke, Versuch einer mlht.
Einleitung, i. 144), and the Aethiopic (Van der
Vlis, p. 75 sq.), but is less certain with regard
to the two versions of the Arabic (Fritache
thinks the first text of the Arabic to be taken
from the Syriac). A clear witness to the Greek
text is Clement of Alexandria, who expressly
quotes the book as the work of " the prophet
Ezra " (Strom, iii. 16 ; cp. Ambrose, de tmt
mortis, ch. xii.). A question, however, has keen
raised whether the Greek text was not itself a
translation from the Hebrew (Bretschneider in
Hcnke's Mus. iii. 478 sq. ; ap. Lucke, /. «,); but
the arguments from language by which the
hypothesis of a Hebrew (Aramaic) original it
supported, are wholly unsatisfactory ; and in
default of direct evidence to the contrary, it
must be supposed that the book was composed
in Greek. This conclusion is further strength-
ened by its internal character, which points to
Egypt as the place of its composition.
The Latin text, for many years that of the
Codex Sangermanensis ( A.D. 822), compared with
that of the Codex Turinensis (13th cent.) and
of the Codex Dresdensis (15th cent.), can now
be improved by a Complutensian MS. of the
8th cent, discovered by Prof. Palmer in 1826,
and by the Amiens MS. of the 9th cent, dis-
covered by Mr. Bensley in 1874 (cp. lupton,
§ iii.). Followed by the English Version, it
contains two important interpolations (chs. i. ii;
xv. xvi.) which are not found in the four
Oriental Versions, and are separated from the
genuine Apocalypse in the best Latin MSS.
Both of these passages are evidently of Chris-
tian origin : they contain traces of the use of
the Christian Scriptures (e.g. i. 30, 33, 3T;
ii. 13, 26, 45 sq. ; xv. 8, 35 ; xvi. 54), and still
more they are pervaded by an anti-Jewish spirit.
Thus, in the opening chapter, Ezra is commanded
to reprove the people of Israel for their con-
tinual rebellions (i. 1-23), in consequence of
which God threatens to cast them off (i. 24-34)
and to " give their houses to a people that shall
come." But in spite of their desertion, God
offers once more to receive them (ii. 1-32). The
offer is rejected (ii. 33), and the heathen are
called. Then Ezra sees "the Son of God*
standing in the midst of a great multitude
"wearing crowns and bearing palms in their
hands," in token of their victorious confession
of the truth. The last two chapters (xv., rri.)
are different in character. They contain a stero
prophecy of the woes which shall come upon
Egypt, Babylon, Asia, and Syria, and upon the
whole earth, with an exhortation to the chosen
to guard their faith in the midst of all the
trials with which they shall be visited (? the
Decian persecution. Cp. Lucke, p. 186, &«.)-
Another smaller interpolation occurs in the
I-atiu Version in vii. 28, where films meus /«*»
answers to " My Messiah " in the Aethiopic, and
to " My Son Messiah " in the Arabic (cp. Lucke,
p. 170 n. &c ; Speaker's Comm. in loco). The
passage in the Oriental Versions after vii. 35,
now also restored to the Latin, was probably
omitted from dogmatic causes. The chapter
contains a strange description of the inter-
mediate state of souls, and ends with a peremp-
tory denial of the efficacy of human interces-
Digitized by
Google
ESDBAS, SECOND BOOK OF
ma after death. Vigilantins appealed to the
passage in support of his views, and called down
upon himself by this the severe reproof of
Jerome {LA. c. Vigil, c. 7). This circumstance,
combined with the Jewish complexion of the
narrative, may have led to its rejection in later
times (cp. Liicke, p. 155 sq.).
IL Contents. — The original Apocalypse (iii.-
xiv.) consists of a series of angelic revelations
and visions in which Ezra, musing in the out-
skirts of Babylon, is instructed in some of the
great mysteries of the moral world, and assured
of the final triumph of the righteous. The
Jfrrf revcUtkm (iii.-v. 15, according to the
L V.) is given by the Angel Uriel to Ezra,
in "the thirtieth year after the ruin of the
city " (i>. some ninety years too early !), in
answer to his complaints (ch. iii.) that Israel
was neglected by God while the heathen were
lords over them ; and the chief subject is the
unsearehableness of God's purposes, and the
signs of the last age. The second revelation
<v. 20-vi. 34) carries out this teaching yet
farther, and lays open the gradual progress
of the plan of Providence, and the nearness
of the visitation before which evil must attain
its most terrible climax. The third revela-
ttoa (vL 35-ix. 25) answers the objections
which arise from the apparent narrowness of
the limits within which the hope of blessedness
is confined, and describes the coming of Messiah
and the last scene of Judgment. After this
follow three visions. The first vision (ix. 26-
i. 59) is of a woman (Sion) in deep sorrow,
lamenting the death, upon his bridal day, of her
only son (the city built by Solomon), who had
been born to her after she had had no child for
thirty years. Bat while Ezra looked, her face
"apon a sudden shined exceedingly," and "the
woman appeared no more, but there was a city
tmilded." The second vision (chs. xi., xii.), in a
dream, is of an eagle (Rome) which " came up
from the sea " and " spread her wings over all
the earth." As Ezra looked, the eagle suffered
strange transformations, so that at one time
"three heads and six little wings" remained;
and at last only one head was left, when sud-
denly a lion (Messiah) came forth, and with the
teice of a man rebuked the eagle, and it was
fcorot up. The third vision (ch. xiii.), in a
dream, U of a roan (Messiah) " flying with the
cloud* of heaven," against whom the nations of
the earth are gathered, till He destroys them
»ith the blast of His mouth, and gathers
together the lost tribes of Israel and offers Sion,
''prepared and builded," to His people. The
list chapter (xiv.) recounts an appearance to
Ezra of the Lord Who showed Himself to Moses
in the bosh, at Whose command he receives
»?iin the Law which had been burnt, and with
the help of scribes writes down ninety-four
books (the twenty-four canonical Books of the
0. T. and seventy books of secret mysteries),
ud thus the people are prepared for their last
trial, guided by the recovered Law.*
1 For other arrangements of the revelations and
'Moss (t0. sevenfold) see Scbflrer, Zuckler, and Lupton,
♦•»■ who also gives a roller analysis of the contents.
It* ■rhnrsrr views of Iselin, who considers the work a
fc&a, composed by a Syrian Christian against Mabom-
■•anrtna, and of BaUscb, woo finds in ch. xiv. not
SIN* DICT. — VOL. I.
ESDBAS, SECOND BOOK OF 993
III. Date.— The date of the book (chs. iii.—
xiv.) is much disputed (see the three main con-
clusions in Schurer *), though the limits within
which opinions vary are narrower than in the
case of the book of Knoch. Liicke ( Versuch einer
tollst. Einl.* i. 209) places it in the time of
Caesar; Van der VI is, shortly after the death of
Caesar. Laurence (/. c.) brings it down somewhat
lower, to 28-25 B.c, and Hilgenfeld (Jud. Apok.
p. 221 ; Mcssias Jttdaeorum, p. lxi.) agrees with
this conclusion, though he arrives at it by very
different reasoning. On the other hand, GfrOrer
(Jahrh. d. J/eils, i. 69 sq.) assigns the book to the
time of Oomitian (a.d. 81-96), and in this he is
followed by most authorities, Wieseler, Reuss,
Fritzsche, Oillmann, Schiirer,* &c. The inter-
pretation of the details of the vision of the
eagle furnishes the chief data for determining
the time of its composition (cp. Fabricius, Cod.
Pseud, ii. p. 189 sq. ; and Liicke, p. 187, n. &c,
for a summary of the earlier opinions on the
composition of tho book).
The chief characteristics of the " three-
headed eagle," which refer apparently to his-
toric details, 1 " are " twelve feathered wings "
(duodecim aloe pennartun), "eight counter-
feathers " ( contrariae pennae ), and " three
heads ; " but though the writer expressly inter-
prets these of kings (xii. 14, 20) and " king-
doms " (xii. 23), he is, perhaps intentionally, so
obscure in his allusions, that the interpretation
only increases the difficulties of the vision
itself. One point only may be considered cer-
tain, — the eagle can typify no other empire than
Rome. Notwithstanding the identification of
the eagle with the fourth empire of Daniel (cp.
Barn. Ep. 4 ; Daxiel, Book of), it is impossible
to suppose that it represents the Greek king-
dom (Hilgenfeld ; cp. Volkmar, Die tierte Buck
Esra, p. 36 sq., Zurich, 1858). The power of
the Ptolemies could scarcely have been de-
scribed in language which may be rightly
applied to Rome (xi. 2, 6, 40) ; and the succes-
sion of kings quoted by Hilgenfeld to represent .
"the twelve wings" preserves only a faint
resemblance to the imagery of the vision.
Seeking then the interpretation of the vision in
the history of Rome, the second wing (i.e. king),
which rules twice as long as the other (xi. 17),
is found in Augustus, who reigned some fifty-six
years. The " three heads " are taken to repre-
sent the three Flavii (Vespasian, Titus, and
Domitian), and "the twelve" to be the nine
Caesars (Jul. Caesar to Vitellius) and the three
pretenders Piso, Vindex, and Nymphidius
(GfrBrer). Volkmar's interpretation— by which
the twelve wings represent six Caesars (Caesar
to Nero); the eight "counter-feathers," four
usurping emperors, Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and
Nerva ; and the three heads the three Flavii—
offers many striking coincidences with the text,
but is directly opposed to the form of interpre-
tation given by Ezra (xii. 14, 18), and for other
less than five minor Apocalypses worked up In the
time of Hadrian (a.d. 120), may be seen in Zockler,
p. 44T.-TF.]
» The description of the duration of the world as
"divided into twelve (ten Attk.) parts, of which ten
parts are gone already, and half of a tenth part"
(xiv. 11), Is so uncertain in Its reckoning, that no
argument (s.a. that of Hilgenfeld) can be bised npon it.
3 S
Digitized by
Google
994 ESDRAS, SECOND BOOK OF
reasons is extremely improbable. Van der Vlis
and Lficke* regard the twelve kings as only gene-
rally symbolic of the Roman power ; and while
they identify the three heads with the Trium-
virs, seek no explanation of the other details.
The clearer light now thrown upon Jewish
thought and history during the critical period
100 B.C.-100 a.d. makes Gfriirer's hypothesis,
with modifications, the most probable (sec
Schurer 3 ).
The book — apocalyptic in cast and markedly
distinct from the historically framed books
which also bear the name of Ezra — is a
genuine product of Jewish thought. Weisse
(Ecetngelienfrage, p. 222) alone dissents on this
point from the unanimous judgment of recent
scholars (Hilgenfeld, p. 190, &c.) ; and the con-
trast between the tone and style of the Chris-
tian interpolations and the remainder of the book
is in itself sulficient to prove the fact. This
apocalypse was written in Alexandria more
probably than in Palestine; the opening and
closing chapters certainly were ; while their
author is now considered to bare been a Chris-
tian. The date of chs. xv., xvi. is placed between
260-270 A.D. ; that of chs. i., ii. is not fixed so
unanimously.
IV. Character. — In tone and character the
apocalypse of Ezra offers a striking contrast to
that of Enoch [Book of Enoch]. Triumphant
anticipations are overshadowed by gloomy fore-
bodings over the destiny of the world. The idea
of victory is lost in that of revenge. Future
blessedness is reserved only for " a very few "
(vii. 70 ; viii. 1, 3, 52-55 ; ix. 1-13). The great
question is "not how the ungodly shall be
punished, but how the righteous shall be saved,
for whom the world is created " (ix. 13). The
"woes of Messiah " are described with a terrible
minuteness, which approaches the despairing
traditions of the Talmud (v., xiv. 10 sq., ix.
3 sq.); and after a reign of 400 years (vii. 28-35 ;
the clause is wanting in Aeth. v. 29), "Christ,"
it is said, " My Son, shall die (Arab, omits), and
all men that have breath ; and the world shall
be turned into the old silence seven days, like as
in the first beginning, and no man shall remain "
(vii. 29). Then shall follow the resurrection
and the judgment, " the end of this time and
the beginning of immortality" (vii. 43). In
other points the doctrine of the book offers
curious approximations to that of St. Paul, as
the imagery does to that of the Apocalypse
(e.g. 2 Esd. xiii. 43 sq. ; v. 4).' The relation
of " the first Adam " to his sinful posterity, and
the operation of the Law (iii. 20 sq., vii. 48, ix.
36) ; the transitoriness of the world (iv. 26) ;
the eternal counsels of God (ri. sq.) ; His
Providence (vii. 11) and long-suffering (vii. 64);
His snnctification of His people " from the
beginning " (ix. 8) and their peculiar and lasting
privileges (vi. 59), are plainly stated ; and on
the other hand the efficacy of good works (viii.
33) in conjunction with faith (ix. 7) is no less
clearly affirmed.
One tradition which the book contains ob-
tained a wide reception in early times, and
served as a pendant to the legend of the origin
« A complete list of parallel passages between 2 Esd.
and the N. T. may be seen In Lee, 'A*oA«*iSfM»,
pp. 111-26, 'l.'E2.
ESDRAS, SECOND BOOK OP
of the LXX. Ezra, it is said, in answer to liis
prayer that he might be inspired to write again
all the Law which was burnt, received a com-
mand to take with him tablets and fire nun,
and retire for forty days. In this retirement a
cup was given him to drink, and forthwith ins
understanding was quickened and his memory
strengthened; and for forty days and forty
nights he dictated to his scribes, who wrote
ninety-four books (Latin, 204), of which twenty-
four were delivered to the people in place of the
books which were lost (xiv. 20—48). This
strange story was repeated in various forms by
Irenaeus {ode. Haer. iii. 21, 2), Tertullian (it
cult. foem. i. 3, " omne instrumentnm Judaic*
literaturae per Esdram constat restauratotn "),
Clement of Alexandria (Strom, i. 22, p. 410. P.;
cp. p. 392), Jerome (adv. Helv. 7, cp. PseuJo-
Augustine, de Mirab. S. Scr. ii. 32), and many
others ; and probably owed its origin to the
tradition which regarded Ezra as the representa-
tive of the men of "the Great Synagogue," to
whom the final revision of the Canonical Books
was universally assigned in early times.
[Canon.]
V. Reception. — Though the book was assign*!
to the " prophet " Ezra by Clement of Alesno-
dria (Strom, iii. 16) and quoted with respect
by Irenaeus (/. c.) and Ambrose, who adopts or
paraphrases many passages in it (Lupton, § ii.)>
it did not maintain its ecclesiastical position in
the Church. 11 Jerome speaks of it with con-
tempt (adr. Vigilant. See quotation in Speaker's
Comm. on vii. 102 *), and it is rarely found in
MSS. of the Latin Bible. Archbishop Lauren*-
examined 180 MSS., and the book was contained
only in thirteen, and in these it was arrange)!
very differently. It is found, however, in the
printed copies of the Vulgate older than the
Council of Trent, by whieh it wns excluded from
the Canon ; and quotations from it still occnr
in the Roman services (Basnage, ap. Fabr. OA.
Pseud, ii. 191. The words of ii. 3i, 35 are
embodied in the "Misaa pro defunctis" of the
Sarum use). On the other hand, though this
book is included among those which are "reaJ
for examples of life " by the English Church,
no use of it is now made in public worship,
though formerly ii. 36, 37 was used as an Introit
for Whitsun Tuesday. Luther and the Reformed
Church rejected the book entirely ; but it w»
held in high estimation by numerous mystics
(Fabric. /. c. p. 178 sq.), for whom its contents
naturally had great attractions.
VI. Literature.— The literature of the subject
is very large. Some works have been already
noted. Schurer (Oesch. d. Jud. Voltes ««
Zeitalter Jesu Christi* p. 661) and JKckler
(' Die Apokryphen d. A. T.'s nebst einem Anh-mf
fiber die Pseudepigraphen,' p. 448 in Strack
u. Zockler's Kgf. Kamm. in d. heil. Sckriftr*
A. u. A. 2Vs) give a full list. The EngW
reader will find help from Bissell, "The Apo-
crypha," Appendix i. (Lange's Comm. on i&t
Ilohj Scriptures); Eddrup, Introduction to 1
and 2 Esdras in S.P.C.K. Comm. on the Apo-
crypha; Churton's The Uncanonical and if^
crypluxl Scriptures ; and above all from Lupton is
* The references and allusions once foond in Geo™
of Rome, Barnabas, Hennas, TertulIUn, and CjV""
are now generally given up (cp. Lupton, $ li-r
Digitized by
Google
ESDBELOM, ESDRELON
ike Spci 'xr's Comm. on 2 Esd ras. The essay of
Via der Vlis is the most important contribution
to til* study of the text, of which a critical
edition is still needed, though the Latin materials
for its construction are abundant. [B. F. W.] [F.]
ESDBEXOM, ESDBEXON. [Esdra-
1X05.]
ESUBON, THEY OP (rout 'Eo-e/Swircu,
A. Tjfrj 'E<re/8ir» ; Hesebon), Judith v. 15.
[Heshbox.]
ES'EBBIAS QZatotfilas ; &debias), 1 Esd.
riii. 54. [SrerkmaH.]
E'SEK (i&V=strife ; 'AoWa; Calumnia), a
well (182) containing a spring of water; which
to* herdsmen of Isaac dug in the valley of
Gerar, and which received its name of Esek,
or " strife," because the herdsmen of Gerar
" stroTe " (IptPDJVl) w 'th him for the possession
of it* (Gen. rxvi. 20). Josephus (Ant. i. 18,
§ 2) fives the name as to-cor. [G.] [W.]
ESH-BAAL (WaB'K = Boars man [C'X
as in Phoenician = B*K] ; Esbaal), the fourth
son of Saul, according to the genealogy of 1 Ch.
riii. 33 (B. *A<ro/3dA, A. 'U0iaX) and ix. 39
(B. "iffldoA, N. 'Iirj8e£oA, A. BdoA). He is
doubtless the same person as Ish-isosheth, since
it was the practice to change the obnoxious
name of Baal into Bosheth, as in the case of
Jerubfcesheth for Jerub-baal, and (in this very
gvaealogy) of Merib-baal for Mephibosheth :
ej>. also Hos. ix. 10, where Bosheth (A. V.
and B. V. marg. ** shame ") appears to be used
as a synonym for Baal. Which of the two
names is the earlier it is not possible to decide.
[G.] [W.]
ESH'BAN' (}2&9; 'AcrfldV [Gen.], B. 'Ao-«-
Ae», A. t*rf0dr(l Ch.]; Escban), a Horite;
™« gf the four sons of Dishan (so the Hebrew
in Gen. ; but A. V. has Dishon), the son of Seir
trie Horite (Gen. xxxvi. 26 ; 1 Ch. i. 41). Xo
t*ce of the name appears to have been dis-
cirered among the modern tribes of Idumaea.
[0-3 [W-3
ESH'COL (VsC* ; *Z<r X <i\ ; Joseph. "Ecr-
X**to ; Eschof), brother of Mamre the Amorite,
sad of Acer ; and one of Abraham's companions
in his pursuit of the four kings who had carried
«■ lot (Gen. xiv. 13, 24). According to
Joseph™ (.4n/. i. 10, § 2) he was the foremost
«fthe three brothers, but the Bible narrative
«ves this quite uncertain (cp. v. 13 with v. 24).
Taeir residence was at Hebron (xiii. 18), and
P°<sit>ly the name of Eshcol remained attached
fc> one of the fruitful valleys in that district till
to* arrival of the Israelites, who then inter-
preted the appellation as significant of the
Psaaae " cluster " (in- Heb. Eshcol) which they
Stained there. [G.] [W.]
' He wort rendered " strive " (3»n) in the former
PWifr. Mudm re. 31 and 22 is not the same as that
kw »fckb Bttk derived its name, and has therefore
J»a toaslsted by R. V. by a different English word,
"OUStalss," Such points, though small, are anything
°*» wtBjwtant in connexion with these ancient and
Wattiswrta,
ESHEK
995
ESH'COL, THE VALLEY, on THE
BBOOK, of (^ias^ru, or ^btw ; <t.d><r>{
06rpvos : Torrent Mri ; Nchelescol, id est torrens
botri ; Valtis botri), a wddy in the neighbourhood
of Hebron, explored by the spies who were sent
by Moses from Kndesh-barnea. From the firms
i of two of the notices of this transaction (Num.
xxxii. 9 ; Deut. i. 24), and from the speech of
Caleb (Josh. xiv. 7-1 2), it might be gathered that
Eshcol was the furthest point to which the spies
penetrated. But this would bo to contradict
• he express statement of Num. xiii. 21, that they
1 went as far as Rehob. From this fruitful valley
; they brought back a huge cluster of grapes ;
, an incident which, according to the narrative,
obtained for the place its appellation of the
" valley of the cluster " (Xum. xiii. 23, 24). It
I is true that in Hebrew Eshcol signifies a cluster
I or bunch, but the name had existed in this
neighbourhood centuries before, when Abraham
j lived there with the chiefs Ancr, Eshcol, and
I Mamre, not Hebrews but Amorites; and this
I was possibly the Hebrew way of appropriating
the ancient name derived from that hero into
' the language of the conquerors, consistently
| with the paronoma-tic turns so mi:ch in favour
I at that time, and with a practice of which traces
| appear elsewhere.
In the Onomasticon of Eusebius the $dp<ryf
I jSoVpvos- is placed, with some hesitation, at
( Gophna, 15 miles north of Jerusalem, on the
■ Xeapolis road (05.* p. 288, 92). By Jerome
I it is given as north of Hebron, on the road to
Bethsur (Epitaph. Paulae). The Jewish traveller
Ha-Parcbi speaks of it as north of the mountain
J on which the (ancient) city of Hebron stood
(Benjamin of Tudela, Asher, ii. 437). A short
j distance N.W. of Hebron is a fine spring called
I ' Ain Keshhaleh, which in ordinary conversation
I is pronounced 'Am Ashhali. It is mentioned
! under the name 'Ain Eskali by Van de Velde
(ii. 64), De Saulcy (Voy. en Terre Sainte, i. 155),
Sepp (Jcrus. u. d. heil. Land, i. 593), and
identified with Eshcol. On the other hand,
Dr. Rosen (ZDMQ., 1858, pp. 481-2), Guenn
(Judec, iii. 215), and Conder (PEF. Mem. iii.
306) give the form Keshhaleh, which may repre-
sent Eshcol, though the corruption would be
unusual. The Jews of Hebron identify it with
W. Tuffuh, up which runs the road from Hebron
to Tuffuh and Beit Jibiin. The vineyards in
this valley are very fine, and produce the
largest and best grapes in the country, espe-
cially a large seedless grape which is much
sought after (Robinson, Phys. Geog. of If. Land,
p. 110 ; Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 393).
Geikie (Holy Land and the Bible, i. 318) places
Eshcol near Beershebn, but there are many
objections to this. [G.] [W.]
ESH'EAN, R. V. ESH'AN ($&$ ; B. iopd,
A. (?) 'Kodv ; Esaan), one of the cities of Judah,
in the mountainous district, and in the same
group with Arab, er-Rabiych, and Dumah, ed-
Dfimeh (Josh. xv. 52). It is possiblv es-Simia,
2J m. E. of Dtoneh (PEF. Mem. iii. 313, 378).
[G.] [W.]
E'SHEK (pt?J? = oppression; B. "Ao-nA, A.
'Eo-cA<k; Esec), a Benjamite, one of the late
descendants of Saul ; the founder of a large and
3 S 2
Digitized by
Google
1)06
ESHKALONITES, THE
noted family of archers, lit. " treaders of the
bow " (1 Ch. viii. 39). The name ia omitted in
the parallel list of 1 Ch. ix. [G.]
ESHKALO'NITES, THE (accurately " the
Eshkclonite," ^pB^n, in the singular num-
ber; t$ 'Ao-KaXowlTJ; Ascalonitas), Josh. xiii.
3. [Ashkkios.] [G-]
ESHTA'OL (ViKnf^ and ^RCty (?) =
request, Ges. ; B. 'AffroiiA and 'A<rc£, A. 'K<rBa6\ ;
Esthaol, Estaol, Asthaol), a town in the low
country— the Shefelah — of Judah. It is the first
of the first group of cities in that district (Josh,
xv. 33) enumerated with Zoreah (Heb. Zareah), in
company with which it is commonly mentioned.
Zorah (R. V.) and Eshtaol were two of the towns
allotted to the tribe of Dan out of Judah (Josh,
six. 41). Between them, and behind Kirjath-
jearim, was situated Mahaneh-Dan, the camp or
stronghold which formed the head-quarters of
that little community during their constant
encounters with the Philistines. Here, among
the old warriors of the tribe, Samson spent his
boyhood, and experienced the first impulses of
the Spirit of Jehovah ; and hither after his last
exploit his body was brought, up the long slopes
of the western hills, to its last rest in the bury-
ing-place of Manoah his father (Judg. xiii. 25 ;
xvi. 31 ; xviii. 2, 8, 11, 12). [Dan.] In the
genealogical records of 1 Chron. the relationship
between Eshtaol, Zareah, and Kirjath-jearim is
still maintained. [Eshtavlites.]
In the Oaomasticon of Eusebius and Jerome it
is mentioned as Esthaol ('Eo-SooA) of Dan, 10
miles N. of Eleutheropolis on the road to Nico-
polis (OS.* p. 261, 87 ; p. 153, 32). It is now
the small village of Eshu'a, 13 English miles
N. of Beit Jibrin, Eleutheropolis, and not far
from Sw'ah, Zorah, which is also placed by
the Oaomasticon 10 miles N. of Eleutheropolis
(PER Mem. iii. 25). Guerin (Judei, ii. 12)
also identifies the village, which he calls Achou'a,
with Eshtaol. He connects a Wely Sheikh
Qherit with the tomb of Samson (ii. 382, but
see PEF. Mem. iii. 164). A description of
the locality is given by Geikie (Holy Land and
the Bible, ii. 147). * [G.] [W.]
ESHTAULITES, THE (^Knefcri, accur.
" the Eshtaulite," in sing, number ; B. viol 'Eo--
9ian, A. ol 'EaBauKaioi ; Esthaolitae), with the
Zareathites, were among the families of Kirjath-
jearim j(l Oh. ii. 53). [Eshtaol.] [G.]
E8HTEMCA, and in shorter form, without
the final guttural, ESHTEMOH' (toW
and flbnt'X; the latter occurs in Josh. xv.
only: in Josh, xv., B. corruptly 'Zokcuh&v,
A. 'ZoStiui; in Josh, xxi., B. corruptly ttim,
A. 'EvvVfui; in 1 Sam., B. 'Za9tit, A. 'Za-
getut: Istemo, Estemo, Erthamo, Esthemo), a
town of Judah, in the mountains; one of the
group containing Dkdir (Josh. xv. 50). With
its "suburbs" Eshtemoa was allotted to the
priests (xxi. 14; 1 Ch. vi. 57). It was one of
the places frequented by David nnd his followers
during the long period of their wanderings; and
to his friends there he sent presents of the spoil
of the Amalekites (1 Sam. xxx. 28, cp. r. 31).
The place was known in the time of Eusebius
and Jerome, who describe it as a k<S/i» iuylo-rn
ESSENES
in Daroma (OS* p. 254, 70, 'E<r9«^<£). Then is
little doubt that it was discovered by Dr. Robin-
son at es-Semu'a, a village 7 miles south of
Hebron, on the great road from et-Milk, and ia
the neighbourhood of other villages still boring
the names of its companions in the list of Josh.
xv.; Anab, Socoh, Jattir, &c. The village ii
full of ancient remains ; there are some interest-
ing tombs, and boundary stones which appeu
to mark the ancient limits of the city (»e
Robinson, i. 494, ii. 204-5; Schwarz, p. 105;
PEF. Mem. iii. 403, 412; Guenn, Jvdte, iii.
173-75).
In the lists — half genealogical, half tope-
graphical — of the descendants of Judah in lCh,
Eshtemoa occurs as derived from Ishbah/'tht
father of Eshtemoa" (1 Ch. iv. 17); Gcdor,
Socoh, and Zanoah, all towns in the same locality,
being named in the following verse. Eshteooi
appears to have been founded by the descendant*
of the Egyptian wife of a certain Mered, tfe
three other towns by those of his Jewish wife.
See the explanations of Bertheau (ChrtnuK si
loc). [G.] [W-]
ESHTEMO'A (B. 'Eo-ftujuis', A. Wtawn:
Esthamo), in 1 Ch. iv. 19, appears to be the
name of an actual person, "Eshtemoa the Mu-
chathite." [Maachathite.]
ESH'TON (f'WK ; •Ao-o-atW; Esthm), *
name which occurs in the genealogies of Jndah
(1 Ch. iv. 11, 12). Mehir was "the fcther of
Eshton," and amongst the names of his four
children are two— Beth-rapha and Ir-nahssh—
which have the appearance of being names, not
of persons, but of places. [G.] [W.]
ES'LI (Rec. T. 'Eo-Al, B. 'EcrAcf, probably =
tn$»?> Azaliah; £»«,Cod. Amiat. ffcsli),w>
of Nagge or Naggai, and father of Naum, in the
genealogy of Christ (Luke iii. 25). See Herrey,
Genealogies, be, p. 136. [GO
ESO'RA (Alovufxt ; Tulg.omito: the Peshitta
Syriac reads Bethchorn), a place fortified by the
Jews on the approach of the Assyrian army
under Holofernes (Judith iv. 4). The name rosy
be the representative of the Hebrew word Hswr,
or Zorah (Simonis, Onom. if. T. p. 19), but no
identification has yet been arrived at. The
Syriac reading suggests Beth-horon, which »
not impossible (see Speaker's Comm.). ["•]
ESPOUSAL. [Marriage.]
ES'RIL CZopiK, A. "E(pl\ ; Vulg. omits),
1 Esd. ix. 34. [Azareel, or Sharai.] [0-J
ES'BOM (Rec. T. 'Eo-pfit; in Luke, Lschm.
with B, 'EctjkSk; Esrom), Matt. i. 3; I^e
iii. 33. [Hezron.] [ g J
ESSE'NES. 1. In describing the different
sects which existed among the Jews in his own
time, Joseph us dwells at great length and with
especial emphasis on the faith and practice of
the Esscncs, the third in his category; "*
Pharisees and the Sadducees being the other two.
They appear in his description to combine the
ascetic virtues of the Pythagoreans and Stoics
with a spiritual knowledge of the Divine Law.
An analogous sect, marked, however, by chstac-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
ESSENES
teristic differences, used, at one time, to be
found in the Egyptian Thcrapeutae ; and from
the detailed notices of Josephus (B. J. ii. 8 ;
Ait. liii. 5, § 9, xv. 10, § 4 sq., xriii. I,
yl *]. [see § 12]) and Pbilo (Quod omiu prob.
ffier. | 12 sq. [see p. 628, note *]; Fragm.
ap. Euseb. Pracp. Et. tic vita contemplation),
and the casual remarks of Pliny (H. N. v. 17),
later writers bare frequently discussed the
rrlilioD which these Jewish mystics occupied
t»»ards the popular religion of the time, and
mvre particularly towards the doctrines of
Christianity. For it is a init-t remarkable fact
that the existence of such sects appears to be
unrecognised both in the Apostolic writings and
in early Hebrew literature.
2. The name Essene ('£<r<rn yoi, Joseph.; Esseni,
Plin.) or Essaean ('EcrroToi, Philo; Jos. B. J. i.
3, 5, <ic) is itself full of difficulty. Various
derivations hare been proposed for it, and all
are more or less open to objection (see the list in
Lightfoot, 8 p. 349 sq.). The derivation preferred
by Scairer and Ginsburg is that from Kpn =
'• the pious ones " ; Lightfoot would give the
preference to D'NCn = " the silent ones."
3. The obscurity of the Essenes as a distinct
My arises from the fact that they represented
originally a tendency rather than an organisa-
tion. The communities which were formed out
of them were a result of their practice, and not
a necessary part of it. As a sect they were
distinguished by an aspiration after ideal purity
rather than by any special code of doctrines ;
and, like the Chasidim of earlier times [Asst-
DUXs], they were confounded in the popular
estimation with the great body of tbe zealous
observers of the Law (Pharisees). The growth
of Essenism was a natural result of the religious
feeling which was called out by the circumstances
if the Greek dominion ; and it is easy to trace
the process by which it was matured. From
the Maccabaean age there was a continuous
tJjrt among the stricter Jews to attain an
absolute standard of holiness. Each class of
Jtvotees was looked upon as practically impure
by their successors, who carried the laws of
purity still further; and the Essenes stand at
the extreme limit of the mystic asceticism which
*a» thus gradually reduced to shape. The
associations of the "Scribes and Pharisees"
(CH3n, " the companions, the wise ") gave place
to others bound by a more rigid rule ; and the
nit of tbe Essenes was made gradually stricter.
■labs, the earliest Essene who is mentioned (o.
110 B.C), appears Hiring in ordinary society (Jos.
H-J. i. 3, § 5). Menahem, according to tradition
a colleague of Hillel, was a friend of Herod, and
scared for his sect the favour of the king
(J«. Ant. xv. 10, § 5> But by a natural
iopoUe the Essenes withdrew from the dangers
a»a distractions of business. From tbe cities
'a«y retired to the wilderness to realize the
conceptions of religion which they formed, while
tber remained on the whole true to their ancient
kith. To the Pharisees they stood nearly in
tie tame relation as that in which the Pharisees
taenuelves stood with regard to the mass of the
people. The differences lay mainly in rigour of
i'fKtict, and not in articles of belief. While the
■wreets and Saddncees represented political-
Nfijiwa parties, the Essenes came to resemble
trawsstic order (Schurer.* p. 468).
ESSENES
997
4. The traces of the existence of Essenes in
common society are not wanting nor confined to
individual cases. Not only was a gate at
Jerusalem named from them (Jos. B. J, v. 4, § 2,
'Eooijaw srv\q), but a later tradition mentions
the existence of a congregation there which
devoted " one-third of the day to study, one-
third to prayer, and one-third to labour"
(Frankel, Zcitschrift, 1846, p. 458). Those,
again, whom Josephus speaks of (B. J. ii. 8, § 13)
as allowing marriage may be supposed to have
belonged to such bodies as had not yet with-
drawn from intercourse with their fellow-men.
But the practices of the extreme section — which
included non-marriage, absence from tho Temple,
&c. — were afterwards regarded as characteristic
of the whole class, and the isolated communities
of Essenes furnished the type which is preserved
in the popular descriptions. These were regu-
lated by strict rules (tee them at length in
Ginsburg), analogous to those of the monastic
institutions of a later date. The candidate for
admission first passed through a year's noviciate,
in which he received, as symbolic gifts, an axe,
an apron, and a white robe, and gave proof of
his temperance by observing the ascetic rules of
the order (tV airi/y tlatrav). At the close of
this probation, his character (to ^0os) was sub-
mitted to a fresh trial of two years, and mean-
while he shared in the lustral rites of the
initiated, but not in their meals. Tbe full
membership was imparted at the end of this
second period, when the novice bound himself
" by awful oaths " — though oaths were abso-
lutely forbidden at all other times — to observe
piety, justice, obedience, honesty, and secrecy,
" preserving alike the books of their sect, and
Vie names of the Angels " (Joseph. II. J. ii. 8, § 7).
5. The order itself was regulated by an internal
jurisdiction. Excommunication, unless revoked
after due repentance, would be equivalent to a
slow death, since an Essene could not take food
prepared by strangers for fear of pollution. All
things were held in common, without distinction *
of property or house ; and special provision was
made for the relief of the poor. Self-denial,
temperance, and labour — especially agriculture
— were the marks of the outward life of the
Essenes ; purity and divine communion the ob-
jects of their aspiration. Slavery, war, and
commerce were alike forbidden (Philo, Quod om.
prob. I. § 12, p. 877 M.) ; and, according to Philo,
their conduct generally was directed by three
rules, " the love of God, the love of virtue, and
the lore of man " (Philo, /. c).
6. In doctrine they did not differ essentially
from strict Pharisees. Moses was honoured by
tbem next to God (Joseph. B. J. ii. 8, it). They
observed the Sabbath with singular strictness;
and though they were unable to oner sacrifices
at Jerusalem, chiefly from regard to purity
(ttwt>op6rnri ayvtt&y), but partly also from
their conception of sacrifices as of inferior value
(Lightfoot, pp. 371-3 ; Ginsburg, p. 205), tbey
sent gifts thither (Jos. Ant. xviii. 2, § 5). At
the same time, like most ascetics, t)>ey turned
their attention specially to the mysteries of the
spiritual world, and looked upon the body as a
mere prison of the soul, though this, it would
seem, is not to be understood as denying the
resurrection of the body (see Ginsburg, p. 207).
They studied and practised with signal success,
Digitized by
Google
998
ESSENES
according to Josephus, the art of prophecy (see
the instances in Joseph, li. J. ii. 8 : cp. Ant. xv.
10, § 5; B. J. i. 3, § 5), though Lightfoot con-
siders them prophets in the sense only of
fortune-tellers or soothsayers (p. 418) ; and
familiar intercourse with nature gave them an
unusual knowledge of physical truths. They
asserted with peculiar boldness the absolute
power and foreknowledge of God (Joseph. Ant.
xiii. 5, § 9; xviii. 1, § 5), and disparaged the
various forms of mental philosophy as useless or
beyond the range of man (Philo, /. c. p. 877).
7. The number of the Essenes is roughlv esti-
mated by Philo at +,000 (Philo, /. c. ; followed
by Josephus, Ant. xriii. 2, § 5 : cp. B. J. ii. 8 ;
Schiirer, 2 p. 470, n. 12). Their best-known
settlements were on the N. W. shore of the Dead
Sea (Philo ; Plin. II. cc.), but others lived in scat-
tered communities throughout Palestine, and in
other cities besides Jerusalem (Jos. li. J. ii. 8, § 4.
Cp. [Hippol.] Philos. ix. 20; Schiirer, 1 p. 471).
8. In the Talmudic writings there is, as has
been already said, no direct mention of the
Essenes, but their existence is recognised by the
notice of peculiar points of practice and teaching.
Under the titles of " the pious," " the weakly "
(i.e. with study), " the retiring," their maxims
are quoted with respect, and many of the traits
preserved in Josephus find parallels in the
notices of the Talmud (Z. Frankel, Zcitschrift,
Dec. 1846, p. 451 sq. ; Monatsschrift, 1853,
pi 37 sq.). The four stages of purity which are
distinguished by the doctors (Chagiijah, 18 a, ap.
Frankel, op. cit. p. 451) correspond in a sin-
gular manner with the four classes into which
the Essenes are said to hare been divided
(Joseph. B. J. ii. 8, § 10) ; and the periods of
probation observed in the two cases oiler similar
coincidences.*
9. But the best among the Jews felt the peril
of Essenistn as a system, and combined to dis-
courage it. They shrank with an instinctive
dread from the danger of connecting asceticism
with spiritual power, and cherished the great
truth which lay in the saying " Doctrine is not
in heaven." The miraculous energy which was
attributed to mystics was regarded by them
as rather a matter of suspicion than of respect ;
and theosophic speculations were condemned
with emphatic distinctness (Frankel, Monats-
schrift, 1853, pp. 62 sq., 68, 71).
10. The character of Essenism limited its
spread. Out of Palestine, Levitical purity was
impossible, for the very land was impure ; and
thus there is no trace of the sect in Babylonia.
The case was different in Egypt, where Judaism
assumed a new shape from its intimate con-
nexion with Greece. Here the original form in
which it was moulded was represented not by
direct copies, but by analogous forms ; and the
tendency which gave birth to the Essenes has
been sometimes thought to have found a fresh
development in the pure speculation of the
Therapeutae. These (according to Philo) were
Alexandrine mystics who abjured the practical
• This ) 8 is left unaltered. Gtnsburg (p. 204) sup-
port* Frankcl's views. Lightfoot* (p. .156 sq.) is
t roroughly opposed to them. The difference between
these two scholars is extremely interesting, and mninly
arises from regarding the matter from n different point
of view. SchQrcr 2 (p. 470, n. 1 1) agrees with Lightfoot.
ESTHER
labours which rightly belonged to the Essenes,
and gave themselves up to the study of the
inner meaning of the Scriptures. The "whole
day, from sunrise to sunset, was spent in mental
discipline." Bodily wants were often forgotten
in the absorbing pursuit of wisdom, and " meat
and drink " were at all times held to be un-
worthy of the light (Philo, De vit. contempt^ § 4).
But Philo's treatise is now (see Schiirer,* p. 863)
generally considered unauthentic. The Thera-
peutae were probably only Christian monks.
1 1. From the nature of the case Esseniun in
its extreme form could exercise very little in-
fluence on Christianity." In all its practical
bearings it was diametrically opposed to the
Apostolic teaching. The dangers which it
involved were tar more clear to the eye of the
Christian than they were to the Jewish doctors.
The only real similarity between Essenistn and
Christianity lay in the common element of tree
Judaism. Nationally, the Essenes occupy the
same position as that to which John the Baptist
was personally called. They mark the close if
the old, the longing for the new, but in this
case without the promise. In place of the
message of the coming " kingdom " they could
proclaim only individual purity and isolation.
At a later time traces of Essenism appear in the
Clementines (cp. Lightfoot, 5 p. 372), and the
strange account which Epiphanius gives of the
Osseni ('Offenvol) appears to point to some
combination of Essene and pseudo-Christian
doctrines (ffuci: xix.). After the Jewish war
the Essenes disappear from history. The
character of Judaism was changed, and ascetic
Pharisaism became almost impossible.
12. The original sources for the history of
the Essenes have been already noticed. Of
modern essays, the most original and important
are those of Frankel in his Zeitschrift, 184£,
pp. 441-461, and Monatsschrift, 1853, p. 30 sq. ;
cp. the wider view of Jost, Gesch. d. Judentk.
i. 207 sq. See also Hilgenfeld (Die Ketzergc-
schichte d. UrchrisUnthums, p. 84 sq.); GfrBm
(Philo, ii. 299 sq.); Dahne (Jiid.-Alex. Rdij-
Philos. i. 467 sq.); Ewald (Gesch. d. Votk. 1st.
iv. 420 sq.) ; Lightfoot (Epp. to the Colossiaw
and Philemon, 1 p. 349 sq.); Ginsbnrg(" Essenes "
in Diet, of Christian Biography) ; Schiirer (<Jr3r'>.
d. -Hid. Volkei tin Zcitalter Jesu Christi,* ii.
p. 467 sq.); Morrison (The Jews under Soman
Rule, ch. xiv.). The rejection by Ohle (Die
Essener, in Jahrb.f. Prot. Thcoi.'xiv. [18882;
Die Pseudophilon-Essder u.s.tc., in Iteitrage :■
Kirchengeschichte [1888]) of the statements of
Josephus as spurious is not accepted by the best
modern critics. Lucius (Der Essenismus in
seinem Yerhaltniss z. Judenthum [1881]) is less
radical and peremptory. [B. F. W.J [F.]
ES'THEE (inpS = t/i« planet Venus ; 'E<r-
I 9iip), the Persian name of Hadassah, daughter
1 of Abihail tin; son of Shiirrei, the son of Kish. a
I Benjamite [JIordkcai], and cousin of Mordecai.
! The explanation of her old name Hadassah, by
the addition of her new name, by which she was
better known, with the formula IRON ***?!•
| b On this point again Lichtfoot' (p. 397 sq.) t*
I radically opposed to Olnsburg (p. 201 sq.), trboee
I ruling idea is that "Jesus. ..belonged to (the Essene)
I portion of His religious brethren."
Digitized by
Google
ESTHER
ESTHEE
999
"tint is, Esther " (Esth. ii. 7), is exactly analo-
gous to the usual addition of the modern names
ii towns to explain the use of the old obsolete
oaes (Geo. xxxr. 19, 27 ; Josh. xv. 10, &c).
Esther was a beautiful Jewish maiden, whose
ancestor Kish had been among the captives led
away from Jerusalem (part of which was in the
tribe of Benjamin) by Nebuchadnezzar when
J«hoiachin was taken captive. She was an
orphan without father or mother, and had been
brought np by her cousin Mordecai, who had an
office in the household of Ahasuerus king of
IVrsia, and dwelt at " Shushan the palace."
When Vashti was dismissed from being queen,
:.wi all the fairest virgins of the kingdom had
been collected at Shushan for the king to make
choice of a successor to her from among them,
the choice fell upon Esther, and she was
crowned queen in the room of Vashti with
lmiqh pomp and rejoicing. The king was not
aware, however, of her race and parentage ; and
so, with the careless profusion of a sensual
despot, on the representation of Haman the
Agagite, hit prime minister, that the Jews
scattered through his empire were a pernicious
race, he gave him full power and authority to
kill them all, young and old, women and chil-
dren, and take possession of all their property.
The means taken by Esther to avert this great
calamity from her people and her kindred, at
the risk of her own life, and to torn upon
Haman the destruction he had plotted against
the Jews, and the success of her scheme, by
which she changed their mourning, fasting,
weeping, and wailing, into light and gladness
and joy and honour, and became for ever
^specially honoured amongst her countrymen,
are fully related in the Book of Esther. The
least of Porim, i.e. of Lots (?), was appointed by
iJstber and Mordecai to be kept on the 14th and
10th of the month Adar (February and March)
in commemoration of this great deliverance.
'PnuM.] The decree of Esther to this effect is
the last thing recorded of her (ix. 32). The
cantinuous celebration of this feast by the Jews
to the present day is thought to be a strong
"■idence of the historical truth of the Book.
[Esther. Book of.]
The questions which arise in attempting to
;ive Esther her place in profane history are —
L Who is Ahasuerus ? This question is
-fevered under Aiiasltkiu'o, and the reasons
there given lead to the conclusion that he was
Xerxes the son of Darius Hystaspis (cp. Sayce,
Introd. to Ezra, . . . Esther, p. 96 sq.).
1L The second inquiry is, Who then was
Esther? Artissona, Atossa, and others are in- I
•i«d excluded by the above decision ; but are
*f to conclude with Scaliger, that because |
Ahasoerus is Xerxes, therefore Esther is Ames-
trU? Surely not. None of the historical par- |
titulars related by Herodotus concerning Ames- |
tru nuke it possible to identify her with '
Either. Amestris was the daughter of Otanes
(0&o|>oas in Ctesias), one of Xerxes' generals,
ud brother to his father Darius (Herod, vii. 01,
K). Esther's father and mother had been Jews.
Amwrit was wife to Xerxes before the Greek
°t*dition (Herod, vii. 61), and her sons accom-
PKii«i Xerxes to Greece (Herod, vii. 39). and
W all three come to man's estate at the death
"f Xerxes in the 20th year of his reign. Darius,
the eldest, had married immediately after the
return from Greece. Esther did not enter the
king's palace till his 7th year, just the time of
Daxius's marriage. These objections are con-
clusive, without adding the difference of cha-
racter of the two queens. The truth is that
history is wholly silent both about Vashti and
Esther. Herodotus only happens to mention
one of Xerxes' wives ; Scripture only mentions
two, if indeed either of them were wives at all.
But since we know that it was tho custom of
the Persian kings before Xerxes to have several
wives, besides their concubines; that Cyrus had
several (Herod, iii. 3) ; that Cambyses had four
whose names are mentioned, and others besides
(iii. 31, 32, 68) ; that Smerdis had several (ib.
68, 69) ; and that Darius had six wives, whose
names are mentioned (ib. passim), it is most
improbable that Xerxes should have been con-
tent with one wife. Another strong objection
to the idea of Esther being his one legitimate
wife, and perhaps to her being strictly his wife
at all, is that the Persian kings selected their
trices not from the harem, but, if not foreign
princesses, from the noblest Persian families,
either their own nearest relatives, or from ona
of the seven great Persian houses. It seems
therefore natural to conclude that Esther, a
captive and one of the harem, was not of tha
highest rank of wives, but that a special honour,
with the name of queen, may have been given
to her, as to Vashti before her, as the favourite
concubine or inferior wife, whose offspring, how-
ever, if she had any, would not have succeeded
to the Persian throne. This view, which seems
to be strictly in accordance with what we know
of the manners of the Persian court, removes all
difficulty in reconciling the history of Esther
with the scanty accounts left us by profane
authors of the reign of Xerxes.
It only remains to remark on the character
of Esther as given in the Bible. She appears
there as a woman of deep piety, faith, courage,
patriotism, and caution, combined with resolu-
tion ; a dutiful daughter to her adoptive father,
docile and obedient to his counsels, and anxious
to share the king's favour with him for the
good of the Jewish people. That she was a
virtuous woman, and, as far as her situation
made it possible, a good wife to the king, her
continued influence over him for so long a time
warrants us to infer. And there must have
been a singular grace and charm in her aspect
and manners, since she " obtained favour in the
sight of all that looked upon her " (ii. 15).
That she was raised up as an instrument in the
hands of God to avert the destruction of tha
Jewish people, and to afford them protection,
and forward their wealth and peace in their,
captivity, is also manifest from the Scripture
account. But to impute to her the sentiments
put into her mouth by the apocryphal author
of ch. xiv., or to accuse her of cruelty because
of the death of Haman and his sons, and the
second day's slaughter of the Jews' enemies, at
Shushan, is utterly to ignore the manners and
feelings of her age and nation, and to judge her
by the standard of Christian morality in our
own age and country instead. In fact the sim-
plicity and truth to nature of the Scriptural
narrative afford a striking contrast, both with
the forced and florid amplifications of the apo-
Digitized by
Google
1000 ESTHER, BOOK OP
cryphal additions (see e.g. Speaker's Comm. on
the Apocrypha, i. 402), and with the sentiments
of some later commentators. It may be con-
venient to add that the third year of Xerxes was
B.C. 483, his seventh 479, and his twelfth 474
(Clinton, F.H.), and that the simultaneous battles
of Plataea and Mycale, which frightened Xerxes
from Sardis (Diod. Sic. xi. § 36) to Susa, hap-
pened, according to Prideaux and Clinton, in
September of his seventh year. For a fuller dis-
cussion of the identity of Esther, and different
views of the subject, see Prideaux's Connexion,
i. 236, 243, 297 sqq., and Petav. de doctr. Temp.
xii. 27, 28, who make Esther wife of Artaxerxes
Longimanus, following Joseph. Ant. xi. 6, as he
followed the LXX. and the apocryphal Esther ;
J. Scaliger (de emend. Temp. vi. 591 ; Animadv.
Euseb. 100) makes Ahasuerns, Xerxes; Usshcr
(Annal. Vet. Test.) makes him Darius Hystas-
pis ; Loft us, Chaidacn, &c. Eusebius (Canon.
Chron. 338, ed. Mediol.) rejects the hypothesis
of Artaxerxes Longimanus, on the score of the
silence of the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, and
adopts that of Artaxerxes Mnemon, following
the Jews, who make Darius Codomanus to be
the same as Darius Hystaspis, and the son of
Artaxerxes by Esther! It is observable that
all Petavius's and Prideaux's arguments against
Scaliger's view apply solely to the now obsolete
opinion that Esther is Amestris. [A. C. H.]
ES'THEB, BOOK OF. 1. Title and
authorship. The Book is one of the latest of
the Canonical Books of Scripture, having been
written late in the reign of Xerxes, or early in
that of his son Artaxerxes Longimanus. The
author is not known, but some think that he
may possibly have been Mordecai himself. The
minute details giveu of the great banquet, of
the names of the chamberlains and eunuchs and
Hainan's wife and sons, and of the customs and
regulations of the palace, betoken that the
author lived at Shushan, and probably at court,
while his no less intimate acquaintance with the
most private affairs both of Esther and Mordecai
are thought to suit the hypothesis of the latter
being himself the writer. It is also not in
itself improbable that as Daniel, Ezra, and
Nehemiah, who held high offices under the
Persian kings, wrote an account of the affairs
of their nation, in which they took a leading
part, so Mordecai should have also recorded
the transactions of the Book of Esther. The
termination of the Book with the mention of
Mordecai's elevation and government agrees
with this view, which has the sanction of Ibn
Ezra, most of the Jews, Vatablus, Carpzovius,
and others, though not accepted by modern com-
mentators. The Book is included by Josephus
(c. Apion. i. 8) in the twenty-two Books of the
Canon, and probably as the last of those Sixalas
8e«o iMi<rTtvft4va. Those who ascribe it to
Ezra, or to the men of the great Svnagogue
(Baba Bathra, f. 14), may have merely meant
that Ezra edited and added it to the Canon of
Scripture, which he probably did, bringing it,
and perhaps the Book of Daniel, with him from
Babylon to Jerusalem.
2. Date and place.— The earliest reference to
the Book is in 2 Mace. xv. 36, but the apo-
cryphal additions of the LXX. and Josephus
carry the evidence for it further back than the
ESTHER, BOOK OF
date of that work (c. 2nd cent. B.C.). The
closing words of the LXX. Version (see § 3, h)
do not advance the matter. The language
(see § 3, a), but above all the evideut familiarity
of the writer with Persia, go to show that
the author lived in Persia, if after the reign ot
Xerxes ; and the end of the reign of Artaxerxes
Longimanus (B.C. 425) is accepted by many com-
mentators as the date of composition (Eichhorn,
Keil, Kawlinson, Sayce, &c). It must, however,
be admitted that the same premisses lead others
(Ewald, Stahelin, Bertheau, and Orelli) to prefer
a later Persian period or the beginning of the
Greek period (c. B.C. 332), while another class
of critics refuse to the Book any historical
value, and carry it down to much more modem
times (see Oettli, § 6).
3. Text.— The Book of Esther appears in a
form in the LXX.,* and in the translations from
that Version, different from that in which it
is found in the Hebrew Bible. In speaking of
it we shall first speak of (a) the Canonical
Book found in Hebrew, and next (6) of the
Greek Book with its apocryphal addition!,
(a) The Canonical Esther then is placed among
the hagiographa or D'lJinS by the Jews,
and in that first portion of them which the;
call the live volumes, nfejp. It is sometimes
emphatically called Megillah, without other dis-
tinction, and was held in such high repute by
the Jews that it is a saying of Maimonides that
in the days of Messiah the prophetic and hagio-
graphical Books will pass away, except the
Book of Esther, which will remain with the
Pentateuch. This Book is read through by the
Jews in their synagogues at the feast of Purim,
when it was once the custom — since abandoned
at least by British Jews — at the mention of
Hainan's name to hiss, and stamp, and clench
the fist, and cry, " Let his name be blotted
out; may the name of the wicked rot." It
is said also that the names of Hainan's ten
sons are read in one breath, to signify that
they all expired at the same instant of time.
Even in writing the names of Hainan's sods
in the 7th, 8th, and 9th verses of Esth. ix.,
the Jewish scribes have contrived to express
their abhorrence of the race of Haman. For
these ten names are written in three perpen-
dicular columns of 3, 3, 4, as if they were
hanging upon three parallel cords, three upon
each cord, one above another, to represent the
hanging of Haman's sons (Stehelin's Sabbin.
Literat. ii. 319 ; Speaker's Commentani on the
Apocrypha, "The rest of Esther," pp. 362,
col. 2, n. 1, 402 (d)). The Targum of Esth.
ix., in Walton's Polyglott,* inserts a very minute
account of the exact position occupied by Haman
and his sons on the gallows, the height from
the ground, and the interval between each ;
according to which they all hung in one line.
Haman at the top, and his ten sons at intervals
of half a cubit under him. It is added that
Zeresh and Haman's seventy surviving sons fled,
and begged their bread from door to door, in
* The term LXX. Is used here to indicate the whole
Greek volume as we now have It.
b There are two Targums to Esther, both of late date.
See Wolfs BM. Htbr. Pars 11, 1171-31; ^peoAer's
Oomm. on the Apocrypha, i. 3«3.
Digitized by
Google
ESTHER, BOOK OF
trident allusion to Ps. cix. 9, 10. It ha* often
been remarked as a peculiarity of this Book that
the name of God does not once occur in it. Some
of the ancient Jewish teachers were somewhat
staggered at this, but others accounted for it
by saying that it was a transcript, under Divine
inspiration, from the Chronicles of the Medea
ami Persians ; and that, being meant to be read
by heathen, the sacred Name was wisely omitted.
Baiter (Saint's Jtest, iv. ch. iii.) speaks of the
Jewish practice of casting to the ground the Rook
of Esther, because the Name of God was not in
it ; but Wolf (B. H. ii. 90) denies this, aud
says that if any such custom prevailed among
the Oriental Jews, to whom it is ascribed by
Sandys, it must have been rather to express
their hatred of Haman. This peculiarity of
the Book must not be pressed too far. Certain
it is that this Book was always reckoned in the
Jewish Canon, and is named or implied in
almost every enumeration of the Books com-
posing it, from Josephus downwards. Jerome
mentions it by name in the Prolog. Gal., in
his Epistle to Paulinus, and in the preface
to Esther; aa does Augustine, dc Grit. Dei
and de Doctr. Christ., and Origen, as cited
by Eusebius (Hist. Ecdes. vi. 25), and many
others. Some modern commentators, both Eng-
lish and German, have objected to the contents
of the Book as improbable and not strictly
historical ; but if it be true, as Diodorus
Siculus relates, that Xerxes put the Medians
foremost at Thermopylae on purpose that they
might be all killed, became he thought they
were not thoroughly reconciled to the loss of their
national supremacy, it is surely not incredible
tnat he should have given permission to Haman
to destroy a few thousand strange people like
the Jews, who were represented to be injurious
to his empire, and disobedient to his laws. Nor
again, when we remember what Herodotus
relates of Xerxes in respect to promises made at
banquets, can we deem it incredible that he
should perform his promise to Esther to reverse
the decree in the only way that seemed prac-
ticable. It is likely too that the secret friends
ud adherents of Haman would be the persons
to attack the Jews, which would be a reason
why Ahasuerus would rather rejoice at their
detraction." In so many respects the writer
shows such accurate acquaintance with Persian
manners, and is so true to history and chrono-
logy, as to afford the strongest internal evidences
to the truth of the Book. The casual way in
which the author of 2 Mace. xv. 36 alludes to
the feast of Purim, under the name of " Mardo-
cawos's day," as kept by the Jews in the timo of
Kieauor (B.C. 161). is another strong testimony
ia its favour ; and indeed justifies the expression
of L>r. Lee (quoted in Whiston's Josephus, xi.
ch. vi), that " the truth of this hUtory is de-
monstrated by the feast of Purim, kept up from
that time to this very day." *
' The arguments of tbos? who deny strict historical
***ncj to the Book are summarised In Oettli, $ 5,
-■Jochlchtllcbkeit." See D.lver, LOT. p. 452 sq. Cp.
» tie other ride, Sayce, p. 98 sq.— [F.]
' Df- W. Lee also bat some remarks on the proof of
tie kiMttrical character of the Book derived from tlie
*■» of Partm, as well as on other points (/nspir. of
*&«39iq.). See also Sayce, p. 101 j Oettli, p. 233.
*■ etymological deriTsuon from the Persian and the
ESTHEE, BOOK OF
1001
The style of writing is remarkably chaste
and simple. Xerxes, Haman, Mordecai, and
Esther are personages full of life ana indi-
viduality ; and the narrative of the struggle
in Esther's mind between fear and the desire to
save her people, and of the final resolve made in
the strength of that help, which was to be
sought in prayer and fasting, is very touching
and beautiful, and without any exaggeration.
It does not in the least savour of romance. The
Hebrew is very like that of Ezra and parts of
the Chronicles (ai. like that of Ecclesiastes) ;
generally pure, but mixed with words of Persian
origin (Sayce, p. 93), aud of Chaldaic affinity,
which do not occur in older Hebrew.
In short it is just what one would expect
to find in a work of the age to which the Book
of Esther pretends to belong. The student
has indeed only to compare the Hebrew Esther
with the Greek Esther now to be noticed in
order to see the difference between what may
be called genuine history and what is certainly
not.
(6) As regards the LXX. Version of the Book
(of which there are two texts, called by Dr.
Kritzsche, A and B), it consists of the Canonical
Esther with various interpolations prefixed,
interspersed,* and added at the close. Read in
Greek, it makes a complete and continuous
history, except that here and there, as e.g. m
the repetition of Mordecai's pedigree, the patch-
work betrays itself. The chief additions are : —
A preface containing Mordecai's pedigree, hia
dream, and his appointment to sit in the king's
gate, in the second year of Artaxerxes. In the
third chapter, a pretended copy of Artaxerxes's
decree for the destruction of the Jews is added,
written in thorough Greek style; a prayer of
Mordecai is inserted in the fourth chapter ; fol-
lowed by a prayer of Esther, in which she excuses
herself for being wife to the uncircumcised king,
and denies having eaten anything or drunk wine
at the table of Haman: on amplification of
v. 1-3 ; a pretended copy of Artaxerxes's letter
for reversing the previous decree (also of mani-
festly Greek origin in ch. viii.), in which Haman
is called a Macedonian, aud is accused of having
plotted to transfer the empire from the Persians
to the Macedonians, n palpable proof of this
portion having been composed after the over-
throw of the Persian empire by the Greeks ;
and lastly an addition to the tenth chapter, in
which Mordecai shows how his dream was ful-
filled in the events that had happened, gives
glory to God, and prescribes the observation of
the feast of the 14th and 15th Adar. The whole
book is closed with the following entry : — " In
the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemaeus and
Identification of Purim with a Persian festival which the
later Jews metamorphosed Into that connected with the
Book of Esther has been. In various forms, advocated by
'HItslg, Zoni, Laaarde, Reuss (see Oettli. p. 233). The
result Is not pbllologlcally successful (see Halcvy,
HKJ. xv. 2*9, as against Lagarde's Purim), neither Is it
historically defensible.— [F.]
• The Targum to Esther contains other copious
embellishments and amplifications. On the whole
subject of the apocryphal " Additions to Estler," see
Speaker's Omm. on '• The rest of Esther." Jacob, ' Das
Buch Esther Del den LXX.' in ZATW. x. 290, considers
the LXX. Version to have been made In Egypt about
B.C. 30.
Digitized by
Google
1002 ESTHER, BOOK OF
Cleopatra, Dositheus, wno said he was a priest
and Levite, and Pttiemy bis son, brought this
epistle of Phuriir, which they said was the
same, and that Lysimachus, the son of Ptolemy,
that was in Jerusalem, had interpreted it."
This entry was apparently intended to give
authority to this Greek Version of Esther, by
pretending that it was a certified translation
from the Hebrew original. Ptolemy Philometor,
who is here meant/ began to reign B.C. 181.
Though, however, the interpolations of the
Greek copy are thus manifest, they make a con-
sistent and intelligible story. But the apocry-
phal additions as they are inserted in some
editions of the Latin Vulgate, and in the
English Bible, are incomprehensible ; the history
of which is this : — When Jerome translated the
Book of Esther, he first gave the Version of the
Hebrew only as being alone authentic. He
then added at the end a Version in Latin of
those several passages which he found in the
LXX., and which were not in the Hebrew,
.stating where each passage came in, and marking
them all with an obelus. The first passage so
given is that which forms the continuation of
chapter x. (which of course immediately pre-
cedes it), ending with the above entry about
Dositheus. Having annexed this conclusion,
he then gives the Pruoemium, which he says
forms the beginning of the Greek Vulgate, be-
ginning with what is now v. 2 of ch. xi. ; and
so proceeds with the other passages. But in
subsequent editions all Jerome's explanatory
matter has been swept away, and the disjointed
portions have been printed as chapters xi., xii.,
xiii., xiv., xv., xvi., as if they formed a narrative
in continuance of the Canonical Book. The
extreme absurdity of this arrangement is no-
where more apparent than in chapter xi., where
the verse (1) which closes the whole Book in
the Greek copies, and in St. Jerome's Latin
translation, is actually made immediately to
precede that (t>. 2) which is the very first
verse of the Prooemium. As regards the place
assigned to Esther in the LXX., in the Vatican
odition, and most others, it comes between
Judith and Job. Its place before Job is a
remnant of the Hebrew order, Esther there
closing the historical, and Job beginning the
metrical Megilloth. Tobit and Judith have been
placed between it and Nehemiah, doubtless for
chronological reasons. But in the very ancient
Codex published by Tischendorf, and called C.
Friderico-Augustanua (now X), Esther immedi-
ately follows Nehemiah (included under Esdrns
B), and precedes Tobit. This Codex, which con-
tains the apocryphal additions to Esther, was
copied from one written by the martyr Pamphilus
with his own hand, as far as to the end of Esther,
and is ascribed by the editor to the 4th century.
As regards the motive which led to these
additions, one seems evidently to have been to
supply what was thought an omission in the
' He Is the same as Is frequently mentioned in
1 Mace.; eg. x. 57, xl. 12; cp. Joseph. A. J. xiil.
4, 1, 6, and Clinton, F. H. ill. 393. This Identifica-
tion with Philometor, If not positively certain, cannot ho
said to be seriously refuted by Jacob, p. 274 eq. Dosi-
theus seems to be a Greek version of Mattathiab ; Itolemy
was also a common name for Jews at that time. See
Sptaka't Cumm. on the Apocrypha, 1. 364-0.
ESTHER, BOOK OF
Hebrew Book, by introducing copious mention
of the name of God. It is further evident from
the other apocryphal books, and additions to
canonical Scripture, which appear in the LXX.,
such as Bel and the Dragon, Susanna, the Song
of the Three Children, &c., that the Alexandrian
Jews loved to dwell upon the events of the
Babylonish Captivity, and especially upon the
Divine interpositions in their behalf, probably
as being the latest manifestations of God's
special care for Israel. Traditional stories
would be likely to be current among them, and
these would be sure sooner or later to be com-
mitted to writing, with additions according to
the fancy of the writers. The most popular
among them, or those which had most of as
historical basis, or which were written by men
of most weight, or whose origin was lost in the
most remote antiquity, or which most gratified
the national feelings, would acquire something
of sacred authority (especially in the absence of
real inspiration dictating fresh Scriptures), and
get admitted into the volume of Scripture, less
rigidly fenced by the Hellenistic than by the
Hebrew Jews. No subject would be more
likely to engage the thoughts and exercise the
pens of such writers, than the deliverance of the
Jews from utter destruction by the intervention
of Esther and Mordecai, and the overthrow of
their enemies in their stead. Those who made
the additions to the Hebrew narrative according
to the religious taste and feeling of their own
times, probably acted in the same spirit as
others have often done, who have added florid
architectural ornaments to temples which were
too plain for their own corrupted taste. The
account which Josephus follows seems to have
contained yet further particulars, as e.g. the
name of the Eunuch's servant, a Jew, who
betrayed the conspiracy to Mordecai ; other
passages from the Persian Chronicles read to
Ahasuerus, besides that relating to Mordecai,
and amplifications of the king's speech to Hainan,
&c. It is of this LXX. Version that Athanasius
(Feat. Epist. 39, Oxf. transl.) spoke when he
ascribed the Book of Esther to the non-canonicsl
books ; and this also is perhaps the reason why
in some of the lists of the canonical Books
Esther is not named, as e.g. in those of Melito
of Sardis and Gregory Nazianzen, unless in these
it is included under some other book, as Ruth,
or Esdras' (see Whitaker, Ditput. oh H. &r->
pp. 57, 58 [Park. Soc.] ; Cosins on the Canon
of Scr. pp. 49, 50 [ditto]). Origen, singn-
larly enough, takes a different line in his £/>•
to Africanus (Oper. i. 14). He defends the
canonicity of these Greek additions, though
he admits they are not in the Hebrew. His
sole argument, unworthy of a great scholar,
is the use of the LXX. in the Churches,
an argument which embraces equally all the
apocryphal books. Africanus, in his Ep. to
Origen, had made the being in the Hebrew
essential to canonicity, as Jerome did later.
The Council of Trent (1546) pronounced the
whole Book of Esther to be canonical (see
the R. C. commentators in Kaulen, Emleit. t»
die hell. Schriften A. T. § 270 sq.), and
• " This Book of Esther, or sixth of Esdras, as It is
plsced In some of the most ancient copies of the
Vulgate." (Lee's JHttert. on 2nd Btdnu, p. 25.)
Digitized by
Google
ETAM
Ystablus says that prior to thit decision it was
doubtful whether or no Esther was to be included
io the Canon, some authors affirming and some
denying it. He afterwards qualifies the state-
meat by saying that at all events the last seven
chapters were doubtful. Sixtus Senenais, in
spite of the decision of the Council, speaks of
trie* additions, after the example of Jerome, as
"lacinias hinc inde quorumdam Scriptorum
temeritate insertns," and thinks that they are
chiefly derived from Josephus, but this last
opinion is without probability. The manner
and the order in which Josephus cites them
(Ant. xi. 6) show that they had already in bis
days obtained currency among the Hellenistic
Jews as portions of the Book of Esther ; as we
know from the way in which he cites other
apocryphal books that they were current like-
wise; with others which are now lost. For it
wis probably from such that Josephus derived
his stories about Moses, about Sainballat, and
the temple on Mount Gerizim, and the meeting
of the high-priest and Alexander the Great.
Hot these, not having happened to be bound up
with the LXX., perished. However, the mar-
vellous purity with which the Hebrew Canon
has keen preserved, under the providence of God,
is brought out into very strong light, by the
contrast of the Greek volume. Nor is it un-
interesting to observe how the relaxation of the
peculiarity of their national character, by the
Alexandrian Jews, implied in the adoption of the
Creek language and Greek names, seems to have
keen accompanied with a less jealous, and conse-
quently a less trustworthy guardianship of their
great national treasure, " the oracles of God."
See further, Bishop Cosins, on the Canon of
JL &; Wolfs Bibl. JJebr. 11, 88, and passim;
Hotting. Tkesaw. p. 494; Walton, Proteg. ix.
§ 13; Whitaker. IHsput. of Script, ch. viii. ;
l>r. 0. F. Fritzsche, Zusatze turn Buche Esther ;
Baomgarten, dc Fide Lib. Esther, &c. More
modern German literature on the Book of Esther
is enumerated by Cettli in Strack u. Zikkler's
Kgf. Komm, z. d. licit. Schriftcn A. u. X. TUs.
"Einl. z. Esther," § 7. Ci>. Driver, LOT.
p. 449 sq. [A. C. H.] [F.]
E'TAM (DOf; A.VdV: Etam). 1. A village
OVTl) of the tribe of Simeon, specified only in
the list in 1 Ch. iv. 32 (cp. Josh. xix. 7); but
that it is intentionally introduced appears from
the fact that the number of places is summed as
five, though in the parallel list as four. The
cities of Simeon appear all to have been in the
eitreme south of the country (see Joseph. Ant.
v.l.§22). Cornier (PEF. Mem. iii. 261) proposes
to identify it with Kh. 'Aitin, between 8 and 9
miles S. of Beit Jibrin. Eleutheropolis.
& B. AtraV, A. AlVo> (in Josh. xv. 59 a).
A place in Judah, fortified and garrisoned by
Reboboara (2 Ch. xi. 6, B. 'AwdV, B rt . AiVdji,
A. Ai'varf)- From its |>osition in this list we
<u*y conclude that it was near Bethlehem and
Tekoah; and in accordance with this is the
mention of the name among the ten cities which
the LXX. (ed. Swete) inserts in the text of
Jwh, xv. 59 a, " Thecoa and Ephrntha which is
Bethlehem, and Phagor and Aitan (Ethan)."
Reasons are shown below for believing it pos-
*•»»» that this may have been the scene of
Swoon's residence, the cliff Etam being one of
ETAM, THE BOCK
1003
the numerous bold eminences which abound in
this part of the country ; and the spring of En-
hak-kore one of those abundant fountains which
have procured for Etam its chief fame. For
here, according to the statements of Josephus
(Ant. viii. 7, § 3) and the Talmudists, were
the sources of the water from which Solomon's
gardens and pleasure-grounds were fed, and
Bethlehem and the Temple supplied (see Light-
foot on John v.). The name is retained in that
of 'Ain 'Atan, a fine spring, close to "Solomon's
Pools," near Crttis, the waters of which were
formerly conveyed to the Temple by an aque-
duct (see Dillmann* on Josh. I. c).
8. B. AirdV, A. AiVdV. A name occurring in
the lists of Judah's descendants (1 Ch. iv. 3),
but probably referring to the place named
above (2), Bethlehem being mentioned in the
following verse. [G.]
E'TAM, THE BOCK (DB'}f iho ; $ rirpa
'Hrd/i, for A. see below ; Joseph. Ai'toV ; Petra,
and silex, Etam), a cliff or lofty rock (such
seems to be the special force of Seta") into
a cleft or chasm («l***p; A. V. "top," R. V.
" cleft ") of which Samson retired after his
slaughter of the Philistines, in revenge for their
burning the Timnite woman who was to have
been his wife (Judg. xv. 8, 11*). The general
tenor of the narrative seems to indicate that
this natural stronghold (»«Vpa 8' iar\» ox«pd,
Jos. Ant. v. 8, § 8) was in Judah, and that the
Philistines had advanced into the heart of the
territory of that tribe (rr. 9, 10) in their search
for Samson. At Lehi in Judah they were de-
feated, and the victory was so complete that it
raised Samson to be Judge, and secured peace
for 20 years (c. 20). It is evident that the
place Lehi, in which was the spring En-hak-kore
(r. 19), was above, or at a higher altitude than
the country of the Philistines (r. 9) and the
rock Etam (er. 11, 13). There is no further
indication of position (the names have vanished),
but it may be inferred that " the rock " was not
far from a town of the same name.
The identifications that have tiecn proposed
are: — (1) A cliff, or " crag," in the extremely
uneven and broken ground in the Wady (x«-
fuxpl>oi : see note *) Urtas, below 'Ain 'Atan
[Etam. 2]. Here is a fitting scene for the adven-
ture of Samson. It was sufficiently distant from
Timnah to have seemed a safe refuge from the
wrath of the Philistines, while on the other hand
it was not too far for them to advance in search
of him ; and it may be remarked that one of the
easiest and most direct routes from Philistia to
the heart of Judah, now marked by a Roman
road, was that which passes 'Ain Shems, and
goes up by Beit 'Atab and el-Khudf to " Solo-
mon's Pools," Bethlehem, and Jerusalem. This
road was frequently followed at a later date by
the Philistines, who, even in the reign of David,
had a garrison at Bethlehem near its head.
This position is apparently at variance with
the statement, in c. 8, that Samson went oJotro
• There is some uncertainty atom the text of this
passage, the Alex. MS. of the LXX. inserting in v. s
the words irooi tu x«e<VPr- "by the torrent," before
the mention of the rock. Eusebius (OS.* p. 2*4, 83-
84) has iv ry oiniW* 'HtA^ »ap« «? X n l ii PPV- *»
e. 11 the reading agrees with the Hebrew.
Digitized by
Google
1001
ETHAM
to the rock Ktam after the slaughter of the
Philistines ; but it is possible that an allusion
to the ascent which preceded the descent has
been omitted. In 1 Ch. xiii. 6 David is said to
hare gone up to Kirjath-jearim (from Hebron)
to bring up from thence the Ark of God (to
Jerusalem), no mention being made of the
previous descent. The view that the cliff Ktam,
Kamath Lchi, and En-hak-kore must be looked
for in the abundant springs and numerous
eminences in the district round 'Ain 'Atan and
(/rids, is supported by Stanley, Led. on Jewish
Ch. i. 371; Guerin, Judge, iii. 118; Schenkel,
Bib. Lex. ; Winer, B WB. ; Bertheau* ; Birch,
PEFQy. Stat. 1881, p. 323. (2) Major Conder
(PEF. Mem. iii. 22, 23, and Tent Work, i. 275-
77) has proposed Beit 'Atab, "a small village,
standing on a remarkable knoll of rock which
rises some 60 ft. to 100 ft. above the sur-
rounding hilly ridge." "A remarkable cavern,"
which might have been used as a hiding-place
by Samson, runs beneath the houses. This
filace is in Judah, on the direct road to Beth-
ehem, mentioned above, and not far from
Samson's home. But there is nothing nt Beit
'Atab to which the term Sela, " cliff," used in
connexion with such places as Petra and the
gorge at Michmash, could be applied ; and
there is also the difficulty that the Philistines,
in advancing to the higher ground of Lehi,
would have left "the rock" behind them,
and would consequently have been between
Samson and the men of Judah. Major Conder's
identification has been accepted by Tristram,
Bib. Places, p. 48; and Geikie, H. Land and
the Bible, ii. 142. (3) Van de Vclde (ii. 141)
would identify the rock Etam with the Etam of
1 Ch. iv. 32 near 'Ain Itimmon, A7i. Umm er-
Jtumdmtn,and Lehi with Lekiyeh, a short distance
X. of Bcersheba, but these places are too far to
the south, and must have been within the ter-
ritory of Simeon, while it is clear from the
narrative that the scene of Samson's exploit
was in Judah. This view has the support
of Riehm, 11 WB. (s. v.); Keil, Comm. zu
Bidder, xv. 8, p. 316 ; Boettger, Lex. Joseph.
s. v. Aita. [G.] [W.]
E'THAM. [Exodus, the.]
ETHAN (J1VN = strong ; HuM* [1 K.J
Aieir [Ps. BK.j ; Ethan). The name of several
persons. 1. Ethan the Ezrahitk, one of the
four sons of Mahol, whose wisdom was excelled
by Solomon (1 K. iv. 31 ; LXX. v. 27). His
name is in the title of Ps. Ixxxix. There is
little doubt that this is the same person who in
1 Oh. ii. (II. AiSdp, A. -xv) is mentioned —
with the same brothers as before — as a son of
Zerah, the son of Judah. [Dauda; Ezrahite.]
But being a son of Judah, he must have been a
different person from
2. B. Ai9dp, A. -av. Son of Kishi or Kushahih,
a Merarite Levite, head of that family in the
time of King David (1 Ch. vi. 44, Heb. r. 29),
and spoken of as a " singer." With Heman and
Asaph, the heads of the two other families of
Lcvites, Ethan was appointed to sound with
cymbals (xv. 17, 19). From the fact that in
other passages of these Books the three names
arc given as Asaph, Heman, and Jkduthux,
it has been conjectured that the two names
ETHIOPIA
both belonged to the one man, or arc identical;
but there is no direct evidence of this, nor U
there anything to show that Ethan the singer
was the same person as Ethan the Ezrahite,
whose name stands at the head of Ps. Ixxxix..
though it is a curious coincidence that there
should be two persons named Heman and Etluo
so closely connected in two different tribes and
walks of life.
3. B. Aitdv, A. Ovpl. A Gershonite Levite,
one of the ancestors of Asaph the singer (1 Ch.
vi. 42, Heb. c. 27). In the reversed genealogy
of the Gershonites (v. 21 of this chap.) Joan
stands in the place of Ethan as the son of
Zimmah. [G.]
ETHANIM. [Months.]
ETHBA'AL (tyanS; 'E9j8<to».; Joseph.
'W6$a\ot ; Ethbaal), king of Sidon and father
of Jezebel, wife of Ahab (1 K. xvi. 31). Josephus
{Ant. viii. 13, § 1) represents him as king of the
Tynans as well as of the Sidonians. We may
thus identify him with Eithobalus (E18«/3aAoi),
noticed by Menander (Joseph, c. Aphn. i. 18), >
priest of Astarte, who, after having assassinated
Phelcs, usurped the throne of Tyre for 32
years. As 50 years elapsed between the deaths
of Hiram and Pheles, the date of Ethbaal's reign
may be given as about n.c. 940-908. The varia-
tion in the name is easily explained ; Ethbaal =
Kith Baal ; Ithobalus (^lO'lFIs*) = Baal iritt
him, which is preferable in point of sense to the
other. The position which Ethbaal held explains,
to a certain extent, the idolatrous zeal which
Jezebel displayed. [W. L. B.] [A. H. S.]
ETHER plTtf; Ether, A thar), one of the
cities of Judah in the low countrv, the ShefeUA
(Josh. xv. 42 ; B. 'Wok, A. 'ASip), allotted to
Simeon (xix. 7 ; B. 'USep, A. BttVp). In the
parallel list of the towns of Simeon in 1 Ch.
iv. 32, Tochen is substituted for Ether. In his
Onomasticon Eusebius mentions it (OS.* p. 261,
78-79) as being in his time a considerable place
{Kiip.ii luyiimi), called Jethira {'U8*ipi\ near
Malatha in the interior of the district of Daroroa.
But he evidently confounds it with Jattik, now
Kh. 'Attir, to the S.W. of cs-Semu'a, Eshtemos.
Conder (PEF. Mem. iii. 261, 279) and Muhlau
(in Riehm's HWB.) identify it with Kh.el-
'Atr, a short distance N.W. of Beit Jibrin, but
this seems too far N. for a town belonging
to Simeon. The identification of the place is
still uncertain. It was probably situated nearer
Beersheba. [G.] [W.]
ETHIOTIA (tftt; A\6u»wla; Aethiopia).
The country which the Greeks and Romans
described as " Aethiopia " and the Hebrews as
"Cush'May to the south of Egypt, and em-
braced, in its most extended sense, the modern
Xubitt, Sennaar, Kordofan, and Northern Abys-
sinia, and in its more definite sense the kingdom
of Meroe°, from the junction of the Blue and
White branches of the Nile to the border of
Egypt. The only direction in which a clear
boundary can be fixed is in the north, where
Syene marked the division between Ethiopia
and Egypt (Ezek. xxix. 10): in other directions
the boundaries can be only generally described
as the Red Sea on the east, the Libyan desert on
Digitized by
Google
ETHIOPIA
the vest, and the Abyssinian highlands on the
sooth. The name "Ethiopia" is probably an
adaptation of the native Egyptian name " Et-
hauth," which bears a tolerably close resem-
blance to the gentile form "Aethiops;" the
Greeks themselves regarded it as expressive of
s dark complexion (from aXSu, " to burn," and
4«J, "a countenance"). The Hebrew and As-
syrian Cash was borrowed from the Egyptian
Kesh, which designated the district of which
Napata, the modern Gebel Barkal, was after-
wards the capital. The Hebrews do not appear
to have had much practical acquaintance with
Ethiopia itself, thongb the Ethiopians were well
known to them through their intercourse with
Egypt. They were, however, perfectly aware
of its position (Ezek. xxix. 10) ; and they de-
scribe it ss a well-watered country " beyond "
the waters of Cush (Is. xviii. 1 ; Zeph. iii. 10),
being traversed by the two branches of the
Kile, and by the Astaboras or Tucazre. The
Nile descends with a rapid stream in this part
of its course, forming a series of cataracts:
its branches are referred to in the words of Is.
iviii. 2, - whose land the rivers divide." The
papyrus boats (" vessels of bulrushes," Is. xviii.
2), which were peculiarly adapted to the navi-
gation of the Upper Nile, admitting of being
carried on men's backs when necessary, were
regarded as a characteristic feature of the
country. The Hebrews carried on commercial
intercourse with Ethiopia, its " merchandise "
(Is. xlr. 14) consisting of ebony, ivory, frank-
incense, and gold (Herod, iii. 97, 114),' and
precious stones (Job xxviii. 19 ; Joseph. Ant.
Tiii. 6, § 5). The country is for the most part
mountainous, the ranges gradually increasing
in altitude towards the south, until they attain
an elevation of about 8000 feet in Abyssinia.
The inhabitants of Ethiopia were a Hamitic
race (Gen. x. 6), and are described in the Bible as
a dark-complexioned (Jer. xiii. 23) and stalwart
race (Is. xlr. 14, " men of stature ; " xviii. 2. for
" scattered," substitute " tall," 1!. V.). Their
stature is noticed by Herodotus (iii. 20, 114),
as well as their handsomeness. Not improbably
the latter quality is intended by the term in
Is. xviii. 2, which is rendered " peeled " (A. V.)
or "smooth" (R. V.), but which rather meani
"fine-looking." Their appearance led to their
being selected as attendants in royal households
(Jer. xxxviii. 7). The Ethiopians are on one occa-
sion coupled with the Arabians, as occupying the
opposite shores of the Red Sea (2 Ch. xxi. 16) ;
hat elsewhere they are connected with African
nations, particularly Egypt (Ps. lxviii. 31 ; If.
«. 3, 4, xliii. 3, xlv. 14), Phut (Jer. xlvi. 9),
Lab and Lad (Ezek. xxx. 5), and the Snkkiims
(2 Ch. iii. 3). They were divided into various
tribes, of which the Sabaeans were the most
pswerful. [Skba : SmcKim.]
The history of Ethiopia is closely interwoven
with that of Egypt. The two countries were
wt infrequently united under the rule of the
•sue sovereign. Pepi I. of the 6th dynasty
overran that part of Cush or Ethiopia — the To-
Keas of the Egyptian monuments— which lay
between the First and Second Cataracts, but its
complete conquest was reserved for the kings
of Ike 12th dynasty. Amen-em-hat I. subdued
l»e Wswai, who extended from the First Cataract
t* Korosko ; his son Usirtesen I. subjugated the
ETHIOPIAN EUNUCH 1005
negro tribes who spread southward to Wadi
Helta, and Usirtesen III. fixed the frontier of
Egypt at Semneh, where he built a fortress on
either side of the river. Nubia was at this
time well-watered and fertile, the present First
Cataract not having as yet been formed, and the
break in the navigation of the Nile being ap-
parently at Silsileh. The negro tribes extended
much further nort h than subsequently ; the
area occupied by the Nubians being compara-
tively limited. During the period of the
Hyksos, Ethiopia was lost to Egypt, but Ahmes,
the founder of the 18th dynasty, who had mar-
ried a Nubian queen, set about the work of
reconquering it. His successor, Amenophis I.,
completed the work : Ethiopia became an
Egyptian province as far south as Sennaar ;
colonies of fellahin were planted in different
parts of it, and the eldest son of the Egyptian
monarch took from henceforth the title of " the
prince of Cush." In the time of Ramies II., the
Sesostris of the Greeks (of the 19th dynasty), the
great temple of Abu-Simbel was excavated in the
rock ; and though from time to time expeditions
were required against the restless tribes of the
Soudan, the country remained in the possession
of Egypt until after the fall of the 20th dynasty,
when one of the high-priests of Amun of
Thebes established nn independent kingdom at
Napata. For some centuries this kingdom
remained in all respects Egyptian, language,
name«, and customs being alike those of Egypt ;
and it was only gradually that the foreign culture
was replaced by one of native growth. More
than once the kings of Napata overran Egypt,
and finally under Sabako, the So of 2 K. xvii. 4,
they made themselves masters of the whole
country and founded the 25th dynasty. Ta-
harka or Tirhakah (2 K. xix. 9) was driven
back into Ethiopia by the Assyrian forces of
Esar-haddon, B.c. 672 ; and though he made more
than one attempt to recover Egypt daring the
Assyrian occupation of it, his efforts were un-
successful. After the reign of his successor, Nut
Mi-Amun, Ethiopia was divided into two
kingdoms — that of To-Kens, with its capital at
Kipkip; and that of Napata, which at one time
included Berua or Meroe', and the country of
Alo, which extended from the White and Blue
Nile to the plain of Sennaar. Ethiopia now
disappears from history, and is hardly heard of
again until the campaign of Cambyses ; but the
Persian rule did not take any root there, nor
did the influence of the Ptolemies generally
extend beyond Northern Ethiopia. Shortly
before our Saviour's birth, a native dynasty of
females, holding the official title of Candace
(Plin. vi. 35), held sway in Ethiopia, and even
resisted the advance of the Roman arms. One
of these is the queen noticed in Acts viii. 27.
[Cahdace.] [A. H. S.]
ETHIOPIAN 0E>13; AiflfouVj Aethiops).
Properly "Cushite" (Jer. xiii. 23); used of
Zerah (2 Ch. xiv. 9 [8]), and Ebedmelech (Jer.
xxxviii. 7, 10, 12; xxxix. 16). [W. A. W.]
ETHIOPIAN EUNUCH. Acts viii. 26 sq.
gives the history of the baptism by Philip the
Evangelist of the Ethiopian chamberlain of
Candace. He had gone ns a proselyte to Jeru-
salem to attend the great Feast ; he had heard
Digitized by
Google
1006 ETHIOPIAN WOMAN
probably while at Jerusalem of the Death,
Resurrection, and Ascension of Jesus Christ, of
the claims put forth in His Name, and of those
who were known as His followers. When Philip
overtook him he was reading the Messianic
passage, Is. liii., and possibly debating with
himself how far the Prophet's words might be
said to hare found their fulfilment in Christ.
The explanation was given which induced him
to embrace the Gospel. Eusebius does not
hesitate to attribute to this Ethiopian — whom
he calls Indich — the first preaching of the
Gospel to his own people, and the founding of
Christianity among them (see Diet, of Christ.
Biog., ». v." Ethiopian Church "). [F.]
ETHIOPIAN WOMAN (JW? ; A/««o-
iW> ; Aithiopissii), Zipporah, the wife of
Moses, is to described in Num. xii. 1. She is
elsewhere said to hare been the daughter of
a Midianite, and in consequence of this Ewald
and others have supposed that the allusion is to
another wife whom Moses married after the
death of Zipporah. [W. A. W.]
ETHIOPIANS (W3, Is. xx. 4 ; Jcr. xlvi. 9,
'C^S ; Aielawts ; Act/iiopia, Acthiopes). Properly
"Cush" or "Ethiopia" in two passages (Is. xx. 4;
Jer. xlri. 9). Elsewhere " Cnshites," or in-
habitants of Ethiopia (2 Ch. xii. 3, xir. 12 [11],
13 [121, xvi. 8, xxi. 16; Dan. xi. 43; Amos
ix. 7 ; Zeph. ii. 12 ; Acts riii. 27). [Ethiopia.]
[W. A. W.]
ETH'MA (B. 'Oofii, A. Noojid"; Sobei),
1 Esd. ix. 153 (see Speaker'* Comm. in loco). It
occupies the place of Nkuo in the parallel list of
Ezra x. 43.
ETH'NAN (P t nN, <?) = gift; B. Stnn&r, A.
'ZvOa&l ; Ethnan), a descendant of Judah ; one
of the sons of Helah the wife of Ashur, "the
father of Tekoa" (1 Ch. ir. 7).
ETHNABCH (2 Cor. xi. 32). [Governor,
No. 11.]
ETH'NI 03nK;(?)=mKm/Sceni; "AScW;
Athanai), a Gershonite Levite, one of the fore-
fathers of Asaph the singer (1 Ch. ri. 41 ; Heb.
r. 26).
EUBUXU3 (ECflouAoi), a Christian at
Rome mentioned by St. Paul (2 Tim. ir. 21).
EUER'GETES (EtcfryeVijt, a benefactor;
Ptolemacua Eucrgetes), a common surname and
title of honour (cp. Plato, Gorg. p. 506 C, and
Stallbaum in loco) in Greek states, conferred at
Athens by a public vote (Dem. p. 475X and so
notorious as to pass into a proverb (Luke xxii. 5).
The title was borne by two of the Ptolemies:
Ptol. III., Euergetes I., B.C. 247-222, and Ptol.
VII., Eucrgetes II., n.c. 146-117. The Euergetes
mentioned in the prologue to Ecclesiasticus has
been identified with each of these, according
to the different news taken of the history of
the book. [Eoclesi ASTicus ; Jesus son of
Sirach.] [B. F. W.]
EU'MENES II. (EiV>">»), king of Pergamus,
succeeded his father Attalus I., u.c. 197, from
whom he inherited the favour and alliance of
the Romans. In the war with Antiochus the
EUNUCH
Great he rendered the most important services
to the growing republic ; and at the battle of
Magnesia (B.C. 190) commanded his contingent
in person (Just. xxxi. 8, 5 ; App. Syr. 'H\
After pence was made (B.C. 189) he repaired
to Rome to claim the reward of hi* loyalty;
and the Senate conferred on him the province
of Mysia, Lydia, lonin (with some exceptions),
Phrygin, Lycaonia, and the Thracian Chersonese
(App. Syr. 44; Polyb. xxii. 7 ; Liv. xxxviii. 56).
His influence at Rome continued uninterrupted
till the war with Perseus, with whom he is said
to hare entertained treasonable correspondence
(Liv. xxir. 24, 25); and after the defeat of
Perseus (u.c. 167) he was looked upon with
suspicion, which he vainly endeavoured to re-
move. The exact date of his death is not men-
tioned, but it must hare taken place in b.c 159.
The large accession of territory which wot
granted to Eumenes from the former dominion,
of Antiochus is mentioned 1 Mace viii. 8, bat
the present reading of the Greek and Latin texts
offers insuperable difficulties. " The Romans
gave him," it is said, " the country of India ml
Media, and Lydia and parts of his (Antiochus')
fairest countries (oa-6 ri>* koAA. x»P««' a&ToJ)."
Various conjectures have been proposed to re-
move these obvious errors ; but though it msy
be reasonably allowed that Mysia may have
stood originally for Media ('DD for *TC,
Michaelis), it is not equally easy to explain the
origin of X"oa" T V 'lyiudir. It is barely
possible that "Iv&ikIiv may have been substituted
for Iwmjir after Mntlav was already established
in the text. Other explanations are given by
Grimm (Exeg. Handb.) and Wernsdorf (De fdt
Libr. Marc. p. 50 sq.), but they have little
plausibility (see Speaker's Comm., Bissell, and
ZSckler, in loco). [B. F. W.] [F.]
EUNATAN (B. 'Es-oordV, A. 'Z\ra04» ; En-
nagam), 1 Esd. viii. 44, possibly a misprint for
Ennatao, the reading of the Genevan Version
and of the Bishops' Bible (see D. B. Amer. ed.).
[Elnathan.] * [F.]
EUNI'CE (EtVinf ; Eunice), mother of
Timothy (2 Tim. i. 5), a woman of unfeigned
faith, and, as we learn from Acts xvi. 1, a Jewess
and a Christian (sn<rr<). That her husband w«
a Greek is probably mentioned to expUi"
why Timothy had not been circumcised (see
Timothy). 'The influence of the traditien of
her widowhood appears in the addition of x^f 5
(widow) in one cursive MS. [E. R- B.]
EUNUCH (DnD; ewoSxot, tUaJfat ; tf^I"!
variously rendered in the A. V. " eunocb,
" officer," and " chamberlain," apparently a*
though the word intended a class of attendants
who were not always mutilated).* The origin- -1 '
Hebrew word (root Arab. Wy***i impotent esse
ad venerem, Gescn. s. o.) clearly implies the
incapacity which mutilation involves, and per-
haps includes all the classes mentioned in Matt,
xix. 12, not signifying, as the Greek tiroix 05 *
an office merely. The law, Deut. xxiii. 1 ( C P-
Lev. xxii. 24), is repugnant to thus treating any
Israelite ; and Samuel, when describing the
arbitrary power of the future king (1 Sam. riii.
• So Whlston, Jeaepb. Ant. x. 10, } 2, note.
Digitized by
Google
EUNUCH
15, marg.), mentions " his eunuchs,'' but does
not say that he would make " their sons " such.
This, if we compare 2 K. xx. 18, Is. xxxix. 7,
possibly implies that these persons would be
foreigners ; cp. Jer. xxxviii. 7. It was a bar-
barous custom of the East thus to treat captives
(Herod, iii. 49, vi. 32), not only of tender age
(when a non-development of beard and feminine
mould of limbs and modulation of voice ensued),
bat, ic should seem, when past puberty, which
there occurs at an early age. Physiological
considerations lead to the supposition that in
the latter case a remnant of animal feeling is
left ; which may explain Ecclns. xx. 4, xxx. 20
(<p. Juv. vi. 366, and Mart. vi. 67 ; Philostr.
Apoti. Tyan. i. 37 ; Ter. Eun. iv. 3, 24), where
a seioal function, though fruitless, is implied.
Busbequius (Ep. iii. 122, Ox. 1660) seems to
ascribe the absence or presence of this to the
total or partial character of the mutilation ;
but modern surgery would rather assign the
earlier or later period of the operation as the
real explanation. It Is total among modern
Tares (Toarnefort, ii. 8, 9, 10, ed. Par. 1717,
EUNUCH
1007
of EnnncliA. (NimrotitL)
taHlft h flew de ventre); a precaution arising
from mixed ignorance and jealousy. The
"officer" Potiphar (Gen. xxxvii. 30 ; xxxix. 1,
marg. eunuch, and LXX. oviaom, (byovxos)
w«s an Egyptian, was married, and was the
"captain of the guard"; and in the Assyrian
nwoaments an eunuch often appears, sometimes
armed and in a warlike capacity, or as a scribe,
sating the number of heads and amount of spoil,
a receiving the prisoners, and even as officiating
i» religious ceremonies (Layard, Nineveh, ii.
324-6, 334). A bloated beardless face and
double chin is there their conventional type.
Coardin {Voyages en Perse, ii. 283, ed. Amsterd.
I'll) speaks of ennnchs having a harem of
their own. If Potiphar had become snch by
"ptration for disease, by accident, or even by
■slice, snch a marriage seems, therefore, ac-
owding to Eastern notions, supposable* (see
* The Jewish tradition Is that Joseph was made a
••Mch on his first Introduction to Egypt J and yet
U» iccaisilon of Potiphar 's wife, his marriage and
*• Una of his children, arc related subsequently
*t*o» any explanation. See Targom PKndqJon.
Grotius on Deut. xxiii. 1 ; cp. Burckhardt,
IVav. in Ami), i. 290). Nor is it wholly repug-
nant to that barbarous social standard to thins
that the prospect of rank, honour, and royal
confidence might even induce parents to thus
treat their children at a later age, if they
showed an aptness for such preferment. Tin-
characteristics as regards beard, voice, &c,
might then perhaps be modified, or might gra-
dually follow. The Poti-pherah of Gen. xli. 50,
whose daughter Joseph married, was " priest of
On," and no doubt a different person.
The origination of the practice is ascribed to
Semiramis (Amm. Marccll. xiv. 6), and is no
doubt as early, or nearly so, as Eastern despotism
itself. Their incapacity, as in the case of mute-,
is the ground of reliance upon them (Olarkc'f.
Travels, part ii. § 1, 13; Busbeq. Ep. i. p. 33).
By reason of the mysterious distance at which
the sovereign sought to keep his subjects (Herod,
i. 99; cp. Esth. iv. 11), and of the malignant
jealousy fostered by the debased relation of the
sexes, such wretches, detached from social
interests and hopes of issue (especially when, as
commonly, and - ns
amongst the Jews,
foreigners), the natu-
ral slaves of either
sex (Ksth. iv. 5), and
having no prospect
in rebellion save the
change of masters,
were the fittest props
of a government rest-
ing on a servile re-
lation, the most com-
plete tfryava intyvxa
of its despotism or
its lust, the surest
(but see Eath. ii. 21)
guardians (Xenoph.
Cyrop. vii. 5, § Gi>
sq. ; Herod, viii. lOo)
of the monarch's per-
son, and the sole con-
fidential witnesses of
his unguarded or
undignified moments. Hence they have in all
ages frequently risen to high offices of trust.
Thus the "chief" of the cup-bearers and of
the cooks of Pharaoh were eunuchs, as being
near his person, though their inferior agents
need not have been so (Gen. xl. 1, 7, LXX.).
The complete assimilation of the kingdom of
Israel, and latterly d of Judah, to the neigh-
bouring models of despotism, is traceable in the
rank and prominence of eunuchs (2 K. viii. 6,
on Gen. xxxix. 1, xli. 50, and the details given In
xxxix. 13.
« Wilkinson (Inc. Egypt. II. 611 denies the use of
eunuchs in Egypt- Herodotus, Indeed (11. »2), conBrms
bis statement as regards Egyptian monogamy; but if
this as a rule applied to the kings, they seemed at any
rate to have allowed themselves concubines (ik. 181).
From the general beardless character of Egyptian heads
it Is not easy to pronounce whether any eunuchs appear
in the sculptures or not.
« 1 Ch. xxvili. 1 (LXX.) Is remarkable as ascribing
eunuchs to the period of Davtd, nor can It be doubted
that Solomon's polygamy made them a necessary conse-
quence; but In this state they do not seem to hate
played an Important part at this period.
Digitized by
Google
1008
EUNUCH
is. 32, xxiii. 11, xxr. 19; It. lvi. 3, 4; Jer.
xxix. 2, xxxiv. 19, xxxviii. 7, xli. 16, Hi. 25).
They mostly appear in one of two relations,
either military as " set over the men of war,"
greater trustworthiness possibly counterbalanc-
ing inferior courage and military vigour, or
associated, as we mostly recognise them, with
women and children. It is possible but uncertain
that Daniel and his companions were thus treated,
in fulfilment of 2 K. xx. 17, 18 ; Is. xxxix. 7 ; cp.
Dan. i. 3, 7. The court of Herod of course had
its eunuchs (Joseph. Ant. xvi. 8, § 1 ; xv. 7, § 4),
as had also that of Queen Candace (Acts viii.
27). We find the Assyrian Rab-Saris, or chief
eunuch (2 K. xviii. 17), employed together with
other high officials as ambassador. Similarly,
in the details of the travels of an embassy sent
by the Duke of Holstein (p. 136), we find an
eunuch mentioned as sent on occasion of a state-
marriage to negotiate, and of another (p. 273)
who was the Mehetcr, or chamberlain of Shah
Abbas, who was always near his person, and had
his ear (cp. Chardin, iii. 37), and of another,
originally a Georgian prisoner, who officiated as
supreme judge. Fryer {Travels in India and
Persia, 1698) and Chardin (ii. 283) describe
them as being the base and ready tools of
licentiousness, as tyrannical in humour, and
pertinacious in the authority which they exer-
cise ; Clarke {Travels in Europe, &c„ part ii. § 1,
p. 22), as eluded and ridiculed by those whom
it is their office to guard. A great number of
them accompany the Shah and his ladies when
hunting, and no one is allowed, on pain of
death, to come within two leagues of the field,
unless the king sends an eunuch for him. So
eunuchs ran before the closed arabahs of the
sultanas when abroad, crying out to all to keep
at a distance. This illustrates Esth. i. 10, 12,
15, 16 ; ii. 3, 8, 14. The moral tendency of this
sad condition is well known to be the repression
of courage, gentleness, shame, and remorse, the
development of malice, and often of melancholy,
and a disposition to suicide. The favourable
description of them in Xenophon (/. c) is over-
charged, or at least is not confirmed by modem
observation. They are not more liable to
disease than others, unless of such as often
follows the foul vices of which they are the
tools. Michaelis (ii. 180) regards them as the
proper consequences of the gross polygamy of
the Kast, although his further remark that they
tend to balance the sexual disparity which such
monopoly of womex causes is less just, since the
countries despoiled of their women for the one
purpose are not commonly those which furnish
male children for the other.
In the three classes mentioned in Matt. xix.
12 the first is to be ranked with other examples
of defective organization; the last, if taken
literally, as it is said to have been personally
exemplified in Origen (Euseb. Eccl. Hist. vi. 8),
is an instance of human ways and means of
ascetic devotion being valued by the Jews above
revealed precept (see SchBttgen, Hor. Heb. i.
159). But a figurative sense of tinouxos (cp.
1 Cor. vii. 32, 34) is also possible.
The operation itself, especially in infancy, is
not more dangerous than an ordinary amputa-
tion. Chardin (ii. 285) indeed says that only one
in four survives ; and Clot Bey, chief physician
of the Pasha, states that two-thirds die ; but
EUPHBATES
Burckhardt affirms (Nub. p. 329) that the opera-
tion is only fatal in about two out of a hundred
cases.
In the A. V. of Esther the word "chamber-
lain" (marg. cimuch) is the constant render-
ing of D'-JD ; and as the word also occurs in
Acts xii. 20 and Rom. xvi. 23, where the original
expressions are very different, some caution is
required. In Acts xii. 20 roe eVl rov tcoirirot
toD /9ao~iAco>r may mean a "chamberlain"
merely. Such were persons of public influence,
ns we learn from a Greek inscription, preserved
in Walpole's Turkey (ii. 559), in honour of P.
Aelius Alcibiades, "chamberlain of the em-
peror " ((VI icoiTttwoj Ze/9.), the epithets in
which exactly suggest the kind of patronage
expressed. In Rom. xvi. 23 the word iwfapatm
is the one commonly rendered " steward " (t.<j.
Matt. xx. 8 ; Luke viii. 3), and means the one
to whom the care of the city was committed.
See Salden, Otia Theol. de Eunuchis; Keim,
HWB. s. n. ' Verschnittene.* [H. H.]
EUNUCH. ETHIOPIAN. [Ethiopus
Eunuch.]
EUO'DIA, R. V. (Euotta; Uxtus reoepUt,
wrongly EiaiSta ; Evhodia, Amiat.), a Christian
woman of Philippi, named with Syntyche (Phil.
iv. 2). St. Paul beseeches the two to be of one
mind in the Lord. They are described (r. 3) as
having laboured with Paul in the Gospel, an
important testimony to the work of women in
the primitive Church. The A. V. erroneously
takes EioStcw as a man's name from a nom.
EfoSfcu (see Lightfoot's note in loco). [E. R. B.]
EUPHRATES (1Y1B ; Kl^pirns ; Eu-
phrates) is a word of Accadian or pre-Semitic
origin. The early inhabitants of Chaldaea called
the river the Pura-nunu, " the great water," or
Pura, " the water," simply. From this, the later
Semitic population formed Purata by attaching
the Semitic suffix of the feminine to the Acca-
dian word. The Greek Euphrates is a popular
modification of the Persian Ufratu, where the
first syllable represents the adventitious vowel
produced by the omission of the first vowel of
the original name, and the consequent coalescence
of two initial consonants. In the Babylonian
inscriptions, the Euphrates/is often called "the
river of Sippara." It was aiso termed " Sakhan,"
for which the Semitic equivalent seems to hare
been Gikhinnu or Gihon. It is most frequently
denoted in the Bible by the terra "injn, Aon-
nahar, i.e. " the river," the river of Asia, in
grand contrast to the short-lived torrents of
Palestine (see a list of the occurrences of this
term in Stanley, S. and P., App. § 34).
The Euphrates is the largest, the longest, and
by far the most important of the riven of
Western Asia. It rises from two chief sources
in the Armenian mountains, one of them at
Domli, 25 miles N.E. of Erzeroum, and little
| more than a degree from the Black Sea; the
I other on the northern slope of the mountain
I range called Ala-Tagh, near the village of
1 Diyadin, and not far from Mount Ararat. The
former, or Northern Euphrates, has the name
; Frit from the first, but is known also as the
' Kara-Su (Black River) ; the latter, or Southern
| Euphrates, is not called the Frit but the Murad
Digitized by
Google
EUPHRATES
Ckii, yet it is in reality the main river. Both
branches flow at first towards the west or south-
rat, passing through the wildest mountain-
districts of Armenia ; they meet at Kebban-
Main, nearly in long. 39° E. from Greenwich,
hiring run respectively 400 and 270 miles.
Here the stream formed by their combined
waters is 120 yards wide, rapid, and very deep ;
it now flows nearly southward, but in a tortuous
worse, forcing a way through the ranges of
Turns and anti-Taurus, and still seeming as if
EUPHRATES
1009
it would empty itself into the Mediterranean ;
but prevented from so doing by the longitudinal
ranges of Amanus and Lebanon, which here run
parallel to the Syrian coast, and at no great
distance from it, the river at last desists from
its endeavour, and in about lat. 36° turns to-
wards the south-east, and proceeds in this
direction for above 1,000 miles to its embouchure
in the Persian Gulf. The last part of its course,
from Hit downwards, is through a low, flat, and
alluvial plain, over which it has a tendency to
fnad and stagnate ; above Hit, and from thoace
to Smeisot (Samosata), the country alon^ its
tab is for the most part ope:i but hilly ; north
«f ftiiwisot, the stream runs in a narrow
'sll«y among high mountains, and is interrupted
bj numerous rapids. The entire course is cal-
olsted at 1780 miles, nearlv 650 more than
"»t of the Tigris, and only 200 short of that of
•j* Indus ; and of this distance more than twc-
»W» (1200 miles) is navigable for boats, and
^a, *» the expedition of Col. Chesney proved,
m mall steamers. The width of the river is
BIBLE DICT.— VOL. I.
greatest at the distance of 700 or 800 miles
from its mouth — that is to say, from itsj unction.
with the Khabour to the village of Werai. It
there averages 400 yards, while lower down,
from Werdi to Lamlun, it continually decreases,
until at the last-named place its width is not
more than 120 yards, its depth having at the
same time diminished from an average of 18
to one of 12 feet. The causes of this singular
phenomenon are the entire lack of tributaries
below the Khabour, and the employment of the
water in irrigation. The river has also in this
3 T
Digitized by
Google
1010
EUPHRATES
EUPHRATES
part of its course the tendency already noted, to
run off and waste itself in vast marshes, which
every year more and more cover the alluvial
tract west and south of the stream. From this
cause its lower course is continually varying, and
it is doubted whether at present, except in the
season of the inundation, any portion of the
.Euphrates water is poured into the Shat-el-Arab.
The annual inundation of the Euphrates is
caused by the melting of the snows in the
Armenian highlands. It occurs in the month
-of May. The rise of the Tigris is earlier, since
it drains the southern flank of the great Armenian
chain. The Tigris scarcely ever overflows [HlD-
DEKEL], but the Euphrates inundates large
tracts on both sides of its course from Hit
•downwards. The great hydraulic works ascribed
to Nebuchadnezzar (Abyden. Fr. 8) had for
their object to control the inundation by turn-
ing the waters through sluices into canals
prepared for them, and distributing them in
channels over a wide extent of country.
The Euphrates has at all times been of some
importance as furnishing a line of traffic between
the East and the West. Herodotus speaks of
persons, probably merchants, using it regularly
on their passage from the Mediterranean to
Babylon (Herod, i. 185). He also describes the
boats which were in use upon the stream (i. 194)
— and mentions that their principal freight was
wine, which was furnished by Armenia. Boats
such as he describes, of wicker-work and coated
with bitumen, or sometimes covered with skins,
still abound on the river. Alexander appears to
have brought to Babylon by the Euphrates route
vessels of some considerable size, which he had
had made in Cyprus and Phoenicia. They were
so constructed that they could be taken to pieces,
and were thus carried piecemeal to Thapsncus,
where they were put together and launched
(Aristobul. ap. Strab. xvi. 1, § 11). The dis-
advantage of the route was the difficulty of
conveying return cargoes against the current.
According to Herodotus, the boats which de-
scended the river were broken to pieces and sold
at Babylon, and the owners returned on foot
to Armenia, taking with them only the skins
(i. 194). Aristobulus however related (pp.
Strab. xvi. 3, § 3) that the Gerrhaeans ascended
the river in their rafts not only to Babylon, but
to Thapsacus, whence they carried their wares
on foot in all directions. The spices and other
products of Arabia formed their principal mer-
chandise. On the whole there are sufficient
grounds for believing that throughout the Baby-
lonian and Persian periods this route was made
use of by the merchants of various nations, and
that by it the east and west continually inter-
changed their most important products (see
Layard's Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 536-37).
The Euphrates is first mentioned in Scripture
as one of the four rivers of Eden (Gen. ii. 14).
Its celebrity is there sufficiently indicated by
the absence of any explanatory phrase, such as
accompanies the names of the other streams.
We next hear of it in the covenant made with
Abraham (Gen. xv. 18), where the whole country
from "the great river, the river Euphrates," to
the river of Egypt, is promise! to the chosen
race. In Deuteronomy and Joshua we find that
this promise was borne in mind at the time of
the settlement in Canaan (Deut. i. 7, xi. 24 ;
Josh. i. 4) ; and from an important passage is
the First Book of Chronicles it appears that the
tribe of Reuben did actually extend itself to the
Euphrates in the times anterior to Saul (I Ch.
v. 9). Here they came in contact with the
Hagarites, who appear upon the middle Eu-
phrates in the Assyrian inscriptions of the later
empire. It is David, however, who seems for the
first time to have entered on the full enjoyment
of the promise, by the victories which he gained
over Hadadezer, king of Zobah, and his allies,
the Syrians of Damascus (2 Sam. viii. 3-8;
1 Ch. xviii. 3). The object of his expedition wis
" to recover his border," and " to stablish his
dominion by the river Euphrates ; " and in this
object he appears to have been altogether suc-
cessful; insomuch that Solomon, his son, who
was uot a man of war, but only inherited bis
father's dominions, is said to have " reigned over
all kingdoms from the river (i.e. the Euphrates)
unto the land of the Philistines and unto the
border of Egypt " (1 K. iv. 21 ; cp. 2 Ch. it.
26). Thus during the reigns of David ami
Solomon the dominion of Israel actually attained
to the full extent both ways of the original
promise, the Euphrates forming the boundary
of their empire to the north-east, and the river
of Egypt (torrens Ac/ypti) to the south-west.
This wide-spread dominion was lost before the
disruption of the empire under Rehoboam ; and
no more is heard in Scripture of the Euphrates
until the expedition of Necho against the Baby-
lonians in the reign of Josiah. The "great
river " had meanwhile served for some time »
a boundary between Assyria and the country of
the Hittites [sec Assyria], but had been re-
peatedly crossed bv the armies of the Xinevite
kings, who gradually established their sway over
the countries upon its right bank. The crossing
of the rivev was always difficult ; and at the
point where certain natural facilities fixed the
ordinary passage, the strong fort of Carchemish
had been built, probably in very early times, to
command the position. [Carchemish.] Hence,
when Necho determined to attempt the perma-
nent conquest of Syria, his march was directed
upon "Carchemish by Euphrates" (2 Ch. xirr.
20), which he captured and held, thus extending
the dominion of Egypt to the Euphrates, and
renewing the old glories of the Ramesside kings-
His triumph, however, was short-lived. Three
years afterwards the Babylonians — who bad
inherited the Assyrian dominion in these parts
— made an expedition under Nebuchadnezzar
against Necho, defeated his army, " which was
by the river Euphrates in Carchemish" (J«-
xlvi. 2), and recovered all Syria and Palestine.
Then " the king of Egypt came no more out of
his land, for the king of Babylon had taken
from the river of Egypt unto the river Euphrates
all that pertained to the king of Egypt" (2 K.
xxiv. 7).
These are the chief events which Scripture
distinctly connects with the " great river.
It is probably included among the "rivers of
Babylon," by the side of which the Jewish
captives "remembered Zion" and "wept
(Ps. exxxvii. 1); and no doubt is glanced at in
the threats of Jeremiah against the Chaldaean
" waters " and " springs," upon which there »
to be a "drought," that shall "dry them np
(Jer. 1. 38 ; li. 26). The fulfilment of these
Digitized by
Google
EUPOLEMUS
prophecies has been noticed under the head of
Ihaldaea. The river still brings down as
cocch water as of old, but the precious element
U wasted by the neglect of man ; the various
watercourses along which it was in former
times conveyed are dry ; the same channel had
shrunk; and the water stagnates in unwhole-
some marshes.
la ancient times the Euphrates fell into the
*?i without first joining the Tigris, as is now
the case. When Sennacherib pursued the sub-
jects of Merodach-Baladan to the mouth of the
Eolaeos, he had, after sailing out of the Eu-
phrates, quite a long voyage by sea. According
to Pliny (i»*. B. vi. 31), the city of Charax,
the present Mohammerah, which was built by
Alexander the Great, was originally 10 stades
distant from the sea ; in the age of Juba II.
50 miles, and in his own time 120 miles. Loft us
(Chaldaea and Sttsiana, p. 282) states that the
<lelta at the mouths of the Euphrates and Tigris
has increased since the beginning of the Christian
era, at the rate of a mile in about seventy years.
The ancient city of Eridu, now Abu-Shahrein,
when first founded stood upon the coast. Be-
tween the actual mouth of the Euphrates and
the sea, however, lay extensive " salt-marshes,"
called Marratim in Babylonian, the Merathaim
of Jer. 1. 21. It was in these marshes that
ISit-Y agios, the ancestral capital of Merodach-
Baladan, was situated, and it was here that
we 6m hear of his subjects, the Kaldi or
Chnktaesas.
See, for a general account of the Euphrates, Sir
0. Chesney's Euphrates Expedition, vol. i. ; and
for the lower course of the stream, cp. Loftus's
OMaea and Susiarta. See also Rawlinson's
Uendohu, vol. i. Essay ix., and Layard's Xinereh
<nd Babylon, chs. xxi. and xxii. [A. H. S.]
EU-POLEMUS (Euwi\*fLos\ the "son of
John, the son of Accos " ('Auois- ; cp. Neh. iii.
4, 21, Asc.), one of the envoys sent to Rome by
Judas Maccabaeus, c. B.c. 161 (1 Mace viii. 17 ;
2 Mace. iv. 11 ; Joseph. Ant. iii. 10, § 6). He
ins been identified with the historian of the
siae name (Euseb. Pratp. Et. ix. 17 sq.) ; but it
is by no means clear that the historian was of
Jewish descent (Joseph, c. Ap. i. 23 ; yet cp.
Hieroa. de Yir. Itlustr. p. 38). [B. F. W.j
EUBO-CLYDON; R. V. Ecnt-AQCttO (Eftoo-
ditwv ; KA. T.vpaKv\a>v ; Euro-aquilo), the
-woe given (Act* xxvii. 14) to the gale of
"itid which off the south coast of Crete seized
the ship in which St. Paul was ultimately
•'recked on the coast of Malta. The circuro-
'laneej of this gale are described with much
I«rticularity ; nnd they admit of abundant
illustration from the experience of modern sea-
>m» in the Levant. In the first place it came
kwn from the island (hot' out^i), and there-
fore must have blown, more or less, from the
""rthward, since the ship was sailing along the
tooth coast, not far from Mount Ida, and on the
*»» from Fair Hayeks toward Phoenice.
S* Captain Spratt, R.N, after leaving Fair
Havens with a light southerly wind, fell in
*uh * a strong northerly breeze, blowing direct
twsa Mount Ida" (Smith, Voy. and Shipwreck
«f&JW,1856, pp. 97,245). Next, the wind
8 »«ribed as being like a typhoon or whirlwind
EUTYCHUS
1011
(jV(poiVM&t, A. V. and R. V. "tempestuous");
and the same authority speaks of such gales
in the Levant as being generally " accompanied
by terrific gusts and squalls from those high
mountains " (Conybeare and Howson, Life and
Epistles of St. Paul, 1856, ii. 401). It is
also observable that the change of wind in
the voyage before us (xxvii. 13, 14) is exactly
what might have been expected ; for Captain
J. Stewart, R.N., observes, in his remarks on
the Archipelago, that "it is always safe to
anchor under the lee of an island with a
northerly wind, as it dies away gradually,
but it would be extremely dangerous with
southerly winds, as they almost invariably shift
to a violent northerly wind " (Purdy's Sailing
directory, pt. ii. p. 61). The long duration of
the gale (" the fourteenth night," v. 27), the
over-clouded state of the sky (" neither sun nor
stars appearing," v. 20), and even the heavy rain
which concluded the storm (roy favor, xxviii. 2),
could easily be matched with parallel instances
in modern times (see Voy. and Shipwreck, p. 144;
Life and Epp. ii. 412). We have seen that the
wind was more or less northerly. The context
gives ns full materials for determining its direc-
tion with great exactitude. The vessel was
driven from the coast of Crete to Clauda
(xxvii. 16), and apprehension was felt that she
would be driven into the African Syrtis (c. 17).
Combining these two circumstances with the
fact that she was less than half-way from Fair
Havens to Phoenice when the storm began
(c. 14), we come to the conclusion that it came
from the N.E. or E.N.E. This is quite in har-
mony with the natural sense of EiipaxiXuy
{Euro-aquilo, Vulg.), which is found in some of
the best MSS., and has been adopted in R. V. ;
but we are disposed to adhere to the Received
Text, more especially as it is the more difficult
reading, and the phrase used by St. Luke (i
KaXoiptvos E&ookAooW) seems to point to some
peculiar word in use among the sailors. Dean
Alford thinks that the true name of the wind
was (iipaxiXmy, but that the Greek sailors, not
understanding the Latin termination, corrupted
the word into tipoK\iitty, and that so St. Luke
wrote it. [Winds.] [J. S. H.] [W.]
EUTYCHUS (Etrvxos; Eutychus; Actsxx.
9-11). Sitting in the window of the upper room
where St. Paul was preaching, he was overcome
by sleep and fell to the ground. He was taken
np dead. But after St. Paul had embraced him
(like Elisha, 2 E. iv. 34) he said (R. V.), "Make
ye no ado; for his life is in him." St. Paul then
returned to the upper room, and the story closes
with the words, " they brought the lad alive."
St. Paul's words, " his life is in him," appear to
imply that he had not really expired. But
if we accept literally the distinct statement that
he was taken up dead, we must suppose that
St. Paul means " his life is now iu him," as a
consequence of what had been done, without
implying that it had continued to be in him
throughout. It is difficult to interpret the
apparent contradiction without unduly straining
one of the two phrases. It is clear, however,
that the author intends to relate a notable
miracle, either of healing or of raising from the
dead, otherwise the whole story would be with-
out point. [E. R. B.]
3 T 2
Digitized by
Google
1012
EVANGELIST
EVANGELIST («6«yyeX«prtjf ; etange-
lista: Acts xxi. 8; Eph. iv. 11 ; 2 Tim. iv. ft).
The constitution of the apostolic Church in-
cluded a body of men known as Evangelists.
The abseuce of any detailed account of the
organization and practical working of the Church
in the 1st century leaves us in some uncertainty
ns to their functions and position. The meaning
of the name, " the publishers of glad tidings."
tieems common to the work of the Christian
ministry generally, yet in Ephes. iv. 11 the
liayytkurral appear on the one hand after the
&-n6aro\ot and Trpo<pTiTai, and on the other
before the wolfupts and SiSdaicaXoi. Assuming
that the Apostles here, whether limited to the
twelve or not, are those who were looked upon
as the special delegates and representatives of
Christ, and therefore higher than all others in
their authority, and that the Prophets were
men speaking under the immediate impulse of
the Spirit words that were mighty in their
effects on men's hearts and consciences, it would
follow that the Evangelists had a function
subordinate to theirs ; yet more conspicuous
and so far higher than that of the pastors who
watched over a Church that had been founded,
and of the teachers who carried on the work of
systematic instruction. This passage would
accordingly lead us to think of them as standing
between the two other groups — sent forth as
missionary preachers of the Gospel by the first,
and as such preparing the way for the labours
of the second. 1'he same inference would seem
to follow from the occurrence of the word as
applied to Philip in Acts xxi. 8. He had been
one of those who had gone everywhere, cvayyc&i-
(ifuvot rb» KAyor (Acts viii. 4), now in one
city, now in another (viii. 40) ; but he has not
the power and authority of an Apostle (see the
whole narrative in ch. viii.), he does not speak
as a prophet himself, though the gift of prophecy
belongs to his four daughters (xxi. 9), and exer-
cises apparently no pastoral superintendence over
any portion of the flock. The omission of Evange-
lists in the text of 1 Cor. xii. may be explained
on the hypothesis that the nature of St. Paul's
argument led him there to speak of the settled
organization of a given local church, which
of course presupposed the work of the missionary
preacher as alrcadv accomplished, while the
train of thought in Ephes. iv. 11 brought before
his mind all who were in any way instrumental
in building up the Church universal. It follows
from what has been said that the calling of the
Evangelist is expressed by the word KnpintTtiv
rather than tiSiaxttv, or ■Kapaxahtir : it is the
proclamation of the glad tidings to those who
have not known them, rather than the instruc-
tion and pastoral care of those who have believed
and have been baptized. And this is also what
we gather from 2 Tim. iv. 2-5. Timothy is to
" preach the word ; " in doing this he is to " do
the work of an evangelist." It follows also
that the name denotes a work rather than an
order. And hence there are no references to
the existence of an order bearing this title in
any later writers. The word fi/ayyt\toriis does
not occur in the Apostolic Fathers, nor even in
the Aitaxh r * r StSScxa arooTo'Aw, which
recognises a distinotion between two kinds of
ministers, missionary (airoWoAoi ical iroo^fjrai)
and stationary (fV/cKoroi mil Sidxovoi). The
EVE
Evangelist might or might not be a Bishop-
elder or a deacon. The Apostles, so far as they
evangelized (Acts viii. 25, xiv. 7 ; 1 Cor. i. 17),
might claim the title, though there were many
Evangelists who were not Apostles. "Otnnis
apostolus evangelists, non omnis evangelists
apostolus " (Pelagius). The " brother whose
praise was in the Gospel " (2 Cor. viii. 18) may
be looked upon as one of St. Paul's companions
in this work, and known probably by the same
name. In this as in other points connected
with the organization of the Church in the
apostolic age, but little information is to be
gained from later writers. The name was no
longer explained by the presence of those to
whom it had been specially applied, and came
to be variously interpreted. Theodoret (on
Ephes. iv. 11) describes the Evangelists— as they
have been described above — as travelling mis-
sionaries, who rtpiorrts iiciipvTTov : Chrysos-
tom, as men who preached the Gospel ph
irtptomft tamaxov. The two expressions,
when taken together, give us the idea of the
office very fairly. They were distinguished from
the Apostles, to whom they acted as subordi-
nates : " missionary assistants of the Apostles "
(Meyer). The account given by Eusebins
(ff. E. ii. 37), though somewhat rhetorical anil
vague, gives prominence to the idea of itinerant
missionary preaching. Men "do the work of
Evangelists, leaving their homes to proclaim
Christ, and deliver the written Gospels to those
who were ignorant of the faith." The last
clause of this description indicates a change in
the work which before long affected the meaning
of the name. If the Gospel was a written book.
and the office of the Evangelist was to read or
distribute it, then the writers were kot' i^uxh"
the Evangelists. It is thus accordingly that
Eusebius (7. c.) speaks of them, though the old
meaning of the word (as in //. E. v. 10, where
he applies it to Pantaenus) is not forgotten by
him. Soon this meaning so overshadowed the
old that Oecumenius (Estius on Ephes. iv. 11) has
no other notion of the Evangelists than as those
who have written a Gospel (cp. Harless on Ephes.
iv. 11). Augustine, though commonly using
the word in this sense, at times remembers its
earlier signification (Serm. xciv. and eclxvi.).
Ambrosianus (Estius /. c.) identifies them with
deacons. In later liturgical language the word
was applied to the reader of the Gospel for the
day (cp. Neander, Pflanz. u. Lett., iii. 5; Hooker,
E. P. V. ch. Ixxviii. ; Meyer on Acts xxi. 8 : and
for the symbolic representations of the Evan-
gelists in the Church, see Dictionary of Christian
Antiquities, s. v. " Evangelists ").
[E.H.P.] [E.C.S.G.]
EVE (njn, i.e. Chamah, LXX. in Gen. iii. 20,
Z«r(i, elsewhere EJo; Heva), the name given in
Scripture to the first woman. It is simply »
feminine form of the adjective *n, living; alite,
which more commonly makes fTH ; or it may be
regarded as a variation of the noun iVn, which
means life. The account of Eve's creation i*
fonnd in Gen. ii. 21, 22. Upon the failure of
a companion suitable for Adam among the
creatures which were brought to him to o«
named, the Lord God caused a deep sleep t»
fall upon him, and took one of his ribs from
Digitized by VjOOQlC
EVI
him, which he fashioned into a woman, and
brought her to the mu. Various explanations
t! this namtire bare been offered. Perhaps
that which we are chiefly intended to learn
from it is the foundation span which the anion
fcrtween man and wife is built, Til. identity of
oatare and oneness of origin.
Through the subtlety of the serpent, Eve
vis beguiled into a violation of the one com-
mandment which had been imposed u|»n her
iod Adam. She took of the fruit of the for- j
bidden tree aad gave it her husband (cp. 2 Cor.
si. 3;1 Tun. ii.13,14). [ADA*.] The different '
aspects under which Ere regarded her mission j
as a mother are seen in the names of her sons. .
At the birth of the first she said, * 1 have gotten '
a man from the Lord," or perhaps, " 1 hare ,
gotten a man, earn the Lord," mistaking him
for the Redeemer. When the second was born, ,
finding her hopes frustrated, she named him j
Abel, or nmsfjr. When his brother had slain
him, and she again bare a son, she called his
tame Seth, and the joy of a mother seemed to
«»tw«gh the sense of the vanity of life : " For
tied," said she, " hath appointed me another
«ed instead of Abel, for Cain slew him." The
Scripture account of Eve closes with the birth
of Seth. [S. L.] |
EVI (*)* ; EM ; JEW, Bevaeut), one of the five J
kings or princes of Vidian, slain by the Israelites j
in the war after the matter of Baal-peor, and
whose lands were afterwards allotted to Reuben
(Sum. uxi. 8; Josh. xiii. 21). [Midian.]
[E.S.P.]
EVIDENCE. The term used by the A. V.
to describe the document of purchase which
Jeremiah (xxxii. 10 so,.) signed and sealed upon
buying a field at a time when, humanly speak-
ing, such purchase seemed an act of fully. He
relied on God's promise (». 15). The R. V.
renders "deed." [F.]
EVIL-MEBOT)ACH (TfJD ^1£ ; B. El«i-
«V<f»»»V«[ [2 K.} K. OvAaisiopaSdx; Abyden.
' AaiAa syo w oo CT i ; Beros. EveiAiiaodoovxos ; Evil-
mtradack; B«b. Amtl-Uardui [ = Axel-Marduk,
■Manidvk], " Man of Merodach ") was, according
to Beroso*,Abydenus,&c, the son and successor of
Nebuchadnezzar, and came to the throne of Baby-
lonia about 562 B.C. The Second Book of Kings
(at. 27) and the Book of Jeremiah (Hi. 31) re-
late that in the accession year, or first year of
his reign, this king had compassion upon Je-
twiachin, king of Judah (whom Nebuchadnezzar
had cast into prison thirty-seven years before),
released him from his confinement, " spake kindly
to him," honoured him above all the vassal-kings
*i Babylon, and gave him a portion of his table
fw the rest of his life. As Eril-Herodach
only reigned for two years (Abydenus, Fr. 9;
wesns, Fr. 14), or two years and a few months,
according to the tablets dated in his reign, this
lost have been done by means of a deed drawn
«P in legal form, such as the words of the pas-
ses of Scripture imply, and as was usual in
Babylonia at the time, though it is not impos-
sible that Jehoiacbin died before his roval
"Meter. Evil-Herodach was killed in a rebellion
led by his sister's husband, a Babylonian noble
luted Nerigliasar [Ncrqal-shabezer], who
EXCOMMUNICATION 1013
then seized the Babylonian crown. According
to Berosus, Evil-Merodach rendered himself
odious by his debaucheries and other extrava-
gances, and it is to this that bis untimely end
was really due. He was a good-natured, though
anwarlike and unwise roler. (T. G. P.]
EVIL SPIRIT. [Demos.]
EXCELLENCY OF CABMEL, Is. zzxv. 2.
The wonderful profusion of flowering shrubs is
to Tristram '■ th; grand characteristic of the
excellency of CarmeL" [Carmel.] [F.]
EXCELLENT, as applied by A. V. to
Theophilus (Luke i. 3) and to Felix (Acts xiiii.
26) in the phrase " most excellent " (o wpdrioTos),
is usually considered a title or office (cp. "your
Excellency "). The It. V. preserves the same
English word for the same Greek word when
speaking of Felix (Acts xxir. 3) and Festua
(Acts zxri. 25), where the A. V. uses "noble."
EXCOMMUNICATION CA^ooto-siot; Ex-
communicatioy. Excommunication is a power
founded upon a right inherent in all religious
societies, and is analogous to the powers of
capital punishment, banishment, and exclusion
from membership, which are exercised by poli-
tical and municipal bodies. If Christianity is
merely a philosophical idea thrown into the
world to do battle with other theories, and to
be valued according as it maintains its ground
or not in the conflict of opinions, excommuni-
cation, ecclesiastical punishments, and peni-
tential discipline are unreasonable. If a society
has been instituted for maintaining any body of
doctrine, and any code of morals, they'nro
necessary to the txisttnee ii that society. That
the Christian Church is an organised polity,
a spiritual " Kingdom of God " on earth, is the
declaration of the Bible [Church]; and that
the Jewish Church was at once a spiritual and a,
temporal organization is clear.
I. Jarish Fxcommuniixition. — The Jewish
system of excommunication was threefold. For
a first offence a delinquent was subjected to the
penalty of 'TO (Xiddui). Maimonides (quoted
by Lightfoot, fforae JJebrakae, on 1 Cor. v. 5),
Morinus (<fe Poenitentia, ir. 27), and Buitorf
(Lexicon, s. v. M13) enumerate the twenty-four
offences for which it was inflicted. They are
various, and range in heinousness from the
offence of keeping a fierce dog to that of taking
God's name in rain. Elsewhere (Bah. Moed
Katon, fol. 16, 1) the causes of its infliction are
reduced to two, termed money and epicurism, by
which is meant debt and wanton insolence. The
offender was first cited to appear in court, and if
he refused to appear or to make amends, his
sentence was pronounced — "Let H, or N, be
under excommunication." The excommunicated
person was prohibited the use of the bath, or of
the razor, or of the convivial table; and all
who hud to do with him were commanded to
keep him at fonr cubits' distance. He was
allowed to go to the Temple, but not to make
the circuit in the ordinary manner. The term
of this punishment was thirty days ; and it was
extended to a second, and to a third thirty days
when necessary. If at the end of that time the
Digitized by
Google
1014 EXCOMMUNICATION
offender was still contumacious, he was subjected
to the second excommunication, termed Din
(cherem), a word meaning something devoted to
God (Lev. xxvii. 21, 28; Ex. xxir. 20; Num.
xviii. 14). Severer penalties were now attached.
The offender was not allowed to teach or to be
taught in company with others, to hire or to be
hired, nor to perform any commercial transac-
tions beyond purchasing the necessaries of life.
The sentence was delivered by a court of ten,
and was accompanied by a solemn malediction,
for which authority was supposed to be found in
the "Curse ye Meroz" of Judg. v. 23. Lastly
followed K£ltJ55' (Shammathd;, which was an
entire cutting off from the congregation. It has
been supposed by some that these two latter
forms of excommunication were undistinguish-
able from each other.*
The punishment of excommunication is not
appointed by the Law of Moses. It is founded
on the natural right of self-protection which all
societies enjoy. The case of Koran, Dathan,
and Abiram (Num. xvi.), the curse denounced
on Meroz (Judg. v. 23), the commission and
proclamation of Ezra (vii. 26, x. 8), and the
reformation of Neheraiah (xiii. 2o), are appealed
to by the Talmudists as precedents by which
their proceedings are regulated. In respect to
the principle involved, the "cutting off from
the people" commanded for certain sins (Ex.
xxx. 33, 38, xxxi. 14; Lev. xvii. 4), and the
exclusion from the camp denounced on the
leprous (Lev. xiii. 46 ; Num. xii. 14), are more
apposite.
In the New Testament, Jewish excommunica-
tion is brought prominently before us in the
case of the man that was born blind and restored
to sight (John ix.). " The Jews had agreed al-
ready that if any man did confess that Jesus was
Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue.
Therefore said his. parents, He is of age, ask
him" (vo. 22, 23). "And they cast him out.
Jesus heard that they had cast him out " (vv. 34,
30). The expressions here used, &To<rwiycryos
yinfrai — i({fia\oy alnbv t(», appear to refer
to the first form of excommunication or Niddui.
Our Lord warns His disciples that they will
have to suffer excommunication at the hands of
their countrymen (John xvi. 2) ; and the fear
of it is described as sufficient to prevent persons
in a respectable position from acknowledging
their belief in Christ (John xii. 42). In Luke
vi. 22, it has been thought that our Lord re-
ferred specifically to the three forms of Jewish
excommuuication — "Blessed are ye when men
shall hate you, and when they shall separate
you from their company [a^opdronru/], and shall
reproach you [ovtiiiaaHTiv], and cast out your
name as evil [IjcJScUwitih], for the Son of Man's
sake." The three words very accurately express
the simple separation, the additional maledic-
tion, and the final exclusion of niddui, cherem,
and shammathd. This verse makes it probable
that the three stages were already formally dis-
tinguished from each other, though, no doubt,
the words appropriate to each are occasionally
used inexactly.
* A slightly different view of the three forms of ex-
communication will be found on p. 126, col. 1. Cp. also
Hamburger, R.B. s.v. " Bann."— [F.J
EXCOMMUNICATION
II. Christian Excommunication. — Excommuni-
cation, as exercised by the Christian Church, is
founded not merely on the natural right pos-
sessed by all societies, not merely on the example
of the Jewish Church and nation. It was insti-
tuted by our Lord (Matt, xviii. 15, 18), and it
was practised by and commanded by St. Paul
(1 Tim. i. 20; 1 Cor. v. 11 ; Tit. iii. 10).
Its Institution. — The passage in St. Matthew
has led to much controversy, into which we do
not enter. It runs as follows : — " If thy brother
shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his
fault between thee and him alone ; if he shall
hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if
he will not hear thee, then take with thee one
or two more, that in the mouth of two or three
witnesses every word may be established. And
if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the
Church ; but if he neglect to hear the Church,
let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a
publican. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever
ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven,
and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be
loosed in heaven." Our Lord here recognises
and appoints a way in which a member of His
Church is to become to his brethren as a heathen
man and a publican — Le. be reduced to a state
analogous to that of the Jew suffering the
penalty of the third form of excommunication.
It is to follow on his contempt of the censure of
the Church passed on him for a trespass which
he has committed. The final excision is to be
preceded, as in the case of the Jew, by two
warnings.
Apostolic Example. — In the Epistles we find
St. Paul frequently claiming the right to
exercise discipline over his converts (cp.
2 Cor. i. 23 ; xiiL 10). In two cases we find
him exercising this authority to the extent of
cutting off offenders from the Church. One of
these is the case of the incestuous Corinthian:
" Ye are puffed up, and have not rather
mourned, that he that hath done this deed
might be taken away from among you. For I
verily, as absent in body, bat present in spirit,
have judged already, as though I were present,
concerning him that hath so done this deed, in
the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are
gathered together, and my spirit, with the power
of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one
unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that
the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord
Jesus " (1 Cor. v. 2-5). The other case is that
of Hymenaeus and Alexander : " Holding faith,
and a good conscience ; which some having put
away concerning faith have made shipwreck : of
whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I
have delivered nnto Satan, that they may learn
not to blaspheme" (1 Tim. i. lfl, 20). It seems
certain that these persons were excommunicated,
the first for immorality, the others for heresy.
What is the full meaning of the express"''''
"deliver unto Satan," is doubtful. All agree
that excommunication is contained in it, but
whether it implies any further punishment,
inflicted by the extraordinary powers committed
specially to the Apostles, has been questioned.
The strongest argument for the phrase meaning
no more than excommunication may be drawn
from a comparison of Col. i. 13. Addressing
himself to the "saints and faithful brethren in
Christ which «w at Colosse," St. Paul exhorts
Digitized by
Google
EXCOMMUNICATION
EXCOMMUNICATION 1015
thein to " give thanks unto the Father Which
atth made us meet to be partakers of the in-
heritance of the saints in light: Who hath
delivered us from the power of darkness, and
hath translated us into the kingdom of His dear
Sen : in Whom we have redemption through His
blood, even the forgiveness of sins." The con-
ception of the Apostle here is of men lying in
the realm of darkness, and transported from
thence into the kingdom of the Son of God,
which is the inheritance of the saints in light,
by admission into the Church. What he means
by the power of darkness is abundantly clear
from many other passages in his writings, of
which it will be sufficient to quote Eplies. ri. 12 :
"Pat on the whole armour of God, that ye
may be able to stand against the wiles of the
devil; for we wrestle not against flesh and
blood, but against principalities, against powers,
against the rulers of the darkness of this world,
against spiritual wickedness in high places."
Introduction into the Chnrch is therefore, in
St. Panl's mind, a translation from the kingdom
and power of Satan to the kingdom and govern-
ment of Christ. This being so, he could hardly
more naturally describe the effect Of excluding a
man from the Church than by the words,
14 deliver him unto Satan," the idea being, that
the man ceasing to be a subject of Christ's king-
dom of light, was at once transported back to
the kingdom of darkness, and delivered therefore
into the power of its ruler, Satan. This inter-
pretation is strongly confirmed by the terms in
which St. Paul describe* the commission which
he received from the Lord Jesus Christ, when he
was sent to the Gentiles: "To open their eyes,
and to tarn them from darkness to light, and
from the power of Satan unto God, that they
may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance
among them which are sanctified by faith that
is in Me " (Acts xxvi. 18). Here again the act
of being placed in Christ's kingdom, the Chnrch,
is pronounced to be a translation from darkness
to light, from the power of Satan unto God.
Conversely, to be cast out of the Church would
he to be removed from light to darkness, to be
withdrawn from God's government, and deli-
vered into the power of Satan (so Balsanion and
Zoaaras, in Basil. Can. 7 ; Estius, in 1 Cor. v. ;
Beveridge, m Can. Apost. x.). If, however, the
expression means more than excommunication,
it would imply the additional exercise of a
special apostolical power, similar to that exerted
on Ananias and Sapphire (Acts v. 1), Simon
Magus (viii. 20), and Elymas (xiii. 10: so
Chrysostom, Ambrose, Augustine, Hammond,
Grotius, and the elder Lightfoot).
Apostolic Precept. — In addition to the claim
to exercise discipline, and its actual exercise in
the form of excommunication, by the Apostles,
we find apostolic precept directing that disci-
pline should be exercised by the rulers of the
Church, and that in some cases excommunica-
tion should be resorted to : "If any man obey
■ot our word by this epistle, note that man, and
hare no company with him, that he may be
ashamed. Yet count him not as an enemy, but
admonish him as a brother," writes St. Paul to
the Thessalonian* (2 Thess. iii. 14). To the
Romans: "Mark them which cause divisions
*ad offences contrary to the doctrine which ye
We heard, and avoid them " (Rom. xvi. 17).
To the Galatians : " I would they were even cut
off that trouble you " (Gal. v. 12> To Timothy :
" If any man teach otherwise, . . . from such
withdraw thyself" (1 Tim. vi. 3). To Titus
he uses a still stronger expression : " A man
that is an heretic, after the first and second
admonition, reject" (Tit. iii. 10). St. John
instructs the lady to whom he addresses his
Second Epistle, not to receive into her house
nor bid God speed to any who did not believe in
Christ (2 John r. 10) ; and we read that in the
case of Cerinthus he acted himself on the pre-
cept that he had given (Euseb. H. E. iii. 28).
In his Third Epistle he describes Diotrephes,.
apparently a Judaizing presbyter, " who loved
to have the pre-eminence," as " casting out of
the Chnrch," i.e. refusing Church communion to
the stranger brethren who were travelling about
preaching to the Gentiles (3 John v. 10). Id
the addresses to the Seven Churches, the angels
or rulers of the Church of Pergamos and of
Thyatira are rebuked for " suffering " the Nlcc-
laitans and Balaamites " to teach and to seduce
my servants to commit fornication, and to eat
things sacrificed unto idols " (Rev. ii. 20).
There are two passages still more important to
our subject. In the Epistle to the Galatians,
St. Paul denounces, " Though we, or an Angel
from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you
than that which we have preached unto you,
let him be accursed (eWtfepa torn). As I said
before, so say 1 now again, If any man preach
any other gospel unto yon than that ye have
received, let him. be accursed " (aj*W«jua tarw.
Gal. i. 8, 9). And in the First Epistle to the
Corinthians : " If any man love not the Lord
Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maran-atha "~
(1 Cor. xvi. 22). It has been supposed that
these two expressions, " let him be Anathema,"
" let him be Anathema Maran-atha," refer
respectively to the two later stages of Jewish
excommunication — the cherem and the sAam-
mathd. This requires consideration.
The words irdttfia and ajxurqpa have evi-
dently the same derivation, and originally they
bore the same meaning. They express a per-
son or thing set apart, laid up, or devoted.
But whereas a thing may be set apart by way
of honour or for destruction, the words, like
the Latin sacer and the English "devoted,"
came to have opposite senses — to ost)AAotou>-
fiirov 8«o0, and to lupxpuriiivov ©eej. The
LXX. and several ecclesiastical writers use the
two words almost indiscriminately, but in
general the form iriSitita is applied to the
votive offering (see 2 Mace. ix. 16 ; Luke xxi. 5;
and Chrys. Horn. xvi. in Ep. ad Rom.), and the
form &rd$*iia to that which is devoted to evil
(see Deut. vii. 26 ; Josh. vi. 17, vii. 13). Thus
St. Paul declares that he could wish himself an
ifiBtfta from Christ, if he could thereby save
the Jews (Rom. ix. 3). His meaning is that he
would be willing to be set apart as a vile thing,
to be cast aside and destroyed, if only it could
bring about the salvation of his brethren.
Hence we see the force of oWftyta fare* in
Gal. i. 8. "Have nothing to do with him,'"
would be the Apostle's injunction, "but let
him be set apart as an evil thing, for God to-
deal with him as he thinks fit." Hammond (in
toe.) paraphrases it as follows : — " You are to>
disclaim and renounce all communion with him.
Digitized by
Google
101 G EXCOMMUNICATION
to look on him as on an excommunicated person,
under the second degree of excommunication,
that none is to have any commerce with in
sacred things." Hence it is that iri9t)ia tartt
came to be the common expression employed by
Councils at the termination of each canon which
they enacted, meaning that whoever was dis-
obedient to the canon was to be separated from
the communion of the Church and its privi-
leges, and from the favour of God, until he
repented (see Bingham, Ant. xvi. 2, lo').
The expression 'A»d0tpa fmoayaBi, at it stands
by itself without explanation jn 1 Cor. xvi. 22,
is so peculiar, that it has tempted a number of
ingenious expositions. Parkhurst hesitatingly
derives it from !"H-H$ D^ri!J, " Cursed be thou."
But this derivation is not tenable. Buxtorf,
Morinus, Hammond, Bingham, and others iden-
tify it with the Jewish shamm&thd. They do
so by translating shammatha, "The Lord
comes." But thammatha cannot be made to
mean " The Lord comes " (see Lightfoot in loco).
Several fanciful derivations of it are given by
Rabbinical writers, as " There is death," " There
is desolation " ; but there is no mention by them
of such a signification as "The Lord comes."
Lightfoot derives it from ]"!§(?, and it probably
means a thing excluded or shut out. Maran-
atha, however peculiar its use in the text may
seem to us, is an Aramaic expression, signi-
fying " Our Lord is come " (Chrysostom, Jerome,
tstius, Lightfoot), or "Our Lord oometh." If
we take the former meaning, we may regard it
as giving the reason why the offender was to be
anathematized ; if the latter, it would either
imply that the separation was to be in per-
petuity, " donee Dominus redeat " (Augustine),
or, mere properly, it would be a form of solemn
appeal to the day on which the judgment should
be ratified by the Lord (cp. Jude, v. 14). In
any case, it is a strengthened form of the simple
ayiBtpa (arm. And thus it may be regarded as
holding towards it a similar relation to that
which existed between the thammithS and the
cherem, but not on any supposed ground of ety-
mological identity between the two words
thammatha and maranatha. Perhaps we ought
to interpunctuate more strongly between
irdBtpa and fiaparaBd, and read Ijru AWflejur
papavaBd, i>. "Let him be anathema. The
Lord will come " (cp. K. V. " let him be
anathema. Maranatha" — explained as menning
" our Lord Cometh "). The anathema and the
cherem answer very exactly to each other (see
Lev. xxvii. 28; Num. xxi. 3; Is. xliii. 28).
Saturation to Communion. — Two cases of
excommunication are related in Holy Scrip- ]
ture ; and in one of them the restitution of the
offender is specially recounted. The incestuous
Corinthian had been excommunicated by the
Authority of St. Paul, who bad issued his sen-
tence from a distance without any consultation
with the Corinthians. He had required them
publicly to promulgate it and to act upon it.
They had done so. The offender had been
brought to repentance, and was overwhelmed
with grief. Hereupon St. Panl, still absent as
before, forbids the further infliction of the pun-
ishment, pronounces the forgiveness of the
penitent, and exhorts the Corinthians to receive
him back to communion, and to confirm their
love towards him.
EXCOMMUNICATION
Tlie Nature of Excommunication is made more
evident by these acts of St. Paul than by any
investigation nf Jewish practice or of the ety-
mology of words. We thus find, (1) that it is
a spiritual penalty, involving no temporal pun-
ishment, except accidentally; (2) that it con-
sists in separation from the communion of the
Church ; (3) that its object is the good of the
sufferer (1 Cor. v. 5), and the protection of the
sound members of the Church (2 Tim. iii. 17);
(4) that its subjects are those who are guilty
of heresy (1 Tim. i. 20), or gross immorality
(1 Cor. v. 1); (5) that it is inflicted by the
authority of the Church at large (Matt, xviii.
1 18), wielded bv the highest ecclesiastical officer
! (1 Cor. v. 3 ; fit. iii. 10) ; (6) that this officer's
sentence is promulgated by the congregation to
1 which the offender belongs (1 Cor. v. 4), in
| deference to his superior judgment and com-
; mand (2 Cor. ii. 9), anl in spite of any opposi-
| tion ou the jiuit of a minority (r. 6); (7) that
the exclusion may be of indefinite duration, or
for a period; (8) that its duration may be
abridged at the discretion and by the indul-
gence of the person who has imposed the penalty
(t>. 8); (9) that penitence is the condition on
which restoration to communion is granted
(p. 7) ; (10) that the sentence is to be publicly
reversed as it was publicly promulgated (c. 10).
Practice nf Excommunication in the Pott-
Apostolic Church. — Tne first step was an ad-
monition to the offender, repeated once, or eveu
more than once, in accordance with St. Paul'i
precept (Tit. iii. 10. See Apostol. Constitutions,
ii. 37-39 ; S. Ambr. De Offic. ii. 27 ; Prosper,
De lit. ConUtnpl. ii. 7 ; Synesius, Ep. lriii.). If
this did not reclaim him, it was succeeded by
the Lesser Kxcommunication (cupopHr/jdi), by
which he was excluded from the participation
of the Eucharist, and was shut out from the
Communion-service, although admitted to what
was called the Service of the Catechumens (see
Theodoret, Ep. Ixxvii. ad Eulal.). Thirdly
followed the Greater Excommunication or Ana-
thema (warrtKiis ipopuritis, ayaStfui), by which
the offender was debarred, not only from the
Eucharist, but from taking part in all religious
acts in any assembly of the Church, and from
the company of the faithful in the ordinary
concerns of life. In case of submission, offenders
were received back to communion bv going
through the four stages of public penance, in
which they were termed, (1) wpovKkaioms,
flentet, or weepers ; (2) lucpoAyitm, audicnies,
or bearers; (3) iwowlwrorrts, substrati, or
kneelers ; ( 4) avrtarwrts, contittentes, or co-
standers; after which they were restored to
communion by absolution, accompanied by im-
position of hands. To trace out this branch of
the subject more minutely would carry us
beyond our legitimate sphere. Reference may be
made to Suiter's Thesaurus Ecclcsiasticus, ». vv.
TtpitntXttvais, aicpimrts, bxiirrmait, o-iVrmm.
Peferencet.— Tertullian, De Poenitentia, Op.
i. 139, Lutet. 1634; S. Ambrose, De Poenitentia,
Paris, 1686; Morinus, De Poenitentia, Antv.
1682 ; Hammond, Potter of the Keys, Works, i.
406, Lond. 1684 ; Taylor, Doctor Dubitantium,
iii. 4, 2, Lond. 1852; Selden, De jure Katurali
et Gentium juxia Disciplinam Hebraeorum, Lips.
1695 ; Lightfoot, Horae Hebraicae, On 1 Cor.
v. 5, Works, ii. 746, Lond. 1634; Bingham,
Digitized by
Google
EXECUTIONER
Antiquities of tke Christian Chunk, Books xri.
i Tiii., Load. 1875; Van Espen, Jus Ecdesias-
ttcum, Ten. 1789; Marshall, Penitential Dad-
flute of tke Primitire Chunk, Oxf. 1844;
Thorndike, The Chunh's Pover of Excommtmi-
catkm, as found m Scriptun, Works, vi. 21
(see also i. 55, ii. 157), Oif. 1856 ; Waterland,
So Communion tritk Jmpugners of Fundamentals,
Works, iit 456, Oxf. 1843: Augusti, Denk-
vntrdiyieiten aus der Ckristltchen Archaologie,
Leipz. 1817; Hev, Lectures in Divinity, On
Art. XXXIII-, Camb. 1822; Palmer, Treatise
on the Church, ii. 224, Lond. 1842; Harold
Brown*, Exposition of tke Articles, On Art.
XXXIII- Loud. 1863. [F. M/)
EXECUTIONER (TOO); nnov\Mmo).
The Hebrew tahback describes in the first instance
the general office of one of the bod y-guard of a
monarch ; and, in the second place, the special
office of an executioner as belonging to that
guard (cp. DeliUsch, Genesis [1887], in loco).
Thus Potiphar was " captain of the executioners"
(Gen. xxxrii. 36 ; see margin), and had his
official residence at the pnblic gaol (Gen. xl. 3).
Xebuzaradan (2 K. xxv. 8 ; Jer. xxxix. 9) and
Arioch (Dan. it 14) held the same office. That
the M captain of the guard " himself occasionally
performed the duty of an executioner appears
from 1 K. ii. 25, 34. The post was one of high
dignity, and something beyond the present posi-
tion of the zdhit of modern Egypt (cp. Lane, i.
163), with which Wilkinson (ii. 45 [1878]) com-
pares it. It is still not unusual for officers of high
rank to indict corporal punishment with their
own hands (Wilkinson, ii. 43). The LXX. takes
the word in its original sense (cp. 1 Sam. ix. 23),
and terms Potiphar chief-cook, Af>X'/"ty*'P° f -
The Greek tretKovKarmp (Mark vi. 27) is bor-
rowed from the Latin speculator; originally a
military spy or scout, but under the emperors
transferred to the body-guard, from the vigilance
which their office demanded (Tac. Hist. ii. 11;
Suet. CUsmL 35> [W. L. B.] [F.]
EXILE. [Captivitt; DbpehsKKt.]
EX'ODUSfE(osos: called by the Jews, from
it* opening words, TftQE? iT*tt1, or more briefly
mOt?, its usual name), the Second Book of the
Pentateuch, carrying on the narrative of the
history and antiquities of the Israelitish nation
[see GE3TK8I8] from the death of Joseph to the
beginning of the second year after the Exodus
from Egypt (xL 1, 17).
I. Contents.
$ 1. (i.) Chs. L-xii. Events leading to the
deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt, viz. :
a. The increase of Jacob's posterity in Egypt,
and their oppression under a new king, who paid
no heed to the memory of Joseph (ch. i.) ; 6. The
birth and education of Moses, and his flight from
Egypt into the land of Midian (ch. ii.); c. The
call and commission of Moses to be the deliverer
of his people (iii. 1-iv. 26), and preliminary
negotiations with the Israelites and Pharaoh
(iv. 27-vii. 7); d. The series of signs and
wonders by means of which the deliverance from
Egypt was at length effected, and the institution
«f the Passover (vii. 8-xii. 51).
EXODUS
1017
(ii.) Chs. xiiu 1-xix. 2. The journey of the
Israelites from Rameses to Sinai : a. The march
to the Red Sea, the passage through it, and
Moses' song of triumph on the occasion (xii. 37-
xv. 21); 6. The journey from the Red Sea to
Sinai, with particulars of the bitter waters of
Marsh (xv. 23-6), the giving of quails and
manna, and the observance of the Sabbath
(ch. xvL), the miraculous supply of water at
Rephidim, and the conflict with Amalek at the
same time (ch. xvii.), the meeting with Jethro
and the advice given by him to Moses (ch. xviii.).
(iii.) Chs. xix. 3-xl. 38. Events during the
first part of the sojourn at Sinai, viz. : a. The
I solemn establishment of the Theocracy (see
I xix. 5-8, xxir. 3-8), on the basis (a) of the Ten
I Commandments (xx. 1-17); (fi) of a code of laws
' (xx. 23-xxiii. 33), regulating the social life and
religious observances of the people (xii. 3-
| xxiv. 11); A. The giving of. instructions to
Mrses on Mount Sinai, for the construction of
J the Tabernacle, with the vessels and furniture
belonging to it, for the consecration of Aaron
and his sons as priests, the selection of Bexaleel
and Oholiab to execute the skilled work that
was necessary, and the delivery to Moses of the
two tables of the Law (xxiv. 12-nii. 18);
r. The incident of the golden calf, Moses' inter-
cession for the people, and the renewal of the
covenant (xxiii.-xxxiv.) ; d. The construction of
the Tabernacle, in its various parts, in accord-
ance with the directions prescribed in chs. xxv.-
xxxi., and its erection (xl. 17) on the first day
of the second year of the Exodus (xxxv.-xl.):
the consecration of the priests in accordance
with the injunctions laid down in ch. xxix. is
not related till Lev. viii. ; some other omissions
in xxxv.-xl., as compared with xxv.-xxxi., will
be noticed in § 14. In the course of the
history, it will be observed, different legislative
enactments are interspersed (see, besides the
passages that have been specified, chs. xii., xiii.,
and xxxi. 12-17): the relation of these to one
another, and to the narratives with which they
are connected, will appear subsequently.
II. Structure and Authorship.
§ 2. The Book of Exodus is a continuation of
the narrative of Genesis, and presents the same
structural peculiarities. The same two con-
trasted narratives, the priestly (P) and the
prophetical (JE), appear still side by side, each
displaying the same phraseological criteria, and
each marked by the same diflerences of repre-
sentation and style. Referring to the article
Genesis* for an account of the main charac-
teristics of these sources, we proceed to analyse
the narrative of Kxodus ujwn the same prin-
ciples. The interest of P, it will be observed,
lies chiefly in the ceremonial institutions of the
theocracy, which are described by him at length
(xxv.-xxxi., xxxv.-xl.): the parts contributed by
him in Exodus, prior to ch. xxv., form an intro-
ductory sketch of the main features of the
history, constructed upon a similar scale and
plan to that adopted in Genesis, and explained
in the article on that Book.
» And especially to } 11 on the analysis of JE. It Is
not the Intention of toe following Tables to represent
this In every detail as flnal.
Digitized by
Google
1018
EXODUS
EXODUS
It
(i.) Chs. i.-xi. — Events leading to the deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt : —
V I. 1-7.1 13-14. II . 23b-2j.
J 7-4." 16-20. Iv. 1-16.
E 1. 8-12. 15-22. 11. l-23a.' til. 1-6. 9-15. 21-22.
Vi. 2-vil. IS.
19-20a*.
I IE It. 17-
19-20*. 22-31. V. 1-vi. 1.
18. 20b-21.
21bt^22.
J vil. 23. 25. vUl. 1-4 [H. Til. 26-29].
24.
vUl. 5-7 [H. !-»]■
Til. 14-18.
IT (partly).
8-lSa [H. 4-lla].
sob-au.
lSb-19 [H. llb-15].
ix. 8-12.
J Till. 20-32 [H. 16-28]. ix. 1-7.
13-21. 23b-34. X. 1-7.
ix. 22-23a. 24a. 35. X. 8-13*.
Jx.
E
14b-19.
28-29.
14aJ.
20-27.
Xl. 1-3.
8-10.
* To commanded.
t From and the blood.
J To land of Egypt.
> Here, 1. 1-5 repeats the -substance of Gen. xItI. 8-27, as Is sometimes done by P at the beginning of a new stage
of the narrative (cp. Gen. 1. 27 sq. with v. 1 sq. ; t. 32 with vi. 10 ; xL 27 with xi. 26 ; Num. Ui. 2-4 with Ex. vi.
23, Lev. x. 1 sq.
8 So JflUcber [see A 16]. Dlllmann gives w. 15-23a to J, arguing chiefly from the name Reuel, for which In
ch, xvili. 2 (E) we have Jetkro. But, as Jul. remarks, the name Reuel may be here a later insertion : had it
originally stood In the narrative, it would have appeared naturally in v. 16, rather than in r. 18.
§ 3. The grounds of the preceding analysts
are particularly evident in the account of the
negotiations of Moses with Pharaoh, and in the
narrative of the Plagues. Both are marked,
namely, by a series of systematic differences, per-
vading the narrative from beginning to end.
Thus in the former, the section vi. 2-vii. 13, as
seems clear, is not iu reality the sequel of iii. 1-
vi. 1, but is parallel to it. Chs. iii. 1-vi. 1
(disregarding, for the present, iv. 17, 18, 20b-21)
describe the call and commission of Moses, the
appointment of Aaron to be his representative
with the people (iii. 16 ; iv. 1, 16), and three
signs given to him for the satisfaction of the
people: Moses and Aaron have satisfied the
people (iv. 31), but the application to Pharaoh
has been unsuccessful, and something further is
threatened. The continuation of vi. 1, however,
is vii. 14; with vi. 2 there begins evidently
another account of Moses' call, in which, unlike
iv. 31, the people refuse to listen to the promises
conveyed to them (vi. 9), and in which, Moses
protesting his inability to plead * with Pharaoh
(not, as before, with the people), Aaron is
appointed to be his spokesman with him (vi. 11,
12, 29, 30; vii. 1, 2). The case of Pharaoh's
requiring a guarantee is provided for : Aaron's
rod is to be thrown down that it may become a
reptile (pjjl, not BTU, a serpent, as iv. 4),
vii. 8 f. Pharaoh's heart, however, is hardened,
and the narrative at vii. 13 reaches ju«t the
same point as vi. 1. Thus vi. 2-8 is parallel to
iii. 6-9, 14, 15 ; vl. 126=30 to iv. 10; vii. 1 to
iv. 16 ; vii. 4 f. to iii. 19 f., vi. 1. Corresponding
to these material differences, others of expres-
sion and style mark each narrative throughout.
§ 4. The principal differences between the
two narratives of the Plagues may be arranged
• If Pharaoh, as in the present narrative (ch. v), had
already refused to hear Moses, the different, H priori
ground alleged In vi. 12 for his hesitation (a ground,
moreorer. Inconsistent with iv. 31) Is difficult to under-
stand.
as follows: each, it will be noticed, while
differing from the other, eihibila several traits
connecting it with the corresponding narrative
in chs. iii.-vii. 9. In one narrative (P) Aaron co-
operates with Moses, and the command is Say
unto Aaron .... (vii. 19, viii. 5 [Heb. 11 16
[Heb. 12]; so before, vii. 9: even ix. 8, where
Moses acts, both are expressly addressed): no
demand is ever made of Pharaoh ; the sequel is
told briefly, usually within the compass of one
or two verses ; the success or failure of the
Egyptian magicians is noted : the hardening of
Pharaoh's heart is expressed by ptn (was strong,
or made strong, R. V. rnarg.), vii. 22, viii. 19
(Heb. 15), ix. 12 (so vii. 13), and the concluding
formula is And he hearkened not unto them as the
Lord had spoken (vii. 22, viii. 15b [Heb. lib],
19 [Heb. 15], ix. 12; so vii. 13).
In the other narrative (JE), on the contrary,
Moses alone, without Aaron, is commissioned to
go to Pharaoh : he addresses Pharaoh himself
(in agreement with iv. 10-16, where Aaron is
appointed to be his spokesman with the people):
a formal demand is regularly made, Let my
people go that they may serve me (vii. 16, viii. 1
[Heb. vii. 26], ix. 1, 13 ; 1. 3 ; so before, in the
same narrative, iv. 23, v. 1); upon Pharaoh '»
refusing, the plague is announced, and takes
effect without further human intervention (viii.
24 [Heb. 20], ix. 6), or at a signal given by
Moses, not by Aaron (vii. 20, ix. 22 sq., x. 12 sq,,
22) ; the interview with Pharaoh is prolonged,
and described in some detail ; and the term used
to express the hardening of Pharaoh's heart is
not ptn, but 133, T33D, to be or to maek
heavy (vii. 14, viii. 15 [Heb. 11], 32 [Heb. 28J,
ix. 7, 34, x. 1; see B. V. marg.). The style of
the narrative generally is more picturesque and
varied than that of P ; it is marked by recurring
phrases, which are, however, different from those
of P, as Thus saith the Lord, said regularly to
Pharaoh ; Behold, with the participle, in the
announcement of the plague, Thou, thy people,
and thy servants; the expression God of the
Digitized by
Google
EXODUS
Hebrews (vii. 16, ix. 1. 13, x. 3, as before, iii. 18,
v. 3), and several others which the careful
reader will note for himself.
§ 5. Examining JE more particularly, we
observe that the main narrative is J, with
traces of E.
The reasons for supposing It to be not entirely homo-
geneous may be staled briefly thus, (i.) The verses
iv. 17, 20b- 21 stand in no relation to their context ;
iv. 17 speaks of "fas signs" to be performed with the
rod, whereas only one sign to be so performed has been
described In re. 1-9 : Iv. 31 mentions similarly wonders
to be done before Pharaoh, whereas vs. 1-9 speak only
of credentials for the satisfaction of the people. The
Terses read, in fact, like fragments from another nar-
rative, which once of coarse contained the explanations
EXODUS
1010
which are now missing, and to which either v. 18 or
v. 19 doubtless also belonged (for In the existing narra-
tive both are not required, or, at least, v. 19 should
precede v. 18). (it.) It Is observed that in some of the
plagues the effect is not brought about immediately by
God (as e.g. ix. 6), but Moses, as here directed, toe* his
rod (vii. 17, 20b; ix. 23; x. 13). It is difficult now
not to connect these passages with iv. 17, 20b-21, and to
suppose them to have been derived by the compiler
from the same source. Many critics are of opinion that
other traits in the narrative, especially some which
when viewed carefully seem to be redundant, are derived
likewise from E. One or two examples (ix. 24a, 35 ;
x. 14a) have been introduced into the Table; but the
I criteria are slight, and may not be decisive. It is
wiser, therefore, to adopt this opinion. If at all, with
I reserve.
ft
§ 6. (ii.) Chs. xii.-xix. 2.— Departure of the Israelites from Egypt, and Journey to Sinai : —
P III. U20. 28. 37a; 40- 61. XUI. 1-2.
J ill. 29-30. >
xii. 21-27.
xii. 31-36.«
370-39.
s
Xiv.« 1-4.
8-9.
16-18.
19-211.
xiii. 3-16. »
K
P xiv. 21a.*
17-19.
J21C,* 22-23.
26-27s.t
28-29.
(xv. 19.)
Iti
£
\i
21b.
xvl.si-3.
27b.
30-31.
XV. 1-18.S
6-24.
31-36. XTU. la* .
xlx. 1 -2a. $
4-6. 26-30. xvtt.lb-2. 1.
XV. 22-27.
£ 3-6. 8-16. XVili.'
• The words: " And Moses stretched out his band over the sea ; and the waters were divided."
t To ocer the tea. J To Sephidim. 4 To wOdamefs.
xlx. 2b.
1 Cp. xL «, 8 (J).
S With r. 31b cp. iii. 12, X. 8, 11 ; with v. 32, X. 9, 24 (E).
s This section, ss it stands, is generally considered to be the work of the compiler of JE, earlier material,
however, being Incorporated by him, e.g. re. 6, 7, 12, 13.
* The analysis of ch. xiv. is that of NBldeke, Dlllmann (except in one or two clauses), sod Kuenen, which appears
to the writer to be more probable than that of Wellh., who assigns to E part of what is here attributed to P. The
pans ascribed to P, If examined carefully, will be found to presuppose one another, and to be connected together by
many aimilarities of expression, in tome cases agreeing with those elsewhere belonging to P (e.0. ptn, to aardeti,
of the heart). The parts assigned to J exhibit possible traces of the use of E (e.g. tie. 7, 10b (cp. Josh. xxiv. 7, E],
16, ■■ Lift up thy rod," 19a [cp. Gen. xxi. 17 ; xxxl. 11]) ; but the two sources. If both have been employed, are
here so fused, that nothing more definite can be affirmed with confidence.
s Tbe Song Is of course incorporated by the narrator from an earlier source, perhaps from a collection of national
poems. Its general style U sntlqne ; and In the main it to, no doubt. Mosaic : but It appears towards the end to
have undergone some expansion or modification of form at a later age ; for v. 13 (•• Thou hast guided them to Thy
holy habitation ") clearly describes a past event, and t>. 17b points to some fixed abode of the ark, such aa tbe
temple at Shiloh (1 Sam. 1. 9). V. 19 appears to be a redactlonal addition, reverting, in terms borrowed from I>
(see xiv. 23, 28, 29), to the occasion of the Song. ... . .._
s In ch. xvl. m. 4 and 6, on material even more than phraseological grounds, must have their source in a different
current of narrative from t>. 6 so.; for to tie. 9, 7 (evening and swrntBff, In agreement with m. 8, 12, fiah at
evening, and bread at morning) tbe communication made to the people differs In its terms from that stated in
se. 4, t (bread alone) to have been given to Moses ; and vs. 26-30 agree with m. 4, 6. In the text of P, It is
remarkable that the Instructions to Mosea to convey the promise of food to the people (ire. 11, 12) follow tho
account of the actual delivery of the mesaage, re. 6-8 : if It might be assumed that a transposition had taken place,
and that the original order was re. 1-3. 9-12, 6-8, 13, ic., the consecution of tho nsrratlve would be improved.
Jfcwin r. IS Is strance: in tbe sense of ■•What?" man Is a secondary, contracted form, confined to .particular
Aramaic dlalecta (NoUeke, Syr. Or. « 68 ; Wright, Compar. Oraatm. of the Snathe Languages, p. 128).
7 An historically Interesting chapter (see rr. 15 sq., 19 sq.), universally assigned to E.
§ 7. In chs. xii. and xiii. the double treatment
fat discernible without difficulty. Notice in P, xii.
1-13* (Passover); 14-20 (Unleavened Cakes);
28, 37a, 40-42, 51 (narrative); 43-50 (Pass-
«ver— supplemental) ; xiii. 1 sq. (Firstborn),' 20 :
• In xH. 14 "this day " Is tbe first day of Maztotk
(Unleavened Cakes), not tbe Passover : rp. Lev. xxlil. 6.
« In P this injunction Is here Isolated : tbe full expla-
i la first given In Num. 111. 12 sq. ; viil. 16-19.
in JE, xii. 21-7 (Passover); 29-36, 37b, 38
(narrative — continuation of xi. 4-8) ; 39; xiii.
3-10 (Unleavened Cakes); 11-16 (Firstborn).
The connexion between the different parts of
each narrative is observable, not merely in
technical details, bat also in general style and
tone. The Passover was foilotced by the Feast
of Mazxoth ; but the two are in their origin
distinct, and are treated accordingly, especially
in JE. The Passover commemorates the sparing
Digitized by
Google
1020
EXODUS
of the Israelites (xii. 13, 27), the Feast of
Mazzoth the morniug of the Exodus (xiii. 3-10 ;
so xii. 17, xxiii. 15), being brought into con-
nexion with the circumstance that through the
haste with which the Hebrews left Egypt they
were obliged to bake for themselves unleavened
rakes on the morrow (xii. 34, 39) ; the dedica-
tion of the Firstborn (xiii. 11-16) is made a
memorial of the slaughter of the Brstborn of
the Egyptians (xii. 29 sq.).
Ch. xll. 21-2? cannot be the original sequel to rr. 1-13.
The verses do not describe the execution of the com-
mands enjoined, *». 1-13: Moses does not repeat to the
people, even in an abridged form, the injunctions that
he h&t received; on the contrary, several Important
points (t.g. the character of the lamb, and the manner
in which it was to be eaten) are omitted ; and frcth
points (the hyssop, the basin, none to leave the house)
■re mentioned respecting which the Instructions Just
given to him arc silent. It seems clear that w. 21-27
are really part of a different account of the institution
of the Passover, which "stands to xll. 3-13 in the same
relation that the iftuarta-ordlnanoe In xiii. 3-10 stands
§ 8. (iii.) Chs. xix. 3 -xl.— Israel at Sinai: —
t P
EXODUS
to that In xii. 14-20" (Dillm. p. 100). Ft. 25-27
resemble strongly xiii. 3-16 (see m. 5, 8, 10, 14 sq.), and
are no doubt to be referred to the same source, i*.
either J (Dillm.), or the compiler of JE expanding
materials derived from J (so Wellh., at least for xiii.
3-1S).
If the different laws respecting these feasts
be compared, the simplest will be seen to be
those in Ex. xxiii. 15, 18 ; then come those of JE
in chs. xii., xiii., and xxxiv. 18-20, 23-25 ; then
Deut. xvi. ; lastly, the injunctions of P in Ex. xii.
In chs. xii. and xiii. it may be noticed : (1) Pass-
over nnd Mazzoth are more clearly distinguished
in JE than in P; (2) in JE greater stress is laid
on their relation with the history and com-
memorative import ; (3) the provisions in P
are far more definite and strict than in JE
(e.g. xii. 15b, 16, 18, 19b, and the whole of
or, 43-49). It is remarked by Delitzsch that
the greater specialization of the ordinances
in P creates a strong presumption that they
were codified later (Studien, vii. pp. 340, 342).
li
J
E xlx. 3-19.>
xix. 20-25.
XX. 1-21.
xx. 22 xxiii. 33.
xxlv. (1-2).
p
xxlv. 16-18S-*
xxv. l*-xxxl. 18a.f
[J xxtv. 3-8.
IE
(»-">■
12-14. 18b.
xxxi. 18b. xxxil. 1-8.
p
xxxlv. 20-39. xxxv.-xl.
15-20, 30-xxxHI. 6 (in the main), 7-11.
* To cloud.
xxxil!. 12-xxxiv. 28.
t To tutinumy.
• So Wellh., Dillm. ; but admitting that et>. 3-8, the " classical expression In the O. T. of the nature and scope of
the theocratic covenant," has been amplified by the compiler of JE. perhaps (Dillm.) with elements derived from
J. The sequence of the chapter is in many places imperfect, an Indication that It has been formed by a combina-
tion of different sources. Thus the natural sequel of v. 3, went up, would be not v. 7, caste, bat v. 14, went down ;
r. 9b Is superfluous after v. 8b (If, indeed, it be more than a repetition of It, Introduced by a clerical error); r. 13b
is obscure, and not explained by anything which follows [the " trumpet" of ve. 16, 19 is not the " ram's-bom" of
I bis verse]. In the bitter part of the chapter, vv. 20-25 manifestly interrupt the connexion : e. 20 is a repetition of
e. 18a (•* descended "), and v. 21 of v. 12; v. 25, "and said ["IDtOU <""° them" (not, "and told them") should
be followed by the words reported, and Is entirely disconnected with xx. 1 : on the other hand, xx. 1 is the natural
continuation of xlx. 19. Clearly, two parallel narratives of the theophany on Slnal have been combined together :
though It Is no longer possible to determine throughout the precise limits of each (see the attempt of JOllcber,
pp. 306 sq.). Ch. xlx. 20-26 Is generally assigned to J : Kuenen regards these verses, together with v. 13b,
xxlv. 1-2, 9-11 (which similarly interrupt the connexion In ch. xxiv.), as standing by themselves, and forming
part of a third Independent narrative of the occurrences at Slnal.
' Chs. xxv. 1-xxxl. 18a contain P's account of the Instructions given for the construction of the Tabernacle, &c.,
the sequel following in chs. xxxv.-xl., which describe how these instructions were carried out. On some
questions arising out of these sections of P, see below, 6$ 13, 14.
§ 9. In chs. xix. 2 b-xxiv. (after separating
xxiv. 15-18s, which belongs to P, and is the
introduction to ch. xxv.) there are two narra-
tives of the occurrences at Sinai, one attached
to the Decalogue, the other to the " Book of
the Covenant " (i.e. the laws xx. 22— xxiii. 33 ;
see xxiv. 7). The Decalogue, with the narra-
tives attached to it, is generally allowed to
belong to E : the Book of the Covenant is con-
sidered by Wellhausen (Comp. p. 90) to have
formed part of J ; but Kuenen (§ 8. 12, 18),
Dillmanu (p. 220), JUHcher (p. 305), assign it
to E, though it is doubtful whether the grounds
alleged are decisive. The principal grounds for
the separation in ch. xix. have been stated in
§ 8, note >. In xx. 1, 19, 20, 21, notice God
(not Jehovah), as in xix. 3, 17, 19. The sequel
to the " Book of the Covenant " is evidently
nir. 3-8. Ch. xxiv. 12-14, 18b, on the con-
trary, form a natural continuation of xx. 18-21 :
the " elders " in'v. 14 cannot well be the seventy
mentioned in v. 9 (among whom disputes are
not likely to hare arisen during Moses' absence),
but the elders of the people generally, named as
the people's representatives : Moses goes up into
the mountain to receive, not merely the tables
of stone, but also instruction of a more general
kind ("the law and the commandment"), en-
abling him to speak to the people instead of
God, and in accordance with the request, xx. 19
(cp. Deut. v. 27-31). The intermediate verses
(xxiv. 1, 2, 9-11) are of uncertain origin. Pos-
sibly they are to be regarded as introductory
to e. 12 sq., and assigned to E; possibly they
form, with xix. 13b, 20-25 (see § 8, note '),
part of an independent narrative, of which only
fragments have been preserved.
§ 10, The Decalogue, it need hardly be said,
Digitized by
Google
EXODUS
is not the composition of E, bnt is merely in-
corporated by him in his narrative. It is
repeated, a* is well known, in Dent. v. 6-21,
where, though it is introduced formally (re. 5, 22)
as a verbal quotation, it presents in fact con-
siderable differences, especially in the fourth,
fifth, and tenth commandments, from the test
of Exodus. The variations are manifestly due
to the anthor of Deuteronomy, whose style and
characteristic thought they mostly exhibit.'
It is the opinion, however, of many critics,*
based in part upon the fact of this varying text,
that the primitive form of the Decalogue was
not that in which it appears now even in
Exodus; but that originally it consisted merely
of the Commandments themselves, all expressed
with the same terseness exhibited still by the
first, sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth, and that
the explanatory comments appended in the case
of the others were only added subsequently
(probably by the compiler of JE). These com-
ments, in the case of Ex. xx. 10b, 12, bear a
singular resemblance to the style of Deuter-
onomy; so that, unless (as has been supposed)
they can have been introduced here from
Deuteronomy itself, they must be regarded as
belonging to the class of passages in Exodus
indicated in Deuteronomy, § 34, as being the
source of tome of the expressions which in their
entirety give to Deuteronomy its peculiar and
distinctive colouring (to. § 36). The case of
Ex. xx. 11, however (which is not found in
Deuteronomy), is somewhat different. Not
only does this verse form no model for the style
of Deuteronomy, but it is alien in style to JE ;
while on the other hand it resembles closely
two passages of P, Ex. xxxi. 17b, Gen. ii. 2b :
hence, as it is not perhaps very probable that it
would have been omitted when the Decalogue
was incorporated in Deuteronomy, had it
already formed part of it, the conjecture is not
an unreasonable one that it was introduced
into the text of Exodus, alter Deuteronomy
was written, on the basis of the two passages of
P just referred to.
§ 11. The laws contained in the "Book of the
Covenant " (xx. 22-xxiii. 33) comprise two ele-
ments (xxiv. 3), the " words " (or commands)
and the "judgments : " the latter, expressed
all hypothetical! r, occupy xxi. 1-xxii. 17 (Heb.
16), 25a (24a), 26 (25), xxiii. 4 sq.; the former
occupy the rest of the section to xxiii. 19 :
what follows, xxiii. 20 sq., annexing a promise in
case of obedience, imparts, as Wellh. observes,
to the preceeding law-book the character of a
"covenant" (cp. xxiv. 7). The laws them-
selves are taken naturally from a pre-existing
source, in most cases (as it seems) without
alteration of form, though most critics are of
opinion that here and there slight parenetlc
additions have been made by the compiler : for
4 Thos with " observe," Dent. v. 12 (for " re-
■ember"), cp. Dent. xvt. 1 ; with •*»» the Loan thy
God commanded thee," m. 12, IS, xx. 17, xxiv. 8, xxvi.
IS ; with v. 14*. xlv. 2», xv. 10 ; with the motive of
gratitude in e. IS (which takes the place of the reference
la Exodus to the Creation), xv. is, xvi. 11, 12, xxiv.
18, 22 ; with the addition In t. 16b, v. 29 (Heb. 26], vi. 18,
xil. 2f , 28, xxil. 7.
• Kwald, JUUtery, Ii. 169 ; Speaker' i Costm. I. p. 336 ;
DlUni. p. 201.
EXODUS
1021
instance, xxii. 21b-22 (observe in v. 23 [Heb.
22] him, he, his in the Hebrew, pointing back
to the sin;/. " sojourner " in r. 21) ; perhaps also
in xxiii. 23-25a. The verses xxiii. 4 sq. will
hardly be in their original position, for the
context (on both sides) relates to a different
matter, viz. just judgment.
The laws are designed to regulate the life
of a community living under simple conditions
of society, and devoted chiefly to agriculture.
After some introductory directions respecting
the erection of altars xx. 24-26, there follow
the D'ODBTJ (xxi. 1), embodying in its main
principles the civil and criminal law of the
ancient Hebrews, and (xxiii. 14 sq.) certain
elementary religious observances. Slavery,
murder and manslaughter, tcanstealing, injuries
to life or limb, injuries caused by culpable neglect
(as by permitting an unruly animal to be at
large, or opening a pit negligently), theft,
burglary, damage caused by straying animals
or fire to a neighbour's field, neglect in the
care of deposits and loans, seduction, witchcraft,
idolatry (xxii. 20), usury and pledges, veracity
in matters affecting a neighbour's character, and
im]>artia!ity in judgment (xxiii. 1-3, 6-9) are,
in outline, the subjects dealt with in the code :
intermixed (xxii. 21, 22-24, 29-31; xxiii. 4,
5) or appended (xxiii. 9, 10-12, 14-19) are
precepts touching various religious and moral
duties (as oppression of strangers or of others
unable to protect themselves, the offering of
firstlings and first-fruits, the prohibition to eat
nOID ; the injunction xxiii. 4 sq. not to refuse
help to an enemy in his need, the sacred seasons
— viz. the Sabbatical year and the Sabbath [of
both of which the scope, as here defined, is a
philanthropic one], the three annual pilgrim-
ages). The character of the society for the use
of which the code is designed, is evident from
the conditions of life which it presupposes, and
the cases which it contemplates as likely to
arise : notice, for instance, the frequency with
which the ox, the sheep, and the ass are
mentioned — they form even the typical example
of the " deposit, xxii. 9, 10 — and the allusions to
agricultural life in xxi. 33 sq., xxii. 5, 6, xxiii.
10 sq., 16. The only forms of punishment pre-
scribed are retaliation and pecuniary compensa-
tion. Definite rights are secured to the slave.
Women do not enjoy the same social equality
with men. The <?eV, or sojourner, living under
the protection of a family or the community,
has no legal status, but he must not be op-
pressed.' It is interesting to compare the Laws
of the Twelve Tables, or the Laws of Solon
(preserved in Plutarch, Vit. Sotonit), which in
many respects presuppose a similar condition
of society. In what way this code (with
additions not of course to be neglected) is made
the basis of the later legislation of Deuteronomy
(chs. xii.-xxvi.) has been shown in the article
on that Rook.
§ 12. The sequel of JE's narrative in chs. xix.-
xxiv. is xxxi. 18b-xxxiv. 28. comprising the
' Cp. W. R. Smith. O. T. J. C, p. 336 sq. Notice In
xxi. 6, xxil. 8 sq. [Heb. 7 sq. J, the archaic conception of
God being the direct source of law : cp. xvili. 16b
(where Moses* judicial decisions on points submitted to
him are termed "the statutes and laws of God"), and
1 Sam. II. 23, with the writer's note ad foe.
Digitized by
Google
1022
EXODUS
narrative of the Golden Calf and incidents
arising out of it. Ch. xxxii. as a whole may be
assigned plausibly to E, only m. 11-13 being
somewhat unlike E's usual style and manner,
and having been perhaps expanded by the com-
piler of JE (cp. Gen. xxii. 16-18, to which in
r. 13 allusion is made). Chs. xxxii. 34, xxxiii.
1-6 exhibit traces of a double narrative — in
v. 5b, for instance, the people are commanded to
do what they hare already done (». 4b)— -which
confirms the prima facie view that vv. 5a, 6 are
doublets of vv. 3b, 4b. The complication is
recognised by critics,* but no generally accepted
analysis of the entire passage has been effected.
Ch. xxxiii. 7-11 is an interesting passage,
which, as the tenses in the original show, h de-
scribes throughout Moses' habitual practice (e. 7,
" used to take and pitch," &c). In its original
connexion it is not improbable that it was
preceded by an account of the construction of
the "Tent of Meeting," and of the Ark,' of
which the Tent was to be the depository, which,
it may be conjectured, was the purpose for
which the ornaments, tr. 4-6, were employed:
when the narrative was combined with that of
P, this part of it was probably omitted on the
ground that it was no longer needed by the side
of the fuller description in chs. xxv., xxxv., &c.
Chs. xxxiii. 12— xxxiv. 9 form a continuous
whole : as it is difficult to determine whether
it belongs definitely to J or to the compiler of
J E, it is printed in the Table in the line between
the J and the E lines. Ch. xxxiv. 10-26 k in-
troduces the terms of the covenant, r. 27 : it
agrees substantially, often even verbally, with
the theocratic section of the " Book of the
Covenant " (xxiii. 10 sq.), the essential condi-
tions of which appear to be repeated here, with
some enlargement (especially in the warning
against idolatry, tv. 12-17), as the terms on
which the renewal of the covenant is granted.
The structure of JE's narrative in chs. xix.-
xxiv., xxxii.-xxxiv. is complicated. The narra-
tive appears indeed to exhibit unambiguous
marks of composition; but when the attempt is
made to distribute it in detail between the
different narrators, the criteria are frequently
indecisive; and it is possible to frame more
than one hypothesis which will account, at least
apparently, for the facts. Similarly the relation
of the Code xxxiv. 10 sq. to. the very similar Code
in xxiii. 10 sq. is not perfectly evident, and may
be differently explained. Weilhausen, Dillmann,
Jiilicher, and Kuenen have displayed in their
treatment of the subject surprising ability and
acuteness : but beyond a certain point their
conclusions diverge ; and even the most
plausible cannot claim to be more than a
possible interpretation of the facts. The writer
has accordingly made no attempt to do more
than indicate the broad and patent lines of
demarcation which occur in the narrative. In
s E.g. Kuenen, nasi. Tijdtekr. 1881, p. 310.
> Imperfects, Interchanging with perfects and the
yearn consecutive. See the writer's Hebrew limes,
H 120, 131, or Oe«.-K»nti«ch,« $ 112, 3, a («).
1 See Deut. x. 1, the terms of which presuppose the
omission of something in the existing text of Exodus
(cp. Dectkrokomy, y 10).
* Sometimes called, in contradistinction to chs. xxl.-
xxliL, the "Little B.wk of the Covenant," or the
" Words (see «. 27) of the Covenant."
EXODUS
all probability it reached its present form by
a series of stages, which can no longer be wholly
disengaged with certainty. 1
§ 13. We may now revert to chs. xxr.-xxxi.
18a, which contain P's acconnt of the instruc-
tions given to Moses respecting the Tabernacle
and the priesthood. The instructions fall into
two parts, chs. xxv.-xxix and chs. xxx.-xxxi.
The contents of chs. xxv.-xxix. relate to (1) the
vessels of the Sanctuary (ch. xxv.); (2) the
Tabernacle, its curtains, boards, Veil, and Screen
at the entrance (ch. xxvi.) ; (3) the Court round
the Tabernacle, containing the Altar of Burnt-
ofl'ering (ch. xxvii.); (4) the vestments
(ch. xxviii.) and rite of consecration (xxix.
1-37) of the priests ; (5) the daily Burnt-offer-
ing, the maintenance of which is a primary
duty of the priesthood (xxix. 38-42), followed
by what appears to be the close of the entire
body of instructions (xxix. 43—46), in which
Jehovah promises to bless the sanctuary thus
established with His abiding presence. Chs. xxx.-
xxxi. relate to (1) the Altar of Incense (xxx.
1-10); (2) the maintenance of public service
(xxx. 11-16); (3) the Brazen Laver (xxx. 17-
21) ; (4) the holy Anointing Oil (xxx. 22-33);
(5) the Incense (xxx. 34-38); (6) the nomi-
nation of Bezaleel and Oholiab (xxxi. 1-11);
(7) the observance of the Sabbath (xxxi. 12-17).
A critical question of some difficulty here
arises in connexion with the relation of
chs. xxx.-xxxi. to chs. xxv.-xxix. It is sur-
prising to find the Altar of Incense, which from
its importance might have seemed to demand a
place in ch. xxv. (among the other vessels of
the Tabernacle), mentioned for the first time in
xxx. 1-10, where the directions respecting the
essential parts of the Tabernacle are seemingly
complete (ch. xxix. 44-46): even in xxvi. 34 sq.
(where the position of the vessels of the
Sanctuary is defined) it is not named. More-
over, whereas in Ex. xxx. 10 an annual rite to
be observed in connexion with it is enjoined, in
the ceremony for the day of atonement, de-
scribed iu detail in Lev. xvi., no notice of such a
rite is to be found, and only one altar, the Altar
of Burnt-offering, is mentioned throughout the
chapter. Further, a number of passages occur
in which the Altar of Burnt-offering is described
as " the altar," implying, apparently, that there
was no other (e.g. chs. xxvii.-xxix. ; Lev. i.-iii.,
v.-vi., viii., ix., xvi.). It is argued,™ on these
grounds, that the original legislation of P
mentioned no Altar of Incense (incense being
only offered on censers, Lev. xvi. 12, &c), and
that both this and other passages in which it is
spoken of (xxx. 27, xxxi. 8, xxxv. 15, xxxvii.
25, xxxix. 38, xl. 5, 26; Lev. iv. 7, 18 ; Num.
iv. 11X or which term " the Altar " of xxvii. 1,
&c, as though for distinction, "the Altar of
Burnt-offering " (as xxx. 28, xxxi. 9, xxxv. 16,
xxxviii. 1, xl. 6, 10, 29: Lev. iv.), or "the
Brazen Altar " (xxxviii. 30, xxxix. 39), belong
to a secondary and posterior stratum of P. The
other subjects treated in chs. xxx.-xxxi. (above,
2-7) are either snch as wonld naturally find
' See further on this subject Wellh. Covtp. pp. M «!••
327 sq. ; Dillm. Comtn. pp. 189 sq., 331 sq. i JnUcner,
JPlh. 1882, pp. 295 sq. ; C. O. Monteflore, Jewtth
Quarterly Review, 1691, pp. 270 -291.
■ Wellh. Comp. pp. 137 sq. j Kuenen, Sex. t «• 13 -
Digitized by
Google
EXODUS
EXODUS
1023
place in sn Appendix, or (remarkably enough)
occasion difficulties similar to those arising oat
of the mention of the Altar of Incense. Thus
in xxix. 7, LeT. viii. 12, the ceremony of
•minting is confined to the chief priest
(Aaron); in xxx. 30 it is extended to the
ordinary priests (his "sons"). The same ex-
tension recurs in xxriii. 41, xl. 15; Ler. vii.
38, x. 7 ; Num. UL 3. That the ceremony was
limited originally to Aaron seems, however, to
be confirmed by the title " the Anointed Priest "
applied to the chief priest (Ler. iv. 3, 5, 16, vi.
22 [Heb. 15] : cp. Ex. xxix. 29 sq. ; Ler. xri. 32,
xii. 10, 12; Nun. mr. 25), which, if the
priests generally were anointed, would be desti-
tute of any distinctive significance.
These arguments are undoubtedly forcible. It
is true, the use of the term " the Altar " for the
Altar of Burnt-offering might in itself be ex-
plained by the supposition that it was so styled
car' 4t«xi*t > D passages where there was no
danger of confusion with any other altar ; but
in order to be properly estimated, the usage
most of course be viewed in connexion with
the other circumstances referred to. In con-
sidering the argument based on the silence of
Lev. xri, Delitzsch (Studien, iii. p. 117) admits
that " were LeT. xvi. silent as to the Altar of
Incense, the distinction drawn by Wellhausen
betweea two strata of P would be established : "
he contends, however, that this altar is alluded
to in r. 18. Dillmann, on the contrary (with
Oehler, Keil, fcc-X considers — as it seems, justly
— that the order of the ceremonial in Lev. xvi.
lSb-18 supports the view that the Altar of
Burnt-offering (outside the Tabernacle) is re-
ferred to in r. 18 : admitting thus that the
Altar of Incense is not alluded to, he is obliged
to own that at least Ex. xxx. 10 is an addition
to the original law, designed for the purpose of
supplementing Lev. xvi. 16b. But, even with
this concession, it remains that, whatever be the
explanation,* in the body of instructions con-
tained in Ex. xxr.-xxxi. the Altar of Incense
holds a secondary place.
The extension of the ceremony of anointing
to the ordinary priests is allowed by Dillmann
(pp. 463 sq.) to be evidence that the passages so
mentioning it are of secondary origin, unless,
with Kurtz, it could be assumed that the rite
alluded to is the sprinkling with oil and blood
noticed in Ex. xxix. 21, Lev. viii. 30, which,
however, is not termed "anointing," and is
subsequent to the anointing proper (Ex. xxix.
7; Lev. viii. 12). It is doubtful, therefore,
whether this explanation is admissible; and in his
final discussion of the sources of the Pent. (NDJ.
p. 635), Dillmann himself implicitly rejects it,
tor he remarks there that the entire section xxx.
17-38 (together with xxxi. 7 11) appears to be
* later insertion. The section on the Sabbath
(nxL 12-17), as has been frequently remarked
{'■!!■ by Delitzsch, Stwiien, xii. p. 622), has in
* Dillmann suggests that it may have been partly doe
*> lbs writer's historic conadomnsss that the Altar of
'setose did not form part of the original Idea of a
Tabernacle, as the Table. Candlestick, and Altar of
Itonu-olferlng did : Del. supposes that the Divine Idea
°f tfw Tabernacle took shape gradually in the legislator's
Rfad, and that the need of an Incense-Altar was only
KaUsed by him after the plan of the Tabernacle as a
■hole (cos. xiv.. xxix) had been completed.
rr. 13-14a affinities with the Code (the " Law
of Holiness") of which extracts have been
preserved in Lev. xviL-xxri. ; and the inference
is probably a just one, that that Code is the
ultimate source of the verses referred to.*
§ 14. Chs. xxxv.-xl. form the sequel to chs.
xxr.-xxxi., narrating the execution of the in-
structions there communicated to Hoses. Much
is repeated verbatim, with the simple change of
future tenses into past : there are, however, a
few cases of omission or abridgment, and the
order is different. The change of order is in most
cases intelligible. The injunction respecting
the Sabbath, which stands last in the instruc-
tions, occupies here the first place (xxxv. 1-3).
Next follow the presentation of offerings by
the people, and the appointment of Bexaleel and
Oholiab to superintend the work (xxxv. 4-
xxxvi. 7). In the account of the execution of
the work, the Tabernacle stands first (xxxri.
8-38); then follow the sacred vessels to be
placed in it (ch. xxxvii.), the Altar and Laver
with the Court surrounding them (xxxviii.
1-20), and particulars of the amount of metal
employed (xxxviii. 21-31). The Sanctuary
being thus completed, the dress of the Priests
is prepared (xxxix. 1-31), and the entire work
delivered to Moses (xxxix. 32-43.) Finally,
ch. xl. narrates how the Tabernacle was erected,
and its various vessels arranged in order. The
Altar of Incense and the Brazen Lnrer, it will
be noticed, which appear In the Appendix to chs.
xiT.-xxix (viz. in ch. xxx.), are here mentioned
in accordance with the place which thev properly
hold (viz. xxxvii. 25-28; xxxviii. 8). A few
unimportant verses (as xxr. 15, 22, 40) are not
repeated at all ; some other notices (as xxv. 16,
21, 30, 37b), chiefly relating to the position of
the various vessels named, are not repeated in
their corresponding place, but transferred (in
substance) to xl. 17-33 ; the only material
omissions arc the notices of the Urim and
Thummim (xxviii. 30), the Consecration of
Priests (xxix. 1-37), which is deferred till
Lev. viii., the oil for the lamps (xxvii. 20 sq.),
and the Daily Burnt-offering (xxix. 38-42),
for the repetition of which there would scarcely
be occasion. The principal instance of abridg-
ment is xxxvii. 29, where the sections dealing
with the Anointing Oil and the Incense (xxx.
22-33, 34-38) are merely referred to briefly.
In ch. xxxix, as compared with ch. xxxri., some
other cases may also be noticed.
These chapters, like ch. xxx. sq., are treated by
Wellhausen and Kuenen as belonging to a secondary
stratum of P. If the secondary nature of ch. xxx. sq. be
admitted, this conclusion will Indeed follow of necessity :
In chs. xxxv.-xxxlx. the notices referring to ch. xxxi. sq.
are Introduced in their proper order, and ch. xl. alludes
to the Altar of Incense : chs. xxxv.-xl. thus presuppose
chs. xxx. -xxxi. as well as chs. xxv.-xxlx. There ate
also other grounds, peculiar to these chapters, thought to
point In the same direction, for which it must suffice to
refer to Kuenen's carefully written note (Ha. $ «. 16).»
9 See Lsvrnccs ; or the writer's Introduction to the
Literature of tht O. T. (1891), pp. 43 sq., 54.
• S.g„ ch. xxxviii. 34-28, besides presupposing (in
the figure 603,550) the census of Num. I., appears to
imply a misunderstanding of xxx. 11-16, as though the
contribution Imposed there for the maintenance of the
service of the Sanctuary were designed to meet the cost
of Its construction.
Digitized by
Google
1024
EXODUS
Dillmann, though In BL. p. 354 sq. be bad expressed
himself In a different sense. In his final review of the
content* of P (XDJ. p. 635) adopts virtually tlie Mine
opinion, supposing the original nucleus of the six
chapters to have been limited to xxxv. 1-3, 4-5. 20 sq. ;
xxxvi. 2-0 ; xl. 1 sq., 34-38, and considering tbe rest
(which presupposes chs. xxv.-xxxl. In its present form)
to be of later orLin.
As soon as the Priest's Code \* examined with sufficient
mlnnteness. tbe question of its stratification — i.e. tbe
question whether all Its parts are perfectly consistent,
and belong to tbe same stage of Hebrew legislation —
forces itself upon tbe reader's attention ; though tbe
problem which thus arises con hardly be said to have been
as yet adequately grappled with.
§ 15. The text of Exodus, with but few ex-
ceptions, appears to be free from corruptions.
The question of the origin and probable date of
the source* of which it is composed will be
considered under the article Pentateuch, where
also their most characteristic literary features
will be noticed. The " Egyptiauisms," it per-
haps need hardly be remarked, which Canon
Cook affects to discover in the Book,* 1 and which
Canon Kawlinson accepts as well-established
fact,' are purely imaginary : the language is as
genuinely Hebrew as the language of Samuel
or Isaiah ; and the few words of foreign origin
which it exhibits (except, of course, certain
proper names) are limply such as were natural-
ized in Hebrew, just as words like paradise or
palanquin are naturalized among ourselves.
§ 16. Literature. — The Commentaries of
Dillmannand Keilon the Pentateuch, mentioned
under Genesis, and of M. M. Kalisch (London,
1855); the critical works of NOldeke (Unter-
suchungen), Wellhausen (Vie Comp. del Hex. ;
especially pp. 63-100, 136-151, 323-333),
Kuenen, and Kittel, mentioned ft.
Special Monographs. — Julius I'opper, Der
biblische Bericht uber die Stiftshiitte [on chs. xxv.-
xxxi. ; xxxv.-xl.], 1862; A. Kuenen, "Bijdragen
tot de critiek van Pent, en Josua," in the Theol.
Tijdschrift, 1880, pp. 281-302 [on ch. xvi.;
cp. Wellhausen's criticUms in the Nachtrage to
Vie Compos, des Hex. «.«.«. (1889), pp. 323-27],
1881, pp. 164-223 [an endeavour to solve the
problem presented by chs. xix.-xxiv., xxxii.-
xxxiv.; cp. Wellh. ft., pp. 327 sq.] ; — F. Delitzsch,
in the Zeitschrift fir kirM. Wise. u. kirchl.
Leben, 1880, pp. 113 sq. (the Incense-altar),
pp. 337 sq. (the Passover) ; 1 882, pp. 281 sq. (the
Decalogue) ; — Lemme, Vie rcligionsjeschichtlicht
liedeutung des Dekalogs, Breslau, 1880; — Ad.
Jtilicher, Die Quellen von Exodus i.-vii. 7,
Hal is Saxonum, 1880 ; and Vie Quellen von
Exodus vii. 8-xxiv. 1 1, in the Jahrbuchcr /fir
Protettantitche Tneolojie, 1882, pp. 79-127,
272-315 ;— C. A. Briggs, " The Little Book of the
Covenant" [Ex. xxiiv. 11-36], in the Hebrew
Student (Chicago), May 1883, pp. 264-72;
"The Greater Book of the Covenant " [Ex. xx. 22-
xxiii.], ft., June 1883, pp. 289-303];— W. H.
Green, The Hebrew Feasts, London, 1886, espe-
cially pp. 83 sq. [on ch. xii.] ; aud in Hebraica
(Chicago), 1886, pp. 1-12;— W. R. Harper, ft.,
1889, pp. 25 sq.; 1890, pp. 241 sq. ;— W. H.
* Sftaker's Conai. 1. pp. 2*4, 488 sq. (where there
are, besides, many Inaccuracies and misstatements).
' O. T. OomwKnlary, edited by Bishop ElUcott, i,
p. 13» b.
EXODUS, THE
Green, ft., 1891, p. 104 sq. ; B. W. Bacon, " JE
1 in the Middle Books of the Pent." in Journ. of
BM. Lit. 1890, pp. 161-200. [S. B. D.]
EXODUS, THE. The object of this
article is to describe the Exodus chiefly in its
geographical aspect, and to give the results
arrived at in the latest researches on this great
event. The chronology and history will be only
shortly referred to, having been treated more
fully in other articles.
1. Vote. — The date of the Exodus is discussed
under Chronoloq y. Most Egyptologists consider
that this great event took place under Menephthah,
the son of Raraeses II., and that it was facilitated
by the troubles which beset the beginning of
Menephthah's reign, especially by the invasion
of Mediterranean nations which threatened his
throne. Lepaius puts the Exodus in the year
1314 B.C. The date most commonly adopted is
1312 ; but it varies according to the views taken
of Egyptian chronology. Lately, Dr. Mahler of
Vienna, explaining the plague of darkness as a
solar eclipse, has fixed the 27th of March, 1335
B.C., as the day and year of the Exodus. It
would thus fall, not in the reign of Menephthah,
but under Ramcses 11., whose reign the Vien-
nese astronomer has calculated to have lasted
from 1347 to 1280 U.C. If we adopt Dr. Mahler's
calculation as to the Exodus, it raises a con-
siderable historical difficulty, for it is hardly
possible to admit that the Hebrews should have
left Egypt at the beginning of the reign of
Rameses II., when the king was at the pinnacle
of his might and power (cp. P8BA. xii. 167 sq,
xiii. 439 sq.).
2. History. — The Exodus is a great turning-
point in Biblical history. With it the Patri-
archal dispensation ends and the Law begins, and
with it the Israelites cease to be a family and
become a nation. It is therefore important to
observe how the previous history led up to this
event. The advancement of Joseph, and the
placing of his kinsmen in what was to a pas-
toral people " the best of the land," favoured
the multiplying of the Israelites, and the pre-
servation of their nationality. The subsequent
l>ersecution bound them more firmly together,
and at the same time loosened the hold that
Egypt had gained upon them. It was thus that
the Israelites were ready when Moses declared
his mission to go forth as one man from the
land of their bondage.
The history of the Exodus itself commences
with tbe close of that of the Ten Plagues.
[Plaques of Egypt.] In the night in which, at
midnight, the firstborn were slain (Ex. xii. 29),
Pharaoh urged the departure of the Israelites
(cr. 31, 32). They at once set forth from
Rameses (tv. 37, 39), apparently during the
night (r. 42), bnt towards morning, on the
15th day of the first month (Num. xxxiii. 3).
They made three journeys and encamped by the
Red Sea. Here the vanguard of Pharaoh's army,
his chariots and horses, overtook them, and the
great miracle occurred by which they were saved.
3. Geography, — The determination of the route
taken by the Israelites when they left Egypt
is a difficult and much discussed question, on
which, however, recent excavations have thrown
some light. The Hebrews were settled in the
land of Goshen, which originally was the region
Digitized by
Google
EXODUS, THE
between the present towns of Relbeic, Zagazig,
and the site called Tell el-Kebir, and belonged to
the nome of Heliopolis. When the people in-
treated in number, they extended north towards ,
Tanis (Zoan), south towards Heliopolis, and east
in the Wady Tmneilit [GosnEjj]. They carried
with them the name " land of Goshen," which
applied to all the territory in which they were
lettled; bnt the centre, Goshen proper, wa*
EXODUS, THE
1025
the region originally assigned to them, also
called ''land of Rameses." It contained the
city of Rameses, the site of which has not yet
been identified. It is from there that they
started ; there, between Tell el-Kebir and Zagazig,
was their place of meeting, to which flocked the
people scattered north and south towards Tanis
and Heliopolis. We do not know where the
king was living when those events took place ;
— . — — Nauille, Unant, etc.
■ mi ■ Sir W. Dawson,
-l-i-i fliers, Godet.
it bu generally been admitted that it was at |
Tanis, but it may have been at Bubasti?, a much i
nearer locality, which was then a city of great !
importance, and a favourite residence of the
Pharaohs.
In going to the land of Canaan they had the
«hoi« between two roads. One went through |
Tanis and crossed the Pelusiac branch of the |
Site at the place now called Kantarah; soon ,
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
Vap to UhutTftte ttw IioJtu.
afterwards it reached the coast of the Meditcr
ranean, and from
there the frontiers of the
Philistines. This road is called in Scripture
(Ex. xiii. 17) "the way of the land of the
Philistines," which the Hebrews were to avoid,
for they would have had to conquer or to march
round important strongholds and cities occupied
by large garrisons which would have imperilled
considerably their journey. This statement,
Digitized by
Google
1026
EXODUS, THE
" God led them not by the way of the land of
the Philistines, although that was near" (Ex.
xiii. 17), would alone be sufficient to refute the
opinion of Schleiden (Die Landenge von Sues),
who considers the «|1D DJ, Yam Suph, as being
not the Red Sea, but Lake Serbonis, on the coast
of the Mediterranean ; and who makes the
Hebrews follow a track of sand between the
lake and the sea.
The other route, through which Moses led the
people, followed the valley now called Widy
Tumeillt, and reached the desert near the pre-
sent town of Ismailia. It was on this way that
Jacob had arrived several hundred years before,
since we know that the place where he met
Joseph was Pithom-Heroopolis. fPrrHOM.] This
road skirted the northern end of the Red Sea,
which at that time extended much further north
than now, comprising not only the Bitter Lakes,
but very likely also Lake Timsah. The opinions
differ as to the exact spot where the Hebrews
crossed the Yam Suph, the " sea of reeds ;" but
the scholars and travellers who have dealt with
the subject lately, agree on one point, that the
place of the crossing must be looked for north
of Suez.
Rameses, the starting-place, must not be con-
sidered the name of a city, but as referring to
the land of Rameses. [Rameses.] It is more
natural to suppose that the camping-ground and
the place of meeting for u large multitude was
a district rather than a city, which could have
contained only a small portion of the departing
people. From there to the border of the desert
of Etham the distance to be travelled over was
about thirty miles.
The first station after Rameses was Succoth,
a Hebrew word meaning " tents." It seems to
be a well-appropriated name for the resting-
place of a nomad population ; but as it refers to
n locality situated in Egypt, it is more natural to
take Succoth as an Egyptian word which has
been slightly distorted in its form, so as to have
a meaning in the language of the Hebrews, though
retaining nearly the same sound as in Egyptian.
Succoth is not a city, it is a district, and may
be considered as an altered form of the Egyptian
name Thuket or Thukut, a region the capital
of which was the city of Pithom. This identi-
fication, proposed first by Brugsch, has been
adopted by Ebers, Lieblein, and other Egypto-
logists.
From Succoth, pushing straightforward, the
Hebrews reached "Etham in the edge of the
wilderness " (Ex. xiii. 20). All the desert east
of the present Suez Canal, where the -Israelites
marched three days after having crossed the sea,
was called the desert of Etham. This name is
transcribed by the Septuagint '09<£p(Ex. xiii. 20)
and BovSiy (Num. xxxiii. 6). It has been sug-
gested that Etham was the Egyptian word
X«'«»H meaning " an enclosure," " a fort," and
that it referred either to the fortified wall which
the Pharaohs railed in the isthmus in order to
be protected against invasions of the Asiatic
nomads (Ebers, Gosen, p. 522), or to some strong-
hold of which we cannot fix exactly the site
(Brugsch, Diet. Ge"o%, p. 646 ; Knobel-Dillmann
on Exod. xiv. 2). This etymology seems doubtful,
for the reason that the Hebrew language has also
the root Drill, with the same sense ; and it is
not easy to understand why the Hebrews should
EXODUS, THE
have modified the word as if it had been strange
to tbem, while they had it in their own lan-
guage in the same form, and with the same mean-
ing. Etham can also be compared to the region
of Atuma or Atima, mentioned several times in
the papyri as bordering on Egypt, and inhabited
by nomad shepherds (Naville, Pithom, p. 28).
Following the Widy TumeiUt, along the canal
dug by Rameses II., parallel in its direction to
the present Freshwater Canal, the Hebrews had
reached the wilderness, with the intention of
taking a desert route, the entrance of which is
still to be recognised, when they received a com-
mand which at first sight seemed to throw them
entirely out of their way (Ex. xiv. 2, R. V.) :
" And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,
Speak unto the children of Israel, that they
turn back and encamp before Pi-hahiroth, be-
tween Migdol and the sea, before Baal-zephon :
over against it shall ye encamp by the sea."
By this command they were compelled, after
having perhaps retraced their steps for a short
way, to make a right angle, and to march south,
so as to put the sea between themselves aud the
desert. The place where they were to camp is
pointed out minutely, the neighbouring localities
being indicated as landmarks ; but the sites can
only be determined by conjecture, and the identi-
fications proposed differ considerably. For the
expression JVVniVg »J5)7. "before Pi-hahi-
roth," the Septuagint have the following trans-
lations : axtyewn TJji liravKcas (Ex. xiv. 2, 9),
Ari ari/ia Elpie (Num. xxxiii. 7; see Swete's
text), a*4vam ElpiiS (v. 8). Here again
several interpretations have been suggested.
Jablonski proposes the Coptic ni £-30
P(JUT~> "the place where sedge grows,"
which would correspond to the localities called
at present Ghuweybet-el-boos, "the bed of
reeds." This etymology has been adopted
by Ebers, while Brugsch has advocated another
translation derived from Semitic roots: "the
entrance of the caverns or of the pits,
PipaBpa (Diet. Gtog. p. 97). It is also possible
that Pi-hahiroth should only be a modified form
of Pi kcrehet, the house of the serpent, the name
of a sanctuary of Osiris belonging to the nome
of Pithom, and nearer the sea. [Pi-hahiboth.J
We know with certainty that there was a
city of Migdol, MiySctkov (Jer. xliv. 1, xlvi. Hi
Ezek. xxix. 10, xxx. 6), on the north-eastern
frontier of the land, the present Tell es Sennit.
twelve miles from Pelusium according to the
Itinerary of Antoninus ; but the name mentioned
here clearly refers to another place. The word
maktar or tnaktal exists also in the Egypt'» n '. 8n *
guage, with a fortified wall as determinative,
and it means, as in Hebrew, "a tower. »«
know of a "tower of Seti I. ;" and there most
have been many watch-towers in Egyp'i ^I""
cially on the border, just as in Italy there are a
great number of " Torre." Baal-xephon is a place
where the Semitic god Baal was worshipped.
The name is formed like Baal-Gad, Baal-Hanwn.
According to Philo, ZaDhon was the Phoenician
name for the North wind. Baal-zephon, men-
tioned in a papyrus as Baal Zapuna, would tn
be Baal of the North, or the North wind, ana
might be located, according to Tischendort an
Ebers, on one of the heights overhanging "
Red Sea. The name being Semitic, it Is natnra
Digitized by VjOOQlC
EXODUS, THE
look for the site on the eastern side of the
u apposite the camp, — IfeKurlas, according
the Septuagint.
From the scanty information we possess of
a* localities, different roads have been pro-
sed for the crossing of the sea. Ebers makes
t Israelites change their course near the pre-
rt city of Ismailia, and march south along the
[tor Lakes nearly as far as Snez. Pi-hahiroth
for him the mined castle of Agerud, about
i miles north-west of Suez. Migdol is near
: present Shaloof el Terraba, on the east side
the present canal ; and Baal-zephon the sum-
t of Mount Atakah, south of Suez, towering
a the Red Sea, and risible from a great dis-
tn. The Hebrews would have crossed in the
pons which are immediately north of Suez.
is the most southern route proposed, and
rooted also by Professor Godet (Bibl. annotee,
415). An objection to which it is open, is
ie Terr long march which the Hebrews would
»e had to make when they turned round at
tham, in order to reach their new camp at
i-hanimta.
Sir W. Dawson, who explored the place in
883, has come to the following conclusion
Jfoders Saact in Bible Lands, p. 389) :— " After
imevhat cartful examination of the country,'
believe that only one place can be found to
itisfr the conditions of the Mosaic narrative ;
smelr, the south part of the Bitter Lake, be-
veen station Fayid on the railway and station
*neffeh. .Sear this place are some inconsider-
bJe ancient rains, and flats covered with
rwio and Scirpus, which may represent Pi-
liireth. On the west is the very conspicuous
»k known as Jebel Shebremet, more than
XI feet high (Migdol), commanding a very
tie prospect, and forming a most conspicuous
>j«t to the traveller approaching from the
rth. Opposite, in the Arabian desert, rises
it prominent northern point of the Jebel er-
•oitt, marked on the maps as Jebel Maksheih,
id which may have been the Baal-zephon of
loses. Here there is also a basin-like plain,
at»Me for an encampment, and at its north
It the foot of Jebel Shebremet juts out so as
> form a narrow pass, easy of defence. Here
'» the Bitter Lake narrows, and its shallower
ft begins, and a north-east wind, combined
Tth a low tide, would produce the greatest
«"iile effect in lowering the water."
The route which is advocated by the author
'this article, and which seems to him to agree
rith the results of the excavations in the Delta,
' ««11 a with the Biblical narrative, is the
j*n northern one, between the Bitter Lakes and
1*» Timsah. The Israelites, arriving near the
f«tat city of Ismailia, receive the order to
*» ts the south and to march along the sea as
** " » place where the sea was narrow, the
•"a shallow, and where there was a watch-
■"vo (Hiplol), which is supposed to have been
■* lie hill where many centuries afterwards
p"»« erected a stele, and which has been called
*! fc French engineers the Serapeum. Pi-hahi-
">» would be the Egyptian city of Pikerehet,
l < »«a«ary of Osiris, which is represented now
• •* nins situate at the place where the
■J* isaes out of Lake Timsah, at the foot of
"*•* Miriam. Baal-xephon would be a sanc-
"T * » hill, on the other fide of the sea, an
EXORCIST
1027
isolated place of worship, like the so-called
sheikhs of the present day. This view, which is
that of Linant, who derives it chiefly from
geological arguments, has been adopted by
Lieblein, Poole, and by the author of the Suez
Canal, Lesseps.
The route of the Exodus has called forth a
great number of books and papers, the latest of
which are : Ebers, Vurch Gosen turn Simd, 2nd
ed. ; Linant, Memoire stir les principaux travaux
(Tut Hit? publique execute's en Egypte, p. 137 sq. ;
Lieblein, Handel vnd Schijfahrt auf dem Rothcn
Metre; Sir W. Dawson, Egypt and Syria,
p. 43 sq. ; Modern Science in Bible Lands,
p. 382 sq.; Naville, The Store City of Pithom
and the Route of the Exodus, 3rd ed. [Memoirs
of the Egypt Exploration Fund}. [E. K.]
EXOBCIST («*{o»Ki(rrf)t ; exorcuta). The
word exorcist occurs only once in the Bible
(Acts xix. 13), and is then employed ns a de-
signation of persons who professed to cast out
evil spirits by exorcising them, i.e. by adjuring
them by some potent name or spell, to come
out of those whom they possessed (opxffw A/ias
roe 'IrproDr, Acts, I. c. ; cp. /(opa-aVir, opo-oot ;
Joseph. Ant. viii. 2, § 5). The cognate verb
(t'fooKi'faO is found once in the N. T. and once in
the LXX. Version of the 0. T. ; but in both of
these places it is used in its classical sense of
administering an oath to a person, or charging
him with an oath, and as a synonym of the
simple verb (6pnt(a) in the same sense (cp. Matt,
xxvi. 63, with Mark v. 7 ; Gen. xxiv. 3, Heb.
'!|B , 3G'K, " I will make thee swear," with r. 37 ;
Demosth. 1265-6. See also 1 Thess. v. 27, where
iropxlfa is the generally accepted reading).
The use of the word " exorcists " in the pas-
sage from the Acts, as a recognised description
of certain " strolling Jews," confirms what we
know from other sources as to the practice of
exorcism among the Jews. The only example
of anything at all resembling the practice in
the 0. T., though as regards the means cm-
ployed it is not properly an exorcism, is the
familiar instance of David playing on his harp
before Saul, when " an evil spirit from the Lord
troubled him * (1 Sam. xvi. 14). The effect of
David's playing is said to have been that " Saul
was refreshed and was well, and the evil spirit
departed from him" (v. 23). The way in
which both the malady and its cure are spoken
of by the servants of Saul (t>. 16) shows that
the idea of demoniacal possession and of deliver-
ance from it was familiar to the Jews of that
day. Passing to the N. T., we 'find our Lord
Himself recognising not only the prevalence,
but in some cases at least the efficacy, of exor-
cism among the Jews of His own day. When
the nature of the charge brought against Him
by the Pharisees, and the circumstances under
which it was brought, are taken into account, it
is impossible to regard His question to them,
" If I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do
your disciples (uiol) cast them out ? " (Matt. xii.
27) as anything short of an admission, that
there were instances in which exorcism was
successfully practised by the disciples of the
Pharisees. The only alternative is to degrade
Him, morally and intellectually, to the level of
His adversaries, and to suppose, that in order to
silence or conciliate them, He credited them
3 U 2
Digitized by
Google
1028
EXORCIST
EXORCIST
with n power which He and they alike knew to
be simulated. The remark of the people on
another occasion, when our Lord had cost out a
devil, "It was never no seen in Israel," and the
wonder they evinced, may have been called
forth, as Ali'onl suggests, by the manner rather
than by the fact of the cure (Matt. ix. 33 ;
cp. Mark ii. 12). Justin Martyr has an in-
teresting suggestion as to the possibility of a
Jew of his day successfully exorcising a devil,
by employing the name of the God of Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob (AAA' tl &pa 4(opiti(oi tij
ifiiy Kara rov 8tov 'A$paafi Kal 0<ov 'laaax
(tal flfou 'laicift, iawt inroTayfiafrai [to Sai-
Ii6vu>v\ Dial, cum Trijph. c. 85, p. 311, C.
See also Apol. ii. c. 6, p. 45, B, where he
claims for Christianity superior but not
necessarily exclusive power in this respect.
Compare the statements of Iren. adv. Haeres.
ii. 5, and the authorities quoted by Grotius on
Matt. xii. 27). But Justin goes on to say that
the Jewish exorcists, as n class, had sunk down
to the superstitions rites and usages of the
heathen ("HJi) pUrrot ol 4( iijiSiv ttropKiarai tjj
T *X*Vt Hcrtp t«l T«t tSvij, xp&fit'ot J(opict(ovai
Kal Ovfitdnaari Kal KaraSiafiois xp<brTai, thov).
It accords with experience, that the decay of a
religious system should be marked by the pro-
fane and spurious imitation of spiritual powers
which were once really, though it may be excep-
tionally, possessed by its adherents. " Non
habebant quidem Judaei exorcistas ex Legis pre-
script: verum scimus Deum, ut in foederis sui
(ide puroque cultu illos retineret, suam inter eos
praesentiam variis miraculis subinde testatum
esse. Ita fieri potuit ut invocato Dei nomine
daemones fugarent. Populus vero talem Dei
virtutem expertns, ordinarinm sibi munus
temere instituit" (Calvin on Matt. xii. 27).
The driving away of an evil spirit by fumiga-
tion, as described in the Book of Tobit (viii.
2, 3), though not strictly an exorcism, is an
example of such perversion. Josephus, after
asserting of Solomon, rpivous itopKiivtur icari-
Aiirfy, oh ivti/ura ra Sat/ioVta bs M*) KtT *
inavtKDttv luTlidiKowt, says that he himself had
seen one Eleazar, a Jew, releasing people from
the power of demons by the method of Solomon,
in the presence of Vespasian and his sons and
soldiers (Ant. viii. 2, § 5). In another place
(Hell. Jud. vii. 6, § 3) he has a wild story of
exorcism by the use of a root, called Baaras,
from the name of the place where it grows. It
was the profane use by strolling impostors of
the name of Jesus, as a charm or spell to dis-
possess evil spirits, that issued in the disastrous
failure recorded in the Book of the Acts (xix.
13 sq.).
The Christian miracle of casting out devils,
whether as performed by Christ or by His apos-
tles and followers, is never called by the name
of txorcitm in the N. T. ; nor does it appear
that adjuration was used in performing it. The
simple word of command, coming as it did from
His lips " with authority and power " (Luke iv.
36, cp. Mark i. 27), was enough in the case
of our Lord to ensure the result, though, in
some instances at least, that word rose, it should
seem, to special dignity and solemnity, and was
not obeyed without marked tokens of resistance.
The word most commonly used by the Evangel-
ists to describe our Lord's action is iwtrlurio-t.
It is used of the miracle in the synagogue at
Capernaum by the only two of them who record
it, with the addition of the actual terms (<t>ifu*~
0i)ti, ital f(eA0< «■{ auTov) in which the rebuke
was conveyed (Mark i. 25 ; Luke iv. 35). All
three of the Synoptists use it in describing
the miracle on the possessed child, immediately
after the Transfiguration (Matt. xvii. 18;
Mark ix. 25; Luke ix. 42); St. Mark alone
giving the solemn form of address (to urtipa
to aAaAor teal xatpiv, iyit not ttttiaau,
ffcAOe «"{ avrov, ko! /ii)k«V» tiWAfbjj tts
atroV), called forth perhaps by the pecu-
liar malignity of the spirit and his reluc-
tance to desert his prey (c. 26). In the
miracle in the country of the Gadarenes, St.
Mark's ?{<A0e (v. 8) becomes in St. Luke vapty-
y«A« <?(cA0eie (viii. 29 ; or TopforysAAe). The
daughter of the Syro-Phoenician woman was
set free by His mere volition, without personal
contact at all (Mark vii. 29, 30). Authority
(4(ov<r(a) to cast out devils was bestowed by
Christ while on earth upon the Apostles and
the seventy disciples (Matt. x. 1 ; Luke i.
19 : cp. Luke iv. 30 ; Mark i. 27), and a
like power was promised by Him to believers
after His Ascension (Mark xvi. 17). But
though this power was to be exercised by them
" in His Name " (Luke x. 17 ; Mark xvi. 17 :
cp. Matt. vii. 22 ; Mark ix. 38), the virtue of
that Name, as simply uttered in faith, appears
to have sufficed, without any formula of adjura-
tion such as would properly constitute an exor-
cism (irapayyfAAn <roi iy r. ovo/*. 'li\<r. Xp.,
Acts xvi. 18, the only case in which the words
used are given. Sec v. 16 ; viii. 7). In one case,
which however is specially mentioned as excep-
tional, " handkerchiefs or aprons," carried away
to them from the body of St. Paul, had power
to deliver the possessed from the evil spirits
who tormented them (Acts xix. 12).
The reality of exorcism, or of the expulsion
of evil spirits which is commonly understood by
that name, must of course depend upon the
reality of possession. If there be no such thins:
as demoniacal possession, there can be no need
and no room for deliverance from it. But if.
by a careful consideration of those passages of
the N. T. which bear upon the subject, we are
led to the conclusion that " there are evil
spirits, subjects of the Evil One, who, in the days
of the Lord Himself and Hia Apostles especially,
were permitted by God to exercise a direct in-
fluence over the souls and bodies of certain
men " [Demoniacs] ; then it is only reasonable
to suppose that He Who " for this cause was
manifested, that He might destroy the works of
the devil" (1 John iii. 8; cp. Acts x. 38),
should grapple with and overcome that in-
fluence. At the same time, it should not be
forgotten that the argument is strong, wn "j.
taken in the reverse order. From the reality of
expulsion we may reasonably infer the reality
of possession. No theory of accommodation can
satisfactorily account for the language used by
Christ in casting out devils. As well might we
affirm, " if a physician were solemnly to address
the moon, bidding it to abstain from harming his
patient " (Trench, Notes on the Miracles), that he
was only employing the popular language which
speaks of madness as lunacy, as to affirm thst
— when our Lord says to one brought to Him as
Digitized by
Google
EXPIATION
possessed, " Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge
thee, come oat of him, and enter no more into
him " (Mark ix. 25) — it is an honest and truth-
ful accommodation to the views and prejudices
of His hearers on the subject of possession. If
possession were not real, He Who is "the
Troth " could not so have spoken. If so He.
spoke and was obeyed, then possession and His
victory over it are undoubted facts. [T. T. P.]
EXPIATION. [Sacrifice.]
EYE-SERVICE. It has been pointed out
{It. D., Amer. ed.) that we are indebted to tbe
translators of the Bishops' Bible for this ren-
dering of 6$8a\ttoSov\tia (Ephes. vi. 6 ; Col. iii.
22). It describes that service which, duly per-
formed only when the master's eye is upon it, is
fur that reason reluctant and mercenary. [F.]
EZAB, 1 Ch. i. 38. [Ezeic]
EZ'BAI ('am ; B. 'AC«/W, N. •$*, A. 'AC# ;
Asbal), father of Naari, who was one of David's
thirty mighty men (1 Ch. ii. 37). In the
parallel list (2 Sam. xxiii. 35) the names are
given " Paarai the Arbite," which Kennicott
decides to be a -corruption of the reading in
Chronicles (Dissertation, be, p. 209). It is to
be noted that some twenty MSS. of the text in
Samuel read Oupai vibs too *A<r/9( (Driver in
loco). [K.]
KZ'BOy QWX; ea<raP<iy; Kxbon). 1. Son
«f Gad, and founder of one of the Gadite families
(Gen. xlvi. 16 ; Num. xxvi. 16). In the latter
passage the name is written '3TK (A. V. Ozni),
probably by a corruption of the text of verv
early date (or, by tradition, Delitzsch [1887J,
Oen. in loco), since the LXX. (r. 25) have B.
'Af.wi (B*. 'AfurW, AF. 'AfoiW). The process
mav have been the accidental omission of the 3
io the first instance (as in *1tIP3M, Abiezer
[Josh, xvii. 2], which in Num. xxvi. is written
^TB*K, Jeezer), and then, when '3VK was no
longer a Hebrew form, the changing it into
2. 'Katfciv. Son of Bela, the son of Ben-
jamin, according to 1 Ch. vii. 7. It is singular,
however, that while Ezbon is nowhere else
mentioned among the sons of Bela, or Benjamin,
he appears here in company with ''"fV, Iri,
which is not a Benjamite family either, accord-
ing to the other lists, but which is found in
company with Ezbon among the Gadite families,
both in Gen. xlvi. 16 (Eri, , TJ?) and Num. xxvi.
16. Were these two Gadite families incorporated
into Benjamin after the slaughter mentioned
in Judg. xx. ? Possibly they were from Jabesh-
Gilead (cp. xxi. 12-14). [BECKER.] 1 Ch.
vii. 2 seems to fix the date of the census as in
king David's time. [A. C. H.]
EZECHI'AS (B. 'Efefot, A. '£(«(«; Ozias,
Euchias). 1. 1 Esd. ix. 14. Son of Theocanus,
we of those who took up the matter of "strange"
marriage with " strange wives ; " put for Jah-
«iah (R. V. Jahzeiah), son of Tikvah, in Ezra
1 IS (B. Aa(<uL, K*. -as, A. '\a(ias). 3. 2 Esd.
»ii. 40. [HEZEKIAH.]
EZEKIEL
1029
EZECI'AS ('E(tKlas ; Ezechias), 1 Esd.
ix. 43, one of those who stood on the right hand
of Ezra when he read the Book of the Law ; for
Hilkiah in the parallel passage, Neh. viii. 4.
EZEKI'AS (*Ef<«&u, and so Westcott and
Hort in N. T. ; Ezechias), Ecclus. xlviii. 17, 22,
xlix. 4; 2 Mace. xv. 22 ; Matt. i. 9, 10. [Heze-
KIAH.]
EZE'KIEL (bxpTIT). The name is derived
from ^t pJIV, God iriW strengthen (Gesen. Thes.
i. 464), or from h% pjnj, God vUl prevail
(Simonis Onomast. V. T. p. 499). The name
has been strangely misrepresented. The LXX.
calls the Prophet 'lt(tKii)\ (so too Ecclus.
xlix. 8); Josephus, 'U(tnir)kos ; Vulg. Ezechiel ;
Luther, Hesechiel. The same Hebrew name
occurs in 1 Ch. xxiv. 16 as that of the head of
the twentieth of the twenty-four priestly courses,
and there the A. V. represents it by Jehezekcl.
Jewish writers give it under the nearer and
more correct form of Jcchezk-el. Abarbanel
(Praef. in Ezech.) gives a direct significance to
the name, as that of "one who narrated the
might of God to be displayed in the future."
Villalpandus (Pracf. in Ezech. x.) sees a refer-
ence by the Prophet to his own name in the
word D'j?jr) (on the one hand " impudent," on
the other "strong" or "firm") in Ezek. iii.
7-9 ; and at last we get the wholly groundless
conjecture that it was a title applied to the
Prophet descriptively after the commencement
of his career (Sanctius, Prolegom. in Ezech.
p. 2 ; Carpzov, Introd. ii. pt. ii. ch. v.).
The Prophet Ezekiel was, as he himself informs
ns, " the son of Buzi the priest " (i. 3). In the
A. V. and R. V. the clause is rendered " Ezekiel
the priest, the son of Buzi," and this translation
is defended by Hengstenberg, who takes it to
mean that Lzekiel was priest of the exiles
among whom he lived. The Hebrew accent
however points to the other rendering, which
is generally adopted by Jewish writers. The
word Buz (M3) means contempt, and it might
seem strange that such a name should be con-
ferred on any child, yet this was also the name
of the second son of Milcah and Nahor. The
Rabbis, however, have built a theory upon the
name. They have a rule that, whenever a
prophet names his father, the father must also
have been a prophet, and Rabbi David Qimcbi
in his commentary mentions a conjecture that
Ezekiel was the son of Jeremiah, who was called
Buzi because he was rejected and despised. It
need hardly be said that the conjecture is im-
possible, as also is the tradition mentioned by
St. Gregory of Nazianzus that Ezekiel was a
servant of Jeremiah. Of the real relations
which subsisted between the two Prophets we
shall speak further on ; all that we know of
Buzi is that he was a priest of Jerusalem.
Ezekiel thus belonged to the highest aristocracy
of his nation, and it is obvious that he received
from his father a careful and learned education.
The date of his birth depends on the interpre-
tation given to Ezek. i. 1, where he mentions
his call "in the thirtieth year," and "in the
fifth year of Jehoiachin's captivity." The
latter expression gives us, according to the
Hebrew way of reckoning, the date B.C. 594 ;
Digitized by
Google
1030
EZEKIEL
and as, in all other places, Ezekiel dates from
the year of Jehoiachin's captivity (viii. 1 ;
xxiv. 1; xxix. 17; xxx. 20; xl. 1), we are fairly
acquainted with the chronology of his prophe-
cies. The expression "in the thirtieth year"
has been variously explained. Many commen-
tators refer it to the thirtieth year from the new
era of Nabopolassar, father of Nebuchadnezzar,
who began to reign B.C. 625 (Kawlinson,
Herodotus, i. 508). It has been supposed that
Ezekiel thus furnished a Chaldaean as well as a
Jewish date, and similar dates are found in Dan.
ii. 1, vii. 1 ; Ezra vii. 7 ; Neh. ii. 1, v. 14
(Rosenmiiller, Schol. ad loc. ; Scaliger, de emend.
Temp. Prolegom. p. xii.). On the other hand,
Ezekiel nowhere else alludes to this epoch, and
it does not seem to be certain that the accession
of Nabopolassar was observed as an era in
Babylon. Setting aside the conjecture of some
early commentators mentioned by Jerome
(Comment, in Ezech.~), and followed by R.
Qinichi and Hitzig, that the expression refers to
the thirtieth year from the year of jubilee, we
may observe that the Targum of Jonathan has
"thirty years after Hilkiah the high-priest had
found the Book of the Law in the vestibule
under the porch at midnight, after the setting of
the moon, in the days of Josiah, &c, in the
month of Thammuz, in the fifth day of the
month" (cp. 2 K. xxii. 8-xxiii. 26). This
view is adopted by Jerome, Grotiua, Ussher,
Havernick, &c. The Book was discovered
in the eighteenth year of Josiah, and the
date thus furnished coincides with the refer-
ence to the fifth year of king Jehoiachin's
captivity. But there is no trace, either in
Ezekiel or elsewhere, that the finding of the
Book of the Law was ever used to mark an era,
and there can now be little doubt that by the
expression " in the thirtieth year "• Ezekiel was
referring to his own age. This is the mote
likely because he is speaking of a strictly
personal incident, and because at the age of
thirty a priest assumed his full functions (Num.
iv. 23-30). To one who writes more than any
of the earlier Prophets in a priestly spirit, and
was so deeply saturated with priestly traditions,
it was natural to refer to a date which added
new solemnity to the commencement of his
prophetic mission, because it connected that
mission with the hereditary duties of his office.
It is however a fact of profound significance
that the birth of the Prophet happened at the
period in which Josiah, startled by the revela-
tion which he found in the Book of the Law,
began his great reform of worship. The effects
of that reform must have been deeply felt in
the education of a boy whose father was a
priest, and who lived under the very shadow of
the Temple. Whether Ezekiel during his
earlier years travelled among the neighbouring
nations, and so acquired those vivid conceptions
of their circumstances which he afterwards
embodied in his prophecies, we cannot tell ; but
he was brought up amid the influences of a
reformation, during which the Temple and its
* The Hebrew expression means literally " In thirty
years." It may be compared with "after forty
years." to Indicate tbc age of Absalom in 2 Sam. xv. 7 ;
unless, with the Peshltto, Vulgate, and many MSS., we
here read " four " (see Driver in loco).
EZEKIEL
ritual occupied no small part of the thoughts
of his people. Jeremiah, who had attained to
manhood before the great religious movement
which marked the days of Josiah, was less pro-
foundly affected by it. He earnestly enforced
the truth that offerings and services were in
themselves far from sufficient ; and when he
witnessed that utter ruin of his nation and of
its Temple which he had prophesied, he became
the herald of a new covenant, and found comfort
in the thought of days when there should
indeed be no Ark and no Temple, yet all
should know the Lord their God, and have the
Law written in their hearts (Jer. iii. 15—18 ;
xxxi. 31-34). The work to which Ezekiel was
called was different. The day for the New
Covenant of which Jeremiah prophesied had not
yet dawned, and the younger Prophet was com-
missioned, while teaching to his nation many-
spiritual truths of the deepest importance, to
keep alive in their hearts that faithfulness to
the old ordinances which inspired them with
hope and patriotism during the centuries which
were yet to elapse before the Desire of all
nations came suddenly to that Second Temple
which the returning exiles raised from the ruins
of the First (Hag. ii. 7 ; Mai. iii. 1).
King Josiah, at the early age of thirty-nine,
fell in the great battle of Megiddo (B.C. 608),
after receiving a crushing defeat at the hands of
Pharaoh Necho, king of Egypt. The disastrous
end of so good a king was a sore trial to the
faith of the pious Israelites. But worse trials
were to follow. Pharaoh placed Jehoiakim, the
eldest son of Josiah, as his vassal on the throne
of Judah, but in B.C. 605 was himself defeated
at Carchemish by Nebuchadnezzar. The con-
queror allowed Jehoiakim to retain his throne,
but in spite ol this Jehoiakim rebelled against
Nebuchadnezzar three years later, and was slain
in the eleventh year of a bad reign (2 K. xxiii.
37 ; 2 Ch. xxxvi. 8). His son and successor,
Jehoiachin, reigned but three months and ten
days, at the close of which Nebuchadnezzar
carried him away captive to Babylon with his
family, his treasure, and ten thousand prisoners
(2 K. xxiv. 14, 16)," among whom were the
flower of the aristocracy and of the male popu-
lation of Jerusalem. This took place in the
year 597 B.C.
Among these prisoners was Ezekiel, who must
accordingly have been about twenty-five years
old. Josephus, indeed, whose account of this
period is both untrustworthy and marked by
positive errors, says that he was carried away
to Babylon while he was yet a boy (Jos. Antt.
x. 7, § 3). But this statement is inherently
improbable. Ezekiel's last prophecy is dated in
the twenty-seventh year of the exile of Jehoia-
chin (xxix. 17), and it is unlikely that he long
survived that date. If then he was only a boy
at the beginning of the exile, he must have died
at an early age, and must have begun his pro-
phetic work as a very young man ; a fact which
would almost certainly have been mentioned by
tradition. Besides this, it is hardly probable
that Ezekiel would have received so deep an
b According to Jer. Iii. 28, the number of prisoners
was 3023. For the confusion of dates and numbers in
the accounts of the various deportations, see Ewald.
Oaek. Itr. ill. 736.
Digitized by
Google
EZEKIEL
impress from the Temple services, or have pre-
sented so vigorous and mature a type of the
priestly character, as that which is manifested
is his Book, if he had been taken from Jerusalem
be/ore his habits and convictions were fully
formed. There seems to be little ground for
Theodoret's supposition that Ezekiel was a
Xazarite.
Nebuchadnezzar was not one of the mere
rough soldiers who founded some of the ancient
monarchies. He resembled Alexander the Great
in his powers of organisation and in the breadth
of his designs, and, like Cyrus and Darius, he is
always spoken of with respect by the Hebrew
Prophets (Ezek. xxvi. 7 ; Dan. v. 18, &c). The
captivity which he inflicted on the Jewish exiles
took the form of a deportation or transmigra-
tion, and their lot was not aggravated by need-
less cruelties. Ezekiel was placed with a little
colony of his companions at Tel Abib (" Hill of
grassland ") on the river Chebar (iii. 15). Of
Tel Abib nothing is known, nor has the site been
identified.' The Vulgate renders it "acemu
norarvm frugum;" and the LXX., stumbling
over it, represents it by n*ri*fos. It is not
certain whether the river Chebar was the A'ahr
Malta, the "Koyal canal" (Cellaring Geogr.
c 22; Bochart, Phaleg. i. 8), or the river
Khabovr (the ancient ' A0<Sp>u), which flows into
the Euphrates 200 miles north of Babylon.
There can be little doubt that Ezekiel's place of
exile was in Chaldaea proper (i. 3), and there-
fore that the Chebar cannot be (as Bleek con-
jectured, Einleit. § 221. See Fried. Delitzsch,
Wo lag das Parodies? p. 47 sq.) the river Habor
in Gozan (2 K. xvii. 6), which is an affluent of
the Tigris. The nominal tomb of Ezekiel is
shown at a place called Kef it, south of Babylon
(Menasse ben Israel, de Resui: Mart. p. 23 ; see
Ps. Epiphan. * Yit. et Mori. Prophet. ix.> It
is mentioned by Pietro de la Valle, and fully
described in the Itinerary of Benjamin of Tudela
(Itiner. p. 66 ; Hottinger, Thes. Phil. II. i. 3 ;
Gppi Hebraici, p. 82 ; Carpzov, Apparat. Crit.
pp. 203, 204).
It was on the banks of the Chebar, " in the
land of the Chaldeans," that God's message first
reached Ezekiel, and " the heavens were opened "
to him in the thirtieth year of his age, as to
Christ in the river Jordan (Origen). In the
passage describing his call (Ezek. i. 3) the
Targum interpolates the words "in the land
[of Israel, and again a second time He spake to
him m the land] of the Chaldeans." The inter-
polation may partly have been suggested by the
structure of some of Ezekiel's early prophecies,
in which he imagines himself an ideal spectator
of scenes in Jerusalem (viii. 7, &c); but it
also probably sprang from tho Jewish notion
that the Shekinah could not overshadow a
Prophet ont of the Holy land. For this reason
Uashi supposes that ch. xvii. was Ezekiel's first
prophecy, and was uttered before he went into
captivity, a view which he supports by the
Hebrew idiom HVJ iTn (A. V. and K. V. "came
EZEKIEL
1031
« Ttf, '♦mound,* Is a common element In the names
of places : cp. Esra U. 69 ; Josh. xi. 13, where "In their
atnngth " should be rendered " upon their own mound "
(cp. E. V.). The name AMb in this Instance seems
to hare been appropriate, for Ammtanns MarcelUnus
(xiv. 3) says, " Arborae arnnis herbidse rips?."
expressly ") in i. 3. R. Qimchi, however, admits
of exceptions to the Rabbinic rule in case the
prophecy was inspired in some pure and quiet
spot like a river's bank.
Unlike his predecessor in the prophetic office,
who gives us the amplest details of his personal
history, Ezekiel rarely alludes to the facts of
his own life, and we have to complete the imper-
fect picture by the colours of late and dubious
tradition. We only learn from an incidental
allusion that he was married, and had a house
(viii. 1) in his place of exile, and lost his wife
by a sudden and unforeseen stroke. The way
in which he bore this deep affliction was due
to that absorbing recognition of his high call-
ing which enabled him to face every duty
which was laid upon him, and even to sub-
mit to the ceremonial pollution from which he
shrank with characteristic loathing (iv. 14). it
is only in one expression that the feelings of the
man burst through the self-devotion of the
Prophet. His obedience was unwavering, but
the deep pathos of his brief allusion to his wife's
death (xxiv. 15-18) shows what well-springs
of the tenderest emotion were concealed under
his uncompromising opposition to every form
of sin. d
He lived in the highest consideration among
his companions in exile, and their elders con-
sulted him on all occasions (viii. 1, xi. 25,
xiv. 1, xx. 1, &c), because in his united offices
of priest and Prophet he was a living witness
to " them of the captivity " that God had not
abandoned them. Vitringa even says (de Synag.
Yet. p. 332) that " in aedibus suis ut in schola
quadam publica conventus instituebat, ibique
coram frequenti concione divinam interpre-
tabatur voluntatem oratione facundi" (quoted
by Havernick). Jewish writers regard these
meetings as the first beginnings of the future
synagogues, and to this they refer Ezek. xi. 16,
"Although I have scattered them among the
countries, yet will I be to them as a little sanctuary
in the countries where they be." On this pas-
sage the Targum distinctly says that the syna-
gogues are uext in holiness to the Temple (see
Megiila, f. 29, 1 ; Jer. Berakhoth, 5, 1 j Ham-
burger, RE. ii. s. v. Synagoge).
The last date mentioned by the Prophet
is the twenty- seventh year of the Captivity
(xxix. 17% so that his mission extended over
twenty-two years, during part of which period
Daniel was probably living, and already famous
(Ezek. xiv. 14, xxviii. 3). Tradition ascribes
various miracles to him, as, for instance,
escaping from his enemies by walking dry-shod
across the Chebar ; feeding the famished people
with a miraculous draught of fishes, &c. He is
said to have been murdered in Babylon by some
Jewish prince (? i rryoituvos rov hiov, called in
the Roman martyrology for vi. Id. Apr. "judex
populi." Carpzov, Introd. 1. c), whom he had
convicted of idolatry ; and to have been buried
in a orniAaioi' SnrKovr, the tomb of Shem and
Arphaxad, on the banks of the Euphrates. A
curious conjecture, discredited by Clemens
Alexandrinus (Strom, i. c. xv. § 70), but con-
sidered not impossible by Seldeu (Syntagm. de
* There does not seem to be any ground for regarding
the death of Eiekiel's wife as «n unreal event— a mere
imaginary symbol— as Iteuss and others do.
Digitized by
Google
1032
EZEKIEL
fliis Syr. ii. p. 120), Meyer and others, identifies
him with " Nazanitus the Assyrian," the teacher
of Pythagoras. We need hardly mention the
foolish suppositions that he is identical with
Zoroaster, or with the Alexandrian 'EfcitlyKos
6 ray 'loutatK&y rpayqpilvy »oiirr^j (Clem.
Alex. Strom, i. § 155 ; Euseb. Praep. Etxmg.
ix. 28, 29) who wrote a play on the Exodus,
called 'EJa-yar)^ (Kabricius, Bibl. Grec. ii. 19).
This Ezekiel seems to hare lived about u.c. 140
(see Gratz, Gesch. d. Jud. iii. pp. 42, 440).
But by the side of the scattered data of his
external life, those of his internal life appear so
much the richer. We hare already noticed his
stern and inflexible energy of will and character ;
and we also observe a devoted adherence to the
rites and ceremonies of his national religion.
Ezekiel is no cosmopolite, but displays every-
where the peculiar tendencies of a Hebrew
educated under Leritical training. The priestly
bias is always visible, especially in chs. viii.-
xi., xl.-xlviii., and in iv. 13 sq., xx. 12 sq.,
xxii. 8, &c. De Wette and Gesenius attribute
this to a " contracted spirituality," and Ewald
sees in it " a one-sided conception of antiquity
which he obtained merely from books and tradi-
tions," and "a depression of spirit enhanced
by the long continuance of the banishment and
bondage of the people." But it was surely this
very intensity of patriotic loyalty to a system
whose partial suspension he both predicted and
survived, which cheered the exiles with the
confidence of the Prophet's hopes for the future,
and tended to preserve the decaying nationality
of his people. Mr. F. Newman is even more
contemptuous than the German critics. " The
writings of Ezekiel," he says, "painfully show
the growth of what is merely visionary, and an
increasing value for hard sacerdotalism " (Hebr.
Monarchy, p. 330). He speaks of the "heavy
materialism " of Ezekiel's Temple as being " as
tedious and unedifying as Leviticus itself; " but
he refutes his own criticisms when he adds
that Ezekiel's predictions " so kept alive in the
minds of the next generation a belief in a cer-
tain return from Captivity as to have tended
exceedingly towards that result."
We shall try to show in the sketch of his
teaching that what has been called his pre-
dominating ceremonialism and externalism were
partly indeed due to his birth and early train-
ing, but were also essential to the work which
he was appointed to fulfil. It must be borne in
mind that rive centuries were yet to elapse, even
after the Restoration of the Captivity, during
which it was the duty of the Jews to preserve
their national institutions until the Saviour of
the world should come. Over the religious life
of those centuries no Old Testament writer
exercised a more powerful influence than the
prophet Ezekiel.*
It was not only his attainment of the full
age for priestly functions which called forth
the prophetic gifts of Ezekiel. God, Who pre-
pares His servants by the education of history
and experience, trained the mind of His Prophet
by the course of events for the first overpower-
ing revelation which determined his future
• In o'ir Masoretfc canon he Is placed third of the
Nebiim Acharonim, or greater Prophets ; In Baba Kama,
f. 14, 2, be Is placed teemd.
EZEKIEL
career. When Jehoiachin had been taken to
Babylon, his uncle Zedekiah was left as a viceroy
over the poor remnants of the people. In the
fourth year of his reign he joined in a great
movement of Jews, Phoenicians, Ammonites,
Moabites, and Edomites, to throw off the hated
yoke of Nebuchadnezzar. Such designs could
not be kept secret, and to afford himself with a
colourable excuse Zedekiah seems to have gone
in person to Babylon (Jer. Ii. 59),' accompanied
by ambassadors, to some of whom Jeremiah
entrusted the memorable letter in which he had
prophesied that the Captivity should last for
seventy years (xxv. 11), and in which he sternly
rebuked the false prophets who encouraged the
exiles in vain hopes (jer. xxix. 1-32). It was
probably this letter, and the thoughts which it
kindled, which awoke the flame of prophecy in
the heart of the exiled priest. Jeremiah was at
this time all but universally hated and perse-
cuted, and his life was constantly endangered by
the fury of lying prophets and apostate princes
(Jer. xx. 7-18). By the side of the Chebar it
was brought home to the mind of Ezekiel that
he, the aristocratic descendant of Zadok, must
throw himself into the cause of the poor priest
of Anathoth, and share the intense odium which
his prophecies had inspired. It is the moral
and spiritual relationship between these great
Prophets of the epoch of the fall of Judah which
is dimly shadowed in Jewish legends. Jerome
supposes that, being contemporaries during a
part of their mission, they interchanged their
prophecies, sending them respectively to
Jerusalem and Chaldnea for mutual confirma-
tion and encouragement, that the Jews might
hear as it were a strophe and antistrophe of
warning and promise, " velut ac si duo cantores
alter ad alterius vocem sese componerent "
(Calvin, Comment, ad L'zech. i. 2). Although
it was only towards the close of Jeremiah's
lengthened office that Ezekiel received his com-
mission, yet these suppositions are easily
accounted for by the internal harmony between
the two Prophets, in proof of which we may
refer to Ezek. xiii. as compared with Jer. xxiii. 9
sq., and Ezek. xxxiv. with Jer. xxxiii.,&c. This
inner resemblance is the more striking from the
otherwise wide difference of character which
separates the two Prophet*. Jeremiah is far
more of a poet than Ezekiel, though the latter
shows a more daring imagination. The elegiac
tenderness of Jeremiah is the reflex of his
gentle and introspective spirit, while Ezekiel, in
that age when true prophecy was so rare
(Ezek. xii. 21-25; Lam. ii. 9), "comes forward
with all abruptness and iron consistency. Has
he to contend with a people of brazen front and
unbending neck ? He possesses on his own part
an unbending nature, opposing the evil with an
unflinching spirit of boldness, with words full
of consuming fire."
Of the reception of Ezekiel's prophecies during
the twenty-two years over which — though pro-
bably at irregular intervals — his work extended
(Ezek. i. 1, xxix. 17), we have no direct informa-
f It should, however, be observed that the readings of
this verse are uncertain. The LXX, followed by Bleek
and others, resd 'from Zedekiah " for "with " ; and thr
Peshttto reads "eleventh" for "fourth" year of his
reign.
Digitized by
Google
EZEKIEL
tiuu. It is, however, unlikely that lie escaped
the bitter and violent opposition which U the
ordinary fate of the true Prophet.' From vague
and incidental notices we may infer that at first
he was made to suffer even to the extent of
bonds and imprisonment (Ezek. iii. 25); but if
so, he soon triumphed over his enemies, and
obtained honour and recognition as a Prophet,
even while the people took no practical heed to
his words (xxxiii. 32, 33). But while the
general tenor of his life seems to have been far
less stormy and troubled than that of his spi-
ritual father Jeremiah, his ministry was excep-
tionally powerful. Its central lesson has been
summed up in the words " through repentance
to salvation" (Cornill, Dtr Prophet Ezekiel,
p. 264). The chosen people had drunk to the
dregs the cup of humiliation ; they had seen
their kings defeated, dishonoured, dragged into
captivity, cruelly tortured, shamefully slain;
they had seen their royal city ruined and dis-
mantled, and their Temple destroyed by fire.
They had seen the God of Israel become as a
stranger in His own land (Jer. xiv. 8). Vet
there were many of the people who only spoke
the language of unbelief and defiance. They
expressed open doubts of God's power (Is. lix. 1)
or of His justice (Ezek. xviii. 25, 29 ; xxxiii.
17. 20). It was the task of Ezekiel again and
again to refute these blasphemies, and to show
that the secret of Israel's ruin lay exclusively
in Israel's sins, and especially in the sins of
gross idolatry (Ezek. viii. xiv. 1-12), lascivious-
ness (xvi. xxiii.), and bloodguiltiness (xxiv. 6-9),
and in the general corruption and trust in lies of
prophets, priests, princes and people (xxii. 1-31).
in preaching his Theodicaea, Ezekiel had espe-
cially to revive the national faith which had
been so deeply shaken by the miserable end of
the good king Josiah. He had to show how
false was the application of the proverb that
"The father had eaten sour grapes, and the
children's teeth were set on edge " (xviii. 3-32),
and how completely the personal punishment of
bis contemporaries was due to their own offences.
But while thus rebuking a rebellious despair, he
was obliged at the same time to strike down an
overweening confidence. In his days, as in
those of John the Baptist, the people, encou-
raged in their national conceit by false prophets,
were founding vain hopes on the fact that " they
kad Abraham to their father" (Ezek. xxxiii. 24).
Ezekiel not only pointed out how futile was
such a plea for guilty souls (rr. 25-29), but he
dealt at this pride of birth the most tremendous
blow which it had ever received when he ex-
claimed, "Thy birth and thy nativity was of
the land of Canaan ; thy mother was an Hittite,
and thy lather an Amorite; k and thine elder
» He speaks of his people, even bis fellow-exiles, as
" a boose of rebellion," It. 5-8 ; Hi. 9, 28, 21 ; xxiv. 3. Ac.
See too xiv. 3, xx. 32. " Tbe Holy One— blessed be He—
afflicted Ezekiel in order to cleanse Israel from their
Iniquities.'' (Sanhedrin, f. 39.)
k How bitterly this verse was felt by tbe Jews is
shown centuries later by tbe Rabbis of tbe Talmod.
"When the Holy One— blessed be He— commissioned
Easkiel to say to Israel, ' Thy lather was an Amoriteand
•by mother a Hittite,' a pleading spirit " ( according to
Basal, the angel Gabriel) "objected and said, ' If Abra-
ham and Sarah were to stand here in Thy presence,
wouldnt Tbou thus humiliate them to their face ? ' "
EZEKIEL
1033
sister is Samaria, and thy younger sister that
dwelleth at thy right hand is Sodom and her
daughters" (xvi. 3, 44-5'J). They relied on
their holy origin, but their true |>aternity was
proved by their deeds (Is. i. 10 ; Matt. iii. 9 ;
John viii. 44).
Side by side however with the insolence of
obstinate self-defence, Exekiel found that in the
hearts of others there was an abject despondency.
They were saying, "If our transgressions and
our sins be upon us, and we pine away in them,
how should we then live ? " (xxxiii. 10). It was
in answer to such melancholy spirits that Ezekiel
set forth more clearly than any of his predeces-
sors the truth that the one object of punish-
ment is not vengeance, but reformation. The
key-note of all his teaching was, " I have no
pleasure in the death of the nicked ; but that
the wicked turn from his way and lire : turn
ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will
ye die, house of Israel ?" (xxxiii. 11). The
sole remedy for the present disastrons condition
of the nation was that heartfelt repentance
which proves its sinceritv by amendment (iii.
2u ; xviii. 24-32; xxxiii. 13). For those whose
despair was too deeply-seated to be reached even
by this high moral teaching, which for the first
time set forth Jehovah as the Educator of the
human race, Ezekiel received his remarkable
vision of the Resurrection in the Valley of Dry
Bones (xxxvii. 1-14). This striking allegory
had for its immediate object the revival of
national hopes ; but it has a far wider and more
glorious meaning, and, pointing as it does to " a
hope full of immortality," it is one of the deepest
notes of revelation which the Old Testament
contains.'
lW.-kles his high moral and spiritual teaching,
it was Ezekiel's mission to keep alive among the
Jews a sense of their religious unity and poli-
tical existence. Judaism was never intended to
be a cosmopolitan religion ; and when the exiles
contrasted the colossal splendour of Babylon
with their own poor Jerusalem, they needed the
message " fear not, thou worm Jacob " (Is. xli.
14), and the reminder that they were not to
sink into Babylonians, since they had higher
hopes and nobler promises. Their tears were
but to be as the softening showers which should
prepare the soil for a purer seed. It was there-
fore essential that they should not relapse into
the idolatry of their conquerors ; and since they
had no longer a Temple or sacrifices, it was
necessary to insist with the utmost stringency
on their ancient and peculiar institution of the
Sabbath." Ezekiel has been severely judged
because, amid the lofty teachings of his eigh-
teenth chapter, he dwells so strongly on one or
two negative and positive rales (xviii. 6-9, 11-
(Sanhtdrin, f. 44, 1.) The passage certainly shows an in-
tensely unfavourable view of Israel's past, though it was
not meant to apply to Abraham and Sarah at sll, but
to the heathen origin and moral afflnitia of the city qf
JcruiaUm. See ens. xvi., IX. xxiii.
> The Rabbis lost themselves in frivolous discussions
as to whether the scene was real or not ; and. If real,
what became of the men who were raised !
a For the same reason Jeremiah dwells strongly on
the sacredness of the Sabbath (Jer. xvii. 21-2T). It was
tbe strongest bulwark of the law and national life or
the Jews.
Digitized by
Google
1034 EZEKIEL, BOOK OF
13, 15-17). The criticism is unjust, oecause
those rules arc not meant to include all
morality, but are aimed at the dangers which
most immediately menaced the national exist-
ence — idolatry, impurity, greed, and unkind-
ness. How little the teaching of Ezekiel was
akin to Pharisaism may be seen in his insistence
on the fact that a new heart and a new spirit
(xsxvi. 26, 27) are not the reward of merit, but
the gift of God's free love v eo. 21-23, 32, 33 ;
xvi. 62, 63 ; xx. 43, 44). By this mixture of
doctrine and morality, by his thorough examina-
tion of the problems of sin and punishment,
and repentance and free grace (xviii. 32), and by
his reference of all questions to the will and
glory of God, Ezekiel has earned the title of
"the Paul of the Old Testament." Further
than this, by his chosen title " Son of Man " and
its accordance with his deepest thoughts, he
becomes a tvpe of Christ (Isidore, de Vit. et o».
Sand. 39). '
That title was no ordinary one. It is true
that " son of man " is common in Scripture in
the sense of " man " ; but the only two Prophets
to whom the title is given are Daniel, who is thus
addressed once only (Dan. viii. 17), and Ezekiel,
to whom the phrase is applied ninety times. It
is equivalent to weak mortal, and is doubtless
suggested by the noble language of the viiith
Psalm (viii. 4, 5). If in one aspect it implies the
deep humility of the Prophet in the presence of
Him Who had revealed Himself as throned upon
the Cherubim, in another it suggests to Ezekiel
as to David the glory of his privilege in being
chosen to receive the messages of God (see i. 28 ;
iii. 23 ; xliii. 3 ; xliv. 4). [F. W. F.]
EZE'KIEL, BOOK OF. We see in his
Book the gradual transition from the Prophet
into the scribe. He is the precursor of Ezra
in inaugurating the religion of legalism. He
was neither a statesman nor a politician, but
resembles the figure of his own visions, — the
man in the white robe with the inkhorn by
his side (Ezek. ix.). Jeremiah, " the last great
Prophet, the evening star of the declining day
of prophecy, occupies the dividing line between
two ages, and without intending it closes the
species of entirely pure prophecy." He points
to the new covenant (Jer. xxxi. 33, 34),* while
it was the main duty of Ezekiel to secure and
protect the resuscitation of the old covenant
until the fulness of the times. The object of
the " new heart and a new spirit " is " that
they may walk in My ordinances and observe
My statutes." He does not, like Isaiah, look
mainly for new heavens and a new earth
(Is. lxv. 19; lxvi. 22), but sketches a new
and minutely regulated national life.* It is
only in his denunciations that Ezekiel treads
in the footsteps of his prophetic predecessors;
his remedies and ideals are priestly, and his
personal work was to a great extent of a
• Kucnen, "Ezekiel'* (Mod. Ben. p. 816, Oct. 1684),
H xl. 20, xxxvl. 27.
► Compare Jer. ill. 16; vil. 4, 11-14, 21-23; ix. 25,
26 ; xxlv. 6, 7. Chapters xxx., xxxi. exhibit soeh " ele-
vation of thought and expansion of borlton" that
Movers, Hitslg, and others have unwarrantably sup-
posed that they were written by " the second Isaiah "
(see Dr. R. Williams, The Hebrew PropheU, II. 60).
EZEKIEL, BOOK OF
pastoral and didactic character (see xxiii. 6),
such as suited a period of national inaction.
I. Style. — His prophetic method was very-
varied. He furnishes instances of visions (viii.—
xi.), symbolic actions (iv. v. xii.), similitudes
(xv. xvi.), parables (xvii.), proverbs (xii. 22 ;
xviii. 2), poems (xix.), allegories (xxi. xxiii. niv.)y
and direct prophecies (vi. xx., &c). Carpzov
says, "Tanta ubertate et figurarum variatione
floret ut unus omnes prophetici sermonis nu-
meros ac modos explevisse, jure suo sit dicendus **
(Introd. ii. pt. iii. 5). Michaelis and others talk
of bis " plagiarism ; " but although his language
is undoubtedly moulded by his early studies, it
shows a marked originality in form, in concep-
tion, and in many unique phrases, which may be
seen by contrasting his prophecy against Tyre
(xxviii.) with that of Isaiah (xxiii.). He is
indeed more of a writer than either a poet or
an orator, and his style is in general the
result of literary elaboration rather than of
spontaneous passion. This is doubtless due to
the fact that many of his prophecies do not
seem to have been publicly uttered, but re-
corded in private. He seems to have been
a man of silent, meditative, and almost
melancholy character,* and this gave to his
expressions the " evenness and repose " of which
Ewald speaks. The style of Ezekiel bears a
certain indefinable stamp of distinction and
self-restraint, which makes it contrast with the
more impassioned eloquence of his persecuted
contemporary, Jeremiah. On the other hand,
some of his symbols, images, and expressions are
crude and displeasing (xvi. 1-5 ; xxiii. passim),
and he is sometimes prolix from the many itera-
tions and recurrent formulae. 1 ' His composite
symbols show clear traces of the extent to
which his attention had been seized by the
strange forms of art by which he was sur-
rounded amid the temples and palaces of Babylon.
The attempt to interpret these by painting
taxed the highest powers even of an Albrecht
Diirer and a Raphael. These symbols furnish
an almost unique phenomenon in Semitic litera-
ture, and one which can only be explained by
recent familiarity with Aryan surroundings.
But Ezekiel shows in the combination of these
diverse elements a daring imagination and an
architectonic skill. They have exercised a
strong fascination over the minds of thinkers.
St. Gregory of Nazianzus (Or. 23) calls Ezekiel
the loftiest and most wonderful of all Prophets,
i ruv fuya\\en> lirtnrrfo na\ tfyrrbrnt iivarriplmv
(see Carpzov, Introd. i. 192), and Herder de-
scribes him as the Aeschylus and Shakspeare of
the Hebrews. Schiller wished that he had
learnt Hebrew mainly because he wished to read
Ezekiel in his own language. H&vernick is
perhaps too enthusiastic in speaking of " his glow
of divine indignation," and the " torrent of his
eloquence resting on a combination of power
and consistency, the one as unwearied as the
• To speak of him as probably " afflicted by a chronic
nervous malady " (Stud. u. KriL 1877) Is quite to exceed
the limits of legitimate conjecture.
<> Duhm (Die TKeol. d. Pnpheten) contrasts him un-
favourably both with Jeremiah and the later Isaiah, but
the difference between them does not necessarily prove
Inferiority. The work as well as the style of Etekiel
was of another order from that of his predecessors.
Digitized by
Google
EZEKIEL, BOOK OF
other is imposing." St. Jerome, on the other
hind, writes too coldly when he says, " Sermo
ejus nee satis disertus nee admodum rusticus,
std ex ntroque genere medie temperatur"
(Praef. in Esech.). Among the most splendid
passages are ch. L, the prophecy against Tyrus
(xxvL-xxviii.) ; that against Assyria, " the
noblest monument of Eastern history " (xxxi.) ;
and ch. viii., the account of what he saw in the
Temple-porch,
•* when, by the vision led.
His eye surveyed the dark idolatries
Of alienated Judoh."— Milton, Par. Loll, I.
The depth of his matter, and the marvellous
nature of his visions, mako him occasionally
obscure, but chiefly in passages which were
designedly shrouded in enigmatic language (e.g.
xxi. and xxxix.). His prophecy was placed by
the Jews among the J'J jj (treasures), those por-
tions of Scripture which (like the early part of
Genesis and the Canticles) were not allowed to
be read till the age of 30 (Jer. Ep. ad Eiatoch. ;
Orig. proem, h/mii. ir. in Cantic. ; Hottinger,
TKa. Phil. ii. 1, 3). Hence Jerome compares
the " inextricabilis error " of his writings to
Virgil's labyrinth ("Oceanus Scripturarum,
mysteriorumque Dei labyrinthus "), and also to
the catacombs. The Jews classed him in the*
very highest rank of Prophets. The Sanhedrin
is said to hare hesitated long whether his Book
should form part of the Canon, from its occa-
sional obscurity, and from its supposed contra-
dictions to the Law (xviii. 20-xx. 5, xxxiv. 7 ;
Jer. xxxii. 18). But in point of fact these
apparent oppositions are the mere expression of
truths complementary to each other, as Moses
himself might have taught them (Deut. xxiv.
16). Although, generally speaking, comments
on this book were forbidden, R. Ananias under-
took to reconcile the supposed differences."
Spinoxa, Tract. Theol. Polit. ii. 27, partly from
these considerations, inferred that the present
Book is made up of mere fragments, but his
argument from its commencing with a 1, and
from the expression in i. 3 above alluded to,
hardly needs refutation.
II. Unity. — As to the unity of the Book there
has never been any serious question. Josephus
indeed (Antt. x. 5, § 1) has the following pas-
sage : ti ftivm 8i obrn (Jeremiah) Ttpot8i<r*ia*
nana iXXa not i ■wpo<p4rrvi 'U((Klr)kos [*>j]
Tpirros xepl tovtUt 86o f}i&\ia ypdtyas KariKintr.
The undoubted meaning seems to be that Etekiel
(although Eichhorn on various grounds applies
the word to Jeremiah) left two books of pro-
phecy ; which is also stated by Zonaras, and the
Latin translation of Athanasius, where, after
mentioning other lost books, and tvso of Ezekiel,
the writer continues, " Nunc rero jam unum
duntaxat inveniri scimus. Itaque haec omnia
per impiorum Judaeorum amentiam et incuriam
periisse manifestum est" (Synops. p. 136, but
the passage does not occur in the Greek). In
* " Revere the mem o ry of Hananloh ben Hlzkiah, for
bad It not been tor Urn the Book of Eieklel would have
hra suppressed, because It contradicts the Law. By the
help of 300 bottles of oil be prolonged his studies till be
mooeOed all the discrepancies " (ShoMath, t. 13, 2).
Baehl refers to Esek. xliv..31, xlv. 30, at passages which
*Mra to contradict the Law.
EZEKIEL, BOOK OP 1035
confirmation of this view (which is held by
Maldonatus and others) some have referred to pas-
sages quoted in Clem. Alex. Paedag. i. 10, § 91,
ir $ f$pw at ir airrf ical Kptr& at : and again,
TtTonfv Kal ov ritomr ipnaiv q ypaipii (Id.
Strom, vii. 16, § 93). Tertullian says, " Legimus
apud Ezechielem de vacca ilia quae peperit et
non peperit " (de Cant. Christi, § 23 ; cp. Epi-
phan. Haeres. xxx. 30), and refers the supposed
prophecy to the Virgin Mary. The attempt to
identify it with Job xxi. 10 can hardly be
maintained. That these passages (quoted by
Kabricius, Cod. Pseudepigr. Vet. Test. § 221)
can come from a lost genuine book is extremely
improbable, since we know from the Talmud
the extraordinary care with which the later
Jews guarded the \6yia (irra. They may
indeed come from a lost apocryphal book, al-
though we find no other trace of its existence
(Sixtus Sen. BUA. Sand. ii. 61). Le Moyne
( Yar. Sacra, ii. p. 332 sq.) thinks that they
undoubtedly belong to some collection of tradi-
tionary Jewish apophthegms, such as those
which are preserved in Pirke Aboth, or the " chap-
ters of the fathers." Just in the same way we
find certain tryptupa Hyitara attributed to our
Lord by the Fathers, and even by the Apostles
(Acta xx. 35), on which see a monograph by
Kuinoel. The simplest supposition about the
passage in Josephus is either to assume that he
is in error, or to admit a former division of
Ezekiel into two books at ch. xxv., or possibly
at ch. xxxix. Le Moyne adopts the latter view,
and supports it by analogous cases. There is
nothing which militates against it in the fact
that Josephus mentions Svo /lira «tol «Tkoo*i
$l0Kta (c. Apitm. i. 22) as forming the Canon.
III. Genuineness. — Of the genuineness of
the Book of Ezekiel there has never been any
serious doubt. It is true that in Baba Bathra,
f. 15, 1, we are told that "the men of the
Great Synagogue wrote the Book of Ezekiel, the
Twelve Minor Prophets, the Book of Daniel,
and the Book of Esther," where Rashi says
that "the men of the Great Synagogue were
Haggai, Malachi, Zerubbabel, Mordecai, and
their associates." But "the Great Synagogue "
is by many considered a purely unhistorical body,
and it is clear that " wrote " can only mean
"edited." It has indeed been rashly supposed
by Oeder, Vogel, and a writer in the Monthly
Magazine (1798) that the last nine chapters are
a spurious addition to the Book, and it has even
been suggested that they were written by some
Samaritan author to induce the Jews to permit
the co-operation of the Samaritans in the build-
ing of the Second Temple ! Corrodi also doubted
the genuineness of chs. xxxviii. and xxxix.
It- is needless to enter into the very slight show
of argument which was advanced in favour of
these views, because they have long been aban-
doned. Zunz went further (QottesdienstL
Vortr. p. 183 ; Gesamm. Schriften, i. 217), and
impugned the genuineness of the whole Book,
which he believed to have been written between
B.C. 440 and B.C. 400. He argued (1) from
the specific character of some of the predictions
(e.g. xvii. 10 ; xxiv. 2 sq.) ; (2) from the im-
possibility of believing that in B.C. 570 Ezekiel
should have dreamed of suggesting a new set of
laws, a new kind of Temple, and a new division
of the Holy Land; (3) from the absence of any
Digitized by
Google
1036 EZEKIEL, BOOK OF
.illusion to Ezekiel in the Books of Jeremiah and
Ksther ; (4) from the allusions to Daniel
(xiv. 14) ; (5) from certain grammatical and
linguistic peculiarities, lu answer to these
objections of a sincere and learned author we
may reply generally that, even if we allow
the purely a priori objection to specific predic-
tions, they would ouly prove at the outside that
Kzekiel had edited his Book as a literary whole
towards the end of his life. The views of the
ancients and the moderns about literary methods
differed widely, and the addition of subsequent
touches may have been in no disaccord with the
customs of an undeveloped literature, and the
conditions under which the Book was made
public.
Such is the suggestion of Ewald and Kuenen ; '
and although it cannot be proved, and therefore
need not be accepted, it would be absurd to view
such circumstances from a modern standpoint,
or to attribute such subsequent editing to
literary fraud. The second objection of Zuuz
must be treated separately. The third is a
mere argumentum e silcntio, which, as has been
proved again and again by the most decisive
instances, has no validity at all, either in ancient
or modern days. The fourth objection does not
seem to have any intrinsic weight, and is of too
vague a character to be dealt with. The fifth
again has no validity because the conditions of
the Exile are quite sufficient to account for many
linguistic phenomena, and because it is far from
improbable that some of these linguistic pecu-
liarities may be due to a text which is regarded
by many scholars as being the most corrupt in
the Old Testament.
IV. Contents. — That Ezekiel was the editor
as well as the author of the Book is admitted
equally by Ewald, Keil, Kuenen, and nearly all
other inquirers. The prophecies are arranged
according to a definite plan. The Book is
divided into two great parts, separated tromeach
other by the destruction of Jerusalem. The
' According to tbe headings of the prophecies, cbs.
i.-vli. were delivered In the fifth year of Jcholachtn's
captivity s vlil.-xix. in the sixth year ; xx.-xxlll. In tbe
seventh year ; xxlv. In the ninth year. If those head-
ings apply to the entire contents of each chapter,
Ezekiel distinctly predicted the peculiar fate of Zede-
fcfah (xii. 13), and the particulars of tbe siege and fall
of Jerusalem. Kuenen argues that ch. xvli. could
not have been written in the sixth year of Jebolachin'a
captivity, because Zedeklah bad not then actually re-
volted, nor could be at that time have made a covenant
with Egypt, since Egypt is not mentioned in Jer.
xxvll. 3. He also thluks that xxi. 20-32 could not
have been written In n.c. 591, because " the reproach of
the Ammonites" (xxv. 1-7) could not have been
uttered till after the fall of Jerusalem and the profana-
tion of the sanctuary. Hence be argues that Ezekiel
•• did not trouble himself about scrupulous accuracy In
the literary reproduction of his spoken prophecies"
(Propkdt. p. 338, E. T.). His view is that Exeklel's
slight subsequent additions to what he had previously
written or delivered did not in any way militate with
ancient and Eastern conceptions of literary good faith.
Reuse (La I'rophita, U. 1-12) goes even farther, and
supposes that the first twenty-four chapters were merely
written from an ideal ttandjxrint anterior to the ruin of
the Temple. The manner in which Ezekiel, in xxtx.
1J-21, professedly modifies and supplements without
altering his original prophecy against Tyre, Is wholly
unlike the editing process suggested by these critics, and
so tor tells against their view.
EZEKIEL, BOOK OF
first division consists of chs. i.-xxiv. ; the second
of chs. xxv.-xlviii. So marked is the division
that the close of the twenty-fourth chapter
marks the exact half of the Book.' There are
also marked differences between the general
character of these great divisions. The first
section is mainly characterised by threats of
judgment ; the second section by promises of
deliverance, the idea of which is also involved in
the threats against heathen nations. The Book
may also be divided chronologically into three
sections, viz. : — 1. The prophecies before the
fall of Jerusalem (i.-xxiv.) ; 2. Those delivered
during the siege (xxv.-xxxii.); 3. Those deli-
vered after the beginning of the final captivity
(xxxiii.-xlviii.). Ezekiel himself gives fourteen
dates for his groups of prophecies — namely,
those delivered in the fifth year of Jehoiachin's
captivity (i.-vii.) ; in the sixth year (viii.-xix.) ;
in the seventh year (xx.-xxiii.) ; in the ninth
year (xxiv. xxv.) ; in the tenth year (xxix.
1-16) ; in the eleventh year (xxvi.-xxviii. ; xxx.
20-26; xxxi.); in the twelfth year (xxxii., and
perhaps xxxv.-xxxix.) ; in the twenty-fifth year
(xl.-xlviii.) ; in the twenty-seventh year (xxix.
17-xxx. l-20)>
1. Looking yet more closely at the structure
of the Book, we find that the first great .section
js composed of — I. The glorious vision which
inaugurated the Prophet's work (i. ii. Hi.).
II. The general carrying out of his commission
(iii.-rii.) by various symbolic actions (iv. v.) ;
by the rebuke of idolatry (vi.) ; and the threat
of the final doom of Juiah (vii.). III. Details
of the profanation of the Temple by idolatry,
and of the consequent judgment which shnll
come upon Jerusalem (viii.-xi.). IV. Further
rebukes of the special sins of the age, inter-
spersed with exhortations to repentance, and
threats of punishment (xii.-xix.). V. The
imminence of the doom, and renewed denuncia-
tion of the crimes by which it had been pre-
cipitated (xx.-xxiii.). VI. The significance of
the now-commencing punishment (xxiv.).
2. The next section (xxv.-xxxii.) is composed
of seven oracles against Amnion, Moab, Edoni.
the Philistines, and Sidon,' together with the
long and magnificent philippics against Tyre
(xxvi.-xxviii. 19) and Egypt (xxix.-xxxii.) ;
which, as the Prophet explains (xxviii. 24-26),
arc intended as a source of consolation to Israel.
They were delivered during the eighteen months
of the siege. Between the beginning of the
siege and the destruction ot the Temple the
Prophet has no direct message to his country-
men; and some have even understood xxiv. 27,
xxix. 21, xxxiii. 22 (cp. iii. 26) in the sense
that during the progress of the siege he was
actually dumb or silent, and that this account."
for the parenthetic character of these chapters. 11
' It need hardly be said that tbe division of the Book
into actual chapters did not take place until centuries
after the days of Ezekiel.
» xxix. 17 sq. is a postscript to modify what had been
said about the sack of Tyre In xxvt. See t'n/ra.
1 The comparatively insignificant Sldon (xxviii. 20-2.".)
would perhaps hardly have been included among these
denunciations except from tbe mystic significance
attached to the number seven.
* Tbe real or ideal dumbness wss removed " In the
twelfth year of our captivity " (xxxiii. 21), but In this
passage the Feshlrto reads "eleventh," and Is followed
Digitized by
Google
EZEKIEL, BOOK OF
In this section one paragraph (xxix. 17-21) is
placed out of its proper chronological order,
baring been uttered in the twenty-seventh year
of the captivity of Jehoiachin, and therefore
being the latest of all the prophecies of which
Ezekiel himself furnishes a date. It was added
seventeen years after the general prophecy
against Tyre, and may perhaps serve to explain
circumstances about the siege which had not
originally come into the sphere of the Prophet's
vision, and of which the details are not accu-
rately known to us.
3. The third section consists of eight oracles
delivered after the fall of Jerusalem. They are
more directly full of hope and consolation. The
thirty-fourth chapter contains the reproof of the
shepherds that feed themselves, and the thirty-
rifth is the judgment of Mount Seir. The
thirty-seventh contains the splendid vision in
which, under the image of the dry bones in the
valley, Kzekiel not only encourages his people
to believe in the possibility of their restoration,
but also foreshadows, more nearly than any of his
predecessors, the great doctrine of the resurrec-
tion of the body. The thirty-eighth and thirty-
ninth chapters contain in four divisions the
prophecy against Gog and Magog. This general
picture of God's judgments is no doubt partly
intended, like Rev. xx. 7-10, in which it is
imitated, to indicate the final conflict and over-
throw of the powers of evil, but may also be
meant to indicate in a cryptographic manner
the doom of Babylon. This would account for
the obscurity of the prophecy, and the sort of
apocalyptic twilight in which it is enveloped.
4. The last section contains nine chapters
(xl.-xlviii.) whieh have suggested many difficul-
ties, and have been explained in widely different
manners. They fall into three sections. The
first (xl.-xliii.) minutely describes the construc-
tion of the Temple ; the second (xliv.-xlvi.) the
relation of different classes to the Temple and
its service; the third (xlvii. xlviii.) the blessing
which streams from the Temple, and its position
in the redistributed territories of the laud. On
the way in which we understand this section
depends our apprehension of the whole work
and mind of Kzekiel, and of the remarkable
position which he occupies in Jewish history.
Of the general views respecting these chapters
some may be dismissed at once and finally. 1.
It is certain that they are not hittorical, for
the details differ absolutely from the details of
Solomon's Temple, as well as from those of the
second and of Herod's Temple. 2. It is equally
certain, in spite of such isolated expressions as
iliii. 10, xlv. 1, &c, that tbey could never have
been meant to be literally carried out, for they
abound in impossibilities on every page, and all
commentators alike are compelled to admit that
there can be nothing literal in the vision of the
holy waters (xlvii. 1-12). 3. The attempt to
give them a future applicability lands us in the
absurd conclusion that there is to be a millennial
retrogression from Christianity to the " weak and
beggarly elements " of Jewish bondage. 4. All
endeavours to explain them allegorically or
symbolically hare hopelessly failed, because,
by some MRS., as »lso by Ewald, Hitzlg, Kuencn, and
films. Jerusalem was taken in tbe eleventh year of
ZedeHah's reign (Jer. Ii. 5-12).
EZEKIEL, BOOK OF
1037
although such meaning may be attached to some
of the numbers and arrangements, they cannot
be applied without the utmost arbitrariness to
the great mass of minute particulars. 5. Hence
there can be no reasonable doubt that in this, ai
in the previous vision of Gog and Magog, and
indeed by a literary method which prevails
throughout his Book, Ezekiel is simply clothing
general views and conceptions in elaborate and
concrete forms. It is clear from his appeal to
direct Divine sanction (iliii. 10, 11) that he is
not indulging in an objectless play ot fancy ; and
indeed his general views and enactments, as
Keuss truly says, were not without influence on
subsequent legislation. Nevertheless in these
eight oracles we are evidently moving in the
region of a pure Utopia, and dealing only with
an imaginative composition.' That this idea)
picture was incapable of realisation may be seen
from the facts that (a) it sets at defiance the
geography of the Holy Land," and the entire
circumstances of the returning exiles. (0) The
Temple with its precincts is a mile square, or
larger than all Jerusalem, and yet is on the top
of a mountain. (7) It is also placed nine and a
half miles from the utmost bound of the city,
and more than fourteen miles from its centre.
(S) If equal strips of land were, in defiance of
all principles of justice, assigned to the twelve
tribes, the Temple could have nothing to do with
Zion, and would be well on the road to Samaria."
(«) The "oblation" (xlv. 1) of holy land for the
sanctuary cannot by any possibility be brought
into the limits assigned for Palestine (xlvii. 15-
21). (f) The distribution of lands to the tribes,
besides its other incongruities, directly contra-
dicts the prediction of Obadiah v. 19. (n) The
land assigned to the support of the Temple and
its sacrifices is wholly inadequate, and yet the
enormous size of the area set apart for the
Temple itself leaves no room for some of the
tribes in the districts marked ont for them. It
may therefore be regarded as unquestionable
that all the concrete imagery is but the literary
development of a free ideal.
But what was the object of the Prophet i»
this ideal ? The answer is that it represents in
concentrated form the view which he held of
his entire mission. The famous nine chapters
were written with the same kind of object as
Plato's Republic, Sir Thomas More's Utopia,
Bacon's Xcw Atlantis, Campanula's Cititat
Solis, Harington's Oceana, and Fenelon's Salent.
They clothe in concrete forms, which were never
meant for actual realisation, Ezekiel's conceptions
as to the fnture development of the theocracy,
and they are therefore to he regarded as being,
from his point of view, the crown and flower of
all his work. He saw that it was God's will
that the future of Israel should differ widelv-
1 Hence the views of Eiekiel are not once alluded U>
in the Ho jks of Ezra and Nehemlah, or In the prophecies
of Haajgal and Zechariab.
«• Tbe Transjonlanlo territory Is excluded. The re-
mainder of tbe strip assigned to tbe Holy City Is
divided between tbe priests of the house of Zadok, the
other Levltea, and the prince (xlviii.).
• The peculiar order of the tribes. In which Reuben Is
Inserted between Epbrsim and Judah (xlviii. 6. 7), was
ideally intended to counteract tbe tendency of Ephralm
to vex Judab, and Judah to envy Ephralm (Is. xi. 13).
Digitized by
Google
1038 EZEKIEL, BOOK OP
from the past, and that practical securities mast
be devised against the danger of a national
relapse into former idolatries. He saw that
those securities could best be provided in the
then condition of his people by the development
of an elaborate system of ritual. A priest by
birth, by training, and by all his sympathies, he
was also taught by the logic of events nnd the
revelation of God, that hereafter the Temple
and its service must occupy a different and more
important position than it had done during the
whole period since the Exodus. It was intended
to fulfil the function of a necessary education to
the Jews until the fulness of the time should
come. They were to be reminded by every de-
tail of worship that they were a peculiar people.
The Temple was to be the centre and symbol of
their life. That Temple could not be rich with
treasures of gold and silver, like the Temple of
Solomon, but (ideally) it was to be built with
elaborate and symbolic symmetry, and isolated
in the centre of an immense domain, and to be
made the scene of continuous and solemn sacri-
fices. The king or prince was no longer to
claim the prominent functions with regard to it
which he had previously usurped, but was to be
surrounded with safeguards against the tempta-
tions to oppression (xlv. 7, 8), and was to employ
his revenues to supply the priests with sacrifices
(xlv. 16, 17). The feasts and the offerings are
carefully specified. The whole system is to be
placed under the charge of a special order, the
priests of the family of Zadok, who are to be
the exclusive guardians of the sacred precincts.
The aim of the code is " holiness " in the sense
of consecrated separation (Lev. xix. 2): "the
holy mount surrounded by the holy territory of
the priests; the holy house upon the holy
mount ; the holy men to serve the holy house."
Jn other words, the state is practically to be
transformed into a Church, and the theocracy is
to assume the form of a monocracy under the
administration of scribes and people.
V. Ezekiel and Leviticus. — We have now to
consider the modern theories respecting these
chapters, which at the present time form one of
the most debated problems of the Old Testament.
The resemblances between Ezekiel and Lev.
xvii.-xxvi. are of the most remarkable character,
and it cannot be for a moment denied that there
is some connexion between the two Books. A
similarity so close can only have arisen in one of
four ways : (1) Either Ezekiel borrowed largely
from the Book of Leviticus; or (2) those chapters
of the Book of Leviticus are a later addition to
the Pentateuch by authors who borrowed largely
from the Book of Ezekiel ; or (3) both are alike
influenced in large measure by some common
source ; or (4) both were written by the same
author.
The last conclusion (4) is that of Graf (Die
Gesch. Biicher des Alten Tcstamentes, 1866, pp.
81-83), whose theory was laboriously supported
by Bishop Colenso (Pentateuch, pt. vi. ch. i. ii.).°
Kayser, in the main, maintained the same views
• He held that Ezekiel wrote Lev. xxvl., and possibly
Lev. xvill.-xx. ; but, seeing the many expressions not
found in Ezekiel which occur in Lev. xxill., xxiv., xxv..
xxvil.. he thought that others of the last ten chapters of
Leviticus were written either by Ezekiel or by a writer
or writers who stood in close relation to him.
EZEKIEL, BOOK OF
(Jahrb. f. prot. Theol. 1881, pp. 541 sq.), by-
eliminating from the chapters certain elements
which he regarded as Elohistic. The argu-
ment in favour of this opinion loses nearly all
its force when side by side with the verbal
resemblances we observe the differences between
the systems of the two Books. Those differences
are most striking. Thus Ezekiel ignores the
existence of a high-priest, unless it be very
indirectly implied in xli. 3. It is still more
strange that he ignores the Day of Atonement,
the Feast of Pentecost, and the New Moons, and
says nothing of an evening sacrifice (xlvi. 13—
15) or of the Paschal Lamb. He also changes
many other details of the Law as laid down in
the Pentateuch, as for instance in the ritual of
the Feast of Tabernacles (xlv. 25: cp. Num.
xxix. 12-24, 35 ; Lev. xxiii. 36, 39. Compare
also Ezek. xliv. 20 ; Lev. xxi. 5 ; Ezek. xliv. 22 ;
Lev. xxi. 7, 13, 14, &c.).» Accordingly this
theory is rejected by Klostermann, Zeitschr. f.
luther. Theol. 1877, pp. 401 sq. : Wellhausen,
EM. in d. A. T., Von Bleek, 1878, p. 173 ;
Reuss, VHist. Saintc et la Loi, p. 253 ; Smend,
Die Proph. Ezekiel erklart. p. xxvii. ; Delitzsch,
Zeitsch. f. kirchl. Wiss. 1880, xii. 618; and
Kuenen, De Godsdieiut von Israel, ii. 94-96.
The theory has however been again taken up
by Horst, who in his Ecv. xvii.-xxvi. unit
Hczekiel argues that the last nine chapters of
Ezekiel were written by the Prophet long after
the chapters in Leviticus, and in his prophetic
capacity, while the Priestly-codex, as the section
of Leviticus is often called, had been not so
much written as compiled by him twenty-five
years earlier from existing documents.
The first hypothesis — that Ezekiel borrowed
largely from the Book of Leviticus — is the one
adopted by Klostermann (/. c); Dillmann,
Komm. Ex. Levit., who, however, admits the
possibility of additions to Leviticus at the time
of the Exile and later ; Hoffmann, Maijazin f. d.
Wissensch. des Judenth., 1879, pp. 209-215;
Noldcke, Zur Kritik des A. T., pp. 67-71, and
Delitzsch, Pent, kritische Stud., p. 620.' It is
in favour of this opinion that, so far as phrase-
ology is concerned, Ezekiel is not an original
writer, for he borrows very largely from Amos,
Hosea, Isaiah, Zephaniah, and above all Jeremiah.
If this hypothesis be true, the extent of Ezekiel's
indebtedness still remains a remarkable problem,
especially since many of the words and expres-
sions are unique. Against these must indeed
be set a certain number of peculiarities nnd
differences. Hoffmann uses these as a proof that
Ezekiel could not have written the Priest-
codex, because in it there are none of the
p On the many differences between Esekiel and the
Mosaic Law and later custom, see Professor Gardiner
" on Ezekiel and the I^w," Journ. of Soc. of BiU. Lit.,
June 1881. Strack, in his article on the Pentateuch
(Herzog, RB.'xi.), argues further that the mention of
the year of Jubilee in Lev. xxv. 8, and of the Urim and
Thummim In Lev. vlil. 8, Is Inconsistent with the theory
that the main part of the Lcvltlc legislation is of post-
Exilian origin. See Edersheim, Prophecy and History,
1885, pp. 370-273.
* See the long list of parallels in Smend's Commentary,
pp. xxlv., xxv. Hoffmann showsthat no less than eighty-
one passages In this section of Leviticus have eighty-
three parallels In Ezekiel, so that one of the writers
mutt have seen the other.
Digitized by
Google
EZEKIEL, BOOK OP
approximations to the language of older writers
vrbich are found in the prophecy ; and also
because in the Priest-codex the parallels are to
the language of Ezekiel only, and not to the
phrases which he has in common with Deu-
teronomy and Jeremiah. Full weight must be
allowed to these considerations, but it still
remains difficult to account for the circumstance
that Ezekiel should hare written a Book of
forty-eight chapters, and should hare singled
"Ut from the whole Pentateuch one small section,
and especially one isolated chapter (Lev. xxvi.),
for such deep study as to have become thoroughly
saturated with its style and expressions, and to
hare borrowed from' one chapter nearly fifty
expressions, of which eighteen occur nowhere
else in the Bible/
The second hypothesis (2)— that the Priestly-
codex is in reality later than Ezekiel and
partially founded on him — is, with trivial varia-
tions, that of Wellhausen, Kuenen, Smend, Reus?,
Lagarde, Stade, and Robertson Smith. Their
opinion is that the Book of Deuteronomy was in
the main the Book found— or, as they would say,
produced — by the high-priest Hilkiah in the
reign of Josiah, and that the chapters in Leviti-
cus are a modification of Ezekiel's preparatory
and ideal scheme. They consider that the
Prophet meant his Torah to be a sketch for the
ritual of the Restoration, which was to supersede
the old and corrupt mage of the Temple (xliii.
7 ; xliv. 5 ; xIt. 8, 9% and which was to be at
once a reward for the repentance of his country-
men and a scheme to protect them from again
falling into like sins (Rob. Smith, The Prophets
of the Old Testament, pp. 374-387). The
essence of this new ideal is its sacerdotalism, in
that it gives prominence to an atoning ritual,
and puts an end to the sacrifices of individual
Israelites. This it effects partly by a stated
national sacrifice, and partly by separating the
worshippers from the sacrifices by "a double
cordon of priests and Levites." The Levitical
legislation, according to this view, is but a
practical adaptation of Ezekiel's essential prin-
ciples to the actual circumstances of the second
Temple, when Jews were no longer a free people
but a religious community. In the so-called
"Priestly Codex" of Leviticus the nation be-
comes " the congregation ; " the civil order is
almost absorbed in the ecclesiastical ; the State
becomes a Church; the old prophetic ideal be-
comes a sacerdotal ideal.* Ezekiel's last nine
chapters are regarded as the modification of an
«ld priestly Torah, and Lev. xvii.-xxvi. as a
practical adaptation of this Torah, but with the
re-admission of many ancient ordinances. On
this hypothesis Lev. xxvi. is considered to be
an intentional imitation of the style and manner
of Ezekiel. For criticism of this view, we must
refer to the paper of Prof. Gardiner already
qnoted. No literary question seems more ditfi-
cnlt on & priori grounds than the decision as to
which of two writers has borrowed from the
' See Horst, p. 85 ; Colenso, vi. 9. The argument from
rt * we of hapax legomena Is, however, always pre-
orkws. See Stanley Leatnea, Witneu of the Old Tat.
<o Ckrut. p. 28» sq.
' See the view developed in Prof. J. E. Carpenter's
"Tbooah the Prophets to the Law," Modern Rev., Jan.
ISM.
EZEKIEL, BOOK OF 1039
other. For instance, every fresh critic takes a
different view of the obvious relations between
the Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians,
and between St. Jude and 2 Pet. ii. ; and quite
recently there have been opposite opinions as to
whether the Epistle of Barnabas borrows from
the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles or trice
versa. All that can be regarded as certain in
this instance is that there is some direct rela-
tion between the two sections of Ezekiel and
Leviticus. Writers like Hoffmann and Kalisch,
among others, adopt the third hypothesis (3),
that both alike are founded on an older work ;
but no one could compare such paragraphs as
Lev. xxvi. 30-33 with Ezek. vi. 3-7, or again
Lev. xxvi. with Ezek. xxxiv. 25-31, without a
strong conviction that one of the writers must
have actually seen the existing work of the
other. The questions here suggested cannot be
regarded as finally settled, but meanwhile we
may see as clearly as Luther did centuries ago,
that the authorship of this or that section of the
Pentateuch is a matter to be decided (as alone
it can be decided) by simple criticism, and that
it lies altogether out of the domain of religion.
There are no direct quotations from Ezekiel
in the New Testament, but in the Apocalypse
there are many parallels and obvious allusions
to the later chapters. A useful list of these
will be found in Dr. Currey's Commentary
{Speaker's Commentary, vi. 12-16).
The Vision of Ezekiel ("The Chariot") be-
came one of the chief studies of the Kabbalists,
and the repetition of it was supposed to be
surrounded with perils. The Talmud tells us of
a child who was trying to comprehend Chasmal
(A. V. " amber," Ezek. i. 4), when a fire came
out of the Chasmal and consumed him (Chagiga,
f. 13, 1). Many other wonderful circumstances
about the K^HD are narrated in the same
treatise, and in f. 11, 2, that there were four
questions relating to it into which, if a man
pried, " it were better for him that he had never
been born." See, too, Sukka, f. 28, 1, and
Klein, Le Jndatsme, p. 32.
The text of Ezekiel is considered to be the
most corrupt in the Old Testament except that
of the books of Samuel. It may often be con-
jecturally emended from the general character
of the prophet's style, and sometimes from the
renderings of the LXX., though many of the
various readings are obviously older than that
Version. Some are due to glosses and manipu-
lations of later scribes, especially in chs. xl.— xlviii.
See Smend, Per Proph. Ezcchiel, p. xxix.
VI. Bibliography. — The chief commentators
on this " most neglected of the prophets " are,
among the Fathers, Origen, Jerome, and Theo-
doret ; among the Jews, Rabbis David Qimchi
and Abarbanel ; among the Reformers, Oecolam-
padius and Calvin ; among Romanists, Pradus
and Villalpandus. There are modern commen-
taries by Marck (1731), Venema (1790), New-
come, Greenhill, Fairbairn (1851), Kliefoth
(1856), Henderson, H'avernick (1843), Hitzig
(1847), Hengstenberg (1867), Keil (1868),
Smend' (1880), Schroder (in Lange's Bibelmrk),
Cornill (1886), and Orelli (in Strack u. ZSckler's
Kgf. Komm., 1888). In the Speaker's Commen-
tary (1876) the Book is edited by Dr. Currey ;
in Bishop Ellicott's Commentary (1884), by Dr.
Gardiner.
Digitized by
Google
1040 EZEL, THE STONE
Besidei these commentaries, we may refer to
Carpzov, Introd. iv. 203 sq. ; Kayser, Jahrb. f.
prot. Tfutol., 1881 ; Klostermann, Zeitschr. f.
luther. Theol., 1877 ; Delitzsch, Zeitschr. f.
kirchl. Wissensch., 1880; Hoffmann, Magazin
f. d. Wissensch. d. JuJenth., 1879, pp. 210-215 ;
Ewald, Die Propheten d. Alien Bundes (2nd ed.
1868), and Qeschichte des Volkes Israel, iv. ;
Knenen, Die Profeten, and De Godsdienst ton
Israel, ii. ; Duhm, Die Theologie der Propheten,
1875; Zonz, Gottesdienstliche Vortrage, and
Oesammelte Schriften, 1875; Graf, Die Geschkht-
liche Buclier des Allen Bundes, 1866 ; KiSldeke,
Zar Kritik d. A. Test, pp. 67-71 ; Colenso,
Pentateuch and Book of Joshua, part vi. 1872 ;
Wellhausen, Prolegomena zur Qesch. Israels (2nd
ed. 1883) ; Horst, Lev. xvii.-xxvi. und Hezekiel,
1881; Dr. Robertson Smith, The Prophets of
the Old Testament, pp. 374-387 ; Reuss, L'His-
toire Sainte et la Lot, i. 253 sq. ; Knlisch,
Leviticus, p. 386; Driver, LOT. ch. v.; and
for Jewish views, Hamburger, BE. s. v.
4 Jechezkel.' [K. W. F.j
E'ZEL, THE STONE (^>TNri 'Jtfn ; B. to
'Epyii0 iicttvo, A. tpyov, lapis cui nomen est
Ezcl). A well-known stone in the neighbour-
hood of Saul's residence, the scene of the parting
of David and Jonathan when the former finally
(led from the court (1 Sam. xx. 19). At the
second mention of the spot (». 41) the Hebrew
text (33311 hwS; A.V. and R. V. "out of a
place toward the south," R. V. marg. from beside
the south) is, in the opinion of critics, undoubt-
edly corrupt (see the emendation of the text
in Driver, Notes on the Heb. Text of the BB. of
Sam. on 1 Sam. xx. 19). The true reading is in-
dicated by the LXX. B., which in both cases has
Ergab or Argah — in v. 19 for thci Hebrew Eben,
14 stone," and in r. 41 for han-negeb, "the south."
Ergab is doubtless the Greek rendering of the
Hebrew Argob=n heap of stones. The true
reading of c. 41 will therefore be as follows:
" David arose from close to the stone heap," —
close to which (the same preposition, ?VSi A. V.
" by ") it had been arranged beforehand that he
should remain (o. 19). The change in v. 41 from
33TNI1, as the text stood at the time of the
LXX., to 333H, as it now stands, is one which
might easily take place. [G.] [W.]
E'ZEM (P^V = bone; B. Booo-<U, A. Boo-
aip ; Asom), one of the towns of Simeon (1 Ch.
iv. 29). In the lists of Joshua (xix. 3) the
name appears in the slightly different form of
Azesi (the vowel being lengthened before the
cause). [G.]
E'ZEROJ»?= (rearer* ;'£(#>;.£*«■). 1. A
son of Ephraim, who was slain by the aboriginal
inhabitants of Gath, while engaged in a foray on
their cattle (1 Ch. vii. 21). Ewald (Geschichte,
i. 490) assigns this occurrence to the pre-
Egyptian period. 2. A priest noticed in the
Book of Nehemiah (xii. 42; 'U(oip, LXX.).
8. 1 Ch. iv. 4. [W. L. B.]
EZEBI'AS (B. t Ztxplas, A. i •Efrplas;
Azarias), 1 Esd. viii. 1. [Azariaii, 7.]
EZI'AS(B. o 'oQat, A. 'Efl« ; Azahel), 1 Esd.
viii. 2. [AZAKIAH ; Aziei.]
3
EZNITE, THE
E'ZION-GA-BER, or . . . GE'BEB (Jt*yff
133 = the giant's back-bone; Taoluv Ta$ip;
Asiongaber; Num. xxxiii. 35; Deut. ii. 8; 1 K.
ix. 26, xxii. 48; 2 Ch. viii. 17), the last station
named for the encampment of the Israelites
before they came to "the wilderness of Zin.
which is Kadesh," subsequently the station of
Solomon's navy, described as near " Eloth, on
the sea shore, in the land of Edom " (R. V.) ;
and where that of Jehoshaphat was afterwards
" broken " — probably destroyed on the rocks
which lie in "jagged ranges on each side"
(Stanley, S. if P. p. 2). Wellsted (ii. ch. ix.
153) would find it in Dahab [Dizauab], but
this could hardly be regarded as " in the land
of Edom " (although possibly the rocks which
Wellsted describes may have been the actual
scene of the wreck), nor would it accord with
Josephus (Ant. viii. 6, § 4)* as " not far from
Elath." According to the map of Kiepert (iu
Robinson, 1856), it stands at Mm el-Ghudi/dn,
about 10 miles up what is now the dry bed of
the Arabah, but, as be supposed, was then the
northern end of the gulf, which may have
anciently had, like that of Suez, a further ex-
tension. This probably is the best site for it.
By comparing 1 K. ix. 26, 27 with 2 Ch. viii.
17, 18, it is probable that timber was floated
from Tyre to the nearest point on the Mediter-
ranean coast, and then conveyed over land to the
head of the Gulf of Akabah, where the ships
seem to have been built ; for there can hardly
have been adequate forests in the neighbourhood.
[Wilderness of the Wandering.] [H. H.J
EZ'NITE, THE (UXINI, Ken »3¥l/ri ; B. 6
'Aravatos, A. 'Aaiivaos ; Vulg. omits). Accord-
ing to the statement of 2 Sam. xxiii. 8, " Adino
the Eznite " was another name for (R. V.) " Josh-
ebbasshebeth a Tachcemonite (A. V. " the Tach-
monite that sate in the seat "), chief among the
captains." The passage is, however, one of the
most disputed in the whole Bible, owing partly to
the difficulty of the one man bearing two names
so distinct without any assigned reason, and
partly to the discrepancy between it and the
parallel sentence in 1 Ch. xi. 11, in which for
the words "Adino the Eznite" other Hebrew
words are found, not very dissimilar in ap-
pearance, but meaning " he shook (A. V. and
R. V. " lifted up ") his spear." Modern critics
(see Driver, Kotes on the Heb. Text of the BB. of
Sam. in loco) are mostly agreed that the words
in Chronicles preserve the original text, which in
the Book of Samuel has become corrupted. The
form of this particular word is the original text
(the Kethib) Etzno, which has been altered to Etzni
by the Masoret scribes (in the Keri). apparently
to admit of some meaning being obtained from
it. Jerome read it Etzno, and taking it to be
a declension of Etz (="wood") has rendered,
the words "quasi tenerrimus ligni termiculus."
The LXX. and some Hebrew MSS. (see Davidson's
Heb. Text) add the words of Chronicles to the
text of Samuel, a course followed by the A. V.
The passage has been examined at length bv
Kennicott (Dissertation 1, 71-128) and Geseniu*
(Thes. pp. 994, 995), to whom the reader must
* 'A<riuyya£apof, avri) Bcpoaxt) xaActrai, ov reppw
AlAayris TroArwf .
Digitized by
Google
EZRA
be referred for details. Their conclusion is that
the reading of the Chronicles is correct (see
Ln-hrer, /. c). Ewald does not mention it (Gesch.
iii. 180, note). [G.] [\V.]
EZ'XIA (JSryjj =help; 'Eo-Spai). 1. The
head of one of the twenty-two courses of priests
which returned from captivity with Zerubbabel
and Jeshua (Neh. xii. 2). But in the somewhat
parallel list of Keh. x. 2-8, the name of the
same person is written iV^VV, Azariah, as it is
probably in Ezra vii. 1.
2. A man of Judah (1 Ch. iv. IT).
3. The famous scribe and priest, descended
from Hilkiah the high-priest in Josiah's reign,
from whose younger son Azariah sprung Seraiah,
tlzra's father (Ezra vii. 1), thought by many to
be quite a different person from Seraiah the
high-priest. All that is really known of Ezra
is contained in the lost four chapters of the
Book of Ezra and in Neh. viii. and xii. 26.
From these passages we learn that he was a
learned and pious priest residing at Babylon in the
time of Artaxerxes Longimanus (B.C. 465-425).
The origin of his influence with the king does
not appear, but in the seventh year of his reign,
in spite of the unfavourable report which had
been sent by Kehnm and Shimshai (Ezra ir. 8, 9),
he obtained leave to go to Jerusalem, and to
take with him a company of Israelites, together
with priests, a few Levites, singers, porters, and
Kethinim. Of these a list, amounting to 1754,
is given in Ezra viii. ; and these, also, doubtless
form a part of the full list of the returned
captives contained in Neh. vii., and in duplicate
in Ezra ii. (cp. Smend, Vie Listen d. Bit. Etra
». AVA.). Including women and children, the
number probably amounted to between 6,000
and 8,000 souls. The journey of Ezra and his
companions from Babylon to Jerusalem took just
four months ; and they brought up with them
a large free-will offering of gold, silver, and
silver vessels, contributed, not only by the
Babylonian Jews, but by the king himself and
his counsellors. These offerings were for the
House of God, to beautify it, and for the pur-
chase of bullocks, rams, and the other offerings
required for the Temple-service. In addition to
this, Ezra was empowered to draw upon the
king's treasurers beyond the river for any
further supplies he might require; and all
priests, Levites, and other ministers of the
Temple, were exempted from taxation. Ezra
had also authority given him to appoint magis-
trates and judges in Judaea, with power of life
and death over all offenders. This ample com-
mission was granted him at .his own request
(v. 6), and it appears that his great design was
to effect a religious reformation among the
Palestine Jews, and to bring them back to the
observation of the Law of Moses, from which
they had grievously declined. His first step,
accordingly, was to enforce a separation from
their wives upon all who had made heathen
marriages, in which number were many priests
and Levites, as well as other Israelites. This
wss effected in little more than six months after
his arrival at Jerusalem.* With the detailed
EZRA
1041
* The steps of Eire's reformation are well. If some-
what Imaginatively, described by Hunter, After Me
Atk, U, chs. I. IL— [FJ
BIBLE MCT.— VOL. L
account of this important transaction Ezra's
autobiography ends abruptly, and we hear
nothing more of him till, thirteen years after-
wards, in the twentieth of Artaxerxes, we find
him again at Jerusalem with Nehemiah "the
Tirshatha." It is generally assumed that Ezra
had continued governor till Nehemiah superseded
him ; but as Ezra's commission was only of a
temporary nature, " to inquire concerning Judah
and Jerusalem" (Ezra vii. 14), and to carry
thither "the silver and gold which the king
and his counsellors had freely offered unto the
God of Israel " (r. 15), and as there is no trace
whatever of his presence at Jerusalem between
the eighth and the twentieth of Artaxerxes, it
seems probable that after he had effected the
above-named reformation, and had appointed
competent judges and magistrates, with authority
to maintain it, he himself returned to the king
of Persia. This is iu itself what one would
expect, and what is borne out by the parallel
case of Nehemiah, and it also accounts for the
abrupt termination of Ezra's narrative, and for
that relapse of the Jews into their former irre-
gularities which is apparent in the Book of
Nehemiah. Such a relapse, and such a state of
affairs at Jerusalem in general, could scarcely
have occurred if Ezra had continued there.*
Whether he returned to Jerusalem with Nehe-
miah, or separately, does not appear certainly ;
but as he is not mentioned in Nehemiah's narra-
tive till after the completion of the wall (Neh.
viii. 1), it is perhaps probable that he followed
the latter some months later, having, perhaps,
been sent for to aid him in his work. Tho
functions he executed under Nehemiah's govern-
ment were purely of a priestly and ecclesiastical
character, such as reading and interpreting the
Law of Moses to the people during the eight
days of the Feast of Tabernacles, praying in the
congregation, assisting at the dedication of the
wall, and in promoting the religious refor-
mation so happily effected by the Tirshatha.
But in this he filled the first place; being
repeatedly coupled with Nehemiah the Tirshatha
(viii. 9 ; xit. 26), while Eliashib the high-priest
is not mentioned as taking any part in the
reformation at all, through (as some think ; cp.
Hunter, ii. 235) hostility to the course pursued.
In the sealing to the covenant described in
Neh. x., Ezra's name does not occur, probably
because this formal act on the part of the man
who had drawn up the covenant was not
considered necessary, though some consider that
he sealed under the patronymic Seraiah or
Azariah (v. 2). As Ezra is not mentioned after
Nehemiah's departure for Babylon in the thirty-
second year of Artaxerxes, and as everything
fell into confusion during Nehemiah's absence
(Neh. xiii.), it is not unlikely that Ezra may
have died or returned to Babylon before that
year (see his character, Mai. ii. 5-7). Josephus,
who should be our next best authority after
Scripture, evidently knew nothing about the
time or the place of his death. He vaguely
says, " He died an old man, and was buried in
a magnificent manner at Jerusalem'' {Ant.
» On the other band, It is argued that Ezra remained
all this time In Jerusalem, but wss forced Into Inactivity
by the strong reaction against his Puritan regime. Cp.
Hunter, li.Msq.— (P.)
O \
Digitized by
Google
1042
EZttA
EZBA
\i. 5, § 5), and places his death in the high-
priesthood of Joacim, and before the government
of Nehemiah! Bat that he lived under the
high-priesthood of Eliashib and the government
ofNehcmiah is expressly stated in Nehemiah; and
there was a strong Jewish tradition that he was
buried in Persia. Thus Benjamin of Tudela
says of Nehai'-Samorah — apparently some place
on the lower Tigris, on the frontier of Persia,
Zamuza according to the T&lmudist*, otherwise
Zamzumu — "The sepulchre of Ezra the priest
and scribe is in this place, where he died on his
journey from Jerusalem to king Artaxerxes *"
(i. 116), a tradition which certainly agrees very
well with the narrative of Nehemiah. This
sepulchre is shown to this day (>6. ii. 116, note).
Tomb of Ezra on the bwak* of the Euptuale*.
As regards the traditional history of Ezra,
it is extremely difficult to judge what portion
of it has any historical foundation. The
principal works ascribed to him by the Jews,
and, on the strength of their testimony, by
Christians also, are : — 1. The institution of the
Great Synagogue, of which, the Jews say, Ezra
was president, and Daniel, Haggai, Zechariah,
Malachi, Zorobabel, Mordecai, Jeshua, Nehemiah,
&c, were members; Simeon the Just, the last
survivor, living on till the time of Alexander
the Great I 2. The settling the Canon of Scrip-
ture, and restoring, correcting, and editing the
whole sacred volume according to the threefold
arrangement of the Law, the Prophets, and the
Hagiographa, with the divisions of the Pcsutim,
or verses, the vowel-points handed down by
tradition from Hoses, and the emendations of
the Keri. 3. The introduction of the Chaldee
character instead of the old Hebrew or Samari-
tan. 4. The compilership of the Books of Chro-
nicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and, some add, Esther ;
and, many of the Jews say, also of the Books
of Ezekiel, Daniel, and the twelve Prophets.
5. The establishment of synagogues. Of most of
these works a full account is given in Prideaux's
Connexion, i. 308-348 and 355-376 ; also in
Buxtorfs Tiberias. References to the chief
rabbinical and other authorities will be found in
Winer ; Fiirst, Dcr Kanon d. A. Ts., p. 112 sq. ;
and Hamburger, R.E. s. n. A compendious
account of the arguments by which most of
these Jewish statements are proved to be*
fabulous is given in Stehelin's Rabbin. Literat.
pp. 5-8. The chief arc drawn from the silence
of the sacred writers themselves, of the apo-
cryphal books, and of Josephus — and, it might
be added, of Jerome — and from the fact that
they may be traced to the author of the-
chapter in the Mishna called Pirke Atoth.
Here, however, it must suffice to observe that
the pointed description of Ezra (vii. 6) as "a,
ready scribe in the Law of Moses," repeated iu
vv. 11, 12, 21, added to the information
concerning him that " he had prepared his.
heart to seek the Law of the Lord, and to do it.
and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments "
(vii. 10), and his commission " to teach the laws
of his God to such as knew them not " (r. 25),
and his great diligence in rending the Scriptnres
to the people, all give the utmost probability to
the account which attributes to him a corrected
edition of the Scriptures, and the circulation of
many such copies. The Books of Nehemiah ami
Malachi must indeed have been added later ; pos-
sibly by Malachi's authority; and some tradition
to this effect may have given rise to the Jewish
fable of Malachi being the same person as Ezra.
But we cannot affirm that Ezra inserted in the
Canon any Books that were not already acknow-
ledged as inspired, as we have no sufficient
ground for ascribing to him the prophetic
character. Even the Books of which he was
the compiler may not have assumed definitely the
Digitized by
Google
EZBA, BOOK OF
essracter of Scripture till they were sanc-
tioned by Malachi. There does not, however,
s«ra to be sufficient gronnd for forming a defi-
nite opinion on the details of the subject. In
like manner one can only say that the introduc-
tion of the Chaldee character, and the com-
oescement of such stated meetings for hearing
the Scriptures read as led to the regular
synagogue-service, are things likely to have
"cenrred about this time. For the question of
bra's authorship, see Chronicles and Ezra,
Book of. [A. C. H.]
EZRA, BOOK OF. I. Title and Structure
of the Book. — The Book of Ezra speaks for
itself to any one who reads it with ordinary
intelligence, and without any prejudice as to
its nature and composition. It is manifestly
i continuation of the Books of Chronicles, as
indeed it is called by Hilary, Bishop of Poitiers,
Seraena cUerxm Esdras (ap. Cosin's Oanon of
Scr. 51). It is naturally a fresh Book, as com-
mencing the history of the returned captives
after seventy years of suspension, as it were, of
the national life. But when we speak of the
Book as a chronicle, we at once declare the nature
of it, which its contents also abnndantly confirm.
Like the two Books of Chronicles, it consist* of
the contemporary historical journals kept from
time to time by the Prophets, or other author-
ised persons, who were eye-witnesses for the
most part of what they record, and whose
several narratives were afterwards strung toge-
ther, and either abridged or added to, as the
caw required, by a later hand. That later
hand, in the Book of Ezra, was doubtless Ezra's
hi, as appears by the last four chapters, a*
well as by other matter inserted in the previous
chapters. While therefore, in a certain sense,
the whole Book is Ezra's, as put together by
him, yet, strictly, only the last four chapters
are his original work. Nor will it be difficult
t* point out with tolerable certainty several of
the writers of whose writings the first six
chapters are composed. It has already been
suggested [Chronicles, p. 577, col 1] that the
chief portion of the last chapter of 2 Ch. and
Etrai. may probably have been written by Daniel.
The evidences of this in Ezra i. must now be
given more fully. No one probably can read
Daniel as a genuiue Book, and not be struck
with the very singular circumstance that, while
he tells us in ch. ix. that he was aware that the
seventy years' Captivity, foretold by Jeremiah,
wts near its close, and was led thereby to pray
earnestly for the restoration of Jerusalem, and
while he records the remarkable vision in answer
to his prayer, yet he takes not the slightest notice
of Cyrus's decree, by which Jeremiah's prophecy
was fulfilled, and his own heart's desire and
prayer to God for Israel was accomplished, and
which must hare been the most stirring event
in his long life, not even excepting the incident
of the den of lions. He passes over in utter
silence the first year of Cyrus, to which pointed
allusion is made in Dan. i. 21, and proceeds in
ch. x. to the third year of Cyrus. Such silence
is utterly unaccountable. But Ezra i. supplies
the missing notice. If placed between Dan. ix.
sad i. it exactly fills up the gap, and records the
event of the first year of Cyras, in which Daniel
**« so deeply interested. And not only so, but
EZRA, BOOK OF
1043
the manner of the record is exactly Daniel's.
Ezra i. 1 : " And in the first year of Cyrus, king
of Persia," is the precise formula used in Dan. i.
1 ; ii. 1 ; vii. 1 ; viii. 1 ; dx. 1 ; x. 1 ; xi. 1.
The designation (tt>. 1, 2, 8) " Cyrus, king of
Persia," is that used in Dan. x. 1 ; the reference
to the prophecy of Jeremiah in t>. 1 is similar to
that in Dan. ix. 2, and the natural sequence to
it. The giving the text of the decree, vv. 2-4
(cp. Dan. iv.), the mention of the name of " Mith-
redath the treasurer," t). 8 (cp. Dan. i. 3, 11),
the allusion to the sacred vessels placed by
Nebuchadnezzar in the house of his god, t>. 7
(cp. Dan. i. 2), the giving the Chaldee name of
Zerubbabel, vv. 8, 11 (cp. Dan. i. 7), and the
whole locus standi of the narrator, who evidently
wrote at Babylon, not at Jerusalem, are all
circumstances which in a marked manner point
to Daniel as the writer of Ezra i. Nor is there
the least improbability in the supposition that
if Ezra edited Daniel's papers he might think
the chapter in question more conveniently
placed in its chronological position in the
Chronicles than in the collection of Daniel's
prophecies. It is scarcely necessary to add
that several chapters of the Prophets Isaiah
and Jeremiah are actually found in the
Book of Kings, as e.g. Is. xxxvi.-xxxix. in
2 K. xviii.-xx. In the opinion then of the
writer of this article, Ezra i. was by the hand
of Daniel.
As regards Ezra ii., and as far as iii. 1, where
the change of name from Sheshbazzar to Zerub-
babel in v. 2, the mention of Nehemiah the
Tirshatha in vv. 2 and 63, and that of Mordecai
in v. 2, at once indicate a different and much
later hand, we need not seek long to discover
where it came from, because it is found in ex-
terna, verbatim et literatim (with the exception
of clerical errors), in ch. vii. of Nehemiah, to
which it belongs beyond a shadow of doubt
[Nehemiah, Book of]. This portion then was
written by Nehemiah, and was placed by Ezra,
or possibly by a still later hand, in this position,
as bearing upon the return from Captivity related
in ch. i., though chronologically out of place.
Whether the extract originally extended so far
as iii. 1 may be doubted.* The next portion
extends from iii. 2 to the end of ch. vi. With
the exception of one large explanatory addition
by Ezra, extending from iv. 6 to 23 (see below),
this portion is the work of a writer contem-
porary with Zernbbabel and Jeshua and an eye-
witness of the rebuilding of the Temple in
the beginning of the reign of Darius Hystaspis.
The minute details given of all the circum-
stances, such as the weeping of the old men who
had seen the first Temple, the names of the
Levites who took part in the work, of the
heathen governors who hindered it, the expres-
sion (vi. 15) " This house was finished," &c, the
number of the sacrifices offered at the dedica-
tion, and the whole tone of the narrative,
bespeak an actor in the scenes described. Who
then was so likely to record these interesting
events as one of those Prophets who took an
active part in promoting them, and a portion of
whose duty it would be to continue the national
chronicles i That it was the Prophet Haggai
* OettU (} «) suggests that chs. t.-iii. belong to one
bistorical source.
3X2
Digitized by
Google
10H
EZBA, BOOK OF
becomes tolerably sure when we observe further
the following coincidences in style.
1. The title "the Prophet*'' is throughout
this portion of Ezra attached in a peculiar way
to the name of Haggai. Thus in v. 1 we
read, "Then the Prophets, Haggai the Prophet,
and Zechariah the son of Iddo, prophesied," &c. ;
and in vi. 14, " They prospered through the pro-
phesying of Haggai the Prophet, and Zechariah
the son of Iddo." And in Ijjce manner in Hag. i.
1, 3, 12, ii. 1, 10, he is called " Haggai the
Prophet."
2. The designation of Zerubbabel and Jeshua
is identical in the two writers : " Zerubbabel
the son of Shealtiel, and Jeshua the son ol
Jozadak" (cp. Ezra iii. 2, 8, v. 2, with Hag.
i. 1, 12, 14, ii. 2, 4, 23). It will be seen that
ooth writers usually name them together, and
in the same order : Zechariah, on the contrary,
does not once name them together, and calls
them simply Zerubbabel and Jeshua. Only in
vi. 11 he adds "the son of Josedech," where the
difference in transliteration is merely an in-
accuracy in the A. V. corrected in the K. V.
"Jehozadak."
3. The description in Ezra v. 1, 2 of the
effect of the preaching of Haggai and Zechariah
upon Zerubbabel, Jeshua, and the people, is
identical with that in Hag. i., only abbreviated.
And Hag. ii. 3 alludes to the interesting circum-
stance recorded in Ezra iii. 12.
4. Both writers mark the date of the trans-
actions they record by the year of " Darius the
king " (Ezra iv. 24, vi. 15, compared with Hag.
i. 1, 15, ii. 10, &c>
5. Ezra iii. 8 contains exactly the same enu-
meration of those that worked, viz. " Zerub-
babel, Jeshua, and the remnant of their
brethren," as Hag. i. 12, 14, where we have
" Zerubbabel, and Jeshua, with all the remnant
of the people " (cp. too Ezra vi. 16 and Hag.
ii. 2).
6. Both writers use the expression " the work
of the house of the Lord" (Ezra iii. 8, 9
compared with Hag. i. 14); and both use the
phrase " the foundation of the Temple was laid "
(Ezra iii. 6, 10, 11, 12, compared with Hag. ii.
18).
7. Both writers use indifferently the expres-
sions the " house of the Lord " and the " Temple
of the Lord," but the former much more fre-
quently than the latter. Thus the writer in
Ezra uses the expression " the house " lfl'3)
twenty-five times, to six in which he speaks of
" the Temple " f^O'iT). Haggai speaks of " the
house " seven times, of " the Temple " twice.
8. Both writers make marked and frequent
references to the Law of Moses. Thus cp.
Ezra iii. 2, 3-6, 8, vi. 14, 16-22, with Hag. i. 8,
10, ii. 5, 11-13, 17, &c.
Such strongly-marked resemblances in the
compass of two such brief portions of Scripture
seem to prove, in the opinion of the writer of
this article, that they are from the pen of the
same writer.
Bnt the above observations do not apply to
Ezra iv. 6-23, which is a parenthetic addition
by a mnch later hand, and, as the passage most
clearly shows, made in the reign of Artaxerxes
Longimanus (B.O. 465-425). The compiler who
inserted ch. ii., a document drawn up in the reign
EZJUA, BOOK OF
of Artaxerxes, to illustrate the return of the cap-
tives under Zerubbabel, here inserts a notice of
two historical facts, — of which one occurred in
the reign of Xerxes, and the other in the reign
of Artaxerxes, — to illustrate the opposition
offered by the heathen to the rebuilding of the
Temple in the reigns of Cyrus and Cambyses.
He tells us that in the beginning of the reign of
Xerxes, i.e. before Esther was in favour, they
had written to the king to prejudice him
against the Jews— a circumstance, by the way,
which may rather hare inclined him to listen to
Haman's proposition ; and he gives the text of
letters sent to Artaxerxes, and of Artaxerxes'
answer, on the strength of which Rehum and
Shimshai forcibly hindered the Jews from re-
building the city. These letters doubtless came
into Ezra's hands at Babylon, and may hare led
to those endeavours on his part to make the
king favourable to Jerusalem which issued iu
his own commission in the seventh year of his
reign. At v. 24 Haggai's narrative proceeds
in connexion with v. 5. The mention of
Artaxerxes in vi. 14 is of the same kind.
The last four chapters, beginning with chapter
vii., are Ezra's own, and continue the history
after a gap of fifty-eight years — from the
sixth of Darius to the seventh of Artaxerxes.
The only history of Judaea during this interval
is what is given in the above-named parenthesis,
from which we may infer that during this time
there was no one in Palestine to write the
Chronicles. The history of the Jews in Persia
for the same period is* given in the Book of
Esther.
[In the canon of the Jewish Church the Books
of Ezra and Neheraiah are reckoned as one
(Baba Bathra, f. 15 a), and Ezra was regarded
as the " writer." Josephus, Origen ('E. t/wtoi
icol itimpot it M 'Effof in Euseb. Silt. Eecl
vi. 25), Melito of Sardis, Epiphanius, Jerome,
and the LXX. (tt. and A.) also counted the two
as one ; led to their conclusion as much by the
literary character of the Books as by a supposed
desire to bring the number of the Canonical
Books into keeping with the number of the
letters in the Hebrew and Greek alphabets. The
abrupt ending, or rather non-ending, of Ezra,
lent itself to this conclusion; while some of
the most interesting episodes in the history of
Ezra are to be found not in the Book which
bears his name but in Neheraiah (vii. 73 b-x).
It seems impossible now to determine when the
separation between the two Books (Heb. text,
I.XX. B., and Vulg.) took place ; but at least
the point fixed upon — the appearance of Nehe-
miah upon the scene— commends itself as the
most natural which could be selected.
The question of authorship, or perhaps
compilership, is by no means settled. In the
case of the Book Ezra (for the Book of Nehemiah,
see s. n.), separate compilership being pre-
supposed, the style of the portions admitted to
be his (e.g. vii. 27, ix. 15) is declared to be in
agreement with that found elsewhere in the
Book ; and such peculiarities as transition from
the first to the third person, or sections
alternately Hebrew and Aramaic, are not con-
sidered incompatible with the view that hin
was himself the compiler. On this supposition
Ezra's Book was written "in B.c. 457 or very
shortly afterwards " (Sayce, pp. 28-33). On the
Digitized by
Google
EZRAHITE
FABLE
1045
other hand, the peculiarities above mentioned
are with some critics matters of special moment ;
and dual compilership with a 6nal redaction not
being considered satisfactory, a date is taken
from >'eh. xii. 23 (" Darius the Persian " being
taken to be Darius Codomannus, B.C. 336-330),
and the Book is — as regards its present form —
placed at the end of the 4th cent, or in the begin-
ning of the 3rd cent. B.C. (Oettli, § 5.)— F.']
1L Text.— The teit of the Book of Ezra is
not in a good condition. There are a good many
palpable corruptions both in the names and
numerals, and perhaps in some other points,
h is written partly in Hebrew, and partly in
Chaldee. The Chaldee begins at iv. 8, and
continues to the end of ri. 18. The letter or
decree of Artaxerxes (vii. 12-26) is also given
in the original Chaldee. There has never been
any doubt about Ezra being canonical, although
there is no quotation from it in the N. T.
Augustine says of Ezra, "inagis rerum gesta-
rnm scriptor est habitus quam propheta " (de
Cit. Dei, xviii. 36). The period covered by
the Book is eightv years, from the first of Cyrus
(R.C. £36) to the beginning of the eighth of
Artaxerxes (B.C. 456). It embraces the govern-
ments of Zerubbabel and Ezra, the high-priest-
hood* of Jeshua, Joiakim, and the early part of
FJiashib ; and the reigns of Cyrus, Cambyses,
SmerdU, Darius Hystaspis, Xerxes, and part of
Artuerxes. Of these Cambyses and Smerdis
are not named. Xerxes is barely named iv. 6.
[EsDBis, Fiest Book op.] [A. C. H.]
HI. Literature. — The best edition of the
Hfb.-Aram. text U Baer's Lihri Danielis, Ezrae,
ft Xehemiae, 1882, with glossary, &c. by Fried.
Ifclitzsch. Good commentaries are supplied by
Bertbeau-Ryssel « (in the Kgf. Hdb. *. A. 71);
Kefl(in Keii u. Delitzsch's Bibl. Kornm.); Schultz
(in Ltnge's Theoi.-hom. Bffxlw.); Neteler, Die
BB. Extra!, Xe/i., u. Esther; Rawlinson (in
speaker's Commentary) ; Sayce (Introd. to the
hxb of Ezra, Neh. and Esther) ; Ityle (in Cam-
'"tip Bible for Schools); Driver (LOT. p. 507
«).); and Oettli (in Strack und Zockler's Kgf.
A'«m. 2. d. hetf. Schriften d. A. T.), who also
•applies references to numerous German mono-
graph* on special points. [F.]
EZIiAHTTE, THE (*rnmPl; B. Zaptlmt,
A i "E^mtjX/ttis [in K.j BSt. 'IvpcaiKtlrnt [in
P»]; Eu-ahita), a title attached to two persons
-Ethan(l K. iv. 31 ; Ps. lxxxix. title) and Heman
(Ps. lxxxriii. title). The word is naturally
derirable from Ezrab, or — which is almost the
•ane ia Hebrew — Zerach, PP* ; and accordingly
in 1 Ch. ii. 6, Ethan and Heman are both given
as sou of Zerah the son of Judah. Another
ttbia and another Heman are named as Levites
and musicians in the list* of 1 Ch. vi. and
•lse«here. [G.]
EZ"BI (*"W = my help; 'Effopf, A. '%(pai;
Cm), son of Chelub, superintendent for king
David of those who worked " for tillage of the
pmA " (1 Ch. xxvii. 26). [G.]
FABLE (/iWoi ; fabula). Taking the words
" fable " and " parable," not in their strict ety-
mological meaning, but in that which has been
stamped upon them by current usage — looking,
i.e. at the Aesopic fable as the type of the
one, at the Parables of the N. T. us the type of
the other, — we have to ask, (1) In what relation
they stand to each other, as instruments of
moral teaching ? (2) What use is made in the
Bible of this or of that form ? That they have
much in common is, of course, obvious enough,
lu both we find "statements of facts, which
do not even pretend to be historical, used as
vehicles for the exhibition of a general truth "
(Keander, Leben Jem, p. 68). Both differ from
the Mythus, in the modern sense of that word,
in being the result of a deliberate choice of
such a mode of teaching, not the spontaneous,
unconscious evolution of thought in some
symbolic form.* They take their place so far as
species of the same genus. What are the
characteristic marks by which the fable and
the Parable differ from each other, it is perhaps
easier to feel than to define. Thus we hare
(cp. Trench, Kates on the Parables, p. 2)
(1) Lessiug's statement that the fable takes
the form of an actual narrative, while the
Parable assumes only that what is related
might hare happened ; (2) Herder's, that the
diOerence lies in the fable's dealing with brute
or inanimate nature, in the Parable's drawing
its materials exclusively from human life ;
(3) Olshausen's (on Matt. xiii. 1), followed by
Trench (/. c), that it is to be found in the
higher truths of which the Parable is the
vehicle. Perhaps the most satisfactory sum-
ming up of the chief distinctive features of
each is to be found in the following extract
from Neander (/. c.) : — " The Parable is distin-
guished from the fable by this, that, in the
latter, qualities or acts of a higher class of
beings may be attributed to a lower (e.g. those
of men to brutes) ; while, in the former, the
lower sphere is kept perfectly distinct from that
which it seems to illustrate. The beings and
powers thus introduced always follow the law
of their nature, but their acts, according to
this law, are used to figure those of a higher
race The mere introduction of brutes
as personal agents, in the fable, is not sufficient
to distinguish it from the Parable which may-
make use of the same contrivance ; as, for ex-
ample, Christ employs the sheep in one of His
parables. The great distinction here, also, lies
in what has already been remarked; brutes
introduced in the Parable act according to the
law of their nature, and the two spheres of
nature and of the kingdom of God are care-
fully separated from each other. Hence the
reciprocal relations of brutes to each other are
not made use of, as these could furnish no
appropriate image of the relation between man
and the kingdom of God."
• On the myth see Bishop Westcott, Kstayt an the
History 0/ Me Religious Thought in the West, p. 3.
Digitized by
Google
1046
FABLE
Of the fable, as thus distinguished from the
Parable, we have but two examples in the Bible :
(1) that of the trees choosing their king, ad-
dressed by Jotham to the men of Shechem
(Judg. ix. 8-15) — unnecessarily placed by some
(cp. Bleek-Wellhauacn, 4 p. 194) in the times of
the Kings; (2) that of the cedar of Lebanon
and the thistle, as the answer of Jehoash to the
challenge of Amaziah (2 K. xiv. 9). The narra-
tive of Ezek. xvii. 1-10, though, in common
with the fable, it brings before us the lower
forms of creation as representatives of human
characters and destinies, differs from it, in the
points above noticed, (1) in not introducing
them as having human attributes, (2) in the
higher prophetic character of the truths con-
veyed by it. The great eagle, the cedar of
Lebanon, the spreading vine, are not grouped
together as the agents in a fable, but are simply,
like the bear, the leopard, and the lion in the
visions of Daniel, symbols of the great mon-
archies of the world.
In the two instances referred to, the fable has
more the character of the Greek afcor (Quintil.
Inst. Orat. v. 11) than of the /tv6oi: that is,
it is less the fruit of a vivid imagination, sport-
ing with the analogies between the worlds of
nature and of men, than a covert reproof,
making the sarcasm which it affects to hide all
the sharper (Miiller and Donaldson, Hist, of
Greek Literature, vol. i. ch. xi.). The appearance
of the fable thus early in the history of Israel,
and its entire absence from the direct teaching
both of the 0. and N. T., are, each of them
in its way, significant. Taking the received
chronology, the fable of Jotham was spoken
about 1209 B.C. The Arabian traditions of
Lokman do not assign to him an earlier date
than that of David. The earliest Greek alvos
is that of Hesiod (Op. et D. v. 202), and the
proBe form of the fable does not meet us till we
come (about 550 B.C.) to Stesichorus and Aesop.
The first example in the history of Rome is the
apologue of Menenius Agrippa B.C. 494, and its
genuineness has been questioned on the ground
that the fable could hardly at that time have
found its way to Latium (Miiller and Donald-
son, I. c). It may be noticed, too, that when
collections of fables became familiar to the
Greeks, they were looked on as imported, not
indigenous. The traditions that surround the
name of Aesop, the absence of any evidence that
he wrote fables, the traces of Eastern origin in
those ascribed to him, leave him little more
than the representative of a period when the
forms of teaching, which had long been familiar
to the more Eastern nations, were travelling
westward, and were adopted eagerly by the
Greeks. The collections themselves are de-
scribed by titles that indicate a foreign origin.
They arc Libyan (Arist. Rhct. ii. 20), Cyprian,
Cilician. All these facts lead to the conclusion
that the Hebrew mind, gifted, as it was, in a
special measure, with the power of perceiving
analogies in things apparently dissimilar, at-
tained, at a very early stage of its growth, the
power which does not appear in the history of
other nations till a later period. Whatever
antiquity may be ascribed to the fables in the
comparatively later collection of the Pancha
2'antra, the land of Canaan is, so far as we have
any data to conclude from, the fatherland of
FABLE
fable. To conceive brutes or inanimate objects
as representing human characteristics ; to per-
sonify them as acting, speaking, reasoning ; to
draw lessons from them applicable to human
life, — this must have been common among the
Israelites in the time of the Judges. The part
assigned in the earliest records of the Bible to
the impressions made by the brute creation on
the mind of man when " the Lord God formed
every beast of the field and every fowl of the
air, and brought them unto Adam to see what
he would call them " (Gen. ii. 19), and the
apparent symbolism of the serpent in the narra-
tive of the Fall (Gen. iii. 1), are at once indica-
tions of teaching adapted to men in the posses-
sion of this power, and must have helped to
develop it (Herder, Qeitt der Ebraiachen Poesie ;
Werke, xxxiv. p. 16, ed. 1826). The large
number of proverbs in which analogies of this
kind are made the bases of a moral precept,
and some of which {e.g. Prov. xxvi. 11, xxx. 15,
25-28) are of the nature of condensed fables,
show that there was no decline of this power as
the intellect of the people advanced. The ab-
sence of fables accordingly from the teaching of
the O. T. must bo ascribed to their want of
fitness to be the media of the truths which that
teaching was to convey. The points in which
brutes or inanimate objects present analogies to
man are chiefly those which belong to his lower
nature, his pride, indolence, cunning, and the
like ; and the lessons derived from them ac-
cordingly do not rise higher than the pruden-
tial morality which aims at repressing such
defects (cp. Trench, Notet on the Parables, 1. c).
Hence the fable, apart from the associations
of a grotesque and ludicrous nature which
gather round it, apart too from its present-
ing narratives which are "nee verae nee
verisimiles" (Cic. de Invent, i. 19), is in-
adequate as the exponent of the higher truths
which belong to man's spiritual life. It may
serve to exhibit the relations between man and
man ; it fails to represent those between man,
and God. To do that is the office of the
Parable, finding its outward framework in the
dealings of men with each other, or in the
world of nature as it is, not in any grotesque
parody of nature, and exhibiting, in either case,
real and not fanciful analogies. The fable seizes
on that which man has in common with the
creatures below him ; the Parable rests on the
truths that man is made in the image of God,
and that " all things are double one against
another."
It is noticeable, as confirming this view of
the office of the fable, that though those of
Aesop (so called) were known to the great
preacher of righteousness at Athens, though a
metrical paraphrase of some of them was
among the employments of his imprisonment
(Plato, Phaedon, pp. 60, 61), they were not
employed by him as illustrations, or channels of
instruction. While Socrates shows an apprecia-
tion of the power of such fables to represent
some of the phenomena of human life, he was
not, he says, in this sense of the word, iivioKo-
yueis. The myths which appear in the Gorgias,
the Phaedrus, the Phaedon, the Republic, are as
unlike as possible to the Aesopic fables, are (to
take his own account of them) ob fivOoi SAAa
\6yoi, — true, though figurative, representations
Digitized by
Google
FABLE
of spiritual realities ; while the illustrations
from the common facts of life which were so
conspicuous in his ordinary teaching, though
differing in being comparisons rather than narra-
tives, come nearer to the parables of the Bible
(cp. the contrast between -rck luKparixi, as
examples of the napa$o\ii and the Aif-yoi
Airatwuoi, Arist. Rhet. ii. 20). It may be said
indeed that the use of the fable as an instru-
ment of teaching (apart from the embellish-
ments of wit and fancy with which it is asso-
ciated by such writers as Lessiog and La Fon-
taine) belongs rather to childhood, and the
child-like period of national life, than to a
more advanced development. In the earlier
stages of political change, as in the cases of
Jotham, Stesichorns (Arist. Rhet, 1. c), Mene-
nius Agrippa, it is used as an element of per-
suasion or reproof. It ceases to appear in the
higher eloquence of orators and statesmen. The
special excellence of fables is that they are
Jhitaiyopucot (Arist. Shut. 1. c.) ; that " ducere
nnimos solent, praecipue rusticorum et imperi-
torum " (Quint. Inst. Oral. 1. c).
The fMti of false teachers claiming to belong
FAIR HAVENS
1047
to the Christian Church, alluded to by writers
of the N. T. in connexion with ■yivtaS.oyia.t
axipatnoi (I Tim. i. 4), or with epithets 'low-
Zautoi (Tit. i. 14), ypaatus (1 Tim. iv. 7),
fftao^icfiiyoi (2 Pet. i. 10), do not appear to have
had the character of fables, properly so called.
As applied to them, the word takes its general
meaning of anything false or unreal, and here
we need not discuss the nature of the falsehoods
so referred to (see Riehm, HWB. s. n. " Fabcl ; "
Cremer, Bibl.-Theol. Wirterb* s. v. initios).
On the large use and specimens of fable in the
Talmudical writings, see Hamburger, SI:'.
Abth. ii. i. t. " Fabel." [E. H. P.] [F.]
FAIR HAVENS (KoAol \i/ims\ a harbour
in the island of Crete (Acts xxvii. 8), not
mentioned in any other ancient writing. There
seems no probability that it is, as BUcoc sug-
gested (on the Acts, p. 347, ed. 1829), the Ka\v
'AktJ) of Steph. Byz. — for that is said to be a
city, whereas Fair Havens is described as "a place
near to which was a city called Lasaea " (totos
tij tf iyyvt ^" »<fAu A.). Moreover Mr. Pashlev
found (Tratels in Crete, ii. 57) a district
Fair Havens In Crete.
called AcU; and it is most likely that KoM
'Acrfc was situated there; but that district is
in the W. of the island, whereas Fair Havens
was on the S. Its position is now quite certain.
Though not mentioned by classical writers, it is
atill known by its old Greek name, as it was in
the time of Pococke, and other early travellers
mentioned by Mr. Smith (Voyage and Shipw.
of St. Paul* pp. 80-82). Lasaea, too, has
recently been most explicitly discovered. In
fact Fair Havens appears to have been practi-
cally its harbour. These places are situated 4
or 5 miles to the E. of Cape Matala, which is
the most conspicuous headland on the S. coast
«f Crete, and immediately to the W. of which
the coast trends suddenly to the N. This last
circumstance explains why the ship which con-
veyed St. Paul was brought to anchor in Fair
Havens. In consequence of violent and con-
tinuing N. W. winds she had been unable to
hold on her course towards Italy from Cnidus
(r. 7), and had run down, by Salmone, under the
lee of Crete. It was possible to reach Fail-
Havens : bnt beyond Cape Matala the difficulty
would have recurred, so long as the wind re-
mained in the same quarter. A considerable
delay took place (t>. 9), during which it is possible
that St. Paul may have had opportunities of
preaching the Gospel at Lasaea, or even at
Gortyna, where Jews resided (1 Mace. xv. 23),
and which was not far distant : but all this is
conjectural. A consultation took place, at which
Digitized by
Google
1048
FAIRS
it was decided, against the Apostle's advice, to
make au attempt to reach a good harbour named
Phenice, their present anchorage being &*tu84-
toi «pot ■wapaxtituurla* (o. 12). All such terms
are comparative: and there is no doubt that, as
a safe winter harbour, Fair Havens is infinitely
• inferior to 1'henice ; though perhaps even as a
matter of seamanship St. Paul's advice was not
bad. However this may be, the south wind,
which sprang up afterwards (o. 13), proved
delusive ; and the vessel was caught by n
hurricane [Euroclydon] on her way towards
Phenice, and ultimately wrecked. Besides a
view (p. 81), Mr. Smith gives a chart of Fair
Havens with the soundings (p. 257), from which
any one can form a judgment for himself of the
merits of the harbour. [J. S. H. ] [W.]
FAIRS (D'jiaW; ayopi; nundinae, fornm),
a word which occurs only in Ezek. xxvii. and there
no less than seven times (pr. 12, 14, 16, 19, 22,
27, 33): in the last of these verses it is ren-
dered by the A. V. " wares ; " and this, being the
true meaning of the word, is used by the K. V.
throughout. It will be observed that the word
stands in some sort of relation to 21I70 through-
out the whole of the chapter, the latter word
also occurring teven times, and translated by
A. V. sometimes "market" (vv. 13, 17, 19), and
elsewhere "merchandise " (vv. 9, 27, 33, 34, the
rendering of It. V.). The words are used
alternately, and represent the alternations of
commercial business in which the merchants of
Tyre were engaged. That the first of these
words cannot signify "fairs" is evident from
r. 12 ; for the inhabitants of Tarshish did not
visit Tyre, but vice versa. Let the reader
substitute the R. V. " traded for thy wares " fur
the A. V. " traded in thy fairs," and the sense
is much improved. The relation which this
term bears to maarab, which properly means
" barter," appears to be pretty much the" same as
exists between exports and imports. The re-
quirements of the Tyrians themselves, such as
slaves (r. 13), wheat (r. 17), steel (r. 19), were a
matter of miarab: but where the business con-
sisted in the exchange of Tyrian wares for
foreign productions, it is specified in this form,
" Tarshish paid for thy tcares with silver, iron,
tin, and lead." The use of the terms would
probably have been more intelligible if the
Prophet had mentioned what the Tyrians gave
in exchange : as it is, he only notices the one
side of the bargain, viz. what the Tyrians
received, whether they were buyers or sellers.
[W.L.B.] [F.]
FALLOW-DEER ("l-IOny yachmur ; Arab.
jj^^i; A. 0ovfia\on; bubalus ; Ii. V. roe-
buck). The Heb. word, which is mentioned
only in Deut. xiv. 5, as the name of one of the
animals allowed by the Levitical law for food,
and in 1 K. iv. 23 as forming part of the provi-
sions for Solomon's table, appears to point to the
Antilope bubalis, Pallas, the Alcclaphus bubalis
of recent naturalists ; the Bov0a\os of the Greeks
(see Herod, iv. 192 ; Aristotle, Hist. Anim. iii. 6,
• From the root "ion. " to be red " (sec MV.»).
FALLOW-DEER
ed. Schneider, and De Part. Anim. iii. 2, 1 J, eiL
Bekker ; Oppian, Cyn. ii. 300) is properly, we be-
lieve, identified with the before-named antelope.
From the different descriptions of the yachmur,
as given by Arabian writers, and cited bv
Bochart (llieroz. ii. 284 aq.), it would seeil>
that this is the animal denoted ; though Damir's
remarks in some respects are fabulous, and he-
represents the yachmur as having deciduous
horns, which will not apply to any anteloj>e.
Still Cazuinns, according to Rosenmiiller, iden-
tifies the yachmur b with the bekker-el-tcash
! ("wild cow"), which is the modern name in
N. Africa for the Antilope bubalis. Kitto (/Vet.
Jlibl. Deut. /. c.) says, " The yachmur of the
Hebrews is without doubt erroneously identified
| with the fallow-deer, which docs not exist itr
| Asia," and refers the name to the Oryx leucoryr,
' citing Niebuhr as authority for stating that this
| animal is known among the Eastern Arabs by
the name of yazmnr. The fallow-deer (Ccrttm
[ ihwi) is undoubtedly a native of Asia ; indeed
| Persia seems to be its proper country. Hassel-
quist ( True, p. 211) noticed this deer in Mount
Tabor. But it was unknown in Egypt, and can
I never, from its habits as a dweller in woods, have
< existed in Arabia. It was, therefore, unlikely
to be mentioned by Moses. The authority of the
LXX., however, in a question of this kind, has
some weight : accordingly we have little doubt
but that the yachmur of the Heb. Scripture*
denotes the bekkcr-el-xcash, or " wild ox," of
Barbary and N. Africa (see Shaw's Travels,
p. 242, and Suppl. p. 75, folio; Bunon, Hist.
Satw. xii. p. 294). The Greek 0ov0akos evi-
dently points to some animal having the general
appearance of an ox. Pliny (A T . H.- viii. 15)
tells us that the common people in their ijsn* -
A'e^l.ijil.iti l/ii(nil f.
ranee sometimes gave the name of tmbatus to the
Bison (Aurochs) and the tints. He adds, the
animal properly so called is produced in Africa,
» Tachmur, Ruber s " animal ad genus pertlnens cut
est apud Arabes nomen *^ \\ r,» (Freyt-p.
Ltz.Ar.) ^^ •*'
Digitized by
Google
FAMINE
FAMINE
1049
and bears e resemblance to the calf and the
stag. That this antelope partakes in external
form of the characters belonging both to the
Cervine and Bovine ruminants will be evident
to any one who glances at the woodcut.
The bekkei--el-wasli appears to be depicted in
the Egyptian monuments, where it is repre-
sented as being hunted for the sake of its flesh,
which Shaw tells us (Suppl. p. 75) is very sweet
and nourishing, much preferable to that of the
red deer (see Wilkinson's Anc. Egypt, i. pp. 214-
47 [smaller ed. 1878]). This animal, which
is about the size of a stag, was common in
N. Africa up to the Inst century, in the early
part of which Dr. Shaw speaks of it as common
on the Atlas mountains, where it is now all but
extinct. It lives in small herds. The range of
the Bubale is from Morocco to Arabia ; and
though 1 never myself obtained it in Palestine,
yet 1 have found the Arabs east of Jordan per-
fectly familiar with it, and have seen its horns
in their possession. They stated that they often
shot it at its watering-places.
But we believe that the yachmur equally in-
cludes the roebuck, and that the Revisers were
fully justified in so rendering the word. The
roebuck (Orcus capreotm, L.) identical with
the British species was found, though now very
rare in Palestine, by myself in the Gnlilaean
woods, and by Major Cornier on Mount Carmel
(Proc ,2oo/. Soc., London, 1876, pp. 420, 701).
An animal so capable of maintaining itself in
the neighbourhood of man, and still existing,
cannot formerly have been rare. The Araks are
perfectly familiar with it, and call it .^jsT?-,
identical with the Hebrew name. In general
appearance, with its short horns and somewhat
heavy gait, it would bear to incurious ob-
servers the semblance of a diminutive bubale;
and as the larger animal became scarcer and
almost forgotten, the name would be applied to
the more familiar and smaller one. In a similar
way, since the bustard and the stork became
extinct in England, their names are applied by
the coantrv-folk to the smaller Norfolk plover
and the heron. [H. B. T.]
FAMINE. When the "sweet influences
(R. V. "cluster") of the Pleiades "are bound,
and "the bands of Orion" cannot be loosed*
(Job xxxviii. 31), then it is that famines
generally prevail in the lands of the Bible. In
Kgvpt a deficiency in the rise of the Nile, with
•trying winds, produces the same results. The
i&mines recorded in the Bible are traceable to
both these phenomena : and we generally find
that Egypt was resorted to when scarcity
afflicted Palestine. This is notably the case in
the first three famines, those of Abraham, of
Isaac, and of Jacob, although in the last case
Egypt was involved in the calamity, and only
saved from its horrors by the provident policy
of Joseph. In this instance, too, the famine
was widespread, and Palestine further suffered
from the restriction which must have been
* That to to say, when the best and most fertilising or
the rains, which fall when the Pleiades set at dawn
(not exactly beliacallr) at the end of autumn, fail.
[For ether Interpretations, see Delltzach, Davidson,
Bradley, and Speaktr't Covtm. In loco.]
placed on the supplies usually derived, in such
urcumstauces, from Egypt.
In the whole of Syria and Arabia, the fruits
of the earth must ever be dependent on rain :
the watersheds have few large springs, and
the small rivers are not sufficient for the
irrigation of even the level lands. If therefore
the heavy rains of November and December
fail, the sustenance of the people is cut off in
the parching drought of harvest time, when
the country is almost devoid of moisture.
Further, the pastoral tribes rely on the scanty
herbage of the desert-plains and valleys for
their flocks and herds ; for the desert is inter-
spersed in spring-time with spontaneous vege-
tation, which is the product of the preceding
rainfall, and fails almost totally without it.
It is therefore not difficult to conceive the
frequent occurrence and severity of famines
in ancient times, when the scattered population
of a country — pastoral rather than agricultural
— was dependent on natural phenomena which,
however regular in their season, occasionally
failed, and with them the sustenance of man
and beast.
Egypt, again, owes all its fertility — a fertility
that gained for Zoan [Sin] the striking
comparison to the " garden of the Lord " — to
its mighty river, whose annual flood is sufficient
to inundate nearly the whole land and renders
the cultivation of cereals an easy certainty.
But this very bounty of nature has not un-
frequently exposed the country to the opposite
extreme of drought. With scarcely any rain,
aud that chiefly on the Mediterranean coast
(though of late years showers have become
more common at Cairo, and have even reached
Thebes), and with wells only supplied by
filtration from the river through a nitrous
soil, a failure in the rise of the Nile almost
certainly entails a degree of scarcity ; but if
it is followed by cool weather, and occurs only
for a single year, the labour of the people
may in a great measure avert the calamity.
Dearth and famine in Egypt are caused by
defective inundation, preceded, accompanied,
and followed, by prevalent easterly and southerly
winds. Both these winds dry up the earth,
and the latter, keeping back the rain-clouds
from the north, are perhaps the chief cause of
the defective inundation, to which they also
contribute by accelerating the current of the-
river, which northerly winds would retard.
Famines in Egypt and Palestine seem to be
affected by drought extending from Northern
Syria, through the meridian of Egypt, as far
as the highlands of Abyssinia.
The first famine recorded in the Bible ia
that of Abraham, after he had pitched his tent
on the. east of Bethel : " And there was a
famine in the land : and Abram went down
into Egypt to sojourn there, for the famine
was grievous in the land" (Gen. xii. 10). We
may conclude that this famine was extensive,
although this is not quite proved by the fact
of Abraham's going to Egypt; for on the
occasion of the second famine, in the days of
Isaac, this patriarch is recorded to have found
refuge with Abimelech king of the Philistines
in Gerar, and to have been warned by God
not to go down into Egypt, whither therefore
we may suppose he was journeying (Gen. xxvi.
Digitized by
Google
1050
FAMINE
FARTHING
1 sq.). We hear no more of times of scarcity
until the great famine of Egypt which "was
•wer all the face of the earth ; " " and all
countries come into Egypt to Joseph to buy
corn, because that the famine was sore in
all lands" (Gen. xli. 56, 57). "And the
sons of Israel came to buy corn among those
that came: for the famine was in the land
of Canaan" (xlii. 5). Thus, in the third
generation, Jacob is afflicted like his ancestors,
and sends from Hebron to Egypt when he hears
that then is corn there ; and it is added in
a later passage, on the occasion of his sending
the second time for corn to Egypt, " and the
famine was sore in the land," i\«. Hebron (Gen.
-xliii. 1).
The famine of Joseph need be discussed here
only with reference to its physical character-
istics. We have mentioned the chief causes of
famines in Egypt: this instance differs in the
remarkable occurrence of seven consecutive
years of plenty, whereby Joseph was enabled to
provide against the coming dearth, and to
supply not only the population of Egypt with
corn, but those of the surrounding countries :
•• And the seven years of plenty, that was in
the land of Egypt, came to an end. And the
seven years of famine began to come, according
as Joseph had said : and there was famine in all
lands ; but in all the land of Egypt there was
bread. And when all the land of Egypt was
famished, the people cried to Pharaoh for
bread ; and Pharaoh said unto all the Egyptians,
Go unto Joseph ; what he saith to you, do.
And the famine was over all the face of the
earth : and Joseph opened all the storehouses,
and sold unto the Egyptians ; and the famine
was sore in the land of Egypt " (Gen. xli. 53-
56, R. V.).
The modern history of Egypt throws some
curious light on these ancient records of
famines; and instances of their recurrence
may be cited to assist us in understanding
their course and extent. They have not been
infrequent since the Muhammadim conquest,
according to the testimony of Arab historians :
one of great severity, following a deficient rise
of the Nile, in the year of the Flight 507 (a.d.
1200), is recorded by 'Abd-el-Latif, an eye-
witness and a trustworthy authority. He
gives a most interesting account of its horrors,
states that the people throughout the country
were driven to the last extremities, eating offal
and even their own dead, and mentions, as an
instance of the dire straits to which they were
driven, that persons who were burnt alive
for eating human flesh were themselves, thus
ready .roasted, eaten by others. Multitudes
fled the country, only to perish in the desert-
road to Palestine (Relation de VEgypte, trans.
S. de Sacy, p. 360 sq. ; White's text, p. 210 sq.).
But the most remarkable famine occurred
in the reign of the Katiray Khalif el-Mustansir,
the only famine of seven years' duration on
record in Egypt since the time of Joseph. This
famine (a.h. 457-464, a.d. 1064-1071) ex-
ceeded in severity all others of modern times,
and was aggravated by the anarchy which then
ravaged the country. Vehement drought and
pestilence (says Es-Suyuty, in his Husn el
Muh&darah) continued for seven consecutive
years, so that they [the people] ate corpses,
and animals that died of themselves; the
cattle perished ; a dog was sold for five dinars,
and a cat for three dinars . . . and an ardebb
(about five bushels) of wheat for one hundred
dinars, and then it failed altogether. He adds,
that all the horses of the Khalif, save three,
perished, and gives numerous instances of the
straits to which the wretched inhabitants
were driven, and of the organised bands of
kidnappers who infested Cairo and caught
passengers in the streets by ropes furnished
with hooks and let down from the windows, in
order to provide themselves with food. This
account is confirmed by El-Hakrizy (in his
Khitat : cp. Quatrem|re, MeTnoires ge'ographiques
et historiqucs sur VEgypte, ii. 296), from whom
we further learn that the family and even
the women of the Khalif fled, by the way of
Syria, on foot, to escape the peril that
threatened all ranks of the population. The
whole narrative is worthy of attention, since
it contains a parallel to the duration of the
famine of Joseph, and at the same time enables
us to form an idea of the character of famines
in the East. The famine of Samaria resembled
it in many particulars; and that very briefly
recorded in 2 K. viiL 1, 2 (R. V.\ affords
another instance of one of seven years : " Now
Elisha had spoken unto the woman whose son
he had restored to life, saying, Arise, and go
thou and thy household, and sojourn whereso-
ever thou canst sojourn: for the Lord hath
called for a famine ; and it shall also come upon
the land seven years. And the woman arose,
and did according to the word of the man of
God : and she went with her household and
sojourned in the land of the Philistines seven
years." Bunsen (Egypt's Place, &c, iii. 334,
335) quotes the record of a famine in the reign
of Usurtasen I., which he supposes to be that
of Joseph ; but on chronological grounds alone
the theory is untenable. The "famine lasting
many years," referred to in the inscription in
the tomb of Baba at El-Kab (immediately
before the 18th Dynasty ; Brugsch, Hist, of
Egypt under the Pharaohs', i. 158, 302 sq., and
Die WW. sieben Jahre d. Hungersnoth, 1891), if
"a pious fraud," yet shows the existence of a
tradition that there had been, at some early
date, a seven years' period of severe distress
(Renouf, PSBA. 1891, xiii. 444).
In Arabia, famines are of frequent occurrence.
The Arabs, in such cases, when they could not
afford to slaughter their camels, used to bleed
them, and drink the blood, or mix it with
the shorn fur to make a kind of black-pudding.
They ate also various plants and grains, which
nt other times were not used as articles of
food. And the tribe of Hanifeh were taunted
with having in a famine eaten their god in a
dish of dates mashed up with clarified butter
and a preparation of dried curds of milk (Lane,
Ar. Lex. s. v. **>). [E. S. P.]
FAN. [Agriculture, pp. 66, 67.]
FARTHING. Two names of coins, one the
fourth part of the other, are rendered in the
A. V. and in the R. V. by this word.
1. luraapitv (Matt. x. 29; Luke xii. 6%
properly a small as, assarium, but in the N. T.
period used as the Greek equivalent of the
Digitized by
Google
FASTING AND FASTS
FASTING AND FASTS 1051
Latin as. The Vulg. in Matt. x. 29 renders it
by at, and in Lake xii. 6 translates " two
assaria" by dipondius ; the dupondius, or di-
pondius, being equal in value to two cotes.
The Graeco-Roman, or technically Greek im-
perial, coin equivalent to the Roman as is no
doabt intended by the Evangelists.
2. mtpJurrvs, quadrant (Matt. v. 26 ; Mark
xii. 42), a coin equivalent to two lepta (Kara
Sio, 8 iariw KoSpdrrqs, Mark, /. c). The plain
meaning of this passage is that two lepta were
equal to a quadrans, the lepton (Aeirro*) being a
coin current in Palestine, bnt the quadrans not
necessarily so. St. Lake's use of Latin words
renders it quite possible that he intended to give
the information that two common Palestinian
coin* were equivalent to a Roman one, or to the
fourth part of the as. There is no question that
the smallest Roman coin of the earlier emperors
was a quadrans, and that the smallest Judaean
copper coin was lighter, and could well be
reckoned as its half, it being remembered that
bronze or copper money is always of the nature
of a token currency, and that the weight con-
sequently is not to be taken too seriously into
account. It is doubtful if the currency of
Palestine st the time referred to contained a
(coopdVrns. [R. S. P.]
FASTING AND FASTS. Fasting, in the
«nse of a religious or ceremonial abstinence
from food, either partial or complete, for a
certain time, at recurring periods, or under
special public or private emergencies, is a
practice the beginnings of which, like those of
most other instinctive religious customs, are lost
in the mists of an immemorial past. " Food I have
not eaten ; weeping is my fare ; . . . tears are
my meat and drink," is the cry of the old
Accadian penitent, we know not how many
thousands of years before oar era.* And in
certain old Babylonian calendars for the months
of Intercalary Elul, Ve-Adar, Sebat, Tebet,
Sivan, 2nd Nisan, and Marchesvan, prescrib-
ing the rites to be observed by the king on
each day of the month, we find that on five
days — viz. the 7th, 14th, 19th, 21st, and
-'8th — the king was religiously bound to ab-
stain from certain kinds of food and other
indulgences, such as riding in his chariot."
In this connexion, it should be borne in mind
that Babylonia is the earliest recorded home of
the fathers of Israel (Gen. xi. 31 ; Josh. xxir. 2) ;
and that the civilisation of Accad is the oldest,
of which any authentic documents remain. On
the other hand, the monuments of Egyptian
antiquity make no mention of the usage of
fasting.' The brief statements of Herodotus,
to the effect that the Egyptians fasted before
sacrificing to Isis (ii. 40 ; cp. iv. 186), if cor-
rect, refer only to the voluntary practice of iso-
lated localities at a comparatively late period.
» [p-xu]-atJ-f ta-StncmfA-ito ...jb-ca-wo=
[ritmnjul aktU ; MJrifow kurvtati . . . dimtu maUiti.
(Hanoi, ASST. No. 15.)
» These calendars belong to the Assyrian collections
et the British Museum. That tor Intercalary Elul was
published In W. A. /., iv. 32, 33. The remains of the
others are given in the new edition. See PH. 33, 33, 33*.
• Go I am informed by Mr. Le Page Renonf. Neither
in this nor in many other cases most we look to Egypt
fee the origin of Hebrew religious customs.
Although there is no direct inculcation of
fasting as a religious practice in the sacred
literature of China before Buddhism, we find
its disciplinary value recognised in the Doctrine
of the Mean (e.g. in the phrase chai ming, to
purify the mind by abstinence), a work ascribed
to the grandson of Confucius. The Vedas
prescribe fasting ; and the practice of it forms
an important element in the ascetic dis-
cipline both of the Brahman and the Bud-
dhist. The system of Zoroaster and its modern
representative Parsism naturally neglect an
observance which, if favourable to the calm
contemplative life of the religious mystic, is not
compatible with the active stir and strain of a
business career. The strict fast of the ninth
month (Ramadan), universally observed in
Islam, was probably instituted not without
reference to Jewish and Christian precedents.
Nor was the practice unknown to the Greeks and
Romans, although it does not appear to have
been a matter of general obligation as in the
case of Semitic religions. It was customary in
the Eleusinian mysteries ; and the women who
celebrated the Thesmophoria abstained from
common food, though they might eat cakes of
sesame and honey.
On the occasion of certain pmdigia at Rome,
B.C. 191, the Sibylline books ordered a quin-
quennial fast to be instituted in honour of Ceres ;
but this prescription doubtless concerned the
priesthood only, and such of the laity as chose
to honour it (Liv. xxxvi. 37). The idea involved
was that of a sympathetic share in the grief of
the goddess, who abstained from food and
drink during her long search for her lost
Proserpine. Tertullian informs us that on the
occasion of a severe drought, the heathen kept
a thoroughly Jewish fast, and walked in pro-
cession barefoot (De Jejuni), 15). On our Monday
(dies Jovis) a fast in honour of Jupiter was
recognised as meritorious by the Romans (Hor.
Sat. ii. 3, 288-292). But, upon the whole, the
practice had no more than a sporadic and
isolated prevalence in classical antiquity.
In the Old Testament we find numerous refer-
ences to fasting. The term W V — rendered ynvrtta
by the LXX., and jejunium in the Latin Versions,
denoting first " fasting " and then " a fast," in
the concrete sense (plural niDlV, Esth. ix. 31) —
is common in the Prophets (including the histo-
ries) and occurs thrice in the Psalms (xxxr. 13 ;
lxix. 10; cix. 24), but not once in the Law,
where we find instead (Lev. xvi. 29, 31 ; Num.
xxx. 13) the striking expression Cfji fllB, " to
afflict, abase, or humble the soul," i. e. the self
(Ps. iii. 2 ; Is. Ii. 23), or perhaps specially the
appetites and desires (Ps. xlii. 4 ; Prov. vi. 30 ;
Jer. ii. 24).
It was only on one day in the year, the great
Day of Atonement, that the Law required all
Israelites to fast. [Atonement, Day of.] It
has been maintained by a powerful school
of modern critics (Graf, Wellhausen) that the
Day of Atonement is of post-Exilic origin,
on the grounds that it is only mentioned
in the "Priestly Legislation," and that no
reference is made to it in the narrative
(Neh. viii.-x.). We have seen, that so far as
the element of religious fasting is concerned,
that custom is of unknown antiquity; and the
Hebrew phrase which describes it as an " abasing
Digitized by
Google
1052
PASTING AND FASTS
of the soul," may belong to a very distant past,
independently of the relative age of the canoni-
cal documents in which it is now first found.
No very profound study is required to enable
persons of ordinary intelligence to realize the
fact that the great fundamental conceptions and
observances of religion are, broadly speaking,
the same throughout the ancient world. 'Die
Old Testament adopts the common external
forms of worship and service, and adapts
them to the expression of the higher mean-
ings of revealed religion. Thus it does not
expressly originate sacrifice, although it lays
down particular rules to be observed in sacrifice.
It nowhere defines a temple or an altar as
something previously unknown, any more than
it defines the idea of God. It takes for granted
that Israel is already familiar with these and a
hundred other necessary elements of religion;
yet it incidentally reveals, in the clearest way,
the ancient and original sense of such a term as
" altar," when it uses as a synonvmous expres-
sion "the table of Jehovah" (Ezek. xli. 22;
Mai. i. 7-12). Modern researches have demon-
strated that this phrase covers the ultimate pre-
historic conception of an altar. And yet the
first Old Testament writers in which it occurs,
both belong to the period after the fall of the
Jewish monarchy. To argue that the idea was
post-Exilic, on that ground, would be evidently
absurd. The assumption, however, that Israel
did not before the post-Exilic period observe the
Day of Atonement, rests, as we have seen, upon
the precisely similar ground that the bay is
not mentioned by any writer previous to " the
Priestly Legislation," which is referred to that
period. This is not the place to discuss the age
and authorship of the Book of Leviticus and of
that section of the Hexateuch to which it belongs
[Pentatecch]. The inherent weakness of an
argument which assumes that a religious usage
or prescription cannot be primitive, because no
relatively early record of it happens to have
survived, hardly requires to be pointed out.
We may recognise the fact that the historical
Books of the Old Testament nowhere mention
the annual Fast of the tenth day of the seventh
month (Tishri), without drawing Grafs inference
that therefore it was unknown before the Exile
(Graf, Die gesch. Bach, des A. T. p. 41). How
many other things are missing in those frag-
mentary outlines of Israel's history! Some, at
least, who carefully note the characteristics of
these narratives, with their express references to
fuller accounts upon which they are based, and
their occasional episodes or " cameos " of per-
sonal history, interpersed unequally in the
course of mere annals abbreviated at times to
little more than a thin line of royal and
dynastic names, will not be inclined to set much
store by this argument from omission, where so
much besides of equal or greater consequence is
likewise omitted.
But the Day of Atonement is not mentioned
in Neh. viii.-x. " Even in 444 D.C. the year of
the publication of the Pentateuch by Ezra,"
writes Wellhausen, "the great Day of Atonement
has not yet come into force. Ezra begins the
reading of the Law in the beginning of the
seventh month, and afterwards the Feast of
Tabernacles is observed on the fifteenth ; of an
atoning solemnity on the tenth of the month
FASTING AND FASTS
not a word is said in the circumstantial narra-
tive, which, moreover, is one specially interested
in the liturgical element, bnt it is made up for
on the twenty-fourth (Neh. viii. ix.). This testi-
monium e silentio is enough ; down to that date
the great day of the Priestly Code (now intro-
duced for the first time) had not existed " (Pro-
legomena to the Hist, of Israel, p. Ill, Eng. tr.).
It is true that the chronicler exhibits a strong-
interest in everything that concerns the Temple
an>l its services ; but his narrative in these
chapters is far from being " circumstantial " in
the Sense required by this argument, viz. that
of containing a complete " record of proceedings,
from the' first day of the seventh month onwards
to the twenty-fourth," as stated by Professor
Robertson Kniitlt (Old Test, in Jewish Church,
p. 377). THie chronicler does not profess to
supply such at consecutive relation within the
space of these \three chapters. Had that been
his intention, th>e long prayer of the Levitcs
(Neh. ix. 4-38) wWld hardly have been allowed
to occupy such au\ altogether disproportionate
share of his space. » But why is the authority
of the chronicler's compilation, which is referred
by these learned critick to the " very end of the
Persian or the beginning of the Greek period,"
preferred in this instance to that of the
•' Priestly Legislation," Vvhich tnev „i] , v f
have been published in it*, completeness at least
a century and a half befort^ his time ? On the
one hand, no writer suggests that the author
of Chroniclcs-Ezra-Nehemiah v was ignorant ot*
the ordinance of the tenth da\y of the seventh
month. On the other, critics hiive not scrupled
to suppose him capable of fraely antedating-
the customs and institutions o v f later times.
If then he does not mention the Day of Atone-
ment in this passage, it certainly is not
because he did not believe that it had been
observed at all before B.C. 444, nor because
he intended to suggest such a surprising
inference ; but rather because he wished to
dwell at length upon the exceptional public
humiliation of the twenty-fourth day of the same
month. After all, in this as in other portions
of his compilation he made his choice of excerpts
| in his own way, like other Oriental compilers,
without having the fear of modern ' criticism
■ before his eyes. Perhaps, indeed, the celebration
of the Day was not recorded in the source he
was using. It is evident from the whole accouut
that the returned exiles were unfamiliar withi
the ordinances of the ancient Law, which had
fallen into desuetude during their long captivity
in a heathen land. This it was that necessitated
the public reading and exposition of the Law
recorded in the eighth chapter. In the then
irregular state of things, their religions leaders
may not have judged it possible or expedient
to proclaim the observance of the Day of Atone-
ment on that occasion. The ceremonies of the
Day, which were specially concerned, with the
purification of the high priest and Uis family,
and then that of the Temple and its vessels,
would hardly hare seemed appropriate, at a
time when the people had not yet formally
undertaken to observe the Law, and to provide
for the maintenance of the sacrificial worship
(Neh. x. 29 sq.) ; when the dues of the priest-
hood were left unpaid, and " the house of God
was forsaken " (cp. Neh. xiii. 10, 11).' The entire
Digitized by
Google
FASTING AND FASTS
picture presented to us in these vivid though
fragmentary chapters is one of a provisional
»ute of things ; of the gradual restoration and
regulation of the public worship after long
disuse and disorder. The walls of Jerusalem
were not rebuilt in a day ; nor were the pre-
cepts of the Law carried out at ones in all
their fulness by the struggling community of
Judea. The remainder of the Book, which
relates how the population of Jerusalem was
recruited, the Levitical ministry re-established
in the Temple, the observance of the Sabbath
vindicated, witnesses to the fact clearly enough.'
There remains one other objection. It is
urged that the Day of Atonement conflicts with
that purely joyous conception of worship which
characterised ancient Israel. But that concep-
tion is no more than a plausible hypothesis,
which itself conflicts with the general analogy
of the history of religion. Reference has already
been made to those old Accadian confessions of
sin which the Semitic Assyrians of the 7th
century B.C- copied from Babylonian texts for
their own use. Hebrew human nature even in
the earliest period probably resembled human
nature at large in respect of an occasional con-
sciousness of guilt and the need of expiation.
And there were too many occasions in the
national history, when foreign oppression or
domestic disaster, when the sword or drought
or pestilence, irresistibly suggested the Divine
wrath, to allow us to acquiesce in the pro-
position that national sin, atonement, and expia-
tion became principal ideas in the religious
consciousness of Israel only after the Exile. The
witness of the Prophets and of the prophetical
histories is against this view. Would the
troubles of the times of the Judges, or the
plague in David's reign, be the occasion of holi-
day rites and joyous feasting round the altar?
On the other hand, what proof is there that
during the period of the Exile " men felt them-
selves . . . unceasingly under the leaden pressure
of sin and wrath " (Wellhausen, p. 112) ? Such
a conception of the time seems to be unnatural ;
or at least the statement is rhetorically exagge-
rated. The sorrowful utterances of the Lamen-
tations do not express the uniform experience
•>f the entire Captivity. If that were so, the
buoyant oracles of the Prophets of the period arc
as inexplicable as the fact that so many of the
laaished preferred to stay in Babylonia, and so
few took advantage of the Edict of Deliverance.*
4 The "circumstantial narrative " omits to notice the
Sabbatic character of the first day of the seventh month,
and the blast on the priestly trumpets with which it
•vu ushered in (Lev. xxiil. 24 ; cp. Neh. vili. 1), though
the former fact is Implied In the statement that " the
day is uolyunto our Lord" (Neb. vtii. 10). Whether
the trumpet-blast "ill-befitted its quiet solemnity"
<Wellbavusen, p. 110) or not, may be a matter of
opinion. Mirth was not nectasirlly implied by the
blowing of trumpets, but simply the proclamation of
the fact that the day bad begun. See Friedlander,
Tot-book of At JtmitK Ktliffum', p. It.
• The late Friedrich Bleek maintained, on the ground
of iss peculiar contents, that Lev. xvl. was of Mosaic orl-
th>(Binleitung, Y ISaq.). The proceedings with refer-
eace to the desert-fiend (Ansel) can hardly have been
instated for the first time In the 6th cent. ; and, as a
matter of fact, this demon belongs to primitive Accadian
KUgioo (see PSBA., June 1890).
FASTING AND FASTS 1053
During the Exile four annual fast-days were
established, in commemoration of the fall of
Jerusalem and subsequent calamities. These
days were the ninth of the fourth month, for
the capture of Jerusalem (Jer. lii. 6); the
tenth of the fifth month, for the destruction of
the city and the Temple (2 K. xxv. 8, 9 ; Jer. lii,
12); the fast of the seventh month, for the
murder of Gedaliah (2 K. xxv. 25 ; Jer. xli. 1,
2) ; and that of the tenth day of the tenth
month, for the beginning of the siege (2 K. xxv.
1 ; Jer. lii. 4 ; Zech. viii. 19, '20). The Mishna
(Taanith, iv. 6) and St. Jerome (in Zech. viii.),
following contemporary Jewish notions, connect
other events with these fasts, regardless of
manifest anachronisms. After the Return, and
when the rebuilding of the Temple had begun,
the Jews of Babylon sent to inquire of the
priests at Jerusalem whether they were still
bound to keep the fast of the fifth month.
Thereupon the Prophet Zechariah took occasion to
rebuke their hypocritical observance of the fast-
days of both the fifth and the seventh months
(Zech. vii. 5, 6) ; and declared that all the four
lasts would hereafter be turned into days of
"joy and gladness and cheerful feasts " (viii. 19).
According to Jewish tradition, this led to the
abolition of the fasts, but they were re-intro-
duced after the destruction of the second Temple.
The Prophet's words, however, are scarcely a
direct injunction to discontinue the four fasts.
But it is a remarkable coincidence that Titus
took Jerusalem in the fourth month, and the
Temple was burnt in the fifth (on the 10th
Loos=Ab, according to Josephus ; on the 9th of
Ab, according to the Talmud). The Jews still
observe these fasts (Friedlander, pp. 32, 33).
Fasting is one form of sacrifice, the essential
idea of which is the surrender of some persona!
good in order to propitiate the Divine favour.
The necessity of self-denial is illustrated at the
very outset of Scripture by the parable of the
Forbidden Fruit (cp.Tertull. de Jejun. 3). Fast-
ing is, moreover, a natural outward evidence of
inward self-abasement before God, and of humble
acquiescence in the Divine chastisements ; it is
an instinctive mode of manifesting sorrow for
sin, and of enhancing and intensifying that
sorrow. Consequently, so long as the sense of
sin, in any degree beyond a merely sentimental
regret, shall survive ; so long as it is felt that
our worst transgressions arc directly due to the
indulgence of a fallen nature and the corrupt
desires of the flesh, — so long will it seem right to
earnest spiritual minds to mortify the body by
the discipline of fasting.
As a natural accompaniment and token of
intense grief, fasting finds mauy incidental illus-
trations in the Old Testament. It is associated
with mourning for the dead (1 Sam. xxxi. 13 ;
2 Sam. i. 12); with private and personal dis-
tresses (1 Sam. i. 7 ; Ps. cix. 24) ; with sym-
pathetic sorrow for the misfortunes of friends
(1 Sam. xx. 34 ; Ps. xxxv. 13) and for national
calamities (Jndg. xx. 26 ; Neh. i. 4 ; Baruch i. 5 ;
Joel i. 14, ii. 12, 15); with the expression of
penitence for one's own offences (1 K. xxi. 27 ;
Ecclus. xxxiv. 26) and for those of the com-
munity (1 Sam. vii. 6 ; Deut. ix. 18 ; Jonah iii. 5 ;
Ps. Ixix. 10 ; Ezra x. 6 ; Neh. ix. 1). Persons
fasting often displayed other signs of mourning,
such as wearing sackcloth, rending their gar-
Digitized by
Google
1054 FASTING AND FASTS
ments and plucking out the hair of head and
beard, sprinkling the head with earth and
ashes, weeping, lying prostrate on the ground,
neglect of washing and anointing the person,
and walking barefoot (2 Sam. i. 11, xii. 16,
20; IK. xxi. 27; Ezra ii. 3; Neh. ii. 1;
Esth. iv. 3; Add. to Esth. xiv. 2; Is. lviii. 5;
Jonah iii. 6 ; Dan. ix. 3 ; Judith viii. 6 ; 1 Mace.
iii. 47).
In the case of individuals, fasting was recog-
nised as auxiliary to undisturbed communion
with God, and as a preparation for the reception
of Divine revelations (Exod. xxxiv. 28; Deut.
ix. 9 ; Dan. x. 2 ; 2 Esd. v. 13, 20, vi. 31, 35,
&c. ; Matt. iv. 2). Upon similar grounds, the
practice of a fasting reception of the Eucharist
may be justified (cp. also Acts xiii. 3).
In special emergencies extraordinary general
fasts were sometimes proclaimed, in token of
national humiliation for sin, and by way of
averting the Divine wrath or of ensuring the
Divine assistance in public enterprises (1 Sam.
vii. 6 ; 2 Ch. xx. 3 ; Ezra viii. 21 ; Jer. xxxvi. 6,
9; 2 Mace. xiii. 12; Judith iv. 9, 10, vi. 19:
cp. 1 Sam. xiv. 24 ; 1 K. xxi. 9, 12).'
The writings of the Prophets of the Exile and
the Return reveal the origin of a popular ten-
dency to regard fasting as in itself so pleasing
to God as to atone for the flagrant neglect of
the higher duties of righteousness, mercy, and
truth. Against this delusion the Prophets of
the period raise their protest, as their prede-
cessors had done, against a similar heathenish
view of the value of the old sacrificial system.
Like the Ionic philosopher, they bid their
countrymen fast from wickedness (vnartittr
KtucoVirror, Empedocles, Fragm. 454. See Is.
lviii. 3 sq. ; Zech. vii. 5 sq., viii. 16 sq. :
and cp. Joel ii. 12, 13; Jer. xiv. 12), without
implying any denunciation of the proper use of
literal fasting as a spiritual discipline.
To this period must be referred the origin of
fasting "twice in the week" (Luke xviii. 12),
which was the regular custom of the Pharisees,
the days chosen being the second and the fifth
(Monday and Thursday, which were the days
appointed for public fasts, according to Taanith,
ii. 9> See also Matt. ix. 14, vi. 16; Mark ii.
18 ; Luke v. 33. Judith is represented as
fasting daily, except on the Sabbaths and New
Moons and the eves of those festivals (Judith viii.
6) ; a fact which clearly indicates the growing
rigour of the standard of outward sanctity
(cp. also Judith iv. 9 ; Tob. xii. 8 ; Ecclus. xxxiv.
26 ; Luke ii. 37).
Custom varied in the matters of time and
strictness. There was the one day fast from
evening to evening (Jos. Ant. iii. 10, § 3), termin-
ating with the appearance of the stars ; a limit
which is still observed by the Moslems in their
fast of Ramadan. But besides this, we read also
of a fast of three days (Esth. iv. 16 ; 2 Mace,
xiii. 12) ; of four (Acts x. 30, probably) ; of
seven (1 Sam. xxxi. 13) ; and even of forty days.
In the longer periods, we have to think of re-
' In later times, the Sanbedrin was wont to order a
general fast If the beginning of the rainy season was
delayed. And Josephus Informs us of a fast which the
Pharisee Ananias succeeded in getting imposed upon the
town of Tiberias, for his own private ends (£>/«, } 66).
FAT
striction to bare necessaries (Dan. x. 2, 3),' and
perhaps of abstinence even from these until night-
fall. 1 ' The rules of fasting, which were long in
dispute between the schools of Hillel and
Shammai, are systematized in the Talmudic
tracts Joma and Taanith.
It is important to remember that our Lord
has emphatically recognised the religions value
of fasting (Matt. vi. 16-18; ix. 15). He couples
it with prayer as a source of spiritual power
(Matt. xvii. 21). If His disciples are said not to
have fasted so long as " the Bridegroom " was
with them, the denial relates only to the frequent
and excessive fasts of the Jewish sects (Slatt
xi. 19; cp. ix. 15). Fasting was naturally
important in the practice of John's disciple;,
their master's work being especially a preaching
of repentance.
In view of our Lord's attitude towards this
observance, we are not surprised to find that in
the primitive Church not only did Jewish
Christians long continue to keep the Jewish
fast-days, but fasting and prayer were united in
the practice of Gentile believers also, especially
iu the case of Ordination (Acts xiiL 1-3 ; xir.
23). With St. Paul's warnings against the
tendency to attach an independent value to
fasting, and to reduce Christian holiness to
a mere external asceticism (Rom. xiv. 2, 6,
17, 21 ; Col. ii. 16, 21-23 ; 1 Tim. iv. 3-5, 8,
v. 23), we have also to consider his precept
(1 Cor. vii. 5) in favour of fasting, and, above
all, his own practice (2 Cor. vi. 5 ; xi. 27).
It is not logical to confess the Divine authority
of Christ, and the inspiration of His Apostles,
and at the same time to treat as of no perma-
nent obligation an ordinance for which the
Master Himself laid down rules, and which both
He and His immediate followers carefully ob-
served in practice. So far from being, as some
suppose, contrary to the spirit of the Gospel ; as a
token of sorrow for sin, as a means of crucifying
the flesh, as an act of obedience to the precepts
and a following of the example of Christ, fast-
ing is one of the proofs of a sincere acceptance
of the Gospel. [C.J. B.]
FAT. The Hebrews distinguished between
the suet or pure fat of an animal (3Jf1), and
the fat. which was intermixed with the lean
(D'SDC'D, Neh. viii. 10). Certain restriction*
were imposed upon them in reference to the
former : some parts of the suet — viz. about the
stomach, the entrails, the kidneys, and the tail
of a sheep, which grows to an excessive size in
many Eastern countries, and produces a large
quantity of rich fat [Sheep]— were forbidden to
be eaten in the case of animals offered to
Jehovah in sacrifice (Lev. iii. 3, 9, 17 ; vii. 3,
23). The ground of the prohibition was that
the fat was the richest part of the animal, and
» Cp. Tertulllan's portionalc jejunium, or partta 1
fast, i.e. abstinence from particnlar kinds of food.
11 So the Council of Chalcedon decreed that In fastlnx
one should take neither food nor drink all day until
after the evening prayer (Tke Sixteenth HomCy). It
was the rule of the Essence to abstain altogether from
flesh and wine, and only to partake of such food as
bread, vegetables, millet, and water, after sunset.
[Essutie.]
Digitized by
Google
FAT
therefore belonged to Him (iii. 16). It has
been supposed that other reasons were super-
added, as that the use of fat was unwholesome
in the hot climate of Palestine. There appears,
however, to be do ground for such an assump-
tion. The presentation of the fat as the
richest part of the animal was agreeable to the
dictates of natural feeling, and was the ordi-
nary practice even of heathen nations, as
instanced in the Homeric descriptions of sacri-
fices {11. i. 460, u. 423 ; Od. iii. 457), and in
the customs of the Egyptians (Her. ii. 47) and
Persians (Stxab. xv. p. 732). Indeed, the term
ehtieb is itself significant of the feeling on
which the regulation was based ; for it describes
metaphorically the best of any production (Gen.
xlv. 18 ; Num. xviii. 12 ; Ps. lxxxi. 16, cxlvii.
14 : cp. 3 Sam. i. 22 ; Judg. iii. 29 ; Is. x. 16).
With regard to other parts of the fat of sacri-
fices or the fat of other animals, it might be
consumed, with the exception of those dying
either by a violent or a natural death (Lev. vii.
24), which might still be used in any other
way. The burning of the fat of sacrifices was
particularly specified in each kind of offering,
whether a peace-offering (Lev. iii. 9), consecra-
tion offering (viii. 25), sin-offering (iv. 8),
trespass-offering (vii. 3), or redemption-offering
(Num. xviii. 17), The Hebrews fully appre-
ciated the luxury of well-fatted meat, and had
their stall-fed oxen and calves (1 K. iv. 23 ; Jer.
xlvi. 21 ; Luke xv. 23); nor is there any reason
to suppose its use unwholesome. [W. L. B.]
FAT (A.-S./art. Cp. derm, fass), i.e. Vat.
The word employed in the A. V. and R. V. to
translate the Hebrew term 2£P, Yekeb, in Joel
ii. 24, iii. 13 only. The word commonly nsed
for yekeb, indiscriminately with gath, 113, is
" wine-press " or " wine-fat," and once " press-
fat" (K. V. "wine-fat," Hag. ii. 16): but the
two appear to be distinct — gath, the upper re-
ceptacle or " press " in which the grapes were
trod ; and yekeb, the " vat," on a lower level, into
which the juice or must was collected. The
word is derived by Geseuius (Theg. 619 6) from
a root signifying to " hollow or dig out " : and in
accordance with this is the practice in Palestine,
where the " wine-press " and " vats " were
excavated in the native rock of the hills on
which the vineyards lay. Rock-cut presses
are found in every part of the hills of Palestine.
They usually consist of two square basins. The
upper, which was large and shallow, was used
for treading the grapes. A short channel led to
the smaller and deeper basin, yekeb, into which
the wine ran, and whence it was sometimes
(trained off into a third basin. The " wine-
fat " (R. V. " wine-press ") of Mark xii. 1 is
(rtaKiirior, which is frequently used by the LXX.
to translate yekeb in the 0. T. [G.] [VV.]
FATHER (A 3K, Chald. Abba, K3K, Mark
liv. 36, Rom. viii. 15; rwHip; pater: a primi-
tive word, but following the analogy of fl2N, to
stow kindness, Gesen. Thes. pp. 6-8).
The position and authority of the father as
the head of the family is expressly assumed and
auctioned in Scripture, as a likeness of that of
the Almighty over Hi* creatures ; an authority,
as Philo remarks, intermediate between human
FATHER
1055
and divine (Philo, wtpX yovfuiy Ttpqs, § 1). It
lies of course at the root of that so-called pa-
triarchal government (Gen. iii. 16 ; 1 Cor. xi. 3)
which was introductory to the more definite
systems which followed, and which in part, but
not wholly, superseded it. When therefore the
name of " father of nations " was given to Abram
[Auraham], he was thereby held up not only as
the ancestor, but as the example to those who
should come after him (Gen. xviii. 18, 19 ; Rom.
iv. 17). The father's blessing was regarded as
conferring special benefit, but his malediction
special injury, on those on whom it fell (Gen.
ix. 25, 27 ; xxvii. 27-40; xlviii. 15, 20; xlix.);
and so also the sin of a parent was held to affect,
in certain cases, the welfare of his descendants
(2 K. v. 27), though the Law was forbidden to
punish the son for his father's transgression
(Deut. xxiv. 16 ; 2 K. xiv. 6 ; Ezek. xviii. 20).
The command to honour parents is noticed by St.
Paul as the only one of the Decalogue which bore
a distinct promise (Ex. xx. 12 ; Eph. vi. 2), and
disrespect towards tbem was condemned by the
Law as one of the worst of crimes (Ex. xxi. 15,
17; 1 Tim. i. 9: cp. Virg. Aen. vi. 609;
Aristoph. Ran. 274-773). Instances of legal
enactment in support of parental authority are
found in Ex. xxii. 17 ; Num. xxx. 3, 5, xii.
14; Deut. xxi. 18, 21; Lev. xx. 9, xxi. 9.
xxii. 12: and the spirit of the Law in this
direction may be seen in Prov. xiii. 1, xv. 5,
xvii. 25, xix. 13, xx. 20, xxviii. 24, xxx. 17 ; Is.
xlv. 10 ; Mai. i. 6. The father, however, had
not the power of death over his child (Deut.
xxi. 18-21 ; Philo, /. a).
From the patriarchal spirit also the principle
of respect to age and authority in general appears
to be derived. Thus Jacob is described as bless-
ing Pharaoh (Gen. xlvii. 7, 10: cp. Lev. xix.
32, Prov. xvi. 31 ; Juv. Sat. xiii. 54, 55 ; Philo,
I.e. §6).
It is to this well-recognised theory of parental
authority and supremacy that the very various
uses of the term " father " in Scripture are due.
(1.) As the source or inventor of an art or prac-
tice (Gen. iv. 20, 21 ; Job xxxviii. 28, xvii. 14;
John viii. 44 ; 2 Cor. i. 3). (2.) As an object of
respect or reverence (Jer. ii. 27; 2 K. ii. 12,
v. 13, vi. 21). (3.) Thus also the pupils or
scholars of the prophetical schools, or of anv
teacher, are called sons (1 Sam. x. 12, 27 ; IK.
xx. 35; 2 K. ii. 3, iv. 1; Heb. xii. 9; 1 Tim. i.2).
(4.) The term father and also mother is applied
to any ancestor of the male or female line re-
spectively (2 Sam. ix. 7 ; 2 Ch. xv. 16 ; Is. Ii.
2; Jer. xxxv. 6, 18; Dan. v. 2). (5.) In the
Talmud the term father is used to indicate the
chief, e.g. the principal of certain works are-
termed " fathers." Objects whose contact causes
pollution are called " fathers " of defilement
(Mishn. Shabb. vii. 2, vol. ii. p. 29 ; Pesach i. 6.
vol. ii. p. 137, Surenh.). (6.) A protector or
guardian (Deut. xxxii. 6; Job xxix. 16; Ps.
lxviii. 5). Many personal names are found with
the prefixes 2K and 3X, as Ab-salom, Abi-shai,
Abi-ram, &c, implying some quality or attribute
possessed, or ascribed (Gesen. pp. 8, 10. See
reff. under Asia). .
There is no word in Hebrew for "grand-
father," and thus the word " fathers " is used in
the sense of seniors (Acts vii. 2, xxii. 1), and of
parents in general, or ancestors (Dan. v. 2;
Digitized by
Google
105G
FATHOM
Pusey, Daniel, p. 405 ; Jer. xxvii. 7 ; Matt.
xxiii. 30, 32).
Among Mohammedans parental authority haa
great weight (luring the time of pupilage. The
son is not allowed to cat, scarcely to sit, in his
father's presence. Disobedience to parents is
reckoned one of the most heinousof crimes (Burck-
hardt, Sotes on Bed. i. 355 ; Lane, Mod. Eg.
i. 84). [H. W. P.]
FATHOM. [Meascbes.]
FAUCHION (Judith xiii. 6, xvi. 9), some-
times spelt faulc/iivn or falchion. The Greek
word axinbrnt is variously considered to have
been a straight sword, or a crooked sword, or
a short spear (sco Speaker's Comm. on the
Apocrypha in loco). A drawing of the "Aki-
nakes " is given on p. 159.
FEASTS. [Festivals.]
FEET. For customs relative to the feet, see
Dust, Mourmsq, Sandal, and Washing.
FELIX (*v\ii ; Felix), Antonius Felix (Tac.
Hist. v. 9). As a freedman of Antonia, mother
of the Emperor Claudius, he had assumed her
family name. He was brother of Pallas, one of
the great freedmen who were the real adminis-
trators of the empire in the reign of Claudius.
Felix was procurator of Judaea at the time of
.St. Paul's arrest at Jerusalem, and to Felix at
Caesarea he was sent for trial (Acts xxiii. 24,
26). After hearing Tertullus and St. Paul
(Acts xxiv. 1-21), Felix put off the Jews with
the pretext that he would wait for the evidence
of Lysias before deciding, though the chief
captain's opinion was already before him in
writing. A remarkable reason is given for the
postponement (Acts xxiv. 22) — namely, that
"he had more exact knowledge concerning the
Way ; " that is to say, that he knew a good
deal about Christianity and its relation to
Judaism ; or, as may possibly be implied by the
comparative, more than Paul's accusers had
chosen to tell him. The postponement is there-
fore represented in the narrative as being made
in St. Paul's favour, though a bolder and juster
man would at once hare acquitted the accused.
On this statement of his knowledge of " the Way "
follows naturally the account of the audience
given by Felix to St. Paul on the subject of the
Christian faith (Acts xxiv. 24). The Apostle
chose topics of direct personal application to
Felix and Drusilla themselves. The guilty con-
science of Felix was moved to fear. He dis-
missed St. Paul abruptly. Other interviews fol-
lowed, but the impression made does not seem
to have been renewed, as we are expressly told
that " he sent for him the oftener and com-
muned with him," in the hope of getting a bribe
lor his release (Acts xxiv. 26). Two years'
imprisonment followed the trial. Felix was
recalled ; and, desiring to gain favour with the
Jews in view of the complaints which he knew
would follow him to Rome, he left St. Paul in
bonds (Acts xxiv. 27). The gross injustice of
the imprisonment of an innocent man, prolonged
for two years in the hope of obtaining a bribe
for his release, is surely sufficient to meet the
charge that the character of Felix in the Acts
FELIX
is inconsistent with that given by profane
writers. For criticism in this direction, see
Overbeck in loco; De Wette, Apostelgcsch* The
account in Josephus (IS. J. jv. 13) represents
Felix only as a stern governor in a time of great
turbulence, dispersing rebels and crucifying
robbers. But the later narrative of Ant. xx.
7, 8, shows him in his true colours, and from it
we learn the following particulars. He per-
suaded Drusilla to desert her husband Aziz and
live with him [Dbdsilla]. He induced tleazar,
the brigand chieftain, to surrender on promise of
safety, and then sent him to Rome for punish-
ment. He grew weary of the repeated admoni-
tions of Jonathan the high-priest, to whom he
owed his position, and procured his assassina-
tion. He made no attempt to restrain the war-
fare of the factions in Jerusalem. Things went
on as if there was no government (it in ixpa-
(rrarifrif nikti). On Felix's return to Rome he
was followed by accusers from Judaea, and " he
would certainly have suffered punishment for
the wrongs he had committed against the Jews,
had not Nero yielded to the urgent entreaties of
Pallas (brother of the accused), who was then
in great favour with the emperor" (Ant. xx. 8, 9).
Tacitus mentions Felix twice, and his own
fellow-countryman paints him even in blacker
colours than Josephus the Jew. " Relying on his
brother's influence, Felix counted on impunity
for any misdeeds he might commit. His reme-
dial measures were such as to stimulate crime "
(Tac. Ann. xii. 54). " He had the soul of a slave
with the power of a sovereign, and he exercised
his power in all manner of cruelty and lust"
(Tac. Hist. v. 9). After all this, Tertullus'
reference to the " peace " enjoyed by his means,
and to the " clemency " which characterised
him, sounds like the bitterest ironr (Acts xxiv.
It remains to notice very briefly a serious dis-
crepancy between the statements of Josephus
and Tacitus, which is as yet unreconciled. Taci-
tus states that Felix was joint procurator with
Cumanns, having Samaria as his portion, before
his appointment ns sole procurator of Judaea,
Samaria, Galilee, and Peraea. On tho troubles
between the Jews and Samaritans being referred
to the legate of Syria, Quadratus acquitted
Felix and sentCumanus with others to Rome for
trial (Tac. Ann. xii. 54). Josephus, on the
other hand, while he gives a full account of the
Samaritan troubles, and the legate's inquiry
into them, does not mention Felix till his ap-
pointment to Judaea after the trial and con-
demnation of Cumanus at Rome. Ewald accepts
Tacitus' account (Hist. Israel, vii. 418 sq.), but
clitics generally reject it as mistaken. It may
be remarked that it is difficult to understand
why Jonathan should have asked for Felix as
procurator (Jos. Ant. xx. 8, 5) unless the latter
had already served in Syria and gained favour
with the Jews. The interest of the discrepancy
for N. T. students lies in the justification which
has been sought from this lengthened procura-
torship of Felix for the words of St. Paul (Acts
xxiv. 10), "of many years" (cp. " Jampridem
Judacae impositus," Tac. Ann. xii. 54). But
accepting Wieseler's chronology (Chron. Apost.
Zeit. pp. 66-88), Felix had been procurator for
five years (A.D. 53-58) at the time of the trial,
and in a government where so many changes
Digitized by
Google
FELLER
hid occurred this was a long period. The addi- j
turn of t'uuuor to Kfinpi in some few authorities,
feebly justified by Chrysostom, would be a piece !
of flattery impossible in St. Paul's mouth. The '
only other mention of Felix is in Suetonius .
(CW. 28), who calls him " the husband of I
three queens." One of the three was Drusilla, I
already mentioned. Another wife of royal I
descent was a grand-daughter of Antony and
Cleopatra, also named Drusilla by Tacitus (Hist. j
t. 9). But probably this is by confusion with
Drusilla the daughter of Herod Agrippa. The I
third " queen " is unknown. [E. R. B.}
KELLER (Is. xiv. 8 ; A. V. and R. V.). a '
cotter of wood, from the A.-S. feUan, " to fell."
The word describes the destructive character of
the king of Babylon. [F.]
FELLOES (A.-S. foelge), the curved pieces
forming the circumference of a wheel (1 K. vii. i
33, A. V. and R. V. ; Lumby, " Glossary of
Bible Words" in Eyre and Spottiswoode's
Tend** Bible). [F.] j
FENCED CITIES (Dnxao, or nhV3D. I
■ T : • T : • i
I>an. xi. 15, from -1X3, cut off, separate, equiva- j
lent to n'ma Onjr,*Ges. p. 231 ; x6\ta ixvpai, !
raxiptis, TtTcixta/iirai > vrbet, or civitates, mu-
ritoe, munitae, munitissitnnc, firmae). The broad |
distinction between a city and a village in I
Biblical language has been shown to consist in
the possession of walls. [City.] The City had
vails, the village was uuwalled, or had only a |
FENCED CITIES 1057
watchman's tower (TtJQ ; itipryot ; turris cun-
todmn ; compare Gesen. p. 267), to which the
villagers resorted in times of danger. A three-
fold distinction is thus obtained — 1, cities ;
2, unwalled villages ; 3, villages with castles or
towers (1 Ch. xxvii. 25). The district east of
the Jordan, forming the kingdoms of Moab and
Bashan, is said to have abounded from very early
times in castles and fortresses, such as were
built by Uzziah to protect the cattle, and to
repel the inroads of the neighbouring tribes,
besides unwalled towns (Amm. Marc. xiv. 9;
Dent. iii. 5; 2 Ch. xxvi. 10). Of these many
remains probably exist undiscovered at the
present day, if many have been discovered
(Porter, Damascus, ii. 197 ; Conder, ffeth and
Moab, p. 127). The dangers to which unwalled
villages are exposed from the marauding tribes
of the desert, and also the fortifications by
which the inhabitants sometimes protect them-
selves, are illustrated by Sir J. Malcolm
(Sketches of Persia, ch. xiv. 148; and Frazer,
Persia, pp. 379, 380 ; cp. Judg. v. 7). Villages
in the Haw&n are sometimes enclosed by a
wall, or rather the houses being joined together
form a defence against Arab robbers, and the
entrance is closed bv a gate (Burckhardt, Syria,
p. 212).
A further characteristic of a city as a fortified
place is found in the use of the word D33, to
build, and also fortify. So that " to build " a
city appears to be sometimes the same thing as
to fortify it (cp. Gen. viii. 20 and 2 Ch. xvi. t>
with 2 Ch. xi. 5-10 and 1 K. xv. 17).
Fortified place belonging to
The fortifications of the cities of Palestine,
thos regularly "fenced," consisted of one or
■ore walls crowned with battlemented parapets,
H13S, having towers at regular intervals (2 Ch.
mii. 5; Jer. xxxi. 38), on which in later times
ogino of war were placed, and watch was kept
by day and night in time of war (Judg. ix. 45 ;
i £- ix. 17 ; 2 Ch. xxvi. 9, 15). Along the
oldest of the three walls of Jerusalem, there
we 90 towers; in the second, 14; and in the
tiiri, 60 (Joseph. B. J. t. 4, § 2). One such
WBLF. MCT. — VOL. I.
nn enemy of the AnyrliUU.
tower, that of Hananeel, is repeatedly mentioned
(Jer. xxxi. 38; Zech. xiv. 10), as also others
(Neh. iii. 1, 11, 27). The gateways of fortified
towns were also fortified and closed with strong
doors (Judg. xvi. 2, 3 ; 1 Sam. xxiii. 7 ; 2 Sam.
xviii. 24, 33 ; 2 Ch. xiv. 7 ; Neh. ii. 8, iii. 3, 6,
&c. ; 1 Mace. xiii. 33, xv. 39). In advance of
the wall there appears to have been sometimes
an outwork (7*0, irporefxio-/io), In A. V. marg.
ditch, R. V. " rampart " (1 K. xxi. 23 ; 2 Sam.
xx. 15 [A. V. " trench," marg. the outmost
3 Y
Digitized by
Google
1058
FENCED CITIES
wall : R. V. " rampart "] ; Ges. The*, p. 454),
which was perhaps either a palisade or wall
lining the ditch, or a wall raised midway within
the ditch itself, lioth of these methods of
strengthening fortified places, by hindering the
near approach of machines, were usual in earlier
Egyptian fortifications (Wilkinson, Anc. Eg. i.
408 [1878]), but would generally be of less
use in the hill forts of Palestine than in Egypt.
In many towns there was a keep or citadel for a
last resource to the defenders. ■ Those remaining
in the Hauran and Ledja are square. Such existed
at Shechem and Thebez (Judg. ix. 46, 51, viii. 17 ;
2 K. ix. 17), and the great forts or towers of Pse-
phinus, Hippicus, and especially Antonio, served
a similar purpose, as well as that of overawing
the town at Jerusalem. These forts were well
furnished with cisterns (Acts xxi. 34 ; 2 Mace.
v. 5 ; Joseph. Ant. xviii. 4, § 3 ; B. J. i. 5, § 4,
T. 4, § 2, vi. 2, § 1). At the time of the en-
trance of Israel into Canaan there were many
fenced cities existing, which at first caused great
alarm to the exploring party of searchers (Num.
xiii. 28), and afterwards much trouble to the
people in subduing them. Many of these were
FENCED CITIES
refortified, or, as it is expressed, rebuilt by the
| Hebrews (Num. xxxii. 17, 34-42 ; Deut. iii. 4, 5 ;
Josh. xi. 12, 13 ; Judg. i. 27-33), and many,
1 especially those on the sea-coast, remained for a
| long time in the possession of their inhabitants,
who were enabled to preserve them by means of
their strength in chariots (Josh. xiii. 3, 6, xrii.
16; Judg. i. 19; 2 K. xviii. 8; 2 Ch. xxvi. 6).
The strength of Jerusalem was shown by the
| fact that that city, or at least the citadel, or
" stronghold of Zion," remained in the posses-
' sion of the Jebusites until the time of David
| (2 Sam. v. 6, 7 ; 1 Ch. xi. 5). Among the
1 kings of Israel and Judah several are mentioned
as fortifiers or "builders" of cities: Solomon
(1 K. ix. 17-19 ; 2 Ch. viii. 4-6), Jeroboam I.
(1 K. xii. 25), Rehoboam (2 Ch. xi. 5, 12), Baash*
I (I K. xv. 17), Omri (1 K. xvi. 24), Hezekiah
(2 Ch. xxxii. 5), Asa (2 Ch. xiv. 6, 7), Jehosha-
i phat (2 Ch. xvii. 12), but especially Uzziah
(2 K. xiv. 22 ; 2 Ch. xxvi. 2, 9, 15) ; and in the
reign of Ahab the town of Jericho was rebuilt
j and fortified by a private individual, Hiel of
< Bethel (1 K. xvi. 34). Herod the Great was
I conspicuous in fortifying strong positions, as
Awynan fr'ci tiCcttlonJL
Masada, Machaerus, Herodium, besides his great i
works at Jerusalem (Joseph. B. J. vii. 6, i
§§ 1, 2, and 8, § 3; B. J. i. 21, § 10; Ant.
xiv. 13, § 9). :
But the fortified places of Palestine served
only in a few instances to check effectually the
progress of an invading force, though many in-
stances of determined and protracted resistance
are on record, as of Samaria for three years '
(2 K. xviii. 10), of Jerusalem (2 K. xxv. 3) for j
four months, and in later times of Jotapata,
Gamala, Machaerus, Masada, and above all Jeru- |
talem itself, the strength of whose defences drew
forth the admiration of the conqueror Titus
(Joseph. B. J. iii. 6, iv. 1 and 9, vii. 6, §§ 2-*
and 8; Robinson, i. 232).
The earlier Egyptian fortifications consisted
usually of a quadrangular and sometimes double
wall of sun-dried brick, 15 feet thick, and often
50 feet in height, with square towers at inter-
vals, of the same height as the walls, both
crowned with a parapet, and a round-headed
battlement'in shape like a shield. A second lower
wall with towers at the entrance was added,
distant 13 to 20 feet from the main wall, and
sometimes another was made of 70 or 100 feet
in length, projecting at right angles from the
main wall to enable the defenders to annoy the
Digitized by
Google
FERBET
assailants in flank. The ditch was sometimes
fortified by a sort of tenaille in the ditch itself,
<r a ravelin on its edge. In later times the prac-
tice of fortifying towns was laid aside, and the
large temples with their enclosures were made
to serve the purpose of forts (Wilkinson, Anc.
Ejypt. i. 408, 409 [18781).
The fortifications of liineveh, Babylon, Ecba-
tana, and of Tyre and Sidon are all mentioned,
either in theCanonical Booksor in theApocrypha.
FESTIVALS
1059
Tbe «x»n«d Golden Gat* of Jennelem. aliowicf nippowd
remains of the old Jawiah Wall.
In the sculptures of Nineveh representations are
found of walled towns, of which one is thought
to represent Tyre, and all illustrate the mode of
fortification adopted both by the Assyrians and
their enemies (Jer. li. 30-32, 58 ; Ezek. xxvii.
11; Amos i. 10; Nah. iii. 14; Zech. ix. 3; Tob.
i. 17, xiv. 14, 15; Judith LI, 4; Layard, Xin.
ii. pp. 275, 279, 388, 395; Nin. # Bab. pp. 231,
358 ; Von. of Nin. pt. ii. 39, 43). [H. W. P.]
FERBET (Hi»K, anak&h; juryaA^ ; mygale ;
B. V. " Gecko "), one of the unclean, creeping
things forbidden as food in Lev. ii. 30. All
commentators are agreed that the rendering of
the A. V. is erroneous. That of the R. V. seems
the most probable (see the marg. note in loco).
This and the three which follow it in Leviticus
are "creeping things," or reptiles; and the
name is from a root p3K, " to sigh or groan,"
well applicable to the rapid clucking sound
made by the Gecko (Ptyodactylus gecko) by
vibrating its tongue against its palate, whence
the name. The LXX. translates it pvyaX-/},
the shrew mouse (Sorex artmeus), which is
common enough in Palestine, where are also
other species of shrew. The Rabbinical writers
identify andkdh with the hedgehog, which,
though not uncommon in the country, would
not be classed with the creeping things, but is
looked upon as a small porcupine (Lewysohn,
ZoU. dct Talmmls, §§ 129, 134). The gecko is
extremely common in the Holy Land and in
Arabia. It runs with great rapidity on walls
and on smooth, indented surfaces, attaching itself
to a ceiling by means of a remarkable provision
in the structure of the underside of its toes, a
series of fine laminae or plates, so that its move-
ments appear like those of a fly. [H. B. T.]
FESTIVALS. I. The student of antiquity
soon discovers that there is little that can be
called strange or peculiar in the principal
features of the Mosaic system of ritual and
observance. The ceremonial actions in which
the religious spirit found natural expression are
much the same here as elsewhere [see Fasting] ;
allowing for modifications of more or less im-
portance, introduced from time to time by
special enactment, or originating in the altered
circumstances of the Israelitish people at the
various stages of their history. The Higher
Revelation could find free course in the ancient
channels; new ones were needless, and might
even have proved a hindrance to its beneficent
progress. What was good or capable of ex-
pressing good in existing religious usage was
taken up and moulded to its own purposes by
the religion of Moses and the Prophets. Among
the institutions of natural * religion which were
thus accepted by Mosaism as legitimate and
! worthy of adoption and regulation in the
i interests of a more spiritual faith and a more
' enlightened practice, was the festival.
A festival or feast is a period of time con-
sisting of one or more consecutive holy days ;
that is, days hallowed or set apart for the
honour of God. Generically a holy season, the
festival is specifically a season of rejoicing, and
thus excludes the fast. The principal business
of the festival in tbe ancient world was sacrifice
with its attendant ceremonies; and this natur-
ally involved a more or less entire cessation
of the ordinary business of life.
The opinion that the germ of the festival, as
of all other worship, is to be found in periodical
offerings and prayers to the departed, is far
from being borne out by the oldest available
evidence. It directly contradicts the testimony
of the documents of the extremely primitive
Accadian religion; where the chief objects of
adoration are not ghosts, but elemental Powers
of Heaven, Earth, the Deep, Fire, Wind, and
Water: a religion which takes us back to at
least five thousand years before our era, and
whose beginnings must be referred to a yet
remoter epoch. Ea, the Creator of Man, who
has his home in "the waters under the earth,"
is no more a magnified ghost than is Nanna the
Moon, or Utu the Sun, or Mermer the Wind, or
Bilgi the Fire, or Nergal the God of War, or
Ningirsu (the Chinese Siennung) the God of
Tillage. Yet these deities belong to the earliest
records of tbe oldest known language — -the
primitive speech of the land of Shamir and
Accad.
To make " Animism " the one original form
of religion is to ignore the fact that the im-
pressions received in dreams and associated with
the mystery of death were neither the most
frequent nor the most vivid of the influences
to which the primitive mind was subject.
The powers of nature, tbe great objects of
the physical world, the sun and moon daily
departing and returning, apparently of their
* By •' natural," in this connexion, I mean, universally
resulting from the religious instincts of humanity.
3 Y 2
Digitized by
Google
1060
FESTIVALS
FESTIVALS
own will and motion, the sound and force of
the unseen winds, the terrific phenomena of the
storm, would from the outset impress ignorant
but receptive humanity" with those lively
emotions of wonder and awe which find an
instinctive expression in worship ; even if we
must grant that man first appeared upon this
earthly scene in that forlorn destitution of
reason and conscience and spiritual intuition
which current speculation so freely presupposes.
" Animism," to say the least, is no more a com-
plete account of the origin of religion than the
chemistry of the body is a complete account of
human nature ; and there is no ground in
archaeology for denying that the sense of Unseen
Non-human Living Powers is as truly an
aboriginal endowment of humanity as the sense
of an external world.
The Christian apologist is by no means con-
cerned to prove the absolute originality of the
Festivals prescribed or permitted by the Mosaic
Law. It is enough for his purpose to establish
the fact that these and other customary ob-
servances were vitalized under the new religion
by the infusion of a new spirit. That Israel,
like other contemporary peoples, observed
certain festivals before the time of Moses is a
fact which might reasonably be taken for
granted. In those times no festivals could only
mean uo religion. Besides, if the ancestors of
Israel migrated from " Ur of the Chaldees "
(Gen. xi. 31), and if they there had "served
other gods" (Josh. xxir. 2\ they must have
kept the festivals of the Moon, the tutelar god
of Ur. It is an arbitrary and ignorant concep-
tion, justified neither by the sacred records nor
by historical experience, which imagines that
the Mosaic legislation implied or made possible
a clean sweep of all primitive traditions, and
abolished for Israel the entire heritage of the
past. That is not the method by which progress
has been achieved in the history of religion.
But we have the positive evidence of the
Hebrew language, with its use of the primitive
Semitic term Jn (chag), which is common to
Hebrew and the cognate dialects, and must have
descended from the period when the great Semitic
family had not yet broken up into distinct
nations. It is the term rendered " feast " in
Exod. x. 9 ; cp. iii. 18, v. 1. The tenacious
vitality of traditional festivals is well known
from general history, and may be illustrated by
the long survival of the Roman Saturnalia,
under more or less transparent disguises, in
Christian times.
In Israel, as in other ancient nations, we find
Festivals or holy times associated (1) with the
periodic changes of the moon, and (2) with the
recurring seasons of the year. Of the former
kind were the New Moons and Sabbaths ; of the
latter, the three great annual Pilgrimage-
Feasts. As regards the question of relative
antiquity, the lunar Festivals would seem to be
the older. All indications go to suggest that
they were of primitive observance in Israel, and
the opening page of Genesis represents the
Sabbath as of immemorial institution; in perfect
harmony with what we learn from other
* I suppose no one would credit " anthropoid apes "
with any sort of worship— even that of their dead
forbears.
sources, viz. that a Sabbath or Day of Rest was
known in ancient Babylonia, the primeval home
of the forefathers of Jacob, and that the New
Moons were there observed with prescribed
hymns and offerings (see W.A.I. iv. : , plates 25
and 32-33*). The differences of detail in regard
to the observance of the Sabbath, e.g. that the
Babylonian Kalendars seem to restrict it to the
king and certain members of the priestly classes,
and that the 19th day of the month is charac-
terised in the same terms as the 7th, 14th, 21st,
and 28th, cannot reasonably be considered to
weaken the evidence for the Babylonian origin
of the Sabbath. We should expect that in this
as in other instances the effect of Mosaism
would be to develop and spiritualize a pre-
existing institution. In the prominence wnich
it gave to the Sabbath, in the strictness and the
universality of the ordinance, and above all in
the religious significance associated therewith,
we may still say with Dillmann that Mosaism
was " quite original and creative." c
As Wellhausen has remarked, it is probable
that the Sabbath was originally regulated by
the phases of the moon, and thus occurred on
the 7th, 14th, 21st (and 28th) days of the month,
the new moon being reckoned as the first day.
Hence the anxious care with which from the
earliest period watch was kept for the first ap-
pearance of the new moon which determined the
beginning of the month. The service rendered to
man by this planet as a measurer of time and
an indicator of holy seasons is more than once
recognised in the Old Testament. It is called
"the faithful witness in the sky" (Ps. lxxxix.
37), and is said to have been appointed " for set
seasons " (Ps. civ. 19 ; cp. Gen. i. 14).
That the New Moons, i.e. the first days of the
twelve or thirteen lunar months of the Hebrew
year [see Year], were held in high estimation
from ancient times in Israel, is sufficiently
attested, both by the Historical and by the
Prophetical Books (1 Sam. xs. 5, 18; 2 K. iv.
23; Amos viii. 5 ; Hos. ii. 11 ; Is. i. 13 ; cp. Vs.
lxxxi. 3); while the Law lent its sanction to
these traditional holy days by the prescription
of additional offerings (Num. xxviii. 11-15) for
all of them, and by raising the New Moon of the
Seventh Month to a position of special sanctity
(Lev. xxiii. 24 sqq. ; Num. xxix. 1 sqq. ; Feast
OP Tbumpets). The observance of the New-
Moons lasted even to Christian times (Col. ii.
IB).
The position accorded to the New Moon of the
seventh month is not an isolated fact. It stands
in connexion with that peculiar extension of the-
Sabbatical idea to months and years, of which
• The l«te George Smith, quoted by Wellhausen.
Pral€g. p. 112, n. 2, speaks of " a general prohibition
of work on these days" (Auyr. Kpanym Oamon,
pp. 19, 90). Mr. Smith appears to have Inferred ttits
from the expression uo gi/l-ual, u a bad (or unlucky')
day," dmu limnu, which the Babylonian Kalendars
apply to the four (five) days. The texts, however, sa y
nothiug about general observance. They only regul&tc
the conduct of the king and two other official persons
a priest and a soothsayer.
The definition preserved In W.A.I. II. 33, 16 «t».
Sm nut libbi | iabaUw, " The Day of Rest of t be
Heart | "The Sabbath," is very remarkable. There Ir.
however, no documentary evidence connecting it wltt,
the five days mentioned in the text.
Digitized by
Google
FESTIVALS
to trace has been found outside of Motaism.
Thus, as the first day of the seventh month was
to be hallowed by entire rest from work
(staMaMoa) and by religious assembly and
■aeriiice, so the seventh year was ordained as a
nu of rest for the land, during which the
acred soil, Jehovah's gift to His people, was to
wp "a Sabbath of perfect rest'' (thabbiith
JMithon; Lev. xxv. 4) by being left to lie
fallow all the year (Ex. xxiii. 11 ; Lev. xxv. 2-7 ;
jeat. xv. 1 sq.). Similarly, it was ordered that
■iter the lapse of seven times seven years, or
" leven Sabbaths (weeks) of years," the year of
Jubilee should be celebrated (Lev. xxv. 8).
The great annual Festivals connected with the
"-■»*ms of the year seem to have had their origin
m the joy and thankfulness which led men to
ffer to God the firstlings of their flocks and
nerds and the first-fruits of the field and the
rineyird (cp. Gen. iv. 3, 4). Hence the spring
md autumn Festivals, vestiges of which are
oind in the remains of so many ancient peoples,
remote from each other in space and time, in
race and language. Among nations akin to the
Hebrews, the festival of New Year was kept by
the Babylonians and Assyrians, as we learn
irom the cuneiform inscriptions of Esarhaddon
and Nebuchadnezzar ; d while the Sacaean feast
which was celebrated five days in the eleventh
month, and was a kind of Saturnalia, may per-
iups represent the Autumn feast (Berosus ap.
Atheo. Deipn. xiv. 9, 44 ; Ctesias, Fragm. Assyr.
-0) The Syrians of Harran had a famous
•pring festival (Chwolsohn, Ssabier, ii. 25); and
the Arabs before Muhammad appear to have
'bssrred their seventh month, Rajab, as a holy
festival month. Among peoples of Aryan race,
the indent Persians are said to have held a new
tear's festival (Nairoz) for six days at the
beginning of the first month (Farvardin =
March-April), and an autumn feast also of six
days' duration (Mihrgan), from the 16th
Jay of the seventh month (Mihr = September-
wtober) onwards. The Hindus still celebrate
their ifuA-feast in March, and a feast of harvest
in September. The general practice of antiquity,
'<* established by these and similar instances,
raises a strong presumption in favour of the
historical character of the three great annual
Festivals of Israel. It is true that there is little
specific mention of these Festivals outside the
books of the Law. But here again, as in the
<»» of Fasts, we have to bear in mind the
poverty of our documents. The unexceptionable
evidence of the prophetic allusions may be con-
sidered to supply the deficiencies of the historical
fwatives. We know from Amos (v. 21 ; viii.
■'. 10) and Hosea (ii. 13 ; ix. 5) that the annual
Feaste, as well as the New Moons and Sabbaths,
•we, with whatever deviations from the strict
order of Mosaism as represented by the more
orthodox practice of Judah, diligently observed
in Northern Israel ; and the references of Isaiah
(•• 12-14 ; xxix. 1 ; xxx. 29) prove the popu-
* r >tv of the traditional Festivals in the southern
tagdom. As regards the premonarchical
Period, Dillmann justly considers the notice of
' Tie feast was called Zagmukku, a term explained
*> wan t8 iatti, " Beginning of the year" (=Heb.
^CTl PK1). and derived from the Accadian zao,
"tad," md ihjo, m,, > Tear."
FESTIVALS
10C1
the first celebration in Canaan of Passover and
the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Josh. v. 10, 11)
to be ancient and authentic. The annual feast,
celebrated with dances of virgins at Shiloh in
the time of the Judges, appears from the context
to have been a vintage-feast, and thus to repre-
sent the Feast of Tabernacles (Judg. xxi.
19 sq.); and towards the close of this period
we have the yearly pilgrimage of Elkanah and
his family to the same sanctuary (1 Sam. i. .'!,
21). The sacrifices which Solomon offere I
"three times in a year" (1 K. ix. 25) are
rightly referred by the later historian to the
three great annual Feasts (2 Ch. viii. 13); and
that sovereign is recorded to have dedicated the
Temple in the seventh month immediately
before the Feast of Tabernacles (1 K. viii. 2, 65,
66 ; cp. 2 Ch. vii. 9, 10). The important anil
unquestionably authentic notice of Jeroboam's
transference of this last great Festival from the
seventh to the eighth month proves at once its
previous observance and the strong hold which
it had upon the people (1 K. xii. 32). We thus
have adequate if not abundant evidence in
favour of what is, after all, the natural con-
clusion that Israel, like every other ancient
people of note, had from the outset its regular
Festivals and Holy Days. When, therefore, it is
said (2 K. xxiii. 22) that no such Passover as
that of the eighteenth year of Josiah had been
held " from the days of the Judges," it is obvious
that we are not to understand that the Passover
had never before been celebrated at all. This
extraordinary inference of a defunct criticism
does violence to the context (Heb. "the lite n(
this Passover"), and, moreover, wonld prove
too much ; for the chronicler has made a similar
statement in regard to this celebration (2 Ch.
xxxv. 18), and a yet more inclusive one in
regard to the Feast of Tabernacles (Neh. viii.
17); and no critic would accuse that writer of
disbelief in the Mosaic institution of the three
great Festivals. The plain meaning of these
passages is that the Festivals in question had
not previously been observed in perfect accord-
ance with the letter of the written Law.
While all the holy times of the Hebrews
were alike M&'Sdhn (DHIJTD), " fixed or ap-
pointed seasons " (Gen. i. 14 ; Lev. xxiii. 2),
the three annual Feasts of Passover and Uu-
leavened Bread, of Pentecost, and of Tabernacles,
were also called Chaggim (D'jri) ; a term which,
according to its etymology, may have originally
denoted dances in a ring, probably accompanied
by music and singing, like the Greek cyclic
chorus. The cognate verb (Jiff) means "to
dance," 1 Sam. xxx. 16; elsewhere it is "to
keep festival " (Ex. xxxii. 6, 18, 19; Judg. xxi.
19; Lev. xxiii. 39; Ps. xlii. 4), "because they
danced and expanded the Good Day (i.e. the
Feast) with rejoicing," as Kimchi explains.*
• In Arabic the root f' , hhafffa, Is "to go on
pilgrimage " to Mecca ; which agrees with the tact that
the Hebrew chaggim were pilgrimage-feasts.
The Talmud uses the term ufyjl, rlgaliwt. In this
•t :
sense ; owing to a misunderstanding of the sense of that
term in Ex. xxiii. 14 ; cp. Num. xxil. 28 (= "times")
(Gee. The*, s. v. ^J"|).
Digitized by
Google
1062
FESTIVALS
Betides the earlier prescription of these Feasts
in Ex. xxiii. 14-19, xxxiv. 18 sq. (cp. Deut.
xvi.), the middle section of the Law, now com-
monly known as "The Priestly Legislation"
{das Priesterbuch), which Dillmann dates circ.
1000 B.C., bnt which Graf, Wellhausen, and
their school refer to the age following the
Return, furnishes a more elaborate Kalendar ot
Festivals (Lev. xxiii. ; Num. xxviii., xxix.). In
all, seven holy seasons (" set times," md'&dim,
Lev. xxiii. 2) are reckoned in addition to the
weekly Sabbath, as follows : —
(1.) Passover, on the 14th of the first month.
(2.) Unleavened Bread, seven days, beginning
with the 15th of the first month.
(3.) Pentecost, the 50th day after the 16th
of the first month.
(4.) New Moon, or first day, of the seventh
month/
(5.) Day of Atonement, on the 10th day of
the seventh month.
(6.) Feast of Tabernacles, seven days, from
the 15th of the seventh month.
(7.) The Asereth ; that is, perhaps, the Closing
Day, on the 22nd of the seventh month.
Thus six of the seven annual sacred times
fall in the first and seventh months. The five
(or six) months which include winter and the
seasons of ploughing and sowing are unmarked
by any annual feasts or holy seasons. So far as
the numbers are concerned, there is no material
divergence between the different accounts.
Where only three Feasts are enumerated, the
great popular Pilgrim-festivals (Chaggim) are
intended. For particulars as to these Feasts,
see the special articles. Here it may be observed
that the Feast of Unleavened Bread, falling in
the month Abib, i.e. the month of Ears of Corn
(Ex. xxiii. 15), which was the month of the
vernal equinox (March-April) when the first
ears ripened, marked the beginning, as the Feast
of Pentecost marked the end, of the corn-
harvest ; while the Feast of Tabernacles was
essentially a vintage-feast. The agricultural
basis of these festivals is evident from their
alternative names. But the mode in which the
Law associated new facts of religious import
even with observances which in their origin
had a different significance, and thus turned
them into celebrations commemorative of great
providential events in the history of Israel, is
clearly seen in the reason assigned for making
this month Abib the beginning of the year (Ex.
xii. 2),' and in the sacramental meaning as-
cribed to the ordinances of the Passover and of
Unleavened Bread (Deut. xvi. 1-3). Even the
Feast of Tabernacles, or of Ingathering (Ex.
xxiii. 16), with its more obvious import of
harvest joy and thanksgiving, had a historical
reference connected with the feature of dwelling
in leafy booths (Lev. xxiii. 42, 43). Abib or
Nisan was, however, the first month of the
Babylonian year (Nisannu; a softened form of
the Acoadian ni-sanga, " that which is first");
' After the Introduction of the Seleucid era, the New
Moon of the seventh month became a sort of New Year's
Day.
« According to another reckoning (Ex. xxiii. 16").
which was the rule in Syria, the year began In autumn
[see Yeae].
FESTIVALS
as Tisri, the seventh month, had the same name
and position in the Babylonian Kalendar ( Tai-
ritu, probably meaning "Consecration"). The
Accadian name rri DV azag, "month of the
Pure Abode," suggests a possible connexion with
the Feast of Tabernacles.* However this may
be, the fact that these two 7-day Festivals
began on the 15th day of the month, — that is,
at the time of full moon, which was also a
Babylonian sacred season, — seems to indicate a
connexion with the lunar cycle (cp. Num. ix.
9 sq.). The special importance of the Feast
of Tabernacles, both in earlier and in later times,
is evident from Jeroboam's interference with it
(1 K. xii. 32) and from Zechariah's prophecy
concerning it (Zech. xii. 14).
Ewald and Dillmann have plausibly grouped
the six annual Festivals, including the Day of
Atonement and excluding the seventh New
Moon, round the two great Feasts of Unleavened
Bread and Tabernacles. Each greater Festival
is ushered in by a preliminary holy day ( Vor-
jeier) and terminated by a closing celebration
(Kachfeier). The Passover and Pentecost are
thus subordinated to the spring Festival; the
Day of Atonement and the Asereth to that of
autumn. Dillmann's ingenious argument must
not, however, blind us to the fact that the
documents always name three, never two Pil-
grim-Feasts {Chaggim). A love of symmetry
and system is apt to carry us beyond our evi-
dence. Neither the Day of Pentecost nor that
of Atonement really fit into the framework pro-
vided for them. Both are independent celebra-
tions of the greatest importance ; and the latter
is not a " festival " at all in the sense of the
three Pilgrim-Feasts.
All these sacred times involved the cessation
of ordinary business. But seven days within
the feast-cycle were distinguished as Days of
Holy Convocation (Ex. xii. 15 ; Lev. xxiii. ;
Num. xxviii. ; is. i. 13), and were observed with
a more Sabbatical strictness. They were the
first and seventh days of the Feast of Un-
leavened Bread, the Day of Atonement, the
first of the Feast of Tabernacles, the eighth day
(Asirethi) which immediately followed it, the
New Moon of the seventh month, and the Day
of Pentecost. Of these, the Day of Atonement
demanded absolute cessation of every kind of
work (Lev. xvi. 29, xxiii. 2, 31 ; Num. xxix. 7) ;
on the other six, abstention from all "servile
work " (!TOI? n3M7Q ; perhaps chiefly hus-
bandry) was enough (Lev. xxiii. 7, 8, 21, 25, 35,
36 ; Num. xxviii. 18, 19 : cp. Ex. xii. 16). On
all these days assemblies were called for public
worship. Owing to their Sabbath-like cha-
racteristics, they are designated by a kindred
Hebrew term (shabbathdn ; formed from shab-
bath: Lev. xxiii. 24,39): the Day of Atonement
is distinguished by a title which combines the
two expressions (shabbath shabbdthdn; Lev. xxiii.
32).' On any other day of the great 7-day
k The term i>u is explained tukku, "hut." — which
seems to answer to the Heb. tukkMk, f|fc)Dt la the
name of the feast,— as well as hibtu, "dwelling," and
tilit, '* mound" (see S°. 25, 28, 30). We may remember
that the booths of the Feast were set up on the house-
tops.
1 At the end of the verse, simply ShalMtk, Sabbath.
Digitized by
Google
FESTIVALS
festival* work was for obvious reasons permis-
sible, provided the day did not happen to
coincide with a weekly Sabbath.
Festival days were naturally marked in the
public service of the national Sanctuary by
special sacrifices, and in some cases by offerings
characteristic of the occasion, in addition to the
ordinary morning and evening sacrifice (Lev.
ixiii. ; Num. xxviii., xjtix.). As regards the
attendance of the people, it is evident that the
public proclamation of a " Day of Holy Convo-
cation " invited the presence at the services of
all Israelites who might be in the neighbour-
hood of the Sanctuary ; and for the three great
Pilgrim-feasts, attendance was enjoined by the
Law upon all males (Ex. xxiii. 14-17, xxxiv.
23 sqq. ; Deut. xvi. 16). It was expressly for-
bidden to come empty-handed ; and the custom
was to take advantage of the pilgrimages for
the presentation of obligatory as well as free-
will offerings. The fact that no penalties are
threatened for non-attendance may indicate that
the Law is rather regulating ancient and
popular usage than ordaining new observances.
At all events, the general enthusiasm for the
pilgrimage-feasts from ancient times is suffi-
ciently attested (Ps. xlii. 5, lxxxiv. 6, 7; and
the Pilgrims' Hymn-book, Pss. exx.-exxxiv. ;
cp. 1 K. xii. 32). In individual cases, allowance
would naturally be made for untoward circum-
stances, such as distance, difficulties of travel-
ling, poverty, and other material obstacles (cp.
John vii. 8, 10). Philo of Alexandria was even
satisfied with a single pilgrimage, like a modern
Mahometan Hagtfi.
Although women were not under formal
obligation to make the annual pilgrimages, the
examples of Hannah (1 Sam. i. 7 ; ii. 19) and
of the Blessed Virgin (Luke ii. 41) indicate
the practice of pious women in regard to
the greater Festivals from the earliest period
to the latest. In spite of all deductions, the
conflux of Jews from all parts of the world
to Jerusalem for the celebration of the three
great Feasts, especially that of Pentecost (Acts
ii. 9 sq.), was, in the period after the Return,
enormous. Josephus estimates the number at-
tending the Passover at over two millions ; and
the Roman procurator was always careful to
make a strong show of military force in Jeru-
salem on these occasions, in order to overawe
the multitudes of fervid patriots (Jos. Ant. xvii.
9 § 3, 10 $ 2, xx. 8 § 11 ; Bell. Jud. ii. 12 § 1 :
cp. Matt. xxvi. 5 ; Luke xiii. 1 ; Acts xxi. 31
sq.). The great influence of these gatherings,
not only as vivifying old religious memories and
intensifying devotion, bnt also as fostering a
sense of national unity, was already recognised
in the early period of the monarchy (1 K. xii.
2$, 27; cp. 2 Ch. xxx. 1); and their effect
upon the maintenance of Judaism as a living
force throughout the Greek and Roman world
until the fall of Jerusalem can hardly be
overrated.
II. In the period after the Return, certain
annual festivals were instituted in commemora-
tion of historical events in which the mercy of
God was especially recognised. Of these the
chief were :— (1) The Feast of Purim (Esth. ix.
20 sq. : see Purim), in memory of the deliver-
ance of the nation from the designs of Haman ;
and (2) the Feast of the Dedication, instituted
FESTIVALS
1063
ii.c. 164 by Judas Maccabaeus (1 Mace. iv. 56 :
see Dedication). Other new festivals of this
period — such as Nicanor's Day, commemorating
the victory of the 13th Adar, B.C. 161 (see Ni-
CANOR : 1 Mace. vii. 49 ; Jos. Ant. xii. 10, § 5),
and the anniversary of the taking of the Acra
by Simon, B.C. 141 (1 Mace. xiii. 52) — soon fell
into disuse, though the former appears to have
survived until the time of Josephus. The so-
called "Feasts of the Wood-carryings,'' topral
run (vKofoplwr (Jos. Bell. Jud. ii. 17, §§ 6, 7 ;
Taanith, iv. 5) grew out of the circumstance
that the offerings of wood for Temple use (Neh.
x. 34 ; xiii. 21) came in the course of time to be
brought to Jerusalem by all contributors on
the same day, viz. the 14th of the fifth month
(L6os=rAb>
HI. The New Testament does not record the
formal institution of any Christian Festivals.
But although not a word is said of its insti-
tution, we find the Lord's Day already recog-
nised by the Church (Acts xx. 7 : cp. 1 Cor.
xvi. 1, 2; Heb. x. 25; Rev. i. 10); and the
earliest external testimonies confirm the natural
inference from these passages [see Lord's Day].
The first Christians, moreover, followed the
example of their Master in observing the
greater Festivals of the Jewish Church, at least
until the destruction of the Holy Place. Those
Festivals, indeed, had received a new significance
for them, by association with the principal
events in the history of Redemption; just as
the Law had given them a higher import for
ancient Israel, by making them commemorative
of the turning points in the historical emanci-
pation of Jehovah's people. Thus the Passover
was consecrated anew by the sacrifice of Christ
our Passover (1 Cor. v. 7, 8) ; Pentecost, by the
outpouring of the Holy Ghost (Acts ii. 1 sq. ;
xviii. 21 ; xx. 16).
For the rest, it is a superficial error to sup-
pose that the cycle of Festivals is an unnecessary
addition to the simplicity of the Gospel. A
mechanical observance, and a total misconcep-
tion of the use and meaning of festal solem-
nities, may make it such in effect, as happened
in the case of the old Jewish Church. But a
similar perversion of the Lord's Day is by no
means unknown in the history of Christian
sects. The widespread, indeed we may say
universal observance of special days and seasons
among the great historical races of mankind, is
a fact which goes far to prove that they answer
to some special needs of human nature; and
reason cannot refuse to admit that the same
grounds of religious expediency which suggested
the institution of festivals and holy days in all
the great pre-Christian systems, have lost little
of their original force in the lapse of time. It
seems plain that in our present circumstances —
and more now, in the busy, restless modern
world, than at any former period — such days
and seasons of detachment, and holy meditation,
and joyful commemoration of the great facts of
Redemption — yes, and of the lives and deaths of
those glorious patterns of our humbler walk,
the saints of old, — can only be neglected at the
deadly risk of complete absorption in the cares
and pleasures of the passing scene. No stronger
indication of the truth can well be imagineA
than the necessity that has driven religious
bodies, which in time past have exhibited the
Digitized by
Google
1064
FESTUS
FIELD
greatest hostility to the "ecclesiastical super-
stition " of Saints' days, to the observance of
unauthorised equivalents such as anniversaries,
and harvest festivals, and " Flower Services,"
and "Watch Night." What are these and
similar novelties but so many unconscious testi-
monies to the wisdom of the Church Catholic
in her ordinance of fixed holy days ? Festivals,
in short, would seem to be necessary for the
average of mankind, if the spiritual life needs
recurring stimulus and renewal, if religion is to
have its due, and if the homage of public wor-
ship and thanksgiving is to be offered at fitting
intervals and with due solemnity to our Divine
Lord and King.
See Reland, Antiq. Hcbr. ; Bahr, Symbolik ;
Ewald's Antiquities of Israel; Dillmann apud
Schenkel's Bibellejcicon, a. v. Feste ; Riehm,
HWB., p. 430 sq. ; Graf, Die gesch. Biicher des
A. T.; Prof. W. Robertson Smith, Prophets,
p. 383 ; Wellhansen's Prolegomena, pp. 83-120 ;
Encycl. Brit.* s. v. Festivals; Hooker, Eocl. Pol.
V. ch. lxix. sq. [C. J. B.]
FESTUS (*rj<TTot ; Festus). Porcius Festus
was sent by Nero as the successor of Felix in
the government of Judaea, and probably arrived
there in the summer of a.d. 60. On his reaching
Jerusalem the case of St. Paul was at once
brought before him by the chief priests, and on
his return to Caesarea he held an inquiry.
Perplexed by the religious questions raised on
the trial (Acts xxv. 20), and still more from a
desire to gain favour with his new subjects, he
was disposed to carry St. Paul to Jerusalem for
a further trial. The danger involved in this
led St. Paul to appeal to Caesar. On the
arrival of Agrippa, Festus related to him the
whole affair, and sought his assistance in gain-
ing understanding of the religious questions
involved. The doctrine of the resurrection
called out from Festus the words " Paul, thou
art mad ; " but the discourse strengthened the
governor's conviction of the prisoner's innocence
of the charges of the Jews, who had probably
sought both before Felix and Festus to identify
St. Paul with the religious impostors (yirrrts)
who under both governors played a prominent
part in the disturbances of the time (cp. also
Acts xxi. 38). Festus shows exactly the same
selfishness as Felix in his readiness to gratify
the Jews at St. Paul's expense. But he may
not have heard of the conspiracy and ambush
two years before, and may have suspected no
treachery. Beyond this there is nothing to
blame in him as a magistrate, and the narrative
of the Acts harmonises with the account of i
Josephus (B. J. ii. 14, 1), who contrasts him
favourably with his successor Albinus. His
cynical inability to understand religious earnest- ,
ness contrasts unfavourably with his predeces-
sor's " knowledge of the Way " and awakened
conscience; but Festus was certainly a better
governor and probably a better man. His
friendship with Herod Agrippa II. (Acts xxv.
13) is illustrated by an incident recorded by
Josephus {Ant. xx. 8, 11), in which he takes
Agrippa's part. He died in less than two years
after his appointment. [E. R. B.]
FETTEBS (DJFIJJTU;^; D^t). 1. The
first of these Hebrew words, nechushtaim, ex-
presses the material of which fetters were
usually made, viz. brass (it'Jeu x cLKlct ^ > A V.
and R. V. "fetters of brass "X and also that
they were made in pairs, the word being in the
dual number: it is the most usual term for
fetters (Judg. xvi. 21; 2 Sam. iii. 34; 2 K.
xxv. 7 ; 2 Ch. xxxiii. 11, xxxvi. 6 ; Jer. xxxix.
7, lii. 11). Iron was occasionally employed for
the purpose (Ps. cv. 18, cxlix. 8> 2. Cebtl
occurs only in the above Psalms, and, from its
appearing in the singular number, may perhaps
apply to the link which connected the fetters.
Zikkim (" fetters," Job xxxvi. 8) is more usually
translated " chains " (Ps. cxlix. 8 ; Is. xlv. 14 ;
Nah. iii. 10), but its radical sense appears to
refer to the contraction of the feet by a chain
(Gesen. Thesaur. p. 424). [W. L. B.]
fever (nrnp. n^, Tnvi; tmtfn,
fityos, iptSiffpis ; Lev. xxvi. IS; Deut. xxviii.
22). These words, from various roots signify-
ing heat or inflammation, are rendered in the
A. V. by various words suggestive of fever, or
a feverish affection. The word plyos ("shudder-
ing ") suggests the ague as accompanied by
fever, as in the opinion of the LXX. probably
intended ; and this is still a very common
disease in Palestine. The third word, which
they render lfnB«rix&s (a terra still known to
pathology), a feverish irritation, and which in
the A. V. is called burning fever, may perhaps
be erysipelas. The cases in the Gospels are St.
Peter's wife's mother (Matt. viii. 14 ; Mark i.
30 ; Luke iv. 38) and the " nobleman's son "
(John iv. 52, wpiaaouaa, vvptris), but neither
having any distinctive symptom. Fever con-
stantly accompanies the bloody flux, or dysentery
(Acts xxviii. 8; cp. De Mandelslo, Travels,
ed. 1669, p. 65> Fevers of an inflammatory
character are mentioned (Burckhnrdt, Arab. i.
446) as common at Mecca, and putrid ones at
Djidda. Intermittent fever and dysentery, the
latter often fatal, are ordinary Arabian diseases.
For the former, though often fatal to strangers,
the natives care little, but much dread a
relapse. These fevers sometimes occasion most
troublesome swellings in the stomach and legs
(ii. 290, 291> [H. H.j
FIELD (iTjb). The Hebrew sadeh is not
adequately represented by our " field ;" the two
words agree in describing cultivated land, but
they differ in point of extent, the sadeh being
specifically applied to what is unenclosed, while
the opposite notion of* enclosure is involved in
the word field. The essence of the Hebrew word
has been variously taken to lie in each of these
notions, Gesenius (Thesaur. p. 1321) giving it
the sense of freedom, Stanley (5. and P. p. 490)
that of smoothness, deriving arvwm from arare.
On the one hand, sadeh is applied to any culti-
vated ground, whether pasture (Gen. xxix. -»
xxxi. 4, xxxiv. 7 ; Ex. ix. 3), tillage (Gen. xxxvii.
7, xlvii. 24; Ruth ii. 2, 3 ; Job xxiv. 6; Jer.
xxvi. 11 ; Micah iii. 12), woodland (1 Sam. ii*.
25, A. V. and R. V. " ground ;" Ps. cixxii. 6),
or mountain-top (Judg. ix. 32, 36; 2 Sam. i.
21); and in some instances in marked opposi-
tion to the neighbouring wilderness (Stanley,
pp. 236, 490), as in the instance of Jac .
settling in the field of Shechem (Gen. xuu*
Digitized by
Google
FIELD
19), the 6eld of Moab (Gen. xxxvi. 35 ; Mum
ni. 20, A. V. " country ;" Ruth i. 1), and the
vale of Siddim, i.e. of the cultivated fields, which
tunned the oasis of the Pentapolis (Gen. xiv. 3,
8; «ee Delitzach [1887] and Dillmann 5 ), though
i different sense has been given to the name by
Gesenias ( Thesaur. p. 1321). On the other band,
the tttdeh is frequently contrasted with what is
enclosed, whether a vineyard (Ex. xxii. 5 ; Lev.
xxv. 3, 4; Num. xvi. 14, xx. 17; cp. Num. xxii.
23, "the aas went into the field," with v. 24, "a i
path of the vineyards, a wall being on this side
and a wall on that side "), a garden (the very
same of which, JJ, implies enclosure), or a walled
town (Dent, xxviii. 3, 16) : unwalled villages or
scattered houses ranked in the eye of the Law as
fields (Lev. xxv. 31), and hence the expression
•is Toil leypovs = houses in the fields (in villas,
Vulg. ; Mark vi. 36, 56). In many passages
the term implies what is remote from a house
(Gen. iv. 8, ixiv. 63 ; Deut. xxii. 25) or settled
habitation, as in the case of Esau (Gen. xxv. 27 ;
the LXX., however, refers it to his character,
iypvixot) : this is more fully expressed by 'JB !
illjfiT, " the open field " (I.ev. xiv. 7, 53, xvii.
5; Num. xix. 16; 2 Sam. xi. 11), with which
14 naturally coupled the notion of exposure and
desertion (Jer. ix. 22; Ezek. xvi. 5, xxxii. 4,
xxxiii. 27, xxxix. 5).
The separate plots of ground were marked off
by stones, which might easily be removed (Deut.
xix. 14, xxvii. 17 ; cp. Job "xxiv. 2 ; Prov. xxii.
28, xxiii. 10) : the absence of fences rendered
the fields liable to damage from straying cattle
(Ex. xxii 5) or fire («. 6; 2 Sam. xiv. 30):
hence the necessity of constantly watching
Hock* and herds, the people so employed being
in the present day named Natoor (Wortabet,
Syria, i. 293). A certain amount of protection
was gained by sowing the tallest and strongest
of the grain crops on the outside : " spelt "
appears to have been most commonly used for
this purpose (Is. xxviii. 25, as in the margin).
From the absence of enclosures, cultivated land
of any size might be termed a field, whether it
ivere a piece of ground of limited area (Gen.
ixiii. 13, 17; Is. v. 8), a man's whole inherit-
ance (Lev. xxvii. 16 sq. ; Ruth iv. 5 ; Jer. xxxii.
£•. 25; Prov. xivii. 26, xxxi. 16), the ager
puUieus of a town (Gen. xli. 48 ; Neh. xii. 29),
*< distinct, however, from the ground imme-
diately adjacent to the walls of the Levitical
cities, which was called EHJD (A. V. and R. V.
"suburbs"), and was deemed an appendage of
the town itself (Josh. xxi. 11, 12), or lastly the
territory of a people (Gen. xiv. 7, xxxii. 3,
xiitL 35; Num. xxi. 20; Ruth i. 6, iv. 3;
1 Sam. vi. 1, xxvii. 7, 11). In 1 Sam. xxvii. 5,
"a town in the field" (A. V. and R. V.
u country ") = a provincial town as distinct
from the royal city. A plot of ground sepa-
rated from a larger one was termed Trip D(p?n
(Gen. xxxiii. 19 ; Ruth ii. 3 ; 1 Ch. xi.' 13), or
•imply nzfrn (2 Sam. xiv. 30, xxiii. 12 ; cp.
2 Sam. xix. 29). Fields occasionally received
names after remarkable events, as Helkath-
Haxxurim, the field of the strong men, or possibly
of tie sharp knives (R. V. marg., 2 Sam. ii. 16 ;
cp. Driver, Note* on the Ileb. Text of the BB. of
FIG, F1G-TKEE
1065
Sum. The LXX. has a different reading), or
from the use to which they may have been
applied (2 K. xviii. 17 ; Is. vii. 3 ; Matt,
xxvii. 7).
It should be observed that the expressions
" fruitful field " (Is. x. 18, xxix. 17, xxxii. 15,
16) and " plentiful field " (Is. xvi. 10 ; Jer. xlviii.
33) are not connected with sadch, but with
carmel, meaning a park or well-kept wood, as
distinct from a wilderness or a forest. The
same term occurs in 2 K. xix. 23 and Is. xxxrii.
24 (A. V. " Carmel '% Is. x. 18 (« forest "X »»<•
Jer. iv. 26 (" fruitful place ") [Cabmel]. Dis-
tinct from this is the expression in Ezek. xvii.
5, inrrrjb (A. V. " fruitful field "), which
means a field suited for planting suckers.
We have further to notice other terms —
(1.) ShcJemoth (n'lD'IB'), translated "fields,"
and connected by Gesenius with the idea of
enclosure. It is doubtful, however, whether
the notion of burning does not rather lie at the
bottom of the word. This gives a more con-
sistent sense throughout. In Is. xvi. 8, it
would thus mean the withered grape ; in Hab.
iii. 17, blasted corn ; in Jer. xxxi. 40, the burnt
parts of the city (no " fields " intervened be-
tween the south-eastern angle of Jerusalem and
the Kedron) ; while in 2 K. xxiii. 4, and Deut.
xxxii. 32, the sense of a place of burning is ap-
propriate. It is not therefore necessary to treat
the word in Is. xxxvii. 27, "blasted," as a
corrupt reading (cp. 2 K. xix. 26). (2.) Abel
(72K), a vtell-toatered spot, frequently employed
as a prefix in proper names. (3.) Achu (intt),
a word of Egyptian origin (see reff. in MV."),
given in the LXX. in a Grecised form, &x<'
(Gen. xli. 2, 18, "meadow;" Job viii. 11, "Mag;"
Is. xix. 7, LXX.), meaning the green flags and
rushes that grow in the marshes of Lower Egypt.
(4.) Maareh (iTirD). which occurs only onee
(Judg. xx. 33, "meadows"; R. V. " Maareh-
Geba "), with a sense of openness or bareness or
exposure : thus, " they came forth on account
of the exposure of Gibeah," the Benjamites
having been previously enticed away (c. 31).
[W. L. Ii.] [P.]
FIELD, FULLER'S, THE [Fuller's
Field, The.]
FIELD, POTTER'S, THE. [Aceldama ;
Potter's Field, The.]
FIG, FIG-TREE (HJIWI, teinah; Arab.
^fjj, teen ; o-i«rij ; ficus) belongs to the natural
order of the Bread-fruit family, and the sub-
order Moreae, which includes also the mulberry.
It is a word of frequent occurrence in the 0. T.,
where it signifies the tree Ficus Carica of Lin-
naeus, and also its fruit. The LXX. render it
by o-uttri and o-ixoy, and when it signifies fruit
by o-inrij — also by oviaiiv or autt&v, ficetum, in
Jer. v. 17 and Amos iv. 9. In N. T. ov«rij is the
fig-tree, and <rC*a the figs (.las. iii. 1 2). It is
indigenous in Southern Europe, North Africa, the
Canary Islands, Asia Minor, Syria, Persia, Ar-
menia, and Northern India. It has a very smooth
bark, with very large, thick, and palmate leaves.
The branches are numerous, wide and spreading,
presenting an object of striking beauty when in
Digitized by
Google
1066
FIG, FIG-TREE
fall leaf. The fruit, unlike any other in this
country, is an enlarged, succulent, hollow re-
ceptacle, containing the imperfect Bowers in its
interior. Hence the blossom of the fig-tree is
not risible till the receptacle has been cut open.
The fig-tree is very common in Palestine (Deut.
viii. 8). Mount Olivet was famous for its fig-
trees in ancient times, and they are atill found
there (see Stanley, S. & P. pp. 187, 421, 422).
The name probably means "early ripening,"
from j\, "to be in good time." See MV. U
In Gen. iii. 7, the identification of ilJNFl fw
with the leaves of the Ficus Carica has been
disputed by Gesenius, Tuch, and others (see
Delitzsch [1887] in loco), who think that the
large leaves of the Indian ttusa Paradisiaca
are meant (Germ. Adamsfeige, Fr. figiUer
a" Adam). These leaves, however, would not
have needed to be strung or sewn together, and
the plant itself is not of the same kind as
the fig-tree. Dillmann* considers that the
writer chose the fig-leaf as the largest with
which he was familiar among Palestine leaves.
The failure or destruction of the fig is re-
peatedly threatened by the Prophets as one of
Jehovah's sore judgments upon the land, which
was " a land of wheat and barley and vines and
fig-trees " (Deut. viii. 8). " He smote their
vines also and fig-trees " (Ps. cv. 33). It must
be borne in mind that the dried fig is not only
an agreeable luxury, but, as an important article
of daily food, is one of the staples of the
country. Dried figs along with barley-cakes
are the usual provender of the traveller, as
well as the cheapest food.
" To sit every man under his vine and under
his fig-tree" (1 K. iv. 25; 2 K. xviii. 31 ; Is.
xxxvi. 16 ; Mic. ir. 4, Zech. iii. 10) conveyed
to the Jew the fullest idea of peace, security,
and prosperity. Nor is the expression merely
figurative. There is no protection against the
rays of an Eastern sun more complete than the
dense foliage of the fig-tree, which often touches
the ground at its circumference. Under such a
fig-tree, screened from all human observation,
had Nathanael wrestled in prayer, but was noted
by the omniscient eye of Jesus the Messiah.
When figs are spoken of as distinguished from
the fig-tree, the plur. form D'J^R is used (see
Jer. viii. 13).
2. There are also the words ITH33, IB, and
n?3^, signifying different kinds of figs.
(a.) in Hos. ix. 10, njKFQ flTO? signifies the
first ripe of the fig-tree, and the same word
occurs in Is. xxviii. 4, and in Mic. vii. 1
(cp. Jer. xxiv. 2). Lowth on Is. xxviii. 4
quotes from Shaw's Trav. p. 370 sq. a notice
of the early fig called boccore, and in Spanish
Albacora (see MV." s. n.). (6.) IB is the
unripe fig, which hangs through the winter.
It is mentioned only in Cant. ii. 13, and its
name comes from the root J3S, crudus fuit. The
LXX. render it tKwBou It is found in the Greek
word Bi)(tycrr4 = 'JNB JVg, " house of green
figs " (see Buxt. p. 1691). (c.) In the Historical
Books of the 0. T. mention is made of cakes of
figs, used as articles of food, and compressed
into that form for the sake of keeping them.
They also appear to have beeu used remedially
FIG, FIG-TBEE
for boils (2 K. xx. 7 ; Is. xxxviii. 21). Such a cake
was called i"!?3' : !, or more fully D'OKD n731.
t •• : J • •• i V v :
from a root which in Arab, dabala = to make
into a lump. Hence, or rather from the Syr.
Krrai, the first letter being dropped, came
the Greek word xaKiBii. Athenaeus (xi. p. 500,
ed. Casaub.) makes express mention of the »a-
XiBri 'ivpuactf. Jerome on Ezek. vi. describes the
iraAtuJjf to be a mass of figs and rich dates,
formed into the shape of bricks or tiles, and
compressed in order that they may keep. Such
cakes harden so as to need cutting with an axe.
Few passages in the Gospels have given occa-
sion to so much perplexity as that of St. Mark
xi. 13, where the Evangelist relates the circum-
stance of our Lord's cursing the fig-tree near
Bethany : " And seeing a fig-tree afar off having
leaves, He came, if haply He might find any
thing thereon: and when He came to it, He
found nothing but leaves ; for the time of figs
teas not get " (R. V. " for it was not the season of
figs "). The apparent unreasonableness of seek-
ing fruit at a time when none could naturally
be expected, and the consequent injustice of the
sentence pronounced upon the tree, is obvious
to every reader.
The fig-tree, as has been stated above, in
Palestine produces fruit at two, or even three,
different periods of the year : first, there is the
biccur&h, or " early ripe fig," which ripens from
May to August, according to situation. The
biccurah drops off the tree as soon as ripe;
hence the allusion in Nah. iii. 12, when shaken
they "even fall into the mouth of the eater."
Shaw (Trav. i. 264, 8vo ed.) aptly compares
the Spanish name breba for this early fruit,
" quasi breve," as continuing only for a short
time. About the time of the ripening of the
biccwrim, the harmous or summer fig begins to
be formed ; these rarely ripen before September,
when another crop, called "the winter fig,"
appears. Shaw describes this kind as being of
a much longer shape and darker complexion
than the karmous, hanging and ripening on the
tree even after the leaves are shed, and, pro-
vided the winter proves mild and temperate,
being gathered as a delicious morsel in the spring
(cp. also Plin. A'. H. xvi. 26, 27).
The attempts to explain the above-quoted
passage in St. Mark are numerous, and for the
most part very unsatisfactory.
The explanation which has found favour with
most writers is that which understands the
words Katpbs aixtnv to mean " the fig-harvest ; "
the yif in this case is referred not to the clause
immediately preceding, " He found nothing but
leaves," but to the more remote one, " He came
if haply He might find any thing thereon " (for
a similar trajection it is usual to refer to Mark
xvi. 3, 4) ; the sense of the whole passage being
then as follows: "And seing a fig-tree afar off
having leaves, He came if perchance He might
find any fruit on it (and He ought to have found
some), for the time of gathering it had not yet
arrived, but when He came He found nothing
but leaves " (see the notes in the Greek Testa-
ment of Burton, Trollope, Bloomfield, Webster
and Wilkinson ; Macknight, Harm, of the Gospels,
ii. p. 591, note, 1809 ; Elsley's Annot. ad I. c,
&c). A forcible objection to this explanation
Digitized by
Google
FIG, FIG-TREE
will be found in the fact that at the time im-
plied, viz. the end of March or the beginning
of April, no figs at all eatable would be found
oo the trees ; the biccurim seldom ripen in
Palestine before the end of June, and at the
time of the Passover the frnit, to use Shaw's
expression, would be " hard and no bigger than
common plums," corresponding in this, state to
tie paggim (D'iB) of Cant. ii. 13, wholly unfit
for food in an unprepared state ; and it is but
reasonable to infer that our Lord expected to
find something more palatable than these small
sour things upon a tree which by its show of
foliage bespoke, though falsely, a corresponding
show of good fruit, for it is important to re-
member that the fruit comes before the leaves.
Again, if Ktupis denotes the " fig-harvest," we
mast suppose that, although the fruit might
not have been ripe, the season was not very far
distant, and that the figs in consequence must
hare been considerably more matured than
these hard paggim; but is it probable that St.
Mark should have thought it necessary to state
that it was not yet the season for gathering figs
in March, when they could not have been fit to
gather before June at the earliest ?
The difficulty is best met by looking it full in
the face, and by admitting that the words of
the Evangelist are to be taken in the natural
order in which they stand, neither having re-
course to trajection, nor to unavailable attempts
to prove that edible figs could have been found
on the trees in March. It is true that occa-
sionally the winter figs remain on the tree in
mild seasons, and may be gathered the following
spring, but this is not to be considered a usual
circumstance.
But, after all, where is the unreasonableness
of the whole transaction ? It was stated above
that the fruit of the fig-tree appears before the
leares ; consequently if the tree produced leaves
it should also have had some figs as well. As
to what natural causes had operated to effect so
unusual a thing for a fig-tree to have leaves in
March, it is unimportant to inquire; but the
stepping out of the way with the possible chance
(ii too, si forte, " under the circumstances ; "
•« Winer, Oram. ofN. T. Diction, p. 465, Mas-
son's transl.) of finding eatable fruit on a fig-tree
in leaf at the end of March, would probably be
repeated by any observant modern traveller in
Palestine. The whole question turns on the
pretensions of the tree: had it not proclaimed
by its foliage its superiority over other fig-trees,
and thus proudly exhibited its preeodousness ; or,
had our Lord at that season of the year visited
any of the other fig-trees upon which no leaves
aadas yet appeared with the prospect of finding
fruit — then the case would be altered, and the
"ureasonableness and injustice real. The words
°f St. Mark, therefore, are to be understood in
the sense which the order of the words naturally
•uggests. The Evangelist gives the reason why
no fruit teas found on the tree, viz. " because
it was not the time for fruit ; " we are left to
Wer the reason why it ought to have had fruit
'f it were true to its pretensions; and it must
he remembered that this miracle had a typical
dwjn, to show how God would deal with the
"**» *ho, professing like this precocious fig-
tree "to be first," should be "last" in His
UTonr, seeing that no fruit was produced in
FIB
10(57
their lives, but only, as Wordsworth well ex-
presses it, " the rustling leaves of a religious
profession, the barren traditions of the Pharisees,
the ostentatious display of the Law, and vain
exuberance of words without the good fruit of
works."
The question is well summed up by Arch-
bishop Trench (Notes on the Miracles, p. 438) :
"All the explanations which go to prove that,
according to the natural order of things in a
climate like that of Palestine, there might have
been even at this early time of the year figs on
that tree, either winter figs which had survived
till spring or the early figs of spring them-
selves: all these, ingenious as they often are,
yet seem to me beside the matter. For, without
entering further into the question whether they
prove their point or not, they shatter upon that
oil yap fir itaipbt triiaav of St. Mark ; from which
it is plain that no such calculation of probabilities
brought the Lord thither, but those abnormal
leaves which He had a right to count would have
been accompanied with abnormal fruit." See also
Trench's admirable reference to Ex. xvii. 24.
In the fig-tree as in all other plants, there
are individual peculiarities, and the writer has
often noticed, both in Palestine and especially in
the Canary Islands, trees which naturally, or
from their situation, put forth their leaves much
earlier than their neighbours. But the fruit
also precedes the foliage. Yet occasionally wc
have found trees in leaf without fruit. These
were generally young trees which had been
making vigorous growth. In some moist and
hot nooks, as at Engedi, and in some Canary Is-
land glens, the fig-tree never sheds its leaf and
bears sparingly throughout the year. In Palestine
irregular pieces of ground, the mouths of wells,
and corners of vineyards are generally occupied
by a fig-tree, " A fig-tree planted in a vine-
yard." The fig still maintains its repute in the
East as the best poultice (Is. xxxviii. 21), and
its use is familiar among ourselves as efficacious
for gumboils. [H. B. T.]
FIB (Bn-13, birosh; D'nhS, beHthim [see
MV.' 1 ]; from BH3, "to cut," bet. p. 246, ren-
dered indifferently in LXX. as aputuBos, KiSpos,
wirvs, Kvr&puro-os, utitcn : dbies, cupressus ; A. V.
and B. V. "fir;" B. V. marg. cypress). The
word occurs very frequently in the 0. T., gene-
rally in connexion with Lebanon and other
mountain districts, and the A. V. translation is
probably correct, though the term may have
included the cypress, which is a conifer, and
the juniper, which is similar in general appear-
ance. That it is a general expression, like our
own word "fir," may be inferred from the
LXX. rendering it sometimes niicn (pine), at
other times mnrapto-aos (cypress), or apKtvdos
(juniper), all of which must have been well
known to the Alexandrines. The timber was
used for boards or planks for the Temple (1 K.
vi. 15) ; for its two doors (v. 34) ; for the ceiling
of the greater house (2 Ch. iii. 5); for ship-
boards (Ezek. xxvii. 5) ; for musical instruments
(2 Sam. vi. 5). The red heart-wood of the tall
fragrant juniper of Lebanon was no doubt ex-
tensively used in the building of the Temple ;
and the identification of berSsh or berith with
this tree receives additional confirmation from
the LXX. words apKtvSos and xitpos, "a
Digitized by
Google
1068
FIRE
juniper." The deodar, the larch, and Scotch fir,
which have been by some writers identified with
the bcrush, do not exist in Syria or Palestine.
The most abundant species of pine now found in
Lebanon and Western Palestine is Pinus halepen-
sis (Mill.) or Aleppo pine, a very handsome tree,
not unlike our Scotch fir. It must be this
species, still common on Lebanon, which is asso-
ciated with the cedar for Us noble growth.
"The fir-trees were not like his boughs"
(Ezek. xxxi. 8). "The choice tir-trees of
Lebanon "(Is. xxxvii. 24). On Gilead and other
mountainous regions east of Jordan its place is
taken by Pinus carica (Don.), an allied species.
The Aleppo pine is found occasionally throughout
the country as far south as Hebron, but has
generally been destroyed for fuel. In the time of
the Crusades there was a fir-wood on the hills
between Jerusalem and Bethlehem, of which
not a trace now remains. A few trees linger
far south of Hebron, near Jattir (-Attir). Pinus
laricio (Poir.), the Austrian pine, has been intro-
duced on the coast, where also Pinaster pinca,
&c, is found sparingly. The only true fir, as dis-
tinguished from pine, is Abies cilicica (Ant. and
K.) on I-ebanon, probably abundant in ancient
times. But the handsome Juniperus execha
(Klor. cane.) is still very common, and Cuprcssus
stmpertirens (L.), both native and planted, is
frequent. [Cedar.] [H. B. T.]
FIBE(1. t?K; rvp; ijnis: 2. -Rtf, and also
"WR; ^»t; lux; flame or light). The applica-
tions of fire in Scripture may be classed as : —
I. Religious. (1.) That which consumed the
burnt sacrifice, and the incense-offering, begin-
ning with the sacrifice of Noah (Gen. viii. 20),
and continued in the ever-burning fire on the
Altar, first kindled from heaven (Lev. vi. 9, 13,
ix. 24), and rekindled at the dedication of Solo-
man's Temple (2 Ch. vii. 1, 3).
(2.) The symbol of Jehovah's Presence, and the
instrument of His power, in the way either of
approval or of destruction (Ex. iii. 2, xiv. 19,
xix. 18; Num. xi. 1, 3; Judg. xiii. 20; IK.
xviii. 38; 2 K. :. 10, 12, ii. 11, vi. 17; cp.
Is. Ii. 6, lxvi. 15, 24; Joel ii. 30; Mnl. iii. 2, 3,
iv. 1 ; Mark ix.44: 2 Pet. iii. 10; Rev. xx. 14,
15 ; Keland, Ant. Sacr. i. 8, p. 26 ; Jennings,
JeirishAnt. ii. 1, p. 301 ; Joseph. Ant. iii. 8, § 6,
viii.4, § 4). Parallel with this application of fire
and with its symbolical meaning is to be noted
the similar use for sacrificial purposes, and the
respect paid to it, or to the heavenly bodies as
symbols of deity, which prevailed among so many
nations of antiquity, and of which the traces are
not even now extinct (W. R. Smith, The Religion
of the Semites, i. Index s. n. "Fire"): e.g. the
Sabaean and Magian systems of worship, and their
alleged connexion with Abraham (Spencer.oSs Leg.
Hebr. ii. 1, 2) ; the occasional relapse of the Jews
themselves into sun-, or its corrupted form of fire-
worship (Is. xxvii. 9; cp. Gesen. JSn, p. 489;
Deut. xvii. 3 ; 2 K. xvii. 16, xxi. 3, "xxiii. 5, 10,
11, 13; Jer. viii. 2; Ezek. viii. 16 ; Zeph. i. 5;
Jahn, Arch. Bibl. c. vi. §§405, 408) [Moloch];
the worship or deification of heavenly bodies or
of fire, prevailing to some extent, as among the
Persians, so also even in Egypt (Her. iii. 16;
Wilkinson, Ane. Egypt, i. ;',28 [1878]); the
sacred fire of the Greeks and Romans (Time. i.
FIBE
24, ii. 15 ; Cic. de Leg. ii. 8, 12 ; Liv. xxviii. 12 ;
bionys. ii. 67 ; Plut. Nuina, 9, i. 263, ed. Reiske);
the ancient forms and usages of worship, differ-
ing from each other in some important respects,
but to some extent similar in principle, of
Mexico and Peru (Prescott, Mexico, i. 60, 64 ;
Pertt, i. 101); and lastly the theory of the so
called Guebres of Persia, and the Parsees of
Bombay (Krazer, Persia, c. iv. 141, 162, 164;
Sir R. Porter, Travels, ii. 50, 424; Chardin,
Voyages, ii. 310, iv. 258, viii. 367 sq. ; Niebuhr,
Voyages, ii. 36, 37 ; Mandelslo, Travels, b. i.
L76 ; Gibbon, Hist. c. viii, i. 335, ed. Smith ;
nj. of Tudela, Early Trav. pp. 114, 116;
Burckhordt, Syria, p. 156).
The perpetual fire on the Altar was to be
replenished with wood every morning (Lev.
vi. 12 ; cp. Is. xxxi. 9). According to the
Gemara, it was divided into three parts, one for
burning the victims, one for incense, and one for
supply of the other portions (Lev. vi. 15 ; Re-
laud, Antig. Hebr. i. 4, 8, p. 26 ; and ix. 10,
p. 98). Fire for sacred purposes obtained else-
where than from the Altar was called " strange
fire," and on account of their use of such Nadab
and Abihu were punished with death by fire from
God (Lev. x. 1, 2 ; Num. iii. 4, xxvi. 61).
(3.) In the cose of the spoil taken from the
Midianites, such articles as could bear it were
purified by fire as well as in the water ap-
pointed for the purpose (Num. xxxi. 23). The
victims slain for sin-offerings were afterwards
consumed bv fire outside the camp (Lev. iv. 12,
21, vi. 30, x'vi. 27 ; Heb. xiii. 11). The Naxarite
who had completed his vow, marked its com-
pletion by shaving his head and casting the hair
into the fire on the Altar on which the peace-
offerings were being sacrificed (Num. vi. 18).
II. Domestic. Besides for cooking purposes,
fire is often required in Palestine for warmth
(Jer. xxx vi. 22; Mark xiv. 54 ; John xviii. 18;
Harmer, Obs. i. 125 ; Raumer, p. 79). For this
purpose a hearth with a chimney is sometimes
constructed, on which either lighted wood or
pans of charcoal are placed (Harmer, i. 405).
In Persia a hole made in the floor is sometimes
filled with charcoal, on which a sort of table is
set covered with a carpet; and the company
placing their feet under the carpet draw it over
themselves (Olearius, Travels, p. 294 ; Chardin,
Voyages, viii. 190). Rooms in Egypt are
warmed, when necessary, with pans of char-
coal, as there are no fire-places except in
the kitchens (Lane, Mod. Eg. i. 41 ; English-
woman in Egypt, ii. 11).
On the Sabbath the Law forbade any fire to
be kindled, even for cooking (Ex. xxxv. 3; Num.
xv. 32). To this general prohibition the Jews
added various refinements, e.g. that on the eve
of the Sabbath no one might read with s light,
though passages to be read on the Sabbath by
children in schools might be looked out by the
teacher. If a Gentile lighted a lamp, a Jew
might use it, but not if it had been lighted for
the use of the Jew. If a Festival day fell on the
Sabbath eve, no cooking was to be done (Mishn.
Shabb. i. 3, xvi. 8, vol. ii. pp. 4, 56 ; Moed Katin,
ii. vol. ii. p. 287, Surenhus.).
III. The dryness of the land in the hot season
in Syria of course increases liability to accident
from fire. The Law therefore ordered that any
one kindling a fire which caused damage to corn
Digitized by
Google
FIEEPAN
FIRMAMENT
1069
in t field, should make restitution (Ex. xxii. 6; i demands notice (cp. Delitxsch [1887] and Dill-
cp. Jodg. iv. 4, 5 ; 2 Sam. xiv. 30 ; Mishu. | mann 5 in loco). It is generally regarded as
Moaxtk, vi. 5,6,to1. iv. p. 48, Surenh.; Burck
hardt, Syria, pp. 496, 622).
IV. Pnnishment of death by fire was awarded
hi the Law only in the cases of incest with a
mother-in-law, and of unchastity on the part of
a daughter of a priest (Lev. xx. 14, xxi. 9). In
the former case both the parties were to suffer,
expressive of simple expansion, and is so ren-
dered in the margin of the A. V. (/. c. ; B. V.
" expanse ") ; but the true idea of the word is
a complex one, taking in the mode by which the
expansion is effected, and consequently implying
the nature of the material expanded. The verb
raka means to expand by beating, whether by
.. the latter the woman only. This sentence I the hand, the foot, or any instrument. It is
appears to have been a relaxation of the original especially used, however, of beating out metals
practice in such cases (Gen. xxxviii. 24). Among i into thin plates (Ex. xxxix. 3 ; Num. xvi. 39),
other nations, burning appears to have been no i and hence the substantive DW|!n = " broad
uncommon mode, if not of judicial punishment. | (R. y. "beaten") plates" of metal (Num. xvi.
it least of vengeance upon captives ; and in a : 38). It is thus applied to the flattened surface
modified form was not unknown in war among
the Jews themselves (2 Sam. xii. 31 ; Jer. xxix.
22: Dan. iii. 20, 21). In certain cases the
bodies of executed criminals and of infamous
persons were subsequently burnt (Josh. vii. 25 ;
2 K. xxiii. 16).
The Jews were expressly ordered to destroy
the idols of the heatherl nations, and especially
any city of their own relapsed into idolatry (Kx.
xxiii. 20; 2 K. x. 26; Deut. vii. 5, xii. 3, xiii.
16). In some cases, the cities, and in the case
of Hazor, the chariots also, were, by God's order,
consumed with fire (Josh. vi. 24, viii. 28, xi. 6,
9, 13). One of the expedients of war in sieges
was to set fire to the gate of the besieged place
(Jodg. ix. 49, 52). [Sieges.]
V. Incense was sometimes burnt in honour of
the dead, especially royal personages, as is men-
tioned specially in the cases of Asa and Zede-
kiah, and negatively in that of Jehoram (2 Ch.
in. 14. xxi. 19 ; Jer. xxxiv. 5).
VI. The use of fire in metallurgy was well
known to the Hebrews at the time of the Exo-
dus (Ex. xxxii. 24, xxxv. 32, xxxvii. 2, 6, 17,
iiiTiii. 2, 8; Num. xvi. 38, 39). [HANDI-
CRAFT.]
VII. Fire or flame is used in a metaphorical
seise to express excited feeling and divine
inspiration, and also to describe temporal cala-
mities and future punishments (Ps. lxvi. 12 ;
of the solid earth (Is. xlii. 5, xliv. 24 ; Ps.
exxxvi. 6), and it is in this sense that the term
ia applied to the heaven in Job xxxvii. 18 (R. V.)
— " Canst thou with Him spread " (rather ham-
mer) "out the sky, which is strong' as a
molten mirror " — the mirror to which he refers
being made of metal. The sense of solidity,
therefore, is combined with the ideas of expan-
sion and tenuity in the term rakia. Saalschutz
(Archaeol. ii. 67) conceives that the idea of
solidity is inconsistent with Gen. ii. 6, which
implies, according to him, the passage of the
mist through the rakia; he therefore gives it
the sense of pure expansion — it is the large and
lofty room in which the winds, &c, have their
abode. But it should be observed that Gen. ii.
6 implies the very reverse. If the mist had
penetrated the rakia, it would have descended
in the form of rain ; the mist, however, was
formed under the rakia, and resembled a heavy
dew— a mode of fructifying the earth which,
from its regularity and quietude, was more
appropriate to a state of innocence than rain,
the occasional violence of which associated it
with the idea of Divine vengeance. Bnt the
same idea of solidity runs through all the refer-
ences to the rakia. In Ezek. i. 22-26, the
" firmament " is the floor on which the throne
of the Most High is placed. That the rakia
should be transparent, as implied in the com-
Jer. xx. 9: Joel ii. 30; Mai. iii. 2 ; Matt. xxv. parens with the sapphire (Ex. /. c.) and with
41 ; Mark ix. 43 ; Rev. xx. 15). [H- W - P
FIREPAN (njjirtD; ivptiov, Bviuar^ptor;
ipem receptaculum; thuribulum\ one of the
vessels of the Temple service (Ex. xxvii. 3,
xnriii. 3; 2 K. xxv. 15; Jer. Iii. 19). The
same word ia elsewhere rendered "snuff-dish"
(Ex. xxv. 38, xxxvii. 23 ; Num. iv. 9 ; «Va-
surrip; emunetorium) and "censer" (Lev. x. 1,
rrl 12; Num. xvi. 6 sq.), a variety of ren-
dering preserved by the R. V. There appear,
therefore, to have been two articles so called :
one, like a chafing-dish, to carry live coals for
the purpose of burning incense ; another, like a
snuffer-dish, to be used in trimming the lamps,
in order to carrv the snuffers and convey away
the snuff. " [W. L. B.]
FIRKIN. [Measures.]
FIRMAMENT. This term was introduced
into our language from the Vulgate, which
gives prmamentum as the equivalent of the
crystal (Kzek. I. c. ; cp. Rev. iv. 6), is by no
means inconsistent with its solidity. Further,
the office of the rakia in the economy of the
world demanded strength and substance. It was
to serve as a division between the waters above
and the waters below (Gen. i. 7). In order to
enter into this description we must carry our
ideas back to the time when the earth was a
chaotic mass, overspread with water, in which
the material elements of the heavens were in-
termingled. The first step, therefore, in the
work of orderly arrangement, was to separate
the elements of heaven and earth, and to fix a
floor of partition between the waters of the
heaven and the waters of the earth ; and
accordingly the rakia was created to support
the upper reservoir (Ps. cxlviii. 4), itself being
supported at the edge or rim of the earth's disk
by the mountains (2 Sam. xxii. 8; Job xxvi. 11).
In keeping with this view the rakia was pro-
vided with "windows" (Gen. vii. 11; Is. xxiv.
18; Mai. iii. 10) and "doors" (Ps. lxxviii. 23),
through which the rain and the snow might
rripiufia of the LXX. (better Greek Ven. — , descend. A secondary purpose which the rakia
t4/io from Ttirm% and of the rakia (IPf?^) of the | served was to support the heavenly bodies, sun,
Hebrew text (Gen. i. 6). The Hebrew term first ; moon, and stars (Gen. i. 14), in which they were
Digitized by
Google
1070
FIRMAMENT
fixed as nails, and from which, consequently,
they might be said to drop off (Matt. xxiv. 29).
In all these particulars we recognise the same
view as was entertained by the Greeks and, to a
certain extent, by the Lai ins. The former
applied to the heaven such epithets as " brazen "
(X<&Kf<n>, II. xvii. 425 ; wo\ixa\Kov, II. v. 504)
and "iron'*(<riJ^p«o»', Od. xv. 828, xvii. 565}—
epithets also used in the Scriptures (Lev. xxvi.
19); and that this was not merely poetical
embellishment appears from the views promul-
gated by their philosophers, Empedocles (Plu-
tarch, Plac. Phil. ii. 11) and Artemidorus (Senec.
Quaest. vii. 13). The same idea is expressed in
the caelo affixa sidera of the Latins (Plin. ii. 39,
xviii. 57). If it be objected to the Mosaic
account that the view embodied in the word
rakia does not harmonize with strict philoso-
phical truth, the answer to such an objection is,
that the writer describes things as they appeared
to him rather than as they are. The writer
purposed "to give, in a few broad and powerful
strokes, the great outlines of creation : shadow-
ing forth its deep mysteries in a series of grand
and impressive representations on a scale of
magnificence which is without parallel. In the
tone of description suited to such a purpose,
minute specification is out of place. All is vast
and general. Let anything be added in the way
of minute distinction, or of explanation and
conciliation, and the whole style of conception !
is changed" (Conant). In truth the same ab-
sence of philosophic truth may be traced
throughout all the terms applied to this subject, '
and the objection is levelled rather against the
principles of language than anything else.
Examine the Latin caelum (koiKov), the " hollow
place " or cave scooped out of solid space ; our
own " heaven," ue. what is heaved up ; the Greek
obpavis, similarly significant of height (Pott.
Etym.Forsch. i. 123); or the German "Himmel,"
from heimeln, to cover — the "roof" which con-
stitutes the " heim " or abode of man : in each
there is a large amount of philosophical error.
Correctly speaking, of course, the atmosphere is
the true rakia by which the clouds are sup-
ported, and undefined space is the abode of the
celestial bodies. There certainly appears an
inconsistency in treating the rakia as the sup-
port both of the clouds and of the stars, for it
could not have escaped observation that the
clouds were below the stars: but perhaps this
may be referred to the same feeling which is
expressed in the coelum ruit of the Latins, the
downfall of the rakia in stormy weather. Al-
though the rakia and the shamayim (" heaven ")
are treated as synonymous in Gen. i. 8, yet it
would be more correct to recognise a distinction
between them, as implied in the expression
" firmament of the heavens " (Gen. i. 14), the
former being the upheaving power and the
latter the upheaved body— the former the line
of demarcation between heaven and earth, the
latter the strata or stories into which the
heaven was divided. Dr. Conant (£. D. Amer.
ed.) has pointed out that.it is well to distinguish
the merely ideal and poetical imagery in later
writings (Ps. civ. 3 ; 2 Sam. xxii. 8; Job xxvi.
11, xxxvii. 18) and in symbolic vision (Ezek. i.
22-26) from the purely descriptive, though
manifestly phenomenal, representation in the
Book Genesis. [\v. L. B.] [F ]
FIRST-BORN
1 FIRST-BORN ("1132; tp«toVo«oj ; prima.
<jenitus ; from "133, early, ripe, Gesen. p. 206),
applied equally both to animals and human
beings. That some rights of primogeniture
existed in very early times is plain, but it is not
so clear in what they consisted. They have been
classed as, a. authority over the rest of the
family; b. priesthood ; c. a double portion of the
inheritance. The birthright of Esau and of
Reuben, set aside by authority or forfeited by
misconduct, proves a genera) privilege as well as
quasi-sacredness of primogeniture (Gen. xxv. 23,
! 31, 34, xlix. 3; 1 Ch. v. 1 ; Heb. xii. 16), and
a precedence which obviously existed, and is
alluded to in various passages (as Ps. lxxxix. 27 ;
Job xviii. 13 ; Rom. viii. 29 ; Col. i. 15 ; Heb.
xii. 23) ; but the story of Esau's rejection tends
to show the supreme and sacred authority of
the parent irrevocable even by himself, rather
than inherent right existing in the eldest son,
which was evidently not inalienable (Gen. xxvii.
29, 33, 36; Grotius, Calmet, Patrick, Knobel;
Dillmann,* Delitzsch [1887] on Gen. xxv. and
xxvii.). ,
Under the Law, in memory of the Exodus, the
eldest son was regarded as devoted to God, and
was in every case to be redeemed by an offering
not exceeding five shekels, within one month
from birth. If he died before the expiration of
thirty days, the Jewish doctors held the father
excused, but liable to the payment if he out-
lived that time (Ex. xiii. 12-15, xxii. 29 ; Num.
viii. 17, xviii. 15, 16 ; Lev. xxvii. 6 ; Lightfoot,
Hot. Hebr. on Luke ii. 22 ; Philo, de Pr. Sacerd.
i. [ii. 233, Mangey]). This devotion of the first-
born was believed to indicate a priesthood be-
longing to the eldest sons of families, which
being set aside in the case of Reuben, was
transferred to the tribe of Levi. This priest-
hood is said to have lasted till the completion of
the Tabernacle (Jahn, Arch. Sibi. x. §§ 165, 387 ;
Selden, de Syn. c. 16 ; Mishn. Zebachim, xiv. 4,
' vol. v. 58 ; cp. Ex. xxiv. 5).
) The ceremony of redemption of the first-born
is described by Calmet from Leo of Modena
(Calm, on Num. xviii.). The eldest son received
a double portion of the father's inheritance
(Deut. xxi. 17), but not of the mother's (Mishn.
Beaoroth, viii. 9. Cp. M. Bloch, Das Mos.-Talm.
Erbrecht, § 16, 1890). If the father had married
two wives, of whom he preferred one to the
other, he was forbidden to give precedence to
the son of the one, if the child of the other were
the first-born (Deut. xxi. 15, 16). In the case
of levirate marriage, the son of the next brother
succeeded to his uncle's vacant inheritance (Deut.
xxv. 5, 6). Under the monarchy, the eldest son
usually, but not always, as appears in the case
of Solomon, succeeded his father in the kingdom
(1 K. i. 30, ii. 22).
The male first-born of animals (DflT "MB s
tiavotyov /rfrrpav ; quod apsrit vulvam) was also
devoted to God (Ex. xiii. 2, 12, 13, xxii. 29,
xxxiv. 19, 20; Philo, /. c, and Quis rerumdic.
haeres. 24 [i. 489, Mang.]). Unclean animals
were to be redeemed with the addition of one-
fifth of the value, or else put to death ; or, if not
redeemed, to be sold, and the price given to the
priests (Lev. xxvii. 13, 27, 28). The first-born
of an ass was to be redeemed with a lamb; or, if
not redeemed, put to death (Ex. xiu. 13, xxxiv.
Digitized by
Google
FIRST-BORN, DEATH OF THE
20;Xom. xviii. 15). Of cattle, goats, or Bheep,
the first-born from eight days to twelve months
M were not to be used, bat offered in sacrifice.
After the burning of the fat, the remainder
ns appropriated to the priests (Ex. xxii. 30;
Xnm. xviii. 17, 18 ; Deot. xv. 19, 20 ; Neh. x.
My If there were any blemish, the animal was
not to be sacrificed, bnt eaten at home (Dent. xr.
SI, 22, and xii. 5-7, xiv. 23). Various refine-
ments on the subject of blemishes are to be
found in Mishn. Becoroth (see Mai. i. 8. By
"firstlings," Dent. xiv. 23, compared with Num.
rriii. 17, are meant tithe animals : see Reland,
Atiq. iii. 10, p. 327; Jahn, Arch. Bibl.
§387). [H. W. P.]
FIB8T - BOBN, DEATH OF THE.
[Plagues, No. 10.]
FIRST-FRUITS. 1. D'*TI33 in pi. only,
or DH23. Gesen. p. 206 : usually rpwroytrrlt-
liata, icnpxd Tir TparroytynipArwv (Ex. xxiii.
19); primitiae, frugum initio, primitiva. 2.
n'lTNT, from E'tO, head or top in two places,
followed by D'"M33, Ex. xxiii. 12, xxxiv. 26
(Gesen. pp. 1249, 1252). 3. fTWIFI, Gesen.
p. 1276 : Afalptptn, iwapxh ", primitiae.
Besides the first-bora of man and of beast,
the Law required that offerings of first-fruits of
produce should be made publicly by the nation
at each of the three great yearly Festivals, and
also by individuals without limitation of time.
.No ordinance appears to have been more dis-
tinctly recognised than this, so that the use of
the term in the way of illustration carried with
it s full significance even in N. T. times (Prov.
iii. 9 ; Tob. i. 6 ; 1 Mace. iii. 49 ; Rom. viii. 23,
ii. 16 ; Jas. i. 18 ; Rev. xiv. 4>
1. The Law ordered in general, that the first
'it all ripe fruits and of liquors, or, as it is twice
"pressed, the first of first-fruits, should be
oifered in God's House. (Ex. xxii. 29, xxiii. 19,
iriiv. 26 ; Philo, de Monorchia, ii. 3 [ii. 224,
Mang.]).
2. On the morrow after the Passover sabbath,
ie. on the 16th of Nisan, a sheaf of new corn was
'■■' he brought to the priest, and waved before
the Altar, in acknowledgment of the gift of
faitfuloess (Lev. xxiii. 5, 6, 10, 12; ii. 12).
Josephus tells us that the sheaf was of barley,
ffld that when this ceremony had been per-
formed, the harvest work might be begun
(Joseph. Ant. iii. 10, § 5).
3. At the expiration of seven weeks from this
tot, U. at the Feast of Pentecost, an oblation
nt to be made of two loaves of leavened bread
toade from the new flour, which were to be
*>vcd in like manner with the Passover sheaf
(Ex. xxxhr. 22; Lev. xxiii. 15, 17; Num.
QTin.26).
t 11>e feast of ingathering, i.e. the Feast of
Ttherueles in the seventh month, was itself
« acknowledgment of the fruits of the harvest
fa. xxiii. 16, xxxiv. 22 ; Lev. xxiii. 39).
These four sorts of offerings were national.
***ides them, the two following were of an in-
"Jniml kind, bnt the last was made by custom
s also a national character.
FIRST-FRUITS
1071
5. A cake of the first dough that was baked
*" to be offered as a heave-offering (Num. xv.
6. The first-fruits of the land were to be
brought in a basket to the holy place of God's
choice, and there presented to the priest, who
was to set the basket down before the Altar.
The offerer was then, in words of which the
outline, if not the whole form was prescribed, to
recite the story of Jacob's descent into Egypt,
and the deliverance therefrom of his posterity ;
and to acknowledge the blessings with which
God had visited him (Deut. xxvi. 2-11).
The offerings, both public and private, resolve
themselves into two classes: a. produce in general,
in the Mishna Dn?33, Biccurim, first-fruits,
primithi fructus, wparraynnritnara, raw produce.
I>. nitM"W, Terumotk, offerings, primitiae, awap-
xai, prepared produce (Gesen. p. 1276 ; Augus-
tine, Quaest. in Hept. iv. 32, vol. iii. p. 732 ;
Spencer, de Leg. Hear. iii. 9, p. 713; Reland,
Antiq. iii. 7 ; Philo, de Br. Sacerd. i. [ii. 233,
Mang.] de Sacrific. Abel, et Cain, 21 [i. 177, 31.]).
a. Of the public offerings of first-fruits, the
Law defined no place from which the Passover
■ sheaf should be chosen, but the Jewish custom,
so far as it is represented by the Mishna, pre-
scribed that the wave-sheaf or sheaves should be
taken from the neighbourhood of Jerusalem
(Tentmoth, x. 2). Deputies from the Sanhedrin
went on the eve of the Festival, and tied the
growing stalks in bunches. In the evening of
the Festival day the sheaf was cut with all pos-
sible publicity, and carried to the Temple. It
was there threshed, and an omer of grain, after
being winnowed, was bruised and roasted ; and
after it had been mixed with oil and frankincense
laid upon it, the priest waved the offering in all
directions. A handful was thrown on the altar-
fire, and the rest belonged to the priests, to be
eaten by those who were free from ceremonial
defilement. After this the harvest might be
carried on. After the destruction of the Temple
all this was discontinued, on the principle, as it
seems, that the House of God was exclusively
the place for oblation (Lev. ii. 14, x. 14, xxiii.
13 ; Num. xviii. 11 ; Mishn. Tenon, v. 6, x. 4, 5 ;
Schehalim, viii. 8; Joseph. Ant. iii. 10, § 5;
Philo, de Pr. Sacerd. i. [ii. 233, Mang.] ; Reland,
Antiq. iii. 7, 3, iv. 3, 8).
The offering made at the Feast of the Pentecost
was a thanksgiving for the conclusion of wheat
harvest. It consisted of two loaves (according
to Josephus one loaf) of new flour baked with
leaven, which were waved by the priest as at
the Passover. The size of the loaves is fixed by
the Mishna at seven palms long and four wide,
with horns of four fingers' length. No private
offerings of first-fruits were allowed before this
public oblation of the two loaves (Lev. xxiii. 15,
20 ; Mishn. Tenon, x. 6, xi. 4 ; Joseph. Ant. iii.
10, § 6 ; Reland, Antiq. iv. 4, 5). The private
oblations of first-fruits may be classed in the
same manner as the public. The directions
of the Law respecting them have been stated
generally above. To these the Jews added or
from them deduced the following. Seven sorts
of produce were considered liable to oblation,
viz. wheat, barley, grapes, figs, pomegranates,
olives, and dates (Gesen. p. 219; Deut. viii.
8 ; Mishn. Bicurim, i. 3 ; Hasselquist, Travels,
p. 417), but the Law appears to have con-
templated produce of all sorts, and to have
been so understood by Nehemiah (Deut. xxvi.
Digitized by
Google
1072
FlKST-FKlUTis
2 ; Neh. x. 35, 37). The portions intended to
be offered were decided by inspection, and the
selected fruits were fastened to the stem by a
band of rashes (Bic. iii. 1). A proprietor might,
if he thought fit, devote the whole of his pro-
duce as first-fruits (ibid. ii. 4). But though the
Law laid down no rule as to quantity, the mini-
mum fixed by custom was j,th (Reland, Antiq.
iii. 8, 4). No offerings were to be made before
Pentecost, nor after the feast of the Dedication,
on the 25th of Cisleu (Ex. xxiii. 16 ; Lev. xxiii.
16, 17 ; Bic. i. 3, 6). The practice was for com-
panies of twenty-four persons to assemble in the
evening at a central station, and pass the night
in (he open air. In the morning they were
summoned by the leader of the Feast with the
words, " Let us arise and go up to Mount Zion,
the House of the Lord our God." On the road
to Jerusalem they recited portions of Psalms
cxxii. and cl. Each party was preceded by a
piper, a sacrificial bullock having the tips of his
horns gilt and crowned with olive. At their
approach to the city they were met by priests
appointed to inspect the offerings, and were
welcomed by companies of citizens proportioned
to the number of the pilgrims. On ascending
the Temple mount each person took his basket, [
containing the first-fruits and an offering of
turtle-doves, on his shoulders, and proceeded to
the court of the Temple, where they were met
by Levites singing Ps. xxx. 2. The doves were
sacrificed as a burnt-offering, and the first-fruits
presented to the priests with the words appointed !
in Deut. xxvi. The baskets of the rich were of I
gold or silver ; those of the poor of peeled willow.
The baskets of the latter kind were, as well as '
the offerings they contained, presented to the
priests, who waved the offerings at the S.W. i
corner of the altar : the more valuable baskets '
were returned to the owners (Bic. iii. 6, 8).
After passing the night at Jerusalem, the '
pilgrims returned on the following day to their i
homes (Deut. xvi. 7 ; Terum. ii. 4). It is men-
tioned that king Agrippa bore his part in this
highly picturesque national ceremony by carry-
ing his basket like the rest, to the Temple
(Bic. iii. 4). Among other by-laws were the
following : 1. He who ate his first-fruits else- :
where than in Jerusalem and without the proper
form was liable to punishment (Maccoth, iii. 3,
vol. iv. 284, Surenh.). 2. Women, slaves, deaf
and dumb persons, and some others were exempt
from the verbal oblation before the priest,
which was not generally used after the Feast of
Tabernacles (Bic. i. 5, 6).
6. The first-fruits prepared for use were not
required to be taken to Jerusalem. They con-
sisted of wine, wool, bread, oil, date-honey,
onions, cucumbers (Terum. ii. 5, 6; Num. xv.
19, 21 ; Deut. xviii. 4). They were to be made,
according to some, only by dwellers in Palestine ;
but according to others, by those also who
dwelt in Moab, in Ammonitis, and in Egypt
(Terum. i. 1). They were not to be taken from
the portion intended for tithes, nor from the
corners left for the poor (ibid. i. 5, iii. 7). The
proportion to be given is thus estimated in that
treatise : a liberal measure, Jj, or, according to
the school of Shammai, j, ; a moderate portion, |
±; a scanty portion, ^ ( >ee Exek. xlv. 13).
The measuring-basket was to be thrice estimated
during the season (i"6. iv. 3). He who ate or
FISH, FISHING
drank his offering by mistake was bound to add
j, and present it to the priest (Lev. v. 16 ; ixii.
14), who was forbidden to remit the penalty
(Terum. vi. 1, 5). The offerings were the per-
quisite of the priests, not only at Jerusalem, but
in the provinces, and were to be eaten or used
only by those who were clean from ceremonial
defilement (Num. xviii. 11 ; Deut. xviii. 4).
The corruption of the nation after the time
of Solomon gave rise to neglect in these as well
as in other ordinances of the Law, and restora-
tion of them was among the reforms brought
about by Hezekiah (2 Ch. xxxi. 5, 11). Nehe-
miah also, at the Return from Captivity, took
pains to re-organise the offerings of first-fruits
of both kinds, and to appoint places to receive
them (Neh. x. 35, 37 ; xii. 44> Perversion or
alienation of them is reprobated, as care in
observing is eulogised by the Prophets, and
specially mentioned in the sketch of the restora-
tion of the Temple and Temple-service made by
Ezekiel (Exek. xx. 40, xUv. 30, xlviii. 14; Mai.
iii. 8).
An offering of first-fruits is mentioned as an
acceptable one to the prophet Elisha (2 K. iv.
42). ' ;
Besides the offerings of first-fruits mentioned
above, the Law directed that the fruit of all
trees freshly planted should be regarded as uncir-
cumcised, or profane, and not to be tasted by
the owner for three years. The whole produce
of the fourth year was devoted to God, and did
not become free to the owner till the fifth year
(Lev. xix. 23-25). The trees found growing by
the Jews at the conquest were treated as exempt
from this rule (Mishn. Orlah, i. 2).
Offerings of first-fruits were sent to Jerusalem
by Jews living in foreign countries (Joseph.
Ant. xvi. 6, § 7).
Offerings of first-fruits were also customary
in heathen systems of worship (see, for in-
stances and authorities, Parker, Bibliotheca, v.
515 j Patrick, On Deut. xxvi. ; and a copious list
in Spencer, de Leg. Hebr. iii. 9, de Primitiarvn
Oriqine; also Leslie, On Tithes, Works, vol. ii.;
Wiuer, s. v. Erstlingc). [H. W. P.]
FISH, FISHING. Fishes, with the other
inhabitants of the waters, as sea-monsters,
whales, and great reptiles, as well as the fowl
of the air, are the products of the fifth day, or
creative epoch (Gen. i. 21). Their place in the
record of creation is in exact accord with the
results of geological investigation ; which shows
them to be the earliest vertebrate animals found
in the stratified rocks. The earliest types appear
in the Old Red Sandstone, the ganoid fishes
of the Dura Den deposits. From these strata
upwards fishes gradually increase, reaching their
fullest development in the Cretaceous or chalk
epoch, when the warm-blooded mammals or
quadrupeds were beginning to prevail.
The Jewish literature does not show that the
nation ever acquired any intimate knowledge
of this branch of natural history. The fisher-
men, whether of the sea or the lake, doubtless
had distinctive names for the various species
which they caught, but of these only one is
preserved in Josephus, and none in Scripture
or in the Rabbinical writings. They simply
classified them as great or small, clean or un-
clean. The latter is the only distinction between
Digitized by
Google
FISH, FISHING
tie kinds of fish in the law of Moses (Lev. xi. 9-
12). The unclean fish, forbidden as food, were
inch ss had no fins or scales. This would com-
prise all aquatic reptiles, the Siluridae or Sheat
fish, Terr common in the Nile and Jordan, the
SaHdae or Skate fish, and the Petromizidae or
lampreys. To these the Rabbis afterwards
idded the Muramidae or Eels, whose scales are
very minute and covered with a slimy secretion.
The Egyptians adopted a similar classification,
nd looked on all fishes without fins or scales as
unwholesome (Wilkinson, Anc. Egypt, ii. 191-2
[1878]). One of the laws of £1 Hakim pro-
hibits the sale or even the capture of such
(Lane, Mod. Egypt, i. 132). This distinction
is probably referred to in the terms catrpi (etui
*oa idonta, Schleusner, Lex. s. v. ; Trench,
Parables, p. 137) and itaXd (Matt. xiii. 48).
The second division is marked in Gen. i. 21 (as
compared with v. 28), where the great marine
animals (D'Shin D')'}Flil; Kflnj /»«7<^ a )>
gaerically described as "whales" in the A. V.
and " tea-monsters " in the R. V. (Gen. /. c. ;
Job vii. 12) [Whale], but including also other
animals, such as the crocodile [Leviathan]
sod perhaps some kinds of serpents, are dis-
tinguished from "every living creature that
owp«tt"(n^D v in ; A. V. and R. V. "moveth"),
a description applying to fish, along with other
reptiles, as having no legs. To the former class
we may assign the large fish referred to in Jon.
8. 1 (bh| fl; Kkros lUya, Matt. xii. 40),
which Winer (art. Fitche), after Bochart, iden-
tifies with a species of shark (Cam's carcharias) ;
md also that referred to in Tob. vi. 2 sq., iden-
tified by Bochart (Hierox. iii. p. 697 sq.) with
the Slums giants, but by Kitto (art. Fish) with
i species of crocodile (the seesar) found in the
lodes (see Speaker's Oman, in loco). The
Hebrews were struck with the remarkable
fecundity of fish, and have expressed this in
the term 1\ the root of which signifies increase
(cp. Gen. xlviii. 16), and in the secondary
sense of J»"ie>, lit. to creep, thence to multiply
(Gen. i. 20, Till. 17, ix. 7 ; Ex. i. 7), as well as
in the allusions in Ezek. xlvii. 10. Doubtless
they became familiar with this fact in Egypt,
where the abundance of fish in the Nile, and in
the lakes and canals (Strab. xvii p. 823 ; Diod.
i- 3$, 43, 52 ; Herod, ii. 93, 149), rendered it
<me of the staple commodities of food (Num.
«• 5 ; cp. Wilkinson, /. c). The destruction of
the fish was on this account a most serious
visitation to the Egyptians (Ex. vii. 21 ; Is. xix.
8). Occasionally it is the result of natural
owes: thus St. John (Travels tn Valley of the
*«k, ii 246) describes a vast destruction of fish
from cold, and Wellsted (Traveh tn Arabia, i.
310) states that in Oman the fish are visited
with an epidemic about every five years, which
destroys immense quantities of them.
The worship of fishes was expressly forbidden
hj the law of Moses : " The likeness of any fish
that is in the waters beneath the earth " (Deut.
""■18). This strange form of Idolatry was
widely spread and still exists in the East. It
°<t, perhaps, from the fecundity of fishes,
which caused them to be taken as the emblems
of abnndance and increase. The blessing of
BIBLE MCT. — VOL. L
FISH, FISHING
1073
Jacob upon the sons of Joseph was, " Let them
grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth,"
A. V. marg. as /Met do increase (Gen. xlviii.
16). Nations the widest apart, as the Tartars and
the ancient Britons, had their fish-gods, the one
the Nataghi, the other the Brithyll of the Kelts
and Bclgae. In Egypt many species of fishes
were objects of worship (Herod, ii. 72). Hero-
dotus, in the passage referred to, mentions only
two kinds as venerated, but we find from other
authors that different fishes were worshipped in
different places (Plut. de Is. § 18 ; Wilkinson,
/. c}. Cuvier noticed no less than ten distinct
species depicted on the walls of the sepulchral
caves of Thebes (see also Rawlinson, Herod.
ii. 120). The mummies of several kinds of
fishes are found in great numbers stored up
in the Egyptian temples. Fish-worship extended
also to Assyria. The fish-god, a male form of the
Phoenician Dagon, is represented on one of the
sculptures of Khorsabad, though Rawlinson con-
siders them distinct (Herod, i. 593). The male-
god is also described by Berosus(Layard, Nineveh,
ii. p. 466). Ichthyolatry spread also to India
(Banr, Mythologie, il. 51) ; but among the Phi-
listines the fish-god or goddess was a national
deity, and had temples in all their cities, notably
at Gaza and Ashdod. In Scripture records
Dagon was thought to have been represented
with the head, arms, and body of a man, and
the tail of a fish (cp. 1 Sam. v. 4 ; A. V.) ; " only
the stump (fishy part, marg.) of Dagon was left
to him f but (cp. R. V.) the belief that his
body terminated in the tail of a fish arose from
a mistaken etymology of the name [Dagon].
This worship of Dagon remained to the time of
the Hasmonaeaus, who destroyed the temple at
Ashdod. At a later period the idol was of female
form, as we find from Lucian (De Ded Syr.)
and Diodorus Siculus, who describes the image
at Ashkalon as having the face of a woman
and the body of a fish. Sidon was also the fish-
goddess of Phoenicia (Cic de Nat. Dear. iii.).
For an exhaustive summary of historical refer-
ences, see Selden, de DU Syris, de Dagone. The
superstitious veneration of certain fishes still
remains even among the Moslems in Northern
Syria and Mesopotamia. A few miles north of
the Syrian Tripoli is a monastery of dervishes,
with a spring and pool swarming with fish,
which are held sacred, as being inhabited by the
souls of the faithful departed, and to which
offerings are made. So at Orfa, the ancient
Edessa, the fishes of the river are held sacred by
the Moslems (see Robertson-Smith, The Religion
of the Semites, i. 157 sq.).
Fish was a principal article of diet in Egypt,
although forbidden to the priests. "We re-
member the fish which we did eat in Egypt freely,"
was the complaint of the Israelites when they
murmured in the wilderness. Not only was
there, and still is, prodigious abundance of fish
in the Nile, and especially in the Delta, but the
variety of species is very great. Herodotus,
Josephus, and Strabo give us the names of
several kinds, most of which are difficult of
identification. Herodotus names the \ewiStrr4s,
probably Cyprinus lepidotus, allied to the carp,
o£6pr v YX os (Mormyrus oxyrhynchus), and the
eel, as sacred fish (ii. 72, and Plut. de Is. vii. 18,
22). Strabo mentions these, and also xopixwos
(Clarias macrooanthus); a-cWpevi, a species of
3 Z
Digitized by
Google
1074
FISH, FISHING
mullet; <piypes, a bream, and many others which
cannot be satisfactorily identified, as inhabiting
the Nile (Strabo, Oeogr. xvii. p. 1164; ed.
Falconer, Oxford, 1807).* The fresh-water fishes
of Egypt are as varied as they are numerous,
belonging chiefly to the families of the Sparidae,
Labridae, Chromidae, and Cyprinidae, the bream,
perch, and carp. It is very remarkable that
while the Greek language possesses over 400
names for fishes, not more than one or two have
been preserved in Hebrew.
The fishes of the Jordan, its lakes and affluents,
bear a strong affinity to many of the species of
the Nile, though with far less admixture of
species found in other rivers of the Eastern
Mediterranean. In fact, the ichthyology of the
Jordan system is the most isolated and unique,
as regards geographical distribution, in the
world. Thirty-six species have been ascertained,
and of these only one (Blennius lupulus) belongs
to the ordinary Mediterranean fauna. Two others,
Chromis niloticus and Clarias macrocanthus, are
Nilotic. Seven other species occur also in the
rivers of South-West Asia, as the Tigris and
Euphrates. Ten more are found in other parts
of Syria, chiefly in the Damascus lakes; and
the remaining sixteen species of the families
Chromidae, Cyprinodontidae, and Cyprinidae
are peculiar to the Jordan. This analysis points
to a very close affinity of the Jordan with
the rivers and lakes of tropical Africa. The
affinity is not only of families, but of genera,
for Chromis and Hemichromis are peculiarly
Ethiopian forms, while the other species are
identical with, or very closely allied to, the
fishes from other fresh waters of Syria.
But the African forms are a very large pro-
portion of the whole ; and considering the
difficulty of transportation in the case of
fresh-water fishes, these peculiarities are of
great significance. These fishes probably
date from the earliest time after the eleva-
tion of the country from the Eocene ocean.
They form a group far more distinct and
divergent from that of the surrounding
region than can be found in any other class
of existing life. During the epochs subse-
quent to the Eocene, owing to the unbroken
isolation of the basin, there have been no
opportunities for the introduction of new
forms, nor for the further dispersion of the old
ones. The affinity is very close to the forms
of the rivers and fresh-water lakes of East
Africa, even as far south as the Zambesi ; but
while the genera are the same, the species are
rather representative than identical. The solu-
tion appears to be, that during the Meiocene
and Pleiocene periods, the Jordan basin formed
the northernmost of a vast system of fresh-
water lakes, extending from north to south ; of
which, in the earlier part of the epochs, perhaps
the Red Sea, and certainly the Nile basin, the
Nyanza, the Nyassa, and Tanganyika lakes, and
the feeders of the Zambesi, were members.
During that warm period, a fluviatile ichthyo-
logies! fauna was developed suitable to its then
conditions, consisting of representative and,
perhaps, identical species throughout the area.
The advent of the Glacial period was, like its
* For a fuller account of the Nile fishes, see Atbe-
naeus, vU. M sq.
FISH, FISHING
close, gradual. Many species must have perished
under the changed conditions. The hardiest
survived ; and some, perhaps, have been modified
to meet those new conditions. Under this strict
isolation it could hardly be otherwise ; and
however severe the climate may have been — that
of the Lebanon, with its glaciers, corresponding
with the present temperature of the Alps at
a similar elevation (regard being had to the
difference of latitude), the fissure of the Jordan
being, as we certainly know, as much depressed
below the level of the ocean as it is at present, ie.
1300 feet at the Dead Sea — there must have been
an exceptionally warm temperature in its waters,
in which the existing species could survive.
The most important species in the Lake of
Galilee are two species of blenny, Blenniis
lupulus and B. varus ; Chromis niloticus, known
as Botti in Egypt, and Moucht by the fishermen
of Tiberias ; Chromis tiberiadis, the Mowhtlebet
of the fishermen, found in amazing shoals;
C. Andreae, C. Simonis, C. Flavii-Josephi, the
Addadi of the fishermen; C. microstomas, the
Moucht hart of the fishermen, Hemichromis
sacra, all peculiar to the lake ; Clarias macro-
canthus, the silurus, Kopixiros of Josephus,
harbour of the fishermen; Barbus cants and
An Egyptian Landlnt^net. (WUUnfao.)
B. longiceps, the Escheri of the fishermen,
both peculiar, and swarming in the Jordan,
as well as in the lake. The fishes of the
genera Chromis and Hemichromis have an extra-
ordinary manner of propagation. The "P**"
is deposited in a little cavity, and the male fish
takes the ova into his mouth one by one, ana
hatches them there ; and for several weeks aftir,
until they are nearly four inches long, the
young continue to live in his mouth and g""'
which are distended so that his jaws cannot
meet. Dr. Livingstone noticed a similar habit
in a fish of the Lake Tanganyika. The density
of the shoals of fish in the Lake of Galilee can
scarcely be conceived by those who have n
witnessed them. They sometimes cover an acre
or more on the surface in one dense mass,
their
u* iuuiv uu vise ouiibm. ail vus mvm«- • i_,
dorsal fins standing out of the water. JoseP jjJ e
notices this abundance, and mentions also
Coracinus, which, being the same as the aft
fish of the Nile, suggested the belief that the ia«
was connected with the Nile {Bell. Jud. in- "£>
8). There was also a tradition that one of w
ten laws of Joshua enacted that the «*'■/.
the lake should be free to all comers (UgMtw*
Talm. Ex. Matt. iv. 18).
Digitized by
Google
FISH, FISHING
Many of the fish are carried by the rapid
stream of the Jordan in shoals into the Dead Sea,
■where they are stupified and soon perish, and
may be seen floating dead on the surface. No
FISH. FISHING
1075
FidMfBMn of Ul* flea of Galilee casting his not.
more vivid illustration ot the regeneration of the
land by the waters of life could be presented than
the vision of Ezekiel, showing these waters of
death peopled by living things : " The fishers
shall stand upon it from Engedi even unto En-
eglaim: they shall be a place to spread forth
nets ; their fish shall be according to their kinds,
as the fish of the great sea, exceeding many "
(ilrii. 10).
While the Jews diligently prosecuted fishing
in the Sea of Galilee (Joseph. Bell.Jud. iii. 10, § 9)
they do not appear to have themselves worked
the fisheries on their coast ; but they possessed
few localities adapted for boat harbours. Joppa
was indeed their only port where any consider-
able fleet of fishing-boats could find shelter;
for the northern ports were held by the Phoeni-
cians, who, from Tyre and Sidon, extensively
practised this industry. The Hebrew name of
Sidon signifies " fishing-place ; " and fishing is
the only remaining industry of the squalid village
which occupies the site of Tyre. "Tyro shall
be a place for the spreading of nets in the
midst of the sea " (Ezek. xxvi. 5). Jerusalem
was supplied with fish by Phoenician fishermen,
"men of Tyre" (Neh. xiii. 16) who came up
from Joppa ; probably with dried fish, such as is
still largely consumed. The trade in fish must
have been considerable, as one of the gates of
Jerusalem was the fish-gate (2 Ch. xxxiii. 14), im-
plying a fish-market, which would be contiguous
to it, as each commodity to the present day has
its distinct bazaar. Salt-fish is often spoken of
m the Talmud, where it is called fl vD (Lightfoot
on Matt. xiv. 17). There is no clear evidence
that the Jews preserved fish alive in ponds or
tanks as the Egyptians did. In the passages
which are supposed to suggest this (Cant.
vii, 4, "fish-pools in Heshbon "), "fish" is
an interpolation, omitted in R. V. In Is. xix.
10 " all that make sluices and ponds for fish "
is rendered in R. V. " all they that work for
hire (marg. that make dams) shall be grieved
in soul " ; the word " fish " not being in the
Hebrew.
Numerous allusions to the art of fishing occur
in the Bible : in the 0. T. these allusions are of
a metaphorical character, de-
scriptive either of the conver-
sion (Jer. xvi. 16 ; Ezek. xlvii.
10) or of the destruction (Ezek.
xxix. 3 sq. ; Eccles. ix. 12 ;
Amos iv. 2 ; Hab. i. 14) of the
enemies of God. In the N. T.
the allusions are of a historical
character for the most part,
though the metaphorical appli-
cation is still maintained in
Matt. xiii. 47 sq.
The Sea of Galilee was fished
principally by means of the
drag- or draw-net — TTlbSD,
michmoreth, aayftrn, sagena.
whence " seine," as we still
call it (Is. xix. 8 ; Hab. i. 15 ;
Matt. xiii. 47), — a large net,
leaded and buoyed, which is
carried out by a boat, cast, and
then drawn in in a circle, so as
to "enclose a great multitude
of fishes." It is this kind of
net to which our Lord compares the kingdom
of Heaven (Matt. xiii. 47-50). The number
of boats on the lake in our Lord's time was
very large (Joseph. Bell. Jud. iii. 10, § 9), and
the few boats which still exist there employ
Fishing. (Kottronflk.)
the draw-net. The fishing is carried on at
night, the best time for taking fish, as we
know in our own seas, and as we read in Luke
v. 5. Another net very commonly used wns
3 7. 2
Digitized by
Google
1076
FISH GATE
the casting-net — D"IT], cherem (H»b. i. 15; Ezek.
xxvi. 5, 14, xlvii. 10), &fupl&\i)<rrpoir (Matt. ir.
18; Mark i. 16), rete, — elsewhere expressed by
the generic term tim-vor. This was used either
by a naked fisherman wading from the shore, and
by a rapid motion throwing his net and then
drawing it in in a circle, or thrown in the same
manner from a boat. It was this casting-net
that Peter and Andrew were using when called
to be fishers of men (Matt. ir. 18), and it was
also the same kind, as we see from the details
of the narrative, which enclosed the second
miraculous draught after the Resurrection (John
xxi. 6-8). The casting-net is still in common
use round the lake. Another mode of fishing
which was and still is practised on the rivers
FITCHES
was by weirs "or stake-nets formed of a sort of
cane wattle. According to the Rabbis, one of the
traditional laws of Joshua forbade the use of stake-
nets in the Lake of Galilee, where the fishing was
free to all, lest the boats should be damaged by
them (Lightfoot, Talm. Ex. Matt. iv. 16).
Other modes of taking fish in present use in
Palestine, and alluded to in Scripture, are by
the hook and line. Angling is often depicted on
the Assyrian and Egyptian monuments. It was
a favourite amusement, and was also followed
as a livelihood (Wilkinson, ii. 186 [1878]).
It is referred to by Isaiah (xix. 8), "They
that cast angle (Heb. fl^l"!) into the Nile"
(R. V.) ; Hab. i 15, and Job xli. 1. Two
other words are used by Amos: f13Y, tzmnah,
Fishing with Ground Bait. (Wilkinson.) '
and "I'D, sir, Le. « thorn " (ch. iv. 2) ; in Matt,
xrii. 27, we read " cast an hook " (iyicurrpor).
Hooks were used with lines, with or without a
rod, and especially with night-kmes. Fly-fishing
was unknown, as none of the fishes of the Mile
or Palestine will rise like the Salmonidae to a fly.
In Job xli. 2, "Canst thou put an hook into his
nose? or bore his jaw through with a thorn?"
the reference is not to fishing, but to the keeping
•live, after the Egyptian fashion, in tanks, fishes
not required for immediate use, by a hook through
their gills (rtn, cAoocA; « thorn," A.V. ; « hook,"
R. V.). This was attached to a stake by a rope
of rushes (jbJK, agmOn, " hook ; " A. V. " rope ; "
R. V. marg., rope of rushes).
Another method of fishing was with the fish-
spear, still used in the Lebanon and North Syria.
This is alluded to by Job (xli. 7 ; Hebr. xl. 31),
"Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons?
or his head with fish-spears ? "
The fish is a favourite symbol in the Christian
Church, frequent in the catacombs of Rome, and
familiar especially on early Christian sepulchral
monuments in Northern Syria and other parts
of the East, — not, as has beeu absurdly suggested,
from an old superstition, or in honour of the fisher-
men of Galilee, but from the circumstance that
the initial letters of the words 'Iijo-oCj Xpicrro'j,
Biov vtos, SorHjp, form the word 'lx8ts (see Diet.
©/ Christ. Antiq. s. n. " Fish "). [H. B. T.]
FISH GATE (D'Mn 1B0), Neh. iii. 3, xii.
39 ; Zeph. i. 10. A gate in the north wall of
Jerusalem ; it may have led to the fish market,
or the Tyrian merchants who brought fish to
the city (Neh. xiii 16) may have sold them in
front of it. [Jerusalem.] [W.]
FISH-POOLS. Cant. vii. 4. More cor-
rectly Pools, as in R. V. [Heshbon.]
FITCHES (ue. Vetches). Two Hebrew
words are so rendered in A. V. : (1) "9??'
husemeth (Ezek. iv. 9) ; elsewhere A. V. "rye,"
NtteOa
R.V. "spelt;" see Rye.
psAdVOiop ; gith; R. V,
(2) rtt$ kf**:
marg. Wae* <*"***
Digitized by
Google
FLAG
(Is. xxriii. 25, 27), denote* without doubt the
Xigdla saliva, L., an herbaceous annual plant
belonging to the natural order Banunculaceae
and sub-order Helleboreae, which grows in the
S. of Europe and in the N. of Africa. It is
cultivated in Palestine for the sake of its
seeds, which are to this day used in Eastern
countries as a medicine and a condiment. Thejr
an black, whence the name, and hot to the
taste, and are sprinkled thickly over the flat
cakes of the country before they are baked, in
the same way that caraway seeds are used among
ourselves. The seeds may be seen on all the
little provision stalls in the markets. The leaves
of the plant are laciniated, like those of the ranun-
culus, the flower yellow (in other species red or
purple), and the seed-vessel is a cup divided into
partitions or cells with a fringe of horns. This
plant is mentioned only in Is. xxviii. 25, 27,
where especial reference is made to the mode
of threshing it; not with "a threshing in-
strument " fl'nn), but "with a staff" (n^O),
because the heavy-armed cylinders of the former
implement would have crushed the seeds of the
Sigeila. The ii(A.<tV6W of Dioscorides (iii. 83,
«*. Sprengel) ia unquestionably the NigeUa ; both
these terms having reference to its black seeds,
which, according to the above-named author and
Pliny (JIT. 27. xix. 8), were sometimes mixed with
bread. The word gith is of uncertain origin. It
is used by Pliny (N. H. xx. 17), who says,
" flttt ex Graecis alii melanthion, alii melasper-
mon rocaot." Plautus also (Bud. v. 2, 39) has
the same word git : " Os calet tibi 1 num git
Mode factas." Cp. Celsius (Hierob. ii. 71).
Besides the If. sotted, there are seven other
species found wild in Palestine ; N. orvensis, L.,
aud if. damasceaa, L., being common field
weeds; but the seeds of all the wild species
are less aromatic than those the cultivated
plant. [H. B. T.]
FLAG. See Bulbubh.
FLAGON, a word employed in the A. V. to
reader two distinct Hebrew terms : 1. AshUkah,
tyt* (2 Sam. Ti. 19; 1 Ch. xvi. 3; Cant,
ii. 5; Bos. iii. 1). The real meaning of this
word, according to the conclusions of Gesenins
(Tka. p. 166), is a cake of pressed raisins. He
derives it from a root signifying to compress,
and this is confirmed by the renderings of the
IXX. (Xayayov, iftoplrr), srifisiara) and of the
Vulgate, and also by the indications of the Tar-
pon Pseudojon. and the Mishna (Nedarim, 6,
i 10) In the passage in Hosea there is probably
> reference to a practice of offering such cakes
before the false deities (R. V. renders "a cake,"
or "cakes of raisins "). The rendering of the A. V.
* perhaps to be traced to Luther, who in the
fat two of the above passages has tin NSssel
tfan, and in the last Kanrw Winn; but
primarily to the interpretations of modern Jews
{e.g. Gemara, Baba Bathra, and Targum on
Chronicles), grounded on a false etymology (see
Mkhselis, quoted by Gesenins, and the observa-
tions of the latter, as above). It will be
observed that in the first two passages the
*ords "of wine" are interpolated, and that in
»be last « of wine " should be " of grapes."
2. Sebet, ^33 (Is. xxii. 24 only). Nebel is
MBunonly used for a bottle or vessel, originally
FLAX
1077
probably a skin, but in later times a piece of
pottery (Is. xxx. 14). But it also frequently
occurs with the force of a musical instrument
(A. V. generally " psaltery," but sometimes
"viol"), a meaning which is adopted by the
Targum, the Arabic and Vulgate Versions,
Luther, and given in the margin of the A. V.
The text, however, follows the rendering of
the LXX., and with this agrees Gesenius's
rendering, " Beckett una" Flaschen, von allerhand
Art." ' [G.] [W.j
FLAX. Two Hebrew words are used for
this plant in 0. T., or rather the same word
slightly modified — flFIE'tJ and D^g. About
the former there is no question. It occurs only
in three places (Ex. ix. 31 ; Is. xlii. 3, xliii. 17).
As regards the latter, there is probably only one
passage wh'ere it stands for the plant in its
undressed state (Josh. ii. 6). Eliminating all
the places where the words are used for the
article manufactured in the thread, the piece, or
the made-up garment [Linen; Cotton], we
reduce them to two: Ex. ix. 31, certain, and
Josh. ii. 6, disputed.
In the former the flax of the Egyptians is
recorded to have been damaged by the plague of
hail. The word 7lDJ is retained by Onkelos;
but is rendered in LXX. mtpiurrifoy, and in
Vulg. folliculos germinabat. The A. V. seems
to hare followed the LXX. (boiled = oTr«p/ux-
rl(oy); and so Kosenm., "globulus seu nodus
lini maturescentis " (Schol. ad fee.). Gesen.
makes it the calyx, or corolla ; he refers to the
Mishna, where it is used for the calyx of the
hyssop, and describes this explanation as one of
long standing among the more learned Rabbins
(Thes. p. 261).
For the flax of ancient Egypt, see Herodot.
ii. 37, 105 ; Cels. ii. p. 285 sq. ; Heeren, liken,
ii. 2, p. 368 sq. For that of modern Egypt, see
Hasselqnist, Journey, p. 500; Olivier, Voyage,
iii. p. 297 ; Girard's Observation) in Descript. de
r&jypte, t. xvii. {fiat moderne), p. 98; Paul
Lucas, Voyages, pt. ii. p. 47.
From Bitter's Erditmde, ii. p. 916 (cp. his
Vorhalle, &c, pp. 45-48), it seems probable that
the cultivation of flax for the purpose of the
manufacture of linen was by no means confined
to Egypt; but that, originating in India, it
spread over the whole continent of Asia at a
very early period of antiquity. That it was
grown in Palestine even before the conquest of
that country by the Israelites appears from
Josh. ii. 6, the second of the two passages
mentioned above. There is, however, some
difference of opinion about the meaning of the
words pifilj 'fltPB; KwoKaXipLy ; Vulg. stipulae
lini; and so A.V. "stalks of flax;" Joseph,
speaks of \lrov iyxaKlSas, armfuls or bundles of
flax; but Arab. Vers, "stalks of cotton." Ge-
aenius, however, and Rosenmiiller are in favour
of the rendering "stalks of flax." If this be
correct, the place involves an allusion to the
custom of drying the flax-stalks by exposing
them to the heat of the sun upon the flat roofs
of houses; and so expressly in Josephus (Ant.
r. i. § 2), \lrov yap ayxaKitas twi rov riyoot
tyvxe. In later times this drying was done in
ovens (Rosenm. Alterthumsk.). There is a
decided reference to the raw material in the
Digitized by
Google
1078
FLEA
LXX. rendering of Lev. xiii. 47, 2/tarfy orwr-
Trulvtf, and Judg. it. 14, arvniov. cp. Is.
i. 31.
The various processes employed in preparing
the flax for manufacture into cloth are indicated
— 1. The drying process (see above). 2. The
peeling of the stalks, and separation of the
fibres (the name being derived by Gesen. from
VVB, " to tear apart," " to stretch out." But
the term is probably of foreign origin). 3. The
hackling (Is. xix. 9 ; LXX. \lyor to oxurrAv :
vid. Gesen. Lex. s. v. p , "lE> ; and for the combs
used in the process, cp. Wilkinson, Anc. Egypt.
ii. 90 [1878]). The flax, however, was not
always dressed before weaving (see Ecclus. xl.
4, where wfi6Kwov is mentioned as a species of
clothing worn by the poor). That the use of
the coarser fibres was known to the Hebrews,
may be inferred from the mention of tow
(T\"p3) in Judg. xvi. 9, Is. i. 31. That flax
was anciently one of the most important crops
in Palestine appears from Hos. ii. 5, 9; and
that it continued to be grown, and manu-
factured into linen in N. Palestine down to
the Middle Ages, we have the testimony of
numerous Talmudists and Rabbins. It is still
cultivated there, but not so extensively as the
cotton plant. [Cotton j Liken.] (T. E. B.]
FLEA (B*B")B, par'osh; d-oAAor; pulex) is
only twice mentioned in Scripture (1 Sam.
xxiv. 14, xxvi. 20), where David addressing Saul
compares himself to it, as the most insignificant
and contemptible of living things. The flea,
Pulex irritant, L., of the insect order Aphani-
ptera, though world-wide in its distribution, is
nowhere more abundant than in the East. It
propagates there in countless myriads among
the dust of caves, especially if used occasionally
by cattle, and among the stubble and refuse of
old camps. Woe betide the traveller who
incautiously pitches on the site of an old
Bedouin encampment I The villagers in the
wattled huts of Northern Syria are frequently
driven away by the swarms of fleas, and are
compelled to desert their homes for a year
or two. [H. B.T.]
FLESH. [Food.]
FLINT (E"D?n. The corresponding Assyr.
llmOu may betoken the diamond. See MV.").
The Hebrew quadrilitcral is rendered flint in
Deut. viii. 15, xxxii. 13 ; Pa. cxiv. 8 ; and Is. 1. 7.
In Job xxviii. 9 the same word is rendered rock
in the text, and flint in the margin (R. V. text,
"flinty rock "). In the first three passages the
reference is to God's bringing water and oil out
of the naturally barren rocks of the Wilderness
for the sake of His people. In Isaiah the word
is used metaphorically to signify the firmness
of the Prophet in resistance to his persecutors.
In Ezek. iii. 9 the English word " flint " occurs
in the same sense, bnt there it represents the
Hebrew Tzor. So also in Is. v. 28 we have like
flint applied to the hoofs of horses. In 1 Mace,
x. 73, *<fxAa{ is translated flint, and in Wisd. xi.
4 the expression <*« wiroat axporo/uv is adopted
from Deut. viii. 15 (LXX.). [W. D.j
FLOOD. [Noah.]
FLY, FLIES
FLOOR. [Pavement.
FLOUR [Bread.]
FLOWER. [Palestine, Botany of.]
FLOWERS, only in the phrase "her
flowers," A. V. ; " her impurity," R. V. (afHJ ;
4 «Ka»«u><rfa airijt, «V if lupiS/xp afrnjj;
tempus sanguinis menstrualis). Lev. xv. 24, 33.
" Stains " of the menstruation is intended ; the
earliest source of the expression being probably
Plato, Sep. 429 D, where to &y$os means " the
dye," there of purple (oAovpyoV); see also
557 C, traam twBtaiv Trt-wotKiXfiirov. [ISSUE OP
Blood.] [h. h.]
FLUTE, THE (Aramaic MashrauqUho
[KJIVntW], Dan. iii. 5, 7, 10, 15), is one of
the oldest musical instruments known. It is,
no doubt, identical with the Hebrew Chalil
O'hn, 1 Sam. x. 5); but although old, and
having naturally undergone much development
and many changes of construction, it has yet
preserved its two chief characteristics. Its
piccolo is capable of producing very sharp notes
indeed, — and hence its name Mashrauqitho : cp.
Is. v. 26 ; Zech. x. 8. On the other hand, it has
the power of imitating the feeble whisper of the
dying, and the mysterious death-rattle. It is
for these reasons that the ancient Hebrews em-
ployed this instrument on the most opposite
occasions — at burials (Mishna Kethuboth, iv. 4),
at weddings (Mishna Bobo MeUfo, vi. 1), and
at festivals, both private (Is. xxx. 29) and public
(1 Kings i. 40), profane (Is. v. 12) and religious
(Mishna SuJtkah, v. 1). [S. M. S.-S.J
FLUX, BLOODY (Smrtrrtpk, Acts xxviii.
8), the same as our dysentery, which in the
East is, though sometimes sporadic, generally
epidemic and infectious, and then assumes its
worst form. It is always attended with fever.
[Fever.] A sharp gnawing and burning sensa-
tion seizes the bowels, which give off in purging
much slimy matter and purulent discharge.
When blood flows, it is said to be less dangerous
than without it (Schmidt, Bibl. Medic c xiv.
pp. 503-507). King Jehoram's disease was
probably a chronic dysentery and the " bowels
falling out," perhaps the prolapsus ani, known
sometimes to ensue (2 Ch. xxi. 15, 19); but
possibly it was the actual discharge of portions
of the diseased organs (see Biblisch-Talmudischc
Median, by R. J. Wunderbar, iii. B, c). [H. H.]
FLY, FLIES. The two following Hebrew
terms denote flies of some kind.
1. ^e"Au6 (3-12T ; /u/ta; musca) occurs only in
Eccles. x. 1, " Dead tioubim cause the ointment
of the apothecary to send forth a stinking
savour," and in Is. vii. 18, where it is said,
"The Lord shall hiss for the zObub that is in the
uttermost part of the rivers of Egypt." The
Hebrew name, it is probable, is a generic one
for any insect, but the etymology is a matter
of doubt (see Gesenius, Thes. p. 401 ; MV.").
In the first-quoted passage allusion is made
to flies, chiefly of the family ilusddae, getting
into vessels of ointment or other substances;
even in this country we know what an in-
tolerable nuisance the house-flies are in a hot
Digitized by
Google
FLY, FLIES
nmmer when they abound, crawling every-
where and into everything ; but in the East the
nuisance is tenfold greater, where in a few
minutes they will pollute a dish of food. The
zAkd from the rivers of Egypt has by some
writers, as by Oedmann ( Vcrmisch. Samm.
vi. 79), been identified with the ximb of which
Bruce (Trav. v. 190) gives a description, and
which is evidently some species of Tabanus.
Sir G. Wilkinson has given some account
{Trtmsac. of the Entomol. Soc ii. p. 183) of a
gad-fly (Oesfrus) under the name of Dthebab,
a term almost identical with ztbub. Though
zibvb is probably a generic name tor any flies, in
this passage of Isaiah it may be used to denote
some very troublesome and injurious fly, (cut'
^»xi»- "The Dthebab is a long grey fly,
which comes out about the rise of the Nile, and
is like the Cleg of the north of England; it
abounds in calm hot weather, and is often met
with in June and July, both in the desert and
on the Nile." This insect is very injurious to
camels and horses, and causes their death, if the
sores which it generates are neglected ; it attacks
both man and beast. We have found it ex-
tremely tormenting to our herses and mules in
the hotter parts of Palestine.
So grievous a pest was the z&mb in the plains
of Philistia, that the Phoenicians invoked against
it the aid of their God, under the name of
BAAL-ZEBtm, "the Lord of the fly." Though
such a title may seem a term of derision, and
has been so interpreted, as applied in contempt
by the Israelites (Selden, De Due Syria, p. 375),
yet there seems no reason to doubt that this
was the name given to their god by his
worshippers ; and the torments caused by flies
in hot climates amply account for the designa-
tion. Similarly the Greeks gave the epithet
ori/unos to Zeus (Pausan. v. 14, § 2; Clem.
Alex. Protrept. ii. 38). Pliny speaks of a Fly-
god, Myiodes (xxix. 6, 34). The Jews in
derision changed the name Baal-zebub to Baal-
zebul, " Lord of the dunghill," and applied it
m the time of onr Lord to the prince of the
devils (Matt. xii. 24, Ice.).
2. 'Arfb (311?; mWpvia; omne genus mus-
oanan, muscoe divert* generis, rmisca gravissima ;
" swarms of flies," " divers sorts of flies," A. V.
and R. V.), the name of the insect, or insects, which
God sent to punish Pharaoh : see Ex. viii. 21-31 ;
Ps. lirviii. 45, cv. 31. The question as to what
particular insect is denoted by 'drib, or whether
any one species is to be understood by it, has
long been a matter of dispute. The Scriptural
details are as follows:— The '6r6b filled the
houses of the Egyptians, covered the ground,
lighted on the people, and the land was laid
watte on their account. The LXX. explain
*oro6 by Kw6fivia, ije. "dog-fly:" it is not
very clear what insect is meant by this
Greek term, which is frequent in Homer, who
often uses it as an abusive epithet. It is not
improbable that one of the Hippoboseidae or
horse-flies, perhaps H. Equina, Linn., is the
Knifima of Aelian (JF. A. iv. 51), though Homer
may have used the compound term to denote
extreme impudence, implied by the shamelessness
ef the dog and the teasing impertinence of the
common fly (Musca). As the 'drib is said to
have filled the houses of the Egyptians, it seems
FOOD
1079
not improbable that common flies {Muscidae)
are more especially intended, and that the
compound Kw6/ivia denotes the grievous nature
of the plague, though we see no reason to
restrict the 'drSb to any one family. It may
include, besides the horse-fly, those blood-sucking
tormentors the gnats or mosquitoes (Oulicidac),
and the gad-flies (Oestrus). The common
horse-fly is, however, quite tormenting enough
to have been of itself the Egyptian plague. It
settles on the human body like the mosquito,
sucks blood, and produces festering sores. " Of
insects," says Sonnini (Trav. iii. p. 199), "the
most troublesome in Egypt are flies ; both man
and beast are cruelly tormented with them.
No idea can be formed of their obstinate rapacity.
It is in vain to drive them away, they return
again in the self-same moment, and their perse-
verance wearies out the most patient spirit."
It is the great instrument of spreading the well-
known purulent ophthalmia, which is conveyed
from one individual to another by these dreadful
pests, which alight on the diseased eye, and then
with their feet moist from the discharge inocu-
late the next healthy person on whom they
settle. See for cases of Myosis produced by
Dipterous larvae, Transactions of Entomol. Soc.
ii. pp. 266-269.
The identification of the l &r&> with the cock-
roach (Blatta Orientalis), which Oedmann ( Verm.
Sam. pt. ii. c 7) suggests, and which Kirby
(Bridga. Threat, ii. p. 357) adopts, has nothing
at all to recommend it, and is purely gratuitous,
as Mr. Hope proved in 1837 in a paper on this
subject in the Trans. Entomol. Soc. ii. 179-183.
The error of calling the cockroach a beetle, and
the confusion which has been made between it
and the sacred beetle of Egypt (Atmchus sacer),
has been repeated by H. Kalisch (Hist, and
Crit. Comment. Exod. /. c). The cockroach, as
Mr. Hope remarks, is a nocturnal insect, and
prowls about for food at night, "but what
reason have we to believe that the fly attacked
the Egyptians by night and not by day ? " We
see no reason to be dissatisfied with the reading
in our own Version. [W. H.] [H. B. T.]
FOOD. The diet of Eastern nations has
been in all ages more light and simple than our
own. The chief points of contrast are the
small amount of animal food consumed, the
variety of articles used as accompaniments to
bread, the substitution of milk in various forms
for our liquors, and the combination of what we
should deem heterogeneous elements in the same
dish, or the same meal. The chief point of agree-
ment is the large consumption of bread, the
importance of which in the eyes of the Hebrew
is testified by the use of the term lechem (ori-
ginally food of any kind) specifically for bread,
as well as by the expression " staff of bread "
(Lev. xxvi. 26 ; Ps. cv. 16 ; Ezek. iv. 16, xiv.
13). Simpler preparations of corn were, how-
ever, common ; sometimes the fresh green ears
were eaten in a natural state,* the husks being
rubbed off by the hand (Lev. xxiii. 14; Deut.
xxiii. 25 ; 2 K. iv. 42 ; Matt. xii. 1 ; Luke vi. 1);
more frequently, however, the grains, after
• This custom 1s still practised to Palestine (Robin-
son's Researches, 1. 4(3).
Digitized by
Google
1080
FOOD
being carefully picked, were roasted in a pan
over a fire (Lev. ii. 14), and eaten as " parched
corn," in which form it was an ordinary article
of diet, particularly among labourers, or others
who had not the means of dressing food (Lev.
xxiii. 14; Ruth ii. 14; 1 Sam. xvii. 17, xxv. 18;
2 Sam. rrii. 28): this practice is still very
usual in the East (cp. Lane, i. 251 ; Robinson,
Researches, ii. 350). Sometimes the grain was
bruised (like the Greek polenta, Plin. xviii. 14),
in which state it was termed either KH1 (tputri,
LXX. ; A. V. "beaten," R. V. "bruised-; " Lev.
ii. 14, 16), or rtBH (irrurinu, Aq., Symm. ;
A. V. " ground corn," R. V. " bruised corn ; "
2 Sam. xvii. 19 ; cp. Prov. xxvii. 22), and then
dried in the sun ; it was eaten either mixed with
oil (Lev. ii. 15), or made into a soft cake named
nDn» (A. V. "dough," R. V. marg. coarse
meal; Num. xv. 20 ; Neh. 1. 37 ; Ezek. xliv. 30).
The Hebrews used a great variety of articles
(John xxi. 5) to give a relish to bread. Some-
times salt was so used (Job vi. 6), as we learn
from the passage just quoted; sometimes the
bread was dipped into the sour wine (A. V. and
R. V. "vinegar ") which the labourers drank
(Ruth ii. 14) ; or, where meat was eaten, into
the gravy, which was either served up separately
for the purpose, as by Gideon (Judg. vi. 19), or
placed in the middle of the meat dish, as done
by the Arabs (Burckhardt, Notes, i. 63), whose
practice of dipping bread in the broth, or melted
fat of the animal, strongly illustrates the
reference to the sop in John xiii. 26 sq. The
modern Egyptians season their bread with a
sauce " composed of various stimulants, such as
salt, mint, sesame, and chickpeas (Lane, i. 180).
The Syrians, on the other hand, use a mixture
of savory and suit for the same purpose (Rus-
sell, i. 93). Where the above-mentioned acces-
sories were wanting, fruit, vegetables, fish, or
honey, were used. In short it may be said that
all the articles of food, which we are about to
mention, were mainly viewed as subordinates to
the staple commodity of bread. The various
kinds of bread and cakes are described under
the head of Bread.
Milk and its preparations hold a conspicuous
place in Eastern diet, as affording substantial
nourishment ; sometimes it was produced in a
fresh state (37Tt; Gen. xviii. 8), but more gene-
rally in the form of the modern leban, i.e. sour
milkOTKpri; A. V. "butter;" Gen. xviii. 8;
Judg. v. 25*; 2 Sam. xvii. 29). The latter is
universally used by the Bedouins, not only as
their ordinary beverage (Burckhardt, Nbtes, i.
240), but mixed with rice, flour, meat, and even
salad (Burckhardt, i. 58, 63; Rnssell, Aleppo,
i. 118). It is constantly offered to travellers,
and in some parts of Arabia it is deemed scan-
dalous to take any money in return for it
(Burckhardt, Arabia, i. 120). For a certain
season of the year, leban makes up a great part of
the food of the poor in Syria (Russell, I.e.). Butter
(Prov. xxx. 33) and various forms of coagulated
milk, of the consistency of the modern kaimak
6 The later Jews named this sauce nDITI (Mishn.
Pa. 1, y 8): It consisted of vlnegsr, almonds, and spice,
thickened with flour. It was used at the celebration of
the Passover (Pes. 10, y 3).
POOD
(Job x. 10 ; 1 Sam. xvii. 18 ; 2 Sam. xvii. 29),
were also used. [Butteb ; Cheese ; Milk.]
Fruit was another source of subsistence : figs
stand first in point of importance ; the early
sorts described as the "summer fruit" Qff);
Amos viii. 1, 2) and the "first ripe fruit"
(fTU33 ; Hos. ix. 10 ; Mic vii. 1) were esteemed
a great luxury, and were eaten as fresh fruit;
but they were generally dried and pressed into
cakes, similar to the date-cakes of the Arabians
(Burckhardt, Arabia, i. 57), in which form they
were termed D , ?3'n (xoAtWcu, A. V. "cakes of
figs;" 1 Sam. xxv. 18, xxx. 12; 1 Ch. xii. 40),
and occasionally pp simply (2 Sam. xvi. 1;
A.V. " summer fruit "). Grapes were generally
eaten in a dried state as raisins (D'pPV ; ligaturae
uvae passae, Vulg. ; 1 Sam. xxv. 18, xxx. 12;
2 Sam. xvi. 1 ; 1 Ch. xii. 40), but sometimes, as
before, pressed into cakes, named ilfT'GTK (2 Sam.
vi. 19 ; 1 Ch. xvi. 3 ; Cant. ii. 5 ; Hoi. iii. 1),
understood by the LXX. as a sort of cake, \iya-
vev larb rrryiyov, and by the A. V. as a " flagon
of wine," and by the R. V. as " a cake of raisins."
Fruit- cake forms a part of the daily food of the
Arabians, and is particularly adapted to the
wants of travellers ; dissolved in water, it affords
a sweet and refreshing drink (Niebnhr, Arabia,
p. 57 ; Russell, Aleppo, i. 82) ; an instance of its
stimulating effect is recorded in 1 Sam. xxx. 12.
Apples (probably citrons) are occasionally noticed,
but rather in reference to their fragrance (Cant,
ii. 5, vi. 8) and colour (Prov. xxv. 11) than as
an article of food. Dates are not noticed in
Scripture, unless we accept the rendering of f£
in the LXX. (2 Sam. xvi. l)as=e>o(mn; it can
hardly be doubted, however, that where the
palm-tree flourished, as in the neighbourhood of
Jericho, its fruit was consumed ; in Joel i. 12 it
is reckoned among other trees valuable for their
fruit. The pomegranate tree is also noticed by
Joel; it yields a luscious fruit, from which a
species of wine was expressed (Cant, viii 2;
Hag. ii. 19). Melons were grown in Egypt
(Num. ii. 5), but not in Palestine. The mul-
berry is undoubtedly mentioned in Luke xvii. 6
under the name ovkAhwos : the Hebrew D'$?3
so translated (2 Sam. v. 23 [R. V. marg. balsam
tree]; 1 Ch. xiv. 14) is rather doubtful; the
Vulg. takes it to mean pears. The evKo/iofia
(" sycomore," A. V. ; Luke xix. 4) differed from
the tree last mentioned ; it was the Egypt!*
fig, which abounded in Palestine (1 K. x. 27), and
was much valued for its fruit (1 Ch. xxvii. 28;
Amos vii. 14). [Apple ; CrTBOif ; Fi<» i M? 1 "
herrv-tree ; palm-tree; pomeorawate i st-
camine-tree; Sycamore.]
Of vegetables we have most frequent noticeof
lentils (Gen. xxv. 34 ; 2 Sam. xvii. 28, xxiii. «»
Ezek. iv. 9), which are still largely used by tw
Bedouins in travell ing (Burckhardt, Arabia, i. 65);
beans (2 Sam. xvii. 28 ; Ezek. iv. 9), wl» ich 5 *r'
form a favourite dish in Egypt and Arabia for
breakfast, boiled in water and eaten with butter
and pepper; from 2 Sam. xvii. 28 it might be
inferred that beans and other kinds of pn«*
were roasted, as barley was, but the second V?
in that verse is interpolated, not appearing ">
the LXX. and other Versions (see QPB.*), »?»
even if it were not so, the reference to pvlse •»
Digitized by
Google
FOOD
the A. V., as of cicer in the Vnlg., is wholly
unwarranted ; encumbers (Nam. xi. 5 ; Is. i. 8 ;
Bar. vi. 70 ; cp. 2 K. ir. 39, where wild gourds,
Cucmertu an'nmt, were picked in mistake for
cucumbers); leeks, onions, and garlic, which
were and still are of a superior quality
is Egypt (Num. xi. 5; cp. Wilkinson, Ane.
Egypt, i. 169 [1878]; Lane, i. 251); lettuce,
«f which the wild species, Zactuca agrestis, h
identified with the Greek -rutpU by Pliny (xxi.
65), and formed, according to the LXX. and the
VoJg, the " bitter herbs " (D'TIO) eaten with
the Paschal lamb (Ex. xii. 8; Num. ii. 11);
endive, which if still well known in the East
(Rnssell, i. 91), may have been included under
the same class. In addition to the above we
aire notice of certain » herbs " (nhlK ; 2 K. iv.
39) eaten in times of scarcity, which were
mallows according to the Syriac and Arabic
Versions, but, according to the Talmud, a veget-
able resembling the Bratnoa eruca of Linnaeus ;
and again of sea-purslain (TITO? ; tfAipa ; A. V.
"mallows," R. V. " salt-wort ") and broom-root
(DWIT, A. V. and R. V. "juniper ; " Job xxx. 4),
ss etten by the poor in time of famine, unless the
latter were gathered as fnel. An insipid plant,
probably purslain, used in salad, appears to be
referred to in Job vi. 6, under the expression
IHO^TI T] (" white of egg," A. V., R. V. marg.
the jvice of purtiam). The usual method of
eating vegetables was in the form of pottage
073 ; fytyui ; pulmentum ; Gen. xxv. 29 ; 2 K.
ir. 38; Hag. ii. 12); a meal wholly of veget-
ables was deemed very poor fare (Prov. rv. 17 ;
Dan. I 12 ; Rom. xiv. 2). The modern Arabians
coastline but few vegetables ; radishes and leeks
are most in use, and are eaten raw with bread
(Burckhardt, Arabia, i. 56). [Beans; Cu-
cumber; Gabuc; Gocrd; Leek; Lentil;
0»I(W.]
The spices or condiments known to the
Hebrews were numerous: cummin (Is. xxviii.
25; Matt, xxiii. 23), dill (Matt, xxiii. 23;
"anise," A. V.), coriander (Ex. xvi. 31 ; Num.
a. 7), mint (Matt, xxiii. 13), rue (Luke xi. 42),
mustard (Matt. xiii. 31, xvii. 20), and salt (Job
vi. 6), which is reckoned among " the principal
things for the whole use of man's life " (Ecclus.
mix. 26). Nuts (pistachios) and almonds (Gen.
xliii- 11) were also used as whets to the appetite.
[AUSOTD-TREE ; ANISE ; CORIANDER ; CCMMIN ;
Mwr; Mustard; Nuts; Spices.]
In addition to these classes, we have to notice
xoe other important articles of food: in the
fin* place, honey, whether the natural product
ef the bee (1 Sam. xiv. 25 ; Matt. iii. 4), which
•bounds in most parts of Arabia (Burckhardt,
AVoow, i. 54), or the other natural and artificial
productions included under that head, especially
the &bt of the Syrians and the Arabians,
i& grape-juice boiled down to the state of
the Roman defrutum, which is still exten-
<"ely used in the East (Russell, i. 82); the
latter is supposed to be referred to in Gen. xliii.
11 and Ezek. xxvii. 17. The importance of
""Key as a substitute for sugar is obvious ; it
**s both used in certain kinds of cake (though
prohibited in the case of meat offerings, Lev. ii
11), as in the pastry of the Arabs (Burckhardt,
•draWu, i. 54), and was also eaten in its natural
FOOD
1081
state either by itself (1 Sam. xiv. 27; 2 Sam.
xvii. 29 ; 1 K. xiv. 3), or in conjunction with
other things, even with fish (Luke xxiv. 42).
" Butter and honey " is an expression for rich
diet (Is. vii. 15, 22) ; such a mixture is popular
among the Arabs (Burckhardt, Arabia, i. 54).
"Milk and honey" are similarly coupled to-
gether, not only frequently by the sacred
writers, as expressive of the richness of the
promised land, but also by the Greek poets (cp.
Callim. Hymn, in Jot. 48 ; Horn. Od. xx. 68).
Too much honey was deemed unwholesome
(Prov. xiv. 27). With regard to oil, it does not
appear to have been used to the extent we might
have anticipated ; some modern Arabs only
employ it in frying fish (Burckhardt, Arabia, i.
54), substituting butter for all other purposes ;
others make it a prominent article of food ;
while other Orientals eat it universally in place
of butter and fat during Lent. Among the
Hebrews oil was deemed an expensive luxury
(Prov. xxi. 17), to be reserved for festive
occasions (1 Ch. xii. 40) ; it was chiefly used in
certain kinds of cake (Lev. ii. 5 sq.;~l K. xvii.
12). "Oil and honey "are mentioned in con-
junction with bread in Ezek. xvi. 13, 19. The
Syrians, especially the Jews, eat oil and honey
(dies) mixed together (Rnssell, i. 80). Eggs are
not often noticed, but were evidently known as
articles of food (Is. x. 14, lix.5; Luke xi. 12),
and are reckoned by Jerome (/n Epitaph. Paul.
i. 176) among the delicacies of the table. The
Orientals of to-day fry them in twice their bulk
of fat or butter or oil. [Honey ; On..]
The Orientals are, as a rule, sparing in the use
of animal food * : not only does the excessive heat
of the climate render it both unwholesome to
eat much meat (Niebuhr, Detcript. p. 46), and
expensive from the necessity of immediately con-
suming a whole animal; but beyond this the
ritual regulations of the Mosaic law in ancient,
as of the Koran in modern times, have tended to
the same result. It has been inferred from Gen.
ix. 3, 4, that animal food was not permitted
before the Flood : but the notices of the flock of
Abel (Gen. iv. 2) and of the herds of Jabal (Gen.
iv. 20), as well as the distinction between clean
and unclean animals (Gen. vii. 2), favour the
opposite opinion ; and the permission in Gen. ix.
3 does not so much constitute a considerable
difference (Dillmann* in loco) as (cp. Delitzsch
[1887] in loco) a more explicit declaration of a
condition implied in the grant of universal
dominion previously given (Gen. i. 28). The
prohibition then expressed against consuming
the blood of' any animal (Gen. ix. 4) was more
folly developed in the Levitical Law, and enforced
by the penalty of death (Lev. iii. 17, vii. 26,
xix. 26; Deut. xii. 16; 1 Sam. xiv. 32 sq. ; Ezek.
xliv. 7, 15), on the ground, as stated in Lev.
xvii. 11 and Deut. xii. 23, that the blood con-
tained the principle of life, and, as such, was to
be offered on the Altar ; probably there was an
• Dr. Post (B. D. Amer. ed., s. v. "Food," note at
end) points out, however, that dyspepsia Is very common
among the people, and arises partly from their heavy
and unwholesome food, and partly from the fact that
their heavy meal is taken Just before retiring for the
night. Re describes a stew as consisting of meat and
vegetables fried In butter or fas, sod the eater as drink-
ing ss ranch of the fatty matter as possible.
Digitized by
Google
1082
FOOD
additional reason in the heathen practice of con-
suming blood in their sacrifices (Ps. xvi. 4 ; Ezek.
xxxiii. 25). The prohibition applied to strangers
as well as Israelites, and to all kinds of beast or
fowl (Lev. vii. 26 ; xvii. 12, 13). So strong was
the feeling of the Jews on this point, that the
Gentile converts to Christianity were laid under
similar restrictions (Acts xv. 20, 29 ; xxi. 25).
As a necessary deduction from the above principle,
all animals which had died a natural death
(f!?33, Dent. xiv.21),or had been torn of beasts
(ns"?b, Ex. xxii. 31), were also prohibited (Lev.
xvii. 15 ; cp. Ezek. iv. 14), and were to be thrown
to the dogs (Ex. xxii. 31) : this prohibition did not
extend to strangers (Deut. xiv. 21). Any person
infringing this rule was held unclean until the
evening, and was obliged to wash his clothes (Lev.
xvii. 15). In the N. T. these cases are described
under the term muniv (Acts xv. 20), applying
not only to what was strangled (as in A. v.), but
to any animal from which the blood was not
regularly poured forth. Similar prohibitions
are contained in the Koran (ii. 175, v. 4, xvi.
116), the result of which is that at the present
day the Arabians eat no meat except what has
been bought at the shambles. Certain portions
of the fat of sacrifices were also forbidden (Lev.
iii. 9, 10), as being set apart for the Altar (Lev.
ill. 16, vii. 25 : cp. 1 Sam. ii. 16 sq. ; 2 Ch. vii.
7) : it -should be observed that the term in Neh.
viii. 10, translated fat, is not 3J*n, but CJOBTD
=the fatty pieces of meat, delicacies. In addi-
tion to the above, Christians were forbidden to
eat the flesh of animals, portions of which had
been offered to idols (flSoi\6Sura), whether at
private feasts, or as bought in the market (Acts
xv. 29, xxi. 25; 1 Cor. viii. 1 sq.). All beasts
and birds classed as unclean (Lev. xi. 1 sq. ;
Dent. xiv. 4 sq.) were also prohibited [Unclean
Beasts and Birds]: and in addition to these
general precepts there was a special prohibition
against " seething a kid in his mother's milk "
(Ex. xxiii. 19, xxxiv. 26 ; Deut. xiv. 21), which
has been variously understood, by Talmudical
writers as a general prohibition against the joint
use of meat and milk (Mishna, Cholin, cap. 8,
§ 1); by Michaelis (Mos. Recht, iv. 210) as pro-
hibiting the use of fat or milk, as compared
with oil, in cooking ; by Luther and Calvin as
prohibiting the slaughter of young animals ; and
by Bochart and others as discountenancing cruelty
in any way. These interpretations, however, all
fail in establishing any connexion between the
precept and the offering of the first-fruits, as
implied in the three passages quoted. More
probably it has reference to certain heathen
usages at their harvest festivals (Maimonides,
More Neboch. 3, 48; Spencer, do Legg. Hebr.
Sitt. 535 sq. Cp. Knobel-Dillraann on Exod.
xxiii. 19): and there is a remarkable addition in
the Samaritan Version and in some copies of the
LXX. in Deut. xiv. 21, which supports this
view ; Ji yap iron? toSto, itrtl lurwa\aKa iioti,
cVi idaayA 4ari r$ 6t$ 'laxdp (cp. Knobel, Com-
ment, in Ex. xxiii. 19). The Hebrews further
abstained from eating the sinew of the hip ("PJ
ntpjn, Gen. xxxii. 32 [Heb. r. 33]), in memory
of the struggle between Jacob and the Angel
(cp. «. 25). The LXX., the Vulg., and the
A. V. interpret the &ro{ \tyip*yair word nasheh
FOOD
of the shrinking or benumbing of the muscle (i
ivipKnaw, qui emararit ; "which shrank"):
Josephus (Ant. i. 20, § 2) more correctly ex-
plains it, to revpor to ■whari ; and there it
little doubt that the nerve he refers to is the
nermu ischiadievs, which attains its greatest
thickness at the hip. There is no further
reference to this custom in the Bible ; bat the
Talmudists (Cholin, 7) enforced its observance
by penalties.
Under these restrictions the Hebrews were
permitted the free use of animal food : generally
tpeaking, they only availed themselves of it in
the exercise of hospitality (Gen. xviii. 7), or at
festivals of a religious (Lx. xii. 8), public (1 K.
i. 9 ; 1 Ch. xii. 40), or private character (Gen.
xxvii. 4 ; Luke xv. 23) : it was only in royal
households that there was a daily consumption
of meat (1 K. iv. 23 ; Neh. v. 18). The use of
meat is reserved for similar occasions among the
Bedouins (Burckhardt's Notes, i. 63). The
animals killed for meat were— calves (Gen. xviii.
7 ; 1 Sam. xxviii. 24 ; Amos vi. 4), which are
farther described by the term fatling (KH!?=
fufexos aertvris, Luke xv. 23, and aerurri.
Matt. xxii. 4; 2 Sam. vi. 13; 1 K. i. 9 sq.;
A.V. " fat cattle ") ; lambs (2 Sam. lit 4 ; Amos
vi. 4) ; oxen, not above three years of age (1 K.
i. 9 ; Prov. xv. 17 ; Is. xxii. 13 ; Matt. xxii. 4),
which were either stall-fed (EP103; moVx m
tkktterot), or taken up from the pastures Qt"] ;
06ts rofuiSei ; 1 K. iv. 23) ; kids (Gen. xxvii.
9; Judg. vi. 19; 1 Sam. xvi. 20); harts, roe-
bucks, and fallow-deer (1 K. iv. 23), which
are also brought into close connexion with
ordinary cattle in Deut. xiv. 5, as though hold-
ing an intermediate place between tame and
wild animals ; birds of various kinds (OH^V '
A. V. " fowls ; " Neh. v. 18 ; the LXX., how-
ever, gives xf/HfM?, as though the reading
were D'TpV) ; quail in certain parts of Arabia
(Ex. xvi. 13'; Num. xi. 32); poultry (D»"13"l3 >
1 K. iv. 23 ; understood generally by the LXX,
opvt0av iK\tirriy viTcvrd ; by Kimchi and the
A. V. and R. V. as " fatted fowl ; " by Geeenius,
Thesaur. p. 246, as geese, from the whiteness of
their plumage ; by Thenius, Comm. in i c, as
guinea-fowls, as though the word represented
the call of that bird) ; partridges (1 Sam. xxvi.
20) ; fish, with the exception of such as were
without scales and fins (Lev. xi. 9 ; Deut. xiv.
9), both salted, as was probably the case with
the sea-fish brought to Jerusalem (Neh. xiii. 16),
and fresh (Matt. xiv. 19, xv. 36 ; Lnke ixiv. 42).
This in our Saviour's time appears to have bees
the usual food about the Sea of Galilee (Matt,
vii. 10) ; the term ty&ptor is applied to it by
St. John (vi. 9 ; xxi. 9 sq.) in the restricted
sense which the word obtained among the later
Greeks, as = fish. Locusts, of which certain
species only were esteemed clean (Lev. xi. 22),
were occasionally eaten (Matt. iii. 4), but con-
sidered as poor fare. They are at the present
day largely consumed by the poor both in Persia
(Morier's Second Journey, p. 44) and in Arabia
(Niebuhr, Voyaye, i. 319); they are salted and
dried, and roosted, when required, on a frying-
pan with butter (Burckhardt's Notes, ii. 92;
Niebuhr, /. c).
Meat does not appear ever to have been eaten
Digitized by
Google
FOOT
by itself ; various accompaniments are noticed
in Scripture, as bread, milk, and sour milk
(Gen. rriiL 8) ; bread and broth ( Judg. vi. 19) ;
and with fish either bread (Matt. liv. 19, xv.
36 ; John xxi. 9) or honeycomb (Lake xxiv.
42) : the instance in 2 Sam. vi. 19 cannot be
relied on, as the meaning of the term ">ejB^{,
rendered in the A. V. "a good piece of flesh,"
after the Vnlg., astatura b&ulae carnis, is quite
anknown (see Driver, Notes on the Heb. Text of
the BB. of &i»u, in loco. The R. V. renders in
text a portion of flesh, and in marg. of vine).
For the modes of preparing meat, see COOKING ;
and for the times and manner of eating, Meals :
see also Fish, Fowl, &c
To pass from ordinary to occasional sources
of subsistence : prison diet consisted of bread
and water administered in small quantities
(1 K. xxii. 27; Jer. xxxvii. 21): pulse and
water was considered but little better (Dan. i.
12) : in time of sorrow or fasting it was usual
to abstain either altogether from food (2 Sam.
xii. 17, 20), or from meat, wine, and other
delicacies, which were described as rrtllDn Urn,
lit. bread of desires (Dan. x. 3). In time of
extreme famine the most loathsome food was
swallowed ; such as an ass's head (2 K. vi. 25),
the ass, it must be remembered, being an un-
clean animal (for a parallel case cp. Plutarch,
Artaxerx. 24), and dove's dung (see the article
on that subject), the dung of cattle (Joseph.
B. J. v. 13, § 7), and even possibly their own
dang (2 K. xviii. 27). The consumption of
human flesh was not altogether unknown
(2 K. vi. 28; cp. Joseph. B. J. vi. 3, §4), the
passages quoted supplying instances of the exact
fulfilment of the prediction in Dent, xxviii.
56, 57: cp. also Lam. ii. 20, iv. 10; Ezek.
t. 10.
With regard to the beverages used by the
Hebrews, we have already mentioned milk, and
the probable use of barley-water, and of a mix-
ture resembling the modern sherbet, formed of
fig-cake and water. The Hebrews probably
resembled the Arabs in not drinking much
during their meals, bat concluding them with
a long draught of water. It is almost needless
to say that water was most generally drunk.
In addition to these the Hebrews were ac-
quainted with various intoxicating liquors, the
most valued of which was the juice of the
grape, while others were described under the
general term of shechar or strong drink (Lev. x.
9; Num. vi. 3; Judg. xiii. 4, 7), if indeed the
latter does not sometimes include the former
(Sum. xxviii. 7): these were reserved for the
wealthy or for festive occasions. The poor con-
sumed a sour wine (A. V. " vinegar ; " Ruth ii.
14; Matt, xxvii. 48), calculated to quench
thirst, but not agreeable to the taste (Prov. x.
26). [Dbisk, Strong; Vinegar; Water;
Wise.] [W. L. B.] [F.]
FOOT, watering with the (Dent. xi. 10).
[Garden.]
FOOTMAN, a word employed in the A. V.
in two senses. 1. Generally, to distinguish
those of the people or of the fighting-men who
went on foot from those who were on horseback
or in chariot*. The Hebrew word for this is
FOREHEAD
1083
^JT, ragli, from regel, a foot. The LXX.
commonly express it by wefol, or occasionally
raypeWa.
But, 2. The word occurs in a more special
sense (in 1 Sam. xxii. 17 only ; R. V. " guard ;"
both A. V. and R. V. have in marg. Heb. runn«rs),
and as the translation of a different term from
the above — }*3"1, roots. This passage affords the
first mention of the existence of a body of swift
runners in attendance on the king, though such
a thing had been foretold by Samuel (1 Sam.
viii. 11). This body appears to have been after-
wards kept up, and to have been distinct front
the body-guard — the six hundred, and the thirty
— who were originated by David. See 1 K.
xiv. 27, 28; 2 Ch. xii. 10, 11; 2 K. xi. 4, 6,
11, 13, 19. In each of these cases the word is
the same as the above, and is rendered "guard:"
but the translators and revisers were evidently
aware of its signification, for they have put
the word "runners'' in the margin (1 K. xiv.
27, A. V. and R. V.; 2 K. xi. 4; 2 Ch. xii. 10,
R. V.). This indeed was the force of the term
"footman" at the time the A. V. was made, as
is plain not only from the references just
quoted, but amongst others from the title of a
well-known tract of Bunyan's — The Heavenly
Footman, or a Description of the Man that gets
to Heaven, on 1 Cor. ix. 24 (St. Paul's figure of
the race). Swift running was evidently a
valued accomplishment of a perfect warrior — s>
gibbor, as the Hebrew word is — among the
Israelites. There are constant allusions to this
in the Bible, though obscured in the £. V.,
from the translators not recognising or not
adopting the technical sense of the word gibbor.
Among others see Ps. xix. 5 ; Job x vi. 14 ; Joel
ii. 7, where "strong man," "giant," and
" mighty man " are all gibbor, used in connexion
with running. David was famed for his powers
of running ; they are so mentioned as to seem
characteristic of him (1 Sam. xvii. 22, 48, 51 ;
xx. 6), and he makes them a special subject of
thanksgiving to God (2 Sam. xxii. 30; Ps.
xviii. 29). The cases of Cushi and Ahimaaz
(2 Sam. xviii.) will occur to every one. It is
not impossible that the former — "the Ethio-
pian," as his name most likely is — had some
peculiar mode of running. [Ccmi.] Asahel
also was "swift on his feet, and the Gadite
heroes who came across to David in his diffi-
culties were "swift as the roes upon the
mountains : " but in neither of these last cases is
the word roots employed. The word probably
derives its modern sense from the custom of
domestic servants running by the carriage of
their master. [Gcard.] [G.] [W.]
FOKDS. [See Jordan.]
FOREHEAD (IXP, from fllttp, rad. inns.
to' shine, Gesen. p. 815 ; fiiruiwov ; frons). The
practice for women of the higher classes, espe-
cially married women, in the East, to veil their
faces in public, sufficiently stigmatizes with re-
proach the unveiled face of women of bad cha-
racter (Gen. xxv. 65 ; Jer. iii. 3 ; Niebuhr, Voy.
i. 132, 149, 150 ; Shaw, Travels, pp. 228, 240 ;
Hasselqoist, Travels, p. 58 ; Buckingham, Arab
Tribes, p. 312 ; Lane, Mod. Eg. i. 72, 77, 225-
248 ; Burckhardt, Travels, i. 233). An especial
force is thus given to the term " hard of fore-
Digitized by
Google
1084
FOBESKIN
head," as descriptive of audacity in general
(Ezek. iii. 7-9 ; comp. Jnr. Sat. xiv. 242 —
*' Ejectum attrita de fronte ruborem ").
The custom among many Oriental nations
both of colouring the face and forehead, and of
impressing on the body marks indicative of
devotion to some special deity or religious sect,
is mentioned elsewhere [CtrrrrNOS in Flesh],
(Burckhardt, Notes on Bed. i. 51 ; Niebuhr,
Voy. ii. 57; Wilkinson, Anc. Egypt, ii. 342
[1878]; Lane, Mod. Eg. i. 66.) It is doubtless
alluded to in Rev. (xiii. 16, 17 ; xiv. 9 ; xvii. 5 ;
zx. A!), and in the opposite direction by Ezekiel
(ix. 4-6) and in Rev. (vii. 3 ; ix. 4 ; xiv. 1 ;
xxii. 4). The mark mentioned by Ezekiel with
approval has been supposed to be the figure of
the cross, said to be denoted by the word here
used, lfl, in the ancient Semitic language
(Gesen. p. 1495 ; Spencer, de Leg. Hebr. ii. 20.
3, pp. 409, 413 ; MV.").
It may have been by way of contradiction to
heathen practice that the high-priest wore on
the front of his mitre the golden plate inscribed
" Holiness to the Lord " (Ex. xxviii. 36, xxxix.
30 ; Spencer, /. a).
The "jewel for the forehead " mentioned by
Ezekiel (xvi. 12), and in margin of A. V. Gen.
xxiv. 22, was in all probability nose-rings (so
R. V. Cp. Is. iii. 21 ; Lane, Mod. Eg. iii. 225,
226; Harmer, Obi. iv. 311, 312; Gesen. p. 870;
Winer, st v. Natenring'). The Persian and also
Egyptian women wear jewels and strings of
coins across their foreheads (Olearius, Travels,
p. 317 ; Lane, Mod. Eg. ii. 228). [Nose-jewel.]
For the use of frontlets between the eyes, see
Frontlets; and for symptoms of leprosy ap-
parent in the forehead, Leprosy. [H. W. P.]
FOBESKIN. [Circumcision.]
FOBEST. The corresponding Hebrew terms
are tD], Bnh, and DV1B. The first of these
most truly expresses the idea of a forest, the
etymological force of the word being abundance,
and its use being restricted (with the exception
of 1 Sam. xiv. 26, and Cant. v. 1, in which it
refers to honey) to an abundance of trees. The
second is seldom used, the word itself involving
the idea of what is being cut down (silva a
caedendo dicta, Gesen. Thcsaur. p. 530): it is
only twice (1 Sam. xxiii. 15 sq. ; 2 Ch. xxvii. 4)
applied to woods properly so called, and there
probably to woods on hills as distinguished from
woods on the plain ; its sense, however, is illus-
trated in the other passages in which it occurs,
viz. Is. xvii. 2 (A. V. "bough," R. V. "wood."
The verse is difficult, and the readings varions.
See Delitzsch 4 and Dillmann* in loco), where
the comparison is to the " forsaken places "
(R. V.) of worship in the forest, and Ezek.
xxxi. 3, where it applies to trees or foliage
sufficient to afford shelter (Jrondibus nemorosue,
Vulg. ; A. V. and R. V. " with a shadowing
shroud "). The third, pardes (a word of foreign
origin [see MV."], meaning an enclosed place,
whether garden or park, whence also comes the
Greek rapdSfuros), refers perhaps to forest trees
(Neh. ii. 8), the forests of Palestine being care-
fully preserved under the Persian rule, a regular
warden being appointed, without whose sanction
no tree could be felled. Elsewhere the word
FOBEST
describes a garden or orchard (Eccles. ii. 5 ; Cant,
iv. 13).
Although Palestine has never been in his-
torical times a woodland country, yet there can
be no doubt that there was much more wood
formerly than there is at present. It is not
improbable that the highlands were once covered
with a primeval forest, of which the celebrated
oaks and terebinths scattered here and there are
the relics. The woods and forests mentioned
in the Bible appear to have been situated,
where they are usually found in cultivated
countries, in the valleys and defiles that lead
down from the high- to the lowlands and in the
adjacent plains. They were therefore of no
great size, and correspond rather with the idea
of the Latin saltus than with our forest.
(1.) The wood of Ephraim was the most
extensive. It clothed the slopes of the hills
that bordered the plain of Jezreel, and the plain
itself in the neighbourhood of Bethshan (Josh,
xvii. 15 sq.), extending, perhaps, at one time to
Tabor, which is translated Spvphs by Theodotion
(Hos. v. 1), and which is still well covered with
forest trees (Stanley, p. 350). (2.) The wood
of Bethel (2 K. ii. 23, 24) was situated in the
ravine which descends to the plain of Jericho.
(3.) The forest of Hareth (1 Sam. xxii. 5) was
somewhere on the border of the Philistine plain,
in the southern part of Judah. (4.) The wood
through which the Israelites passed in their
pursuit of the Philistines (1 Sam. xiv. 25) was
probably near Aijalon (cp. e. 31), in one of the
valleys leading down to the plain of Philistia.
(5.) The « wood " (Ps. cxxxu. 6) implied in the
name of Kirjath-jearim (1 Sam. vii. 2) must
have been similarly situated, as also (6) were
the " forests " (Choresh) in which Jotham placed
his forts (2 Ch. xxvii. 4). (7.) The plain of
Sharon was partly covered with wood (Strab.
xvii. p. 578), whence the LXX. gives Spvpbs as
an equivalent (Is. lxv. 10). It has still a fair
amount of wood (Stanley, p. 260). (8.) The
wood (Choresh) in the wilderness of Ziph, in
which David concealed himself (1 Sam. xxiii.
15 sq.), lay S.E. of Hebron.
The greater portion of Peraea was, and still is,
covered with forests of oak and terebinth (Is. ii.
13 ; Ezek. xxvii. 6 ; Zech. xi. 2 : cp. Bucking-
ham's Palestine, pp. 103 sq., 240 sq. ; Stanley,
p. 324). A portion of this near Hahanaim was
known as the "wood of Ephraim" (2 Sam.
xviii. 6), in which the battle between David and
Absalom took place. Winer (art. WSider)
places it on the west side of the Jordan, but a
comparison of 2 Sam. xvii. 26, xviii. 3, 23,
proves the reverse. The statement in xviii. 23,
in particular, marks its position as on the high-
lands, at some little distance from the valley of
the Jordan (cp. Joseph. Ant. vii. 10, §§ 1, 2).
" The house of the forest of Lebanon " (1 K.
vii. 2, x. 17, 21 ; 2 Ch. ix. 16, 20) was so called
probably from being fitted up with cedar. It
has also been explained as referring to the
forest-like rows of cedar pillars. The number
and magnificence of the cedars of Lebanon i»
frequently noticed in the poetical portions of
the Bible. The forest generally supplied Hebrew
writers with an image of pride and exaltation
doomed to destruction (2 K. xix. 23 ; Is. x. 18,
xxiii. 19, xxxvii. 24; Jer. xxi. 14, xxii. '>
xlvi 23 ; Zech. xi. 2), as well as of unfruitful-
Digitized by
Google
FOBNIOATION
ks as contrasted with a cultivated field or
vineyard (Is. xziz. 17, zxxii. 15 ; Jer. xxvi. 18 ;
Ho*. U. 12). [W. L.B.] [F.]
FORNICATION. [Adultebt.]
FORTIFICATIONS. [Fehced Cities.]
FOBTUNATUS C*oproittaros; Fortunatus),
mentioned in 1 Cor. xvi. 17, and in Clem. Rom.
Eg, lix., where Bishop Lightfoot has the follow-
ing note : — " The form of the expression (avv
aX *.) seems to separate Fortunatus from
Ephebus and Bito ; and, if so, he was perhaps
not a Roman who accompanied the letter, but
a Corinthian from whom Clement was expecting
a visit. In this case there is no improbability
in identifying him with the Fortunatus of
1 Cor. rvi. 17, for he seems to be mentioned
by St. Paul (a.d. 57) as a younger member
of the household of Stephanas, and might well
be alive leas than forty years after, when
Clement wrote. It must be remembered, how-
ever, that Fortunatus is a very common
name." [E- R- B.]
FOUNTAIN. 1. JJB, from \>tt, tofioa; also
signifies an "eye," Gesen. p. 1017. 2. ySD
(from IX a well-watered place ; sometimes in
A V. "weU," or "spring." 3. OH? tiflD.
from XV*. to go forth, Gesen. p. 613 ; a gushing
forth oTwaters. 4. "rtpD, from T*p, to dig,
Gesen. p. 1209. 5. lfl2D, from 1?33. to bubble
forth, Gesen. p. 845. 6. % or H^, from bhl.
to roll, Gesen. p. 288 ; all usually rendered nryii,
or nryh S&rror ; fans and font aqmrum. The
special use of these various terms will be found
examined in the Appendix to Stanley's Sinai
and Palestine.
Among the attractive features presented by
the Land of Promise to the nation migrating
from Egypt by way of the desert, none would
be more striking than the natural gush of
waters from the ground. Instead of watering
his field ox garden, as in Egypt, "with his
foot " (Shaw, Travels, p. 408), the Hebrew culti-
vator was taught to look forward to a land that
" drinketh water of the rain of heaven, a land
of brooks of water, of fountains and depths
springing forth in valleys and hills " (Deut. viii.
7; xL 11, R. V.). In the desert of Sinai, " the
few Irving, perhaps perennial springs," by the
(act of their rarity assume an importance
hardly to be understood in moister climates,
and more than justify a poetical expression of
national rejoicing over the discovery of one
(Num. xxi. 17). But the springs of Palestine,
though short-lived, are remarkable for their
abundance and beauty, especially those which
fall into the Jordan and its lakes throughout its
whole course (Stanley, S. if P. pp. 17, 122,
128, 295, 373, 509; Burckhardt, Syria, p. 344).
The spring or fountain of living water, the
"eye" of the landscape (see No. 1), is distin-
guished in all Oriental languages from the
artificially aunk and enclosed well (Stanley,
p. 509). Its importance is implied by the
number of topographical names compounded
with En, or its (Arab.): En-gedi, Am-jidy,
"spring of the gazelle," may serve as a striking
FOUNTAIN
1085
instance (1 Sam. xxiii. 29; Reland, p. 763;
Robinson, i. 504 ; Stanley, App. § 50).
The volcanic agency which has operated so
powerfully in Palestine, has from very early
times given tokens of its working in the warm
springs which are found near the Sea of Galilee
and the Dead Sea. One of them, En-eglaim,
the " spring of calves," at the N.E. end of the
latter, is probably identical with Callirrhoe,
mentioned by Josephus as a place resorted to by
Herod in his last illness (Joseph. B. J. i. 33,
§ 5 ; Kitto, Phyt. Geogr. of Pal. pp. 120, 121 ;
Stanley, S. f P. p. 285). His son Philip built
the town, which he named Tiberias, at the
sulphureous hot-springs at the S. of the Sea of
Galilee (Joseph. Ant. xviii. 2, § 3 ; Hasselquist,
Travels, App. 283 ; Kitto, p. 114; Burckhardt,
Syria, pp. 328, 330 ; Oliphant, Haifa, p. 127).
Other hot-springs are found at seven miles*
distance from Tiberias, and at Omkeis (Gadara)
(Reland, p. 775; Burckhardt, pp. 276, 277;
Kitto, pp. 116, 118).
Jerusalem, though mainly dependent for its
supply of water upon its rain-water cisterns,
appears from recent inquiries to have possessed
either more than one perennial spring, or one
issuing by more than one outlet. To this agree
the " fons perennis aquae " of Tacitus {Hist. v.
12), and the Hiroiv aWa-Aenmft oiorcau of
Aristeas (Joseph, ii. 112, ed. Havercamp;
Robinson, i. 343, 345 ; Williams, Holy. City, ii.
458, 468 ; Raumer, p. 298 ; Ezek. xlvii. 1, 12 ;
Kitto, Phyt. Geogr. pp. 412, 415). [Cisterns;
SlLOAM.]
In the towers built by Herod, Josephus says
there were cisterns with x a * J " >v fYh>"' Ta
through which water was poured forth : these
may have been statues or figures containing
spouts for water after Roman models (Plin.
Epist. v.6;N. H. xxzvi. 15, 151 ; Joseph. B. J.
No Eastern city is so well supplied with water
as Damascus (Early Trav. p. 294). In Oriental
VouoUdn at Naweth. (Bobatfc.)
cities generally public fountains are frequent
(Poole, Englishn. in Egypt, i. 180). Traces of
such fountains at Jerusalem may perhaps be
found in the names En-rogel (2 Sam. zvii. 17),
the " Dragon-well " or fountain, and the " gate
of the fountain "(Neh. ii. 13, 14). The water
which supplied Solomon's pools near Bethlehem
Digitized by
Google
1086
FOUNTAIN GATE
FOX
was conveyed to them by subterranean channels.
In these may also be found " the sealed fountain"
of Cant. iv. 12 (Hasselquist, p. 145; Maundrell,
Early Trav. p. 457). The fountain of Nazareth
Arabs call
J u)» ( jj beni walwal, " sons of
or |C.|,, wawi, as commonly as
howling,"
jam.
In all the passages where the Hebrew shu'al
occurs, excepting possibly Cant. ii. 15, Ezek. xiii.4,
jackals rather than foxes are intended. The
'•' FouataJ.. " uf Cacm.
bears a traditional antiquity, to which it has
probably good derivative, if not actual, claim
(Roberts, Views in Palestine, i. 21, 29, 33 ; Col.
Ch. Chron. No. cxxx. 147 ; Fisher's Views in
Syria, i. 31, iii. 44). [H. W. P.]
FOUNTAIN GATE, Neh. iii. 15 ; xii. 37.
A gate in the city walls on the south side of
Jerusalem, near, and probably leading to, Siloam.
[Jerusalem.]
FOWL, FATTED (D»W3X DnS"!?, bar-
bertm avoosim; tpviOct veronal; aves altiles).
The word only occurs in 1 K. iv. 23, in the list
of supplies for the daily provision of Solomon's
table. There is no other clue to the meaning
of the term than the rendering of the LXX.
Gesenius proposes "fatted geese" or swans,
from T1J, " to be white." But the goose is not
an inhabitant of Syria, which is much too warm
for it, and the swan is only a rare visitor in
winter. Others have suggested guinea-fowls.
But we have no evidence that this tropical
African bird was ever introduced by Solomon or
the Phoenicians. But there seems no difficulty
in accepting the ordinary rendering of our
domestic fowl ; for although we have no proof
of the Jews having possessed poultry before the
Captivity, yet when Solomon introduced pea-
cocks from India, it is most probable he would
also import the common fowl, which has been
from time immemorial domesticated in that its
native country. [H. B. T.]
FOWL, FOWLEB. [Spakbow.]
FOX frvtiff, shu'al; iAonr^f; vulpes). The
Turkish ,J\ji»., jaidl, French chacal, German
schakal, K. V. marg. jackals, are evidently
related to the Hebrew word, and refer to the
jackal {Cants aureus, L.). The various passages
where the word occurs, show that the Hebrews,
like the Arabs at the present day, used the same
name for both fox and jackal. At the same
time, there is another word — D*JK, tyim, lit.
"howlers"— which occurs in is. xiii. 22,
xxxhr. 14, Jer. 1. 39, rendered in A. V. "wild
beasts of the islands," and R. V. " wolves," which
more probably represent* the jackal, whom the
(hctan.
passage in Pa. lxiii. 10, " they shall be a portion for
shu'dlim," evidently refers to "jackals," which
are ever ready to prey on the dead bodies of the
slain, followcaravans for the chance of the animals
that fall, and attack graves for the carrion.
j The fondness of the fox for grapes is well known
in the East ; but not more so than that of the
jackal, which, going in packs,'often commits grest
devastation in the vineyards. Both animals are,
like the dog, omnivorous. Thus in many parts
of North Africa, where the jackals swarm, there
is no possibility of obtaining flesh or carrion, and
they subsist on the fruit of the dwarf palmetto,
with which the plains are covered.
The shu'dlim of Judg. xv. 4 are evidently
"jackals," and not "foxes," for the former
animal is gregarious, whereas the latter is
solitary in its habits ; and it is in the highest
degree improbable that Samson should ever have
succeeded in catching so many as 300 foxes,
whereas he could readily have " taken in snares,"
as the Hebrew verb CI J?) properly means, so
many jackals, which go together for the most part
in large groups. The whole passage, which de-
scribes the manner in which Samson avenged him-
self on the Philistines by tying the tails of two
jackals together, with a firebrand between them,
and then sending them into the standing corn and
orchards of his enemies, has, it is well known,
been the subject of much dispute. Dr. Kennicott
{Remarks on Select Passages in the 0. T., Oxford,
1787. p. 100) proposed, on the authority ot
seven Hebrew MSS., to read shldlim (D , ?DE')i
"sheaves" (?), instead of shu'dlim (D^fS')'
leaving out the letter 1: the meaning then
being, simply, that Samson took 300 sheaves of
corn, and put them end to end (" tail to tail "),
and then set a burning torch between them (see
also what an anonymous French author hss
written under the title of Benards dc Samson,
and his arguments refuted in a treatise, "Do
Vulpibus Simsonaeis," by B. H. Gebhard, in
Thes. Nov. Theol. PhU. i. 553 sq.). The
proposed reading of Kennicott has deservedly
found little favour with commentators. Not to
mention the authority of the important old
Digitized by
Google
FOX
Versions which are opposed to this view, it is
pretty certain that shSdlhn cannot mean
•'sheaves." The word, which occurs only three
times, denotes in Is. xl. 12 "the hollow of the
hand," and in 1 E. xx. 10, Ezek. xiii. 19,
* hand fuls."
The difficulty of the whole passage consists in
understanding how two animals tied together
bv their toils would run far in the same
direction. Col. H. Smith (in Kitto's Cyc. t art.
"Shual ") observes, u they would assuredly pull
counter to each other, and ultimately fight most
tiercely." Probably they would ; but it is only
fair to remember, in reply to the objections
which critics have advanced to this transaction
of the Hebrew judge, that it has yet to be
demonstrated that two jackals united by their
tails would run counter, and thus defeat the
intended purpose ; in so important a matter as
the verification of a Scripture narrative the
proper course is experimental where it can be
resorted to. Again, we know nothing as to the
length of the cord which attached the animals,
a consideration which is obviously of much
importance in the question at issue; for, as
jackals are gregarious, the couples would
naturaJlv run together if we allow a length of
cord of two or three yards, especially when we
reflect that the terrified animals would endeavour
to escape as far as possible out of the reach of
their captor, and make the best of their way
«nt of his sight. The translation of the A. V.
is unquestionably the correct rendering of the
Hebrew, and has the authority of the LXX. and
Vnlg. in its favour. But if the above remarks
are deemed inadequate to a satisfactory solution
of Samson's exploit, we are at liberty to suppose
that he had men to help him, both in the
capture of the jackals and in the use to which
he pnt them, and it is not necessary to conclude
that the animals were all caught .it, and let
loose from, U& same place : some might have been
taken in one portion of the Philistines* territory,
and some in another, and let loose in different
parts of the country. This view would obviate
FRANKINCENSE
1087
Vmtpt* XSotica.
1±* alleged difficulty alluded to above ; for
thsrt would be no necessity for the jackals to
na iny great distance in order to insure the
jnatest amount of damage to the crops : 150
different centres, so to speak, of conflagration
throughout the country of the Philistines must
have burnt up nearly all their corn ; and, from
the whole context, it is evident that the injury
done was one of almost unlimited extent.
With respect to the jackals and foxes of
Palestine, the common jackal of the country is
the Corns aureus, L., so named from its tawny
yellow colour, and which may be heard every
night in the villages. The fox of the southern
and central regions of Palestine, extremely abund-
ant in Judaea and the east of Jordan, is Vulpes
ft'ilotica, Riipp, which differs very slightly from
our own, being a little smaller, more tawny
above, and of a greyer hue below. In its habits
it is very distinct from the jackal, being solitary,
and often hunting in the daytime. It is found
through Egypt, Arabia, and the Syrian desert.
Another species is common in the wooded
districts of Galilee and the north, Vulpes
tiavescens, Gray, the Cants St/riacus of Col. H.
Smith, known to the natives as •, ,-l»V tha'lab.
It is considerably larger than the last species,
and differs from the English fox, of which we
believe it to be only a local race, by its peculiarly
bright light yellowish colour throughout, and
finer and longer fur. It has black ears, and
a splendid brush. It ranges from Syria to
Central Asia, and the north side of the Hima-
"^s^jSZ--'
Canto Byriaemt,
layas (cp. Hemp, and Ehr. Symb. Phys. pt. i. ;
Hasselquist, Trav. p. 184). That jackals and
foxes were formerly, as now, common in Palestine
is evident from the names of place* derived from
these animals, as Hazar-Shual (Josh. xv. 28),
Shaalbim (Judg. i. 3. r >).
The Rabbinical writers make frequent mention
of the fox and his habits. In the Talmud it is
said, "The fox does not die from being under
the earth : he is used to it, and it does not hurt
him." Again: "He has gained as much as a
fox in a ploughed field," i.e. nothing. Another
proverb relating to him is :
" If the fox be at the rudder.
Speak him fairly—' My dear brother.' "
[W. H.] [H.B. T.]
FRANKINCENSE (HjhS UJXtoah, from
\^7, "to be white"; X/JSwoj; thus; Arab.
^UJ, luban [Ex. xxx. 34, &c; 1 Ch. ix. 29;
Matt. ii. 11 ; Rev. viii. 3]), the fragrant gum of
Digitized by
Google
1088
FREEDOM
an Indian tree, procured through Arabia. "All
they from Sheba shall come. They ahall bring
gold and incense " (Is. lx. 6) ; " Incense from
Sheba " (Jer. vi. 20). Frankincense is the gum
or resin of the tree Iioewellia terrata of botanists,
which grows abundantly in the hilly districts of
Central and Southern India, and is known as
"Salai" by the natives. It belongs to the
natural order Amyridaceae, or the Myrrh family.
All the trees of the order, which is tropical,
abound in balsamic resin. Among the genera
which it includes are Amyris and Idea, yielding
elemi and incense-wood, and Batsamodendron, or
balsam tree, from some species of which the
m6r of the Hebrews, the myrrh of commerce, is
procured. Botaellia terrata, and to a more
limited extent Botaellia glabra, are the sources of
the Olibanum, the Hebrew Lebonah, and Greek
Xi&aros, the frankincense of the Scriptures and
of modern commerce. The Hindoos call the
gum "Cundur." It is abundant especially
about Nagpnr, whence large quantities are
exported to Europe. It requires no preparation,
and is procured by cutting slits in the bark,
whence it copiously exudes. The best gum is of
a white eolour, brittle and bitter to the taste,
and is reserved for the Mohammedan markets.
That which is yellowish in colour is considered
less pure, but is in lsrge demand in Southern
and Central Europe for use in the ceremonial of
the Greek and Roman Churches. Previous to
the English occupation of India there was great
uncertainty as to the origin of frankincense ;
the greater part of that supplied to Europe
reaching us by caravan through Persia to Aleppo.
Nor do the ancients, as may be seen from Theo-
phrastus and Pliny, appear to have been much
better informed (Theophr. Hist. Plant, ix. 4;
Plin. Hist. xii. 31). No tree yielding such a
gum has ever been found in Palestine (Cels.
Hierdb. i. 231 sqq.). [H. B. T.]
FBEEDOM, Acts xxii. 28. [Citizenship.]
FBET (A.-S. fretm), used in the sense of
"devour." In Lev. xiii. 55 the word, as a noun
(K. V. "afret"), is the translation of finite,
and signifies the leprosy spot which has eaten
into a garment. [F.]
FRINGES. [Dmss.]
FROO (B'H'IDV, tzephardfa; 0&rpaxos;
rana). Gesenius derives the Hebrew word from
TBY, "to leap," and the Arabic c^«> y rtoV,
FRONTLETS
" marsh," i.e. " the marsh - leaner ; " but
Dietrich's derivation of the word from the root
*1QV, " to swell," is now more generally accepted
(see MV."). The frog was selected by God
as an instrument for humbling the pride of
Pharaoh (Ex. viii. 2-14 ; Ps. lxxviii. 45, cr.
30; Wisd. xix. 10): frogs came in prodigious
numbers from the canals, the rivers, and the
marshes; they filled the houses, and even
entered the ovens and kneading troughs. When
at the command of Moses the frogs died, the
people gathered them in heaps, and "the land
stank " from the corruption of the bodies.
There can be no doubt that the whole trans-
action was miraculous: frogs, it is true, if
allowed to increase, can easily be imagined
to occur in such multitudes as marked the
second plague of Egypt — indeed, similar plagues
are on record as having occurred in various
places, as at Paeonia and Dardania, where
frogs snddenly appeared in such numbers si to
cause the inhabitants to leave that region—
(see Eustathius on Horn. H. i., and other quo-
tations cited by Bochart, Hieroz. iii. 575)— but
that the transaction was miraculous appears
further from the fact that the frogs would not
naturally have died, in such prodigious numbers
as is recorded, in a single day.
It is stated (Ex. viii. 7) that the Egyptisn
"magicians brought up frogs." Some writers
have denied that they could have had any such
power, and think that they must have practised
some deceit. It is worthy of remark, that
though they may have been permitted by God
to increase the plagues, they were quite unable
to remove them.
Amongst the Egyptians the frog was con-
sidered a symbol of an imperfect man, and was
supposed to be generated from the slime of the
river— «7r tSi tov worapov Ikios (see Her-
apollo, i. 26). A frog sitting upon a lotos
(Nelumbiwn) was also regarded by the ancient
Egyptians as symbolical of the return of the
Nile to its bed after the inundations. Toe
symbol was probably suggested by the habit of
the tree frog (ffyla arborm, L.), which sits oo
the foliage for the greater part of the year, but
returns to the water for three months in spring
for the spawning season. Some have connected
the Egyptian word Hhrvr, used to denote the Kile
detcending, with Chrur, the Coptic name of a
frog (Jablonski, Panth. Aegypt. iv. 1, § 9); but
the connexion suggested is more than doubtful.
The only known species of frog which occur at
present in Egypt are the Sana esculenta, Schuu,
of which two varieties are described, which differ
from Spallanzani's species in some slight pecu-
liarities (Descript. de ffigypte, Hist. Nattr.
torn. i. p. 181, fol. ed.), and the little tree frog
(Byla arborea), mentioned above, which in spring
lives in the water in vast myriads. Its croak,
when there are many together, may be heard at
a distance of more than a mile. The Bona
etculenta, the well-known edible frog of the
Continent, has a wide geographical range, being
found all over Europe (though scarce in the
British Isles) ; through Northern Asia and Japan ;
in North Africa and Egypt ; in Syria, Mesopota-
mia, and Northern Persia. [W. H.] [H. B. T.]
FRONTLETS, or PHYLAOTEBLES
(rflDBto, Ex. xiii. 16; Deut. vi. 8, xi. 18; the
Digitized by
Google
TnBUxtM or PhjUrtmiM.
FBONTLET8
»nly three passages of the O. T. in which the
word occurs; LXX. iad\evra; N. T. o>uA.ojc-
r^aa, Matt, xxiii. 5 ; the modern Jews called
them Tephillin, } y'BF), a word not found in the
Bible, Baxtorf, Lex. Tatm. s. v.). These
" frontlets " or " phylacteries " were strips of
parchment, on which were written four passages
of Scripture (Ex. xiii. 2-10, 11-17 ; Deut. vi.
4-9, 13-22) in an ink prepared for the purpose.
They were then rolled up in a case (JV3) of
black calfskin, which was attached to a stiffer
piece of leather, having a thong one finger
broad, and one and
a half cubits long.
"They were placed at
the bend of the left
arm ; and after the
thong had made a
little knot in the shape
of the letter \ it was
wound about the arm
in a spiral line, which
ended at the top of
the middle finger."
This was called "the
Tephiilah on the arm,"
and the leather case
contained only one cell,
the passages being
written on a single
piece of parchment,
with thin lines ruled
between (Godwin, Mos.
k Aar. 1, ch. x. 2159). Those worn on the
forehead were written on four strips of parch-
ment (which might not be of any hide except
cow's hide, A'ori. Bramm. und Rabb. p. 211 ; cp.
Hesych. s. v. 2kvti«^ iwucovpia), and put into
four little cells within a square case, on which
the letter V was written; the three points of
ihe V being "an emblem of the heavenly
Father's, Jehovah, our Lord Jehovah " {Zohar,
foL 54, coL 2). The square had two thongs
(WS1), on which Hebrew letters were in-
scribed ; these were passed round the head, and
after making a knot in the shape- of *1 passed
over the breast. This phylactery was called
"the Tephiilah on the head," and was worn in
the centre of the forehead (Leo of Modena,
Ceremonies of the Jews, i. 11, n. 4 ; Calmet, s. v.
Pkyladery; Otho, Lei. Rabbin, p. 656).
The derivation of JliBDIO is uncertain. Ge-
wu'uj derives it by contraction from JliBBBtS
(ZVs.p.548). The Rabbinic name pV'BFI comes
from ffeOFI, " a prayer," because they were
worn daring prayer, and were supposed to
trpify the sincerity of the worshipper ; hence
ther were bound on the left wrist (Gem. Eruvin.
93, 3 ; Otho, /. c. ; Buxt. Lex. Talm. s. v.). In
Jfait. ixiii. 5, only, they are called <pv\aicrfipia,
"tier because they tended to promote obser-
T Mce of the Law (4«1 /iutj/iV Ix'iy "5 e«oS,
IvL Mart. Dial. c. Tryph. p. 205, for which
'esson Lather happily renders the word by
fentzetteTy, or from the use of them as amu-
j* (Lat. praebia, Gk. s-cofoirra, Grotius ad
«tt xxiii. by. +v\ajerJipior is the ordinary
wek word for an amulet (Plut. ii. 378 B, where
*»*.=the Roman bulla), and is used apparently
*Bh this meaning by a Greek translator (Ezek.
wble tacr. — VOL. I.
FBONTLETS
1089
xiii. 18) for rririCO, cushions (Rosenmiiller,
Schol. ad loc i. ; Schleusner, Lex. in N. T.).
That phylacteries were used as amulets is
certain, and was very natural (Targ. ad Cant.
viii. 3 ; Bartolocc Bibl. Rob. i. 576 ; Winer, s.
vv. . Amulete, Phylakterien). Jerome (on Matt,
xxiii. 5) says that they were thus used in his day
by the Babylonians, Persians, and Indians, and
condemns certain Christian "mulierculae " for
similarly using the Gospels ("parvula evan-
gelia," $l0\ia fiucpd, Chrys.) as irfpidnfiaTa,
especially the Proem, to St. John (cp. Chrysost.
Horn, in Matt. 73). The Koran and other sacred
books are applied to the same purpose to this
day (Hottinger, Hist. Orient, i. 8, p. 301 ; de
nummis Orient, xvii. sq. "The most esteemed
of all Hhegabs is a Mooshaf, or copy of the
Koran," Lane, Mod. Eg. i. 338). Scaliger even
supposes that phylacteries were designed to
supersede those amulets, the use of which had
been already learnt by the Israelites in Egypt.
[Amulets.] There was a spurious book called
Phylact. Angelorum, where Pope Gelasius evi-
dently understood the word to mean " amulets,"
for he remarks that Phylacteria ought rather
to be ascribed to devils. In this sense they
were expressly forbidden by Pope Gregory (" Si
quia . . . phylacteriis usus fuerit, anathema
sit," Sixt. Senensis, BM. Sonet, p. 92 ; cp. Can.
36, Concil. Laod.).
The LXX. rendering aaaKtvra (Aquil. arl-
vaxTa) must allude to their being tightly bound
on the forehead and wrist during prayer. Petit
(Var. Lectt. ii. 3) would read afrfAevro (h. e.
appensa, alSota M hrorpoTrfj ? Schleusner,
Thes. s. v. iurd\.y, but he is amply refuted
by Spencer (de Legg. Bit. iv. 2, p. 1210)
and Witsius (Aegypt. ii. 9, § 11). Jerome calls
them Pittaciola (al. Pictat.), a name which
tolerably expresses their purpose (Forcellini,
Lex. s. v.).
The expression "they make broad their phy-
lacteries" (xAarttVovo-i TO <po\. abr&y, Matt,
xxiii. 5) refers not so much to the phylactery
itself, which seems to have been of a prescribed
breadth, as to the case (flX*Vp) in which the
parchment was kept, which the Pharisees
(among their other pretentious customs, Mark
vii. 3, 4 ; Luke v. 33, &c.) made as conspicuous
as they could (Reland, Antiq. ii. 9, 15). Misled
probably by the term tAutwouo-i, and bv the
mention of the nV'V or fringe (Num. xv. 38,
KAwrr/jia iaKlvBivov M TO Kpamtta ray lrrtpv-
yluy, LXX.) in connexion with them, Epiphanius
says that they were nKirea a-twuvra itopipipas,
like the Roman latklave, or the stripes on a
dalmatic (to Si c^i/urra TJjt ropipipas <pv\ax-
T^pia el<&6artv of liKpifia/iiyoi p.eTovo/ii((iy, c.
Haer. i. 33; Sixt. Sen. /. c). He says that
these purple stripes were worn by the Pharisees
with fringes, and four pomegranates, that no
one might touch them, and hence he derives
their name (Reland, Ant. ii. 9, 15). But that
this is an error is clearly shown by Scaliger
(Elenvh. Trihaer. riii. p. 66 sq.). It is said that
the Pharisees wore them always, whereas the
common people only used them at prayers, be-
cause they were considered to be even holier
than the pV, or golden plate, on the priest's
tiara (Ex. xxviii. 36), since that had the sacred
name once engraved, but in each of the Tephillin
4 A
Digitized by
Google
1090
FRONTLETS
the tetragrammaton recurred twenty-three
times (Carpzov, App. Critic, p. 196). Again the
Pharisees wore the Tephillah above the elbow,
but the Sadducees on the palm of the hand
(Godwin, /. c). The modern Jews only wear
them at morning prayers, and sometimes at
noon (Leo of Modena, I. c).
In our Lord's time they were worn by all
Jews, except the Karaites, women, and slaves.
Boys, when (at the age of thirteen years and a
day) they became niXO »33 (sons of the com-
mandments), were bound to wear them {Baba
Berac. fol. 22, 1, in Glossa), and therefore they
may have been used even by our Lord, as
He merely discountenanced their abuse. The
suggestion was made by Scaliger (/. c), and led
to a somewhat idle controversy. Lightfoot
{Hor. Hebr. ad Matt, xxiii. 5) and Otho {Lex.
Rab. p. 656) agree with Scaliger, but Carpzov
{I. c.) and others strongly deny it, from a belief
that the entire use of phylacteries arose from
an error.
The Karaites explained Deut. vi. 8, Ex. xiii.
9, &c, as a figurative command to remember the
Law (Reland, Ant. p. 132), as is certainly the
case in similar passages (Prov. iii. 3, vi. 21, vii.
3 ; Cant. viii. 6, &c). It seems clear to us that
the scope of these injunctions favours the
Karaite interpretation, and in Ex. xiii. 9 the
word is not niSO'lB, but |Vl3J, " a memorial "
(Gerhardus on Deut. vi. 8 ; Eduardus on Bera-
choth, i. 209 ; Heidanus, de Orig. Erroris, viii.
B. 6; SchSttgen, Hor. Hebr. i. 199; Rosen-
mttller, ad loc.; Hengstenberg, Pent. i. 458).
Considering too the nature of the passages
inscribed on the phylacteries (by no means the
most important in the Pentateuch — for the
Fathers are mistaken in saying that the Deca-
logue was used in this way, Jer. I. c. ; Chrysost.
{. c. ; Theophyl. ad Matt, xxiii. 5), and the fact
that we have no trace whatever of their use
before the Exile (during which time the Jews
probably learnt the practice of wearing them
from the Babylonians), we have no doubt that
the object of the precepts (Deut. vi. 8 ; Ex. xii.
9) was to impress on the minds of the people
the necessity of remembering the Law. But
the figurative language in which this duty was
urged upon them was mistaken for a literal
command. An additional argument against
the literal interpretation of the direction is the
dangerous abuse to which it was immediately
liable. Indeed such an observance would defeat
the supposed intention of it, by substituting an
outward ceremony for an inward remembrance.
We have a specimen of this in the curious
literalism of Kimchi's Comment on Ps. i. 2.
Starting the objection that it is impossible to
meditate in God's law day and night, because of
sleep, domestic cares, &c, he answers that for
the fulfilment of the text it is sufficient to wear
Tephiliin!
In spite of these considerations, Justin {Dial,
c. Tryph. ). c), Chrysostom, Euthymius, Theo-
phylact, and many moderns (Baumgarten,
Comm. i. 479 ; Winer, s. v. Phylact.) prefer the
literal meaning. It rests therefore with them
to account for the entire absence of all allusion
to phylacteries in the 0. T. The passages in
Proverbs {v. supra) contain no such reference,
and in Ezek. xxiv. 17 *)$B means not a Phylactery
FULLER
(as Rashi says), but a turban. [Crowns.]
(Gesen. Thes. p. 1089.)
The Rabbis have many rules about their use.
They were not worn on Sabbaths or other sacred
days, because those days were themselves a sign
or pledge (niN), and required no further
memorial {Zohar, f. 236 ; Reland, I. c). They
must be read standing in the morning (when
blue can be distinguished from green), but in
the evening (at sunset) they might be read
sitting. In times of persecution a red thread
was worn instead (Munster, de Praec. affirm.;
cp. Josh. ii. 18). Both hands were to be
used, if possible, in writing them. The leather
must have no hole in it. A single blot did not
signify if an uneducated boy could read the
word. At the top of the parchment no more
room must be left than would suffice for the
letter 7, but at the bottom there might be room
even for p or "I. A man, when wearing the
Tephiliin, must not approach within four cubits
of a cemetery (Sixt. Senensis, /. c). He who
has a taste for further frivolities (which yet are
deeply interesting aa illustrative of a priestly
superstition) may find them in Lightfoot {Hor.
Heb. ad loc), SchBttgen, Otho {Lex. Sab. s. v.),
and in the Mishna — especially in the treatise
called Bosh Hashanah (see, too, Bab. Berachoth,
f. 7a, &c, in Schwabe, pp. 17, 98, 247, ttc).
The Rabbis even declared that God wore them,
arguing from Is. lxii. 8, Deut. xxxiii. 2 ; cp. Is.
xlix. 16. Perhaps this was a pious fraud to
inculcate their use; or it may have had some
mystic meaning {Zohar, pt. ii. fol. 2 ; Carpzov,
/.a).
Josephus gives their general significance {Ant
iv. 8, § 13, us Ttpi$Knrrbv Trayraxit*y to «fl
airrobt wp60vfwr rov 8eoC). They were sup-
posed to save from the Devil (Targ. ad Cant
viii. 3) and from sin (Hottinger, Jur. Hebr. Leg.
xx. p. 29), and they were used for oaths ; but
the Rabbis disapproved the application of them
to charm wounds, or lull children to sleep (Id.
Leg. 253 ; Maimon. de Idol. ii.). He who wore
them was supposed to prolong his days (Is.
xxxviii. 16), but he who did not was doomed to
perdition, since he thereby broke eight affir-
mative precepts (Maimon. Tephil. iv. 26).
On the analogous practice alluded to in Rev.
xiii. 16, xiv. 1, see Fobkhead.
Besides the authors already quoted (Sixt.
Senensis, Reland, Otho, Lightfoot, Schbttgen,
Carpzov, Hottinger, Godwin, Rosenmttller,
&c), see the following, to whom they refer : —
Maimonides, Tephiliin ; Wagenseil «h Sota, cap.
ii. 397-418 ; Surenhusius, Mishna ad Tract.
Berachoth, pp. 8, 9 ; Beck, de Judaeorum liga-
mentis precativis, and de usu Phylact. (1679);
Basnage, Hist, des Juifs, v. ch. xii. 12 sq. ;
Braunius, de Vest. Sacerd. p. 7 sq. ; Buxtorf,
Synag. Jud. p. 170 sq. ; Ugolini, Thes. torn. xxi. ;
de usu Phylact. There ia in this latter work much
further information, but we have inserted all
that seemed interesting. Full information may
also be found in Hamburger, BE. Abt. ii. s. v.
" Tephiliin," who quotes all the chief Talmudic
passages. [F. W. F.]
FULLER (DJ3, from DM, to tread, Gesen. p.
657 ; yvaiptfc ; fullo). The'trade of the fullers,
so far as it is mentioned in Scripture, appears
Digitized by
Google
FULLER
to hare consisted chiefly in cleansing garments
and whitening them. The use of white garments,
and also the feeling respecting their use for
fatal and religions purposes, may be gathered
from the following passages : —
Eccles. ix. 8 ; Dan. vii. 9 ; Is. lxiv.
6; Zech. iii. 3, 5 ; 2 Sam. vi. 14;
1 Ch. it. 27 ; Mark ix. 3 ; Rev.
ir. 4, Ti. 11, vii. 9; Mishna
Taanith, ir. 8: see also Stat. Silt.
i. 2, 237 ; Ovid, Fast. i. 79 ; Clau-
dian, de Laud. Stil. iii. 289. This
branch of the trade was perhaps
exercised by other persons than
those who carded the wool and
smoothed the cloth when woren
(Mishna Bava Kama, i. ; x. 10).
In applying the marks used to dis-
tinguish cloths sent to be cleansed,
rollers were desired to be careful
to avoid the mixtures forbidden by the Law
(Lev. xix. 19 ; Dent. xxii. 11 ; Mishna Cilaim,
ix.10).
The process of fulling or cleansing cloth, so
far at it may be gathered from the practice of
other nations, consisted in treading on the
garments with the feet or beating with bats in
tabs of water, in which some alkaline substance
answering the purpose of soap had been dissolved
(Gesen. The*, p. 1261, 711 ; Beckmann, Hist, of
Inventions, ii. 94, 95, Bohn). The substances
used for this purpose which are mentioned in
Scripture are ~)T\)- nitre, rirpov, nitrum (Gesen.
p. 930 ; Prov. xxv. 20 ; Jer. ii. 22), and n'l'S.
soap, Tola, herba fullonum, kerba borith (Gesen.
p. 246 ; Mai. iii. 2). Nitre is found in Egypt
and in Syria, and vegetable alkali was also
obtained there from the ashes of certain plants,
probably Salsola kali (Gesen. p. 246 ; Plin. xxxi.
10, 46 ; Hasselquist, p. 275 ; Burckhardt, Syria,
f. 214). The juice also of some saponaceous
plant, perhaps Oypsophila struthium, or Saponaria
ejjicinalis, was sometimes mixed with the water
for the like purpose, and may thus be regarded
as representing the soap of Scripture. Other
substances also are mentioned as being employed
in cleansing, which, together with alkali, seem
to identify the Jewish with the Koman process,
as urine and chalk, Creta cimolia, and bean-water,
U. bean-meal mixed with water (Mishna, Shabb.
ix, 5 ; Xiddah, ix. 6). Urine, both of men and
of animals, was regularly collected at Rome for
cleansing cloths (Plin. H. N. xxxviii. 6, 8; Athen.
xi.p.484; Mart. ix. 93; Plautus, Asm. v. 2, 57),
and it seems not improbable that its use in the
fullers' trade at Jerusalem may have suggested
the coarse taunt of Rabshakeh, during his inter-
view with the deputies of Hezekiah in the
highway of the fullers' field (2 K. xviii. 27),
bit Schoettgen thinks it doubtful whether the
Jews made use of it in fulling (Antiq. full. § 9).
Tbe process of whitening garments was per-
formed by rubbing into them chalk or earth of
■one kind. Creta cimolia (cimolite) was pro-
hably the earth most frequently used. The
•hitest sort of earth for this purpose is a white
[otter's clay or marl, with which the poor at
Some rubbed their clothes on festival days to
»ake them appear brighter (Plin. xxxi. 10,
§ Ho; xxxv. 17). Sulphur, which was used at
FULLER'S FIELD, THE 1091
Rome for discharging positive colour, was
abundant in some parts of Palestine, but there ia
no evidence to show that it was used in the
fullers' trade.
ISTpctan FnHan.
The trade of the fullers, which in Egypt was
carried on both by men and women, as causing
offensive smells, and also as requiring space for
drying cloths, appears to have been carried on
at Jerusalem outside the city ; and from them
a field, a monument, and also a spring (En-
rogel), derived their names (Jer. ii. 22 ; Beck-
mann, Hist, of Inv. ii. 92, 106, Bohn ; Diet, of
Or. and Rom. Antiq., art. Fullo ; Winer, s. v.
Walter; Wilkinson, ii. 106 [1878]; Saalschtitz,
i. 3, 14, 32, ii. 14, 6; Schoettgen, Antiq.
fulloniae). [Handicraft.] [H. W. P.]
FULLER'S FIELD, THE (D3"l3 rrjif;
aypbs rov yva&ius, or xveupivs ; ager fvilonis),
a spot near Jerusalem (2 K. xviii. 17 ; Is.
xxxvi. 2, vii. 3), so close to the walls that a
person speaking from there could be heard on
them (2 K. xviii. 17, 26). It is only inci-
dentally mentioned in these passages, as giving
its name to a " highway " (!"lppp=an embanked
road, Gesen. Thes. p. 957 6)," ' n " (?) °* " <"> "
(?8, A. V. "in"), which highway was the
" conduit of the upper pool." The " end "
(Dyp) of the conduit, whatever that was,
appears to have been close to the road (Is.
vii. 3). One resort of the fullers of Jerusalem
would seem to have been below the city on the
south-east side. [En-rogel.] But Rabshakeh
and his " great host " can hardly have approached
in that direction. They must have come from
the north — the only accessible side for any body
of people — as is certainly indicated by the route
traced in Is. x. 28-32 [Gibeah]; and the
fuller's field was therefore, to judge from this
circumstance, on the table-land on the northern
side of the city. The " pool " and the " conduit "
would be sufficient reasons for the presence of
the fullers.
The fuller's Monument, mentioned by Joseph us
(Ii. J. v. 4, § 2) as being near the K.E. corner
of the third wall, was possibly connected with
the fuller's field. The only known conduit on
the N. side of the city is that, undoubtedly a
very ancient one, which entered the city to the
E. of the Damascus Gate, and in close proximity
to it must have been the fuller's field.
In considering the nature of this spot, it
should be borne in mind that Sadeh, " field," is
a term almost invariably confined to cultivated
4 A 2
Digitized by
Google
1092
FUNEKALS
arable land, as opposed to unreclaimed ground.
[Jerusalem.] [G.] [W.]
FUNEKALS. [Burial.]
FUBLONG. [Measures.]
FURNACE. Various kinds of furnaces are
noticed in the Bible. (1.) "M3R is so translated
in the A. V. in Gen. xv. 17 ; Is. xxxi. 9 ; Neh.
iii. 11, xii. 38. Generally the word applies to
the baker's oven, which is described under
Bread, and some think that the " tower of the
furnaces " in Neh. should be rendered " tower of
the ovens." In Gen. xv. and Is. xxxi. it is used in
a more general sense. (2.) )EQ3, a smelting or
calcining furnace (Gen. xix. 28 ; Ex. ix. 8, 10,
xix. 18), especially a lime-kiln, the use of which
was evidently well known to the Hebrews (Is.
xxxiii. 12; Amos ii. 1). (3.) "113, a refining
furnace (Prov. xvii. 3, xxvii. 21 ; Ezek. xxii.
Furnace— An Egyptian blowing the Are tor melting gold.
(WUUnaon.)
18 sq.), metaphorically applied to a state of trial
(Deut. iv. 20 ; IK. viii. 51 ; Is. xlviii. 10 ; Jer.
xi. 4). The form of it was probably similar to
the one used in Egypt, which is figured above.
The Egyptian Potter's Furnace. (WUUnaon.)
(4.) J-IFIN, a large furnace built like a brick-
kiln, with an opening at the top to cast in the
materials (Dan. iii. 22, 23), with a door on the
ground by which the metal might be extracted
(>:. 26). The Roman fornax, as represented in
Diet, of Or. and Rom. Ant. s. n., gives an idea
of the Persian Attun. The Babylonians and
Persians were in the habit of using the furnace
as a means of inflicting capital punishment (Dan.
/. c ; Jer. xxix. 22 ; 2 Mace. vii. 5 ; Hos. vii. 7).
A parallel case is mentioned byChardin (Voyage
en Perse, iv. 27G), two ovens having been kept
ready heated for a whole month to throw in any
corn-dealers who raised the price of corn. (5.)
The potter's furnace (Ecclus. xxvii. 5 ; xxxviii.
30), which resembles a chimney in shape, and
was about five or six feet high, as represented
GABA
above. (6.) The blacksmith's furnace (Ecclus.
xxxviii. 28). The Greek Kifiwos, which is
applied to the two latter, also describes the
calcining ! furnace (Xen. Vectig. iv. 49). It is
metaphorically used in the N. T. in this sense
(Rev. i. 15, ix. 2), and in Matt. xiii. 42 with an
especial reference to Dan. iii. 6. [W. L. B.]
a
GA'AL f3>W = a graft [Ges.] or loathing [a].] :
B. var. rtfXooS, TdKa, Tad>; A. TadX, IMS;
Joseph. Tai\i]s : Goal), son of Ebed, aided
the Shechemites in their rebellion against Abi-
melech (Judg. ix. ; Joseph. Ant. v. 7, §§ 3, 4).
He does not seem to have been a native of
Shechem, nor specially interested in the revo-
lution, but rather one of a class of condottieri,
who at such a period of anarchy would be
willing to sell their services to the highest
bidder. Josephus calls him rU rSv hfxirrm,
a term which scarcely designates any special
office, as in the case of Zebul (tw iua/urir
fipX "", Joseph, f. c.): more probably it has
reference to the headship of his family (Judg.
ix. 26 ; Joseph. /. c), and the command of s
body of men-at-arms, who seem to have been
permanently attached to his service (aiir Ax\t-
rats xal avyytviat, Joseph.). His appeal to
ante-Israelitish traditions (Judg. ix. 28), to-
gether with the re-establishment of idolatry
at Shechem, shows that the movement in which
he took part was a reactionary one, and pro-
ceeded upon the principle of a combination of
the aborigines with the idolatrous Israelites
against the iconoclastic family of Gideon as re-
presented by Abimelech. The ambitious designs
of Gaal, who seems to have aspired to the
supreme command, awakened the jealousy of
Zebul, who recalled Abimelech, and procured
the expulsion of Gaal from the city upon »
charge of cowardice. (T. E. B.]
GA'ASH (&Vi=spur: B. TaKuM, A Tait;
Josh. xxiv. 30 : Gaas). On the north side of
" the hill of Gaash " (accurately, as in R. V.,
" mountain of G." Tin), in the district of
" mount Ephraim," was Timnath-serah, or
Timnath-heres, the city which at his request
was given by the nation to Joshua; where he
resided, and where at last he was buried (Josh,
xxiv. 30 ; Judg. ii. 9 ; cp. Josh. xix. 49, 50>
We only hear of it again incidentally as the
native place of one of David's guard, " Hiddai,
or Hurai, of the brooks (the torrent-beds or
wadys, '/TO) of Gaash " — the " torrents of the
earthquake " (2 Sam. xxiii. 30; 1 Ch. xi. 32).
By Eusebius and Jerome it is said to have been
near Thamna, i.e. Tibneh, about 12 miles N.E. of
Lydda (OS. 1 p. 255, 63 ; cp. p. 284, 3). Its site
depends on that of Timnath-heres, which has
been identified by some writers (see Dill-
mann,* in loco) with Tibneh, and by others
(Condcr) with Kefr Boris, 9 miles S.W. of
Shechem. " [G.] [W.]
GA'BA (Ml; ra/W, TaijBdA, rajScoV;
Gabee, Gaboa, Geba). Pausal pronunciation of
Geba (R. V.> It is found in the A. V. in
Digitized by
Google
GABAEL
Josh, xriii. 24 ; Ezra ii. 26 ; Neh. vii. 30 : but
in the Hebrew also in 2 Sam. v. 25 ; 2 K. xxiii.
8; Neh. ii. 31. [GABDES.]
GA'BA-EI, (Btf. TafiafiX, A. ranafa ; Vet.
l»t. Gababel [Tob. i. 1J Vulg. Gabetus). 1. An
ancestor of Tobit (Tob. i. 1).
2. A poor Jew (Tob. i. 17, Volg.) of " Rages
in Media," to whom Tobias lent (sub chiro-
grapho dedit, Vulg.) ten talents of silver, which
Gabael afterwards faithfully restored to Tobias
in the time of Tobit's distress (Tob. i. 14, iv. 1,
20, v. 6, ii., x. 2). [Gabmas.] [B. F. W.]
GAB'ATHA (Bagatha), Esth. xii. 1. [Bio-
THAN.]
GAB'BAIC3| = ? exactor of tribute; KTiiPii
[for K. and A. see Swete's text]; Gehbai), ap-
parently the head of an important family of
Benjamin resident at Jerusalem (Neh. zi. 8).
GAB'BATHA (Ta&fiaBa-, GiMatha). The
Hebrew or Chaldee appellation of a place also
called " Pavement " (Xifldorpcurroc), where the
judgment-seat or bema (Ofjfia) was planted, from
his place on which Pilate delivered our Lord to
death (John xix. 13). The name, and the in-
cident which leads to the mention of the name,
occur nowhere but in this passage of St. John.
The place was outside the praetorium (A. V.
"judgment-hall," R. V. "palace"), for Pilate
brought Jesus forth from thence to it.
It U suggested by Lightfoot (Exerc. on St. John
in loco) that the word is derived from 33, "a
surface," in which case Gabbatha would be a mere
translation of \i8icrrpuiroy. There was a room
in the Temple in which the Sanhedrin sat, and
which was called Gazith (see Edersheim, Life
nd Times of Jesus the Messiah, ii. 553), because
it was pared with smooth and square flags
(71*t3); and Lightfoot conjectures that Pilate
may on this occasion have delivered his judg-
ment in that room. But this is not consistent
with the practice of St. John, who in other
instances gives the Hebrew name as that
properly belonging to the place, not as a mere
translation of a Greek one. Besides, Pilate
evidently spoke from the bema — the regular
seat of justice — and this in an important place
like Jerusalem would be a fixed spot, and that
•pot not within the Temple, where the Prae-
lorinm, a Roman residence with the idolatrous
emblems,* could not have been. The word
Gabbatha is more probably Chaldee, NJ133,
from a root signifying height or roundness
(see Edersheim, ii. 578, n. 2)— the root of the
Hebrew word Gibeah, which is the common
terra in the 0. T. for a bald rounded hill, or
elevation of moderate height. In this case
Gabbatha designated the place on which the bema
*a> planted, or perhaps the elevated bema ; and
the " pavement " was possibly some mosaic or
tesselated work, either forming the bema itself,
°r the flooring of the court immediately round
't— perhaps some such work as that which we
are told by Suetonius (Caesar, 46) that Julius
' These emblems were suppressed at Jerusalem. For
Uk movable nature of the bema, see Joseph. B. J. it.
". i 8. Caesarea was the station of the Procurator, not
-tanetlem.
GAD
1093
Caesar was accustomed to carry with him on
bis expeditions, in order to give the bema or
tribunal its conventional elevation. [G.] fW.]
GAB'DES (A. rojB/9iJ!, B. K&ftir ; Gabea),
1 Esd. v. 20. In Ezra ii. 26, Gaba.
GAB'RIAS (B. Tafipias; N. Ta$ptl, i.e.
n*"U3, the man of Jehovah), according to the
present text of the LXX. the brother of Gabael,
the creditor of Tobit (Tob. i. 14), though in
another place (Tob. iv. 20, ry rov rafipia;
cp. Fritzsche ad loc.) he is described as his
father by E. V. (but doubtfully, the word "son "
being in italics). The readings throughout are
very uncertain, and in the Versions the names
are strangely confused. It is an obvious cor-
rection to suppose that Ta&afatp t$ aSt\<pf t<£
rafipia should be read in i. 14, as is in fact
suggested by K., Taftfk(p . . . r$ 48. to? Tafiptt.
The misunderstanding of Ty &8«A^$ (cp. Tob. i.
10, 16, &c.) naturally occasioned the omission
of the article. The Old Latin has, Gabelo fratri
meofilio Gabahel, and in iv. 20. ' [B. F. W.]
GAB'BIEL (^"UJ = man of God; Ta-
Pptfa LXX. and N. T.). The word, which is
not in itself distinctive, but merely a descrip-
tion of the angelic office, is used as a proper
name or title of the Angel sent to Daniel (Dan.
viii. 16, ix. 21), and of the Angel of the An-
nunciation sent to Zacharias and to the Blessed
Virgin (Luke i. 19, 26. In the Targums and
Chaldee paraphrase of the Old Testament,
Gabriel is spoken of [Dent, xxxiv. 16] as one
of the angelic ministrnnts at the burial of
Moses, and [2 Ch. xxxii. 21] as the Angel
destroying the army of Sennacherib). In the
ordinary Jewish and Christian traditions he is
described as one of the " four great Arch-
angels," or as one of the " seven holy Angels
who stand before God " (cp. Luke i. 19, and
Rev. viii. 2). In Holy Scripture he is called
simply " the Angel " and (in Dan. ix. 21) " the
man Gabriel ; " and he appears as the repre-
sentative of the angelic nature, not in its
dignity or power of contending against evil
[Michael], but in its ministration of comfort
and sympathy to man. Thus his mission to
Daniel is to interpret in plain words the vision
of the ram and the he-goat, and to comfort him
after his prayer with the prophecy of the
"seventy weeks." Similarly in the New
Testament he is the herald of good tidings,
declaring the coming of the predicted Messiah
and of His forerunner. His prominent character,
therefore, is that of a " man of God," a " fellow-
servant " of the saints on earth ; and there is a
corresponding simplicity, and absence of all
terror and mystery, in his communications to
men, though the vision of him inspired special
awe. It may be noted that the Koran, imi-
tating in this respect our Holy Scripture,
makes him the special medium of Divine
revelation to Mahomet, and so a kind of patron-
Angel of Islam. [A. B.]
GAD OJ; rott, Joseph. iMSar; Gad), Jacob's
seventh son, the first-born of Zilpah, Leah's
maid, and whole-brother to Asher (Gen. xxx.
11-13 ; xlvi. 16, 18). (a) The passage in which
the bestowal of the name of Gad is preserved —
Digitized by
Google
1094
GAD
like the others, an exclamation on hia birth —
is more than usually obscure : " And Leah
said, Fortunate ! (R. V. ; be gad, 1J3), and she
called his name Gad " (Gen. xxx. 11). Such is
supposed to be the meaning of the old text of
the passage (the Kethib): so it stood at the time
of the LXX., who render the key-word by eV
rixp i m which they are followed by Jerome in
the Vulgate, feliciter, and by most modern com-
mentators.* But in the marginal emendations of
the Masorites (the Ken) the word is given 11 M3,
" Gad comes " (A. V. " a troop cometh "). This
construction is adopted by the ancient Versions
of Onkelos, Aquila (3a0ck y (airis), and Sym-
machus (fAffcr rdJ). (6) In the blessing of
Jacob, however, we find the name played upon
in a different manner : " Gad " is here taken as
meaning a marauding band or troop (the term
constantly used for which is gedud, "H1J), and
the allusion — the turns of which it is impos-
sible adequately to convey in English — would
seem to be to the irregular life of predatory
warfare which would be pursued by the tribe
after their settlement on the borders of the
Promised Land. "Gad, a plundering troop
(gedud) shall plunder him (ye-gudenu), but he
will plunder (ya-gud) at their heels " (Gen. xlix.
19). A. V. renders the words, " Gad, a troop
shall overcome him ; but he shall overcome at
the last." The R. V. is, " Gad, a troop shall
press upon him, but he shall press upon their
heel." b (c) The force here lent to the name
has been by some partially transferred to the
narrative of Gen. xxx., e.g. the Samaritan Ver-
sion, the Veneto-Greek, and our own A. V. ; but
it must not be overlooked that the word gedud
— by which it is here sought to interpret the
gad of Gen. xxx. 11 — possessed its own special
signification of turbulence and fierceness, which
makes it hardly applicable to children in the
sense of a number or crowd, the image sug-
gested by the A. V. Exactly as the turns of
Jacob's language apply to the characteristics
of the tribe, it does not appear that there is
any connexion between his allusions and those
in the exclamation of Leah. The key to the
latter is probably lost. To suppose that Leah
was invoking some ancient divinity, the god
Fortune, who is conjectured to be once alluded
to — and only once — in the so-called later part of
the Book of Isaiah, under the title of Qad (Is. lx v.
11; A. V. "that troop," R. V. "Fortune;"
Ges., " dem Gliick "), is by some considered a
poor explanation, by others not improbable in
an Aramaean.
Of the childhood aud life of the individual
Gad nothing is preserved. At the time of the
descent into Egypt seven sons are ascribed to him,
remarkable from the fact that a majority of their
names have plural terminations, as if those of
families rather than persons (Gen. xlvi. 16). The
list, with a slight variation, is again given on
the occasion of the census in the wilderness of
Sinai (Num. xxvi. 15-18). [Abod; Ezbon;
» In his Quaett. in Genesim, Jerome has in fortuna.
JosephuK (Ant. i. 19, $ 6) gives it a still different turn —
tvx<uo« =/ortuitus.
b Jerome (Dt Benedict. JacobC) Interprets this of the
revenge taken by the warriors of the tribe on their
return from the conquest of Western Palestine, for the
incursions of the desert tribes during their absence.
GAD
Ozni.] The position of Gad during the march
to the Promised Land was on the south side of
the Tabernacle (Num. ii. 14). The leader of the
tribe at the time of the start from Sinai wa>
Eliasaph, son of Reuel or Deuel (ii. 14, x. 20).
Gad is regularly named in the various enume-
rations of the tribes through the wanderings—
at the despatching of the spies (xiii. 15) — the
numbering in the plains of Moab (xxvi. 3, 15);
but the only inference we can draw is an indica-
tion of a commencing alliance with the tribe
which was subsequently to be his next neighbour
(see Dillmann* and Delitzsch [1887] in Gen. (. c).
He has left the more closely related tribe of
Asher, to take up his position next to Reuben.
These two tribes also preserve a near equality in
their numbers, not suffering from the fluctuations
which were endured by the others. At the first
census Gad had 45,650, and Reuben 46,500 ; at
the last, Gad had 40,500, and Reuben 43,330.
This alliance was doubtless induced by the simi-
larity of their pursuits. Of all the sons of
Jacob these two tribes alone returned to the
land which their forefathers had left five hundred
years before, with their occupations unchanged.
" The trade of thy slaves hath been about cattle
from our youth even till now " — " we are shep-
herds, both we and our fathers " (Gen. xlvi. 34,
xlvii. 4)— such was the account which the Pa-
triachs gave of themselves to Pharaoh. The
civilisation and the persecutions of Egypt had
worked a change in the habits of most of the
tribes, but Reuben and Gad remained faithful to
the pastoral pursuits of Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob ; and at the halt on the east of Jordan we
find them coming forward to Moses with the
representation that they " have cattle " — " a
great multitude of cattle " — and the land where
they now are is a " place for cattle." What
shonld they do in the close precincts of the
country west of Jordan with all their flocks and
herds? Wherefore let this land, they pray.be
given them for a possession, and let them not be
brought over Jordan (Num. xxxii. 1-5). Thev
did not, however, attempt to evade taking their
proper share of the difficulties of subduing the
land of Canaan ; and after that task had been
effected, and the apportionment amongst the
nine and a half tribes completed " at the door-
way of the tabernacle of the congregation in
Shiloh, before Jehovah," they were dismissed by
Joshua "to their tents," to their "wives, their
little ones, and their cattle," which they had
left behind them in Gilead. To their tents they
went — to the dangers and delights of the free
Bedawi life in which they had elected to remain,
and in which — a few partial glimpses excepted—
the later history allows them to remain hidden
from view.
The country allotted to Gad formed the
northern portion of the kingdom of Sihon, king
of the Amorites. This kingdom, which was
divided between Reuben and Gad, lay east of
Jordan, and comprised all the hill-country from
the Arnon, Wady ifojib, to the Jabbok, Wadyez-
Zerka, and the whole of the Jordan valley to the
east of the river from the Salt Sea to the Sea of
Chinnereth, or Gennesaret (Dent. Hi. 12-17;
Josh. xii. 2, 3 ; xiii. 27). North of the Jabbok'
• The Jabbok now forms the boundary between two
Turkish adminlstntlve districts.
Digitized by
Google
GAD
was the kingdom of Og, which was allotted to
the half tribe of Manasseh, and the boundary
between the two Amorite kingdoms thus became
the common frontier between Gad and Manasseh.
The possessions of Gad commenced at or near
Heshbon (Josh. xiii. 26). They embraced " half
the hill country of Gilead" (Deut. iii. 12), or
" half the land of the children of Ammon "
(Josh. xiii. 25) ; and included the ancient sanc-
tuary of Mahanaim. On the east the furthest
landmark given is " Aroer, that faces Rabbah,"
the present 'Amman (Josh. xiii. 25). West was
the Jordan (e. 27). The territory thus consisted
of two comparatively separate and independent
parts — (1) the high land, on the general level
of the country east of Jordan ; and (2) the
sunk valley of the Jordan itself — the former
GAD
1095
stopping short at the Jabbok ; the latter occupy-
ing the whole of the great valley on the east side
of the river, and extending up to the very sea
of Chinnereth, or Gennesaret, itself.
The territory of Gad has been well described
as a "combination of rich arable and pasture
lands with fine forests " (Oliphant, Land of
Gilead, p. 223), as "park-like and beautiful,"
and as '* offering the most attractive combina-
tion of soil, climate, and scenery " (p. 197).
The undulating downs clothed with rich grass,
on the east, are pre-eminently a " land for
cattle" (Num. xxxii. 4). The broken country
on the west above the Jordan is very pic-
turesque, and "most beautifully varied with
hanging woods, mostly of the vallonia oak,
laurestinus, cedar, common arbutus, Arbutus
lUporQuL
mdmrJine, &c At times the country had all
the appearance of a noble park " (Irby, p. 147).
It is also a land of rivers and springs, and the
forges through which the streams find their way
from the plateau to the Jordan valley are of
great beauty. " Clear brooks are running be-
tween lawns of turf, or breaking in falls over
high precipices, hung with brambles and green
with fern: thick oak woods of most English
character climb the slopes and here and there
crown a white chalk-cliff" (Conder, Ifeth and
Moah, p. 163). The highest point, Jebel Osh'a,
is 3,597 ft., and the level of the plateau is from
2^00 ft. to 3,000 ft. above the sea. [Gilead.]
Such was the territory allotted to the Gadites :
W there is no doubt that they soon extended
themselves beyond these limits. The official
records of the reign of Jotham of Judah (1 Ch.
v. 11, 16) show them to have been at that time
established over the whole of Gilead, and in
possession of Bashan as far as Saltan — the
modern SSlihad, a town at the eastern extremity
of the noble plain of the Hawr&n — and very far
both to the north and the east of the border
given them originally, while the Manassites
were pushed still further northwards to Mount
Hermon (1 Ch. v. 23). They soon became iden-
tified with Gilead — that name so memorable in
the earliest history of the nation ; and in many
of the earlier records it supersedes the name of
Gad, as we have already remarked it did that of
Bashan. In the Song of Deborah " Gilead " is
said to have " abode beyond Jordan " (Judg. v.
17). Jephthah appears to have been a Gadite, a
native of Mizpeh (Judg. xi. 34 ; cp. v. 31, and Josh,
xiii. 26), and yet he is always designated " the
Digitized by
Google
1096
GAD
Gileadite ; " and so also with Barzillai of Maha-
naim (2 Sam. xvii. 17 ; Ezra tf. 61 : cp. Josh.
xiii. 26).
The character of the tribe is throughout
strongly marked — fierce and warlike — "strong
men of might, men of war for the battle, that
could handle shield and buckler, their faces the
faces of lions, and like roes upon the mountains
for swiftness." Such is the graphic description
given of those eleren heroes of Gad — " the least
of them more than equal to a hundred, and the
greatest to a thousand " — who joined their
fortunes to David at the time of his greatest
discredit and embarrassment (1 Oh. xii. 8), un-
deterred by the natural difficulties of " flood and
field " which stood in their way. Surrounded,
as they were, by Ammonites, Midianites, Hagar-
ites, " Children of the East," and all the other
countless tribes, animated by a common hostility
to the strangers whose coming had dispossessed
them of their fairest districts, the warlike pro-
pensities of the tribe must have had many oppor-
tunities of exercise. One of its great engage-
ments is related in 1 Ch. v. 19-22. Here their
opponents were the wandering Ishmaelite tribes
of Jetur, Nephish, and Nodab (cp. Gen. xxv. 15),
nomad people, possessed of an enormous wealth
in camels, sheep, and asses, to this day the
characteristic possessions of their Bedawi suc-
cessors. This immense booty came into the hands
of the conquerors, who seem to have entered
with it on the former mode of life of their
victims : probably pushed their way further into
the eastern wilderness in the " steads " of these
Hagarites. Another of these encounters is
contained in the history of Jephthah, but this
latter story develops elements of a different
nature and a higher order than the mere fierce-
ness necessary to repel the attacks of the
plunderers of the desert. In the behaviour of
Jephthah, throughout that affecting history,
there are traces of a spirit which we may
almost call chivalresque : the high tone taken
with the Elders of Gilead, the noble but fruitless
expostulation with the king of Amnion before the
attack, the hasty vow, the overwhelming grief,
and yet the persistent devotion of purpose, surely
in all these there are marks of a great nobility
of character, which must have been more or less
characteristic of the Gadites in general. If to
this we add the loyalty, the generosity, and the
delicacy of Barzillai (2 Sam. xix. 32-39), we
obtain a very high idea of the tribe at whose
head were such men as these. Nor must we,
while enumerating the worthies of Gad, forget
that in all probability Elijah the Tishbite, " who
was of the inhabitants of Gilead," was one of
them.
But while exhibiting these high personal
qualities, Gad appears to have been wanting in
the powers necessary to enable the tribe to take
any active or leading part in the confederacy of
the nation. The warriors who rendered such as-
sistance to David might, when Ishbnsheth set up
his court at Mahanaim as king of Israel, have
done much towards affirming his rights. Had
Abner made choice of Shechem or Shiloh instead
of Mahanaim — the quick, explosive Ephraim in-
stead of the unready Gad — who can doubt that
the troubles of David's reign would have been
immensely increased, perhaps the establishment
of the northern kingdom antedated by nearly a
GAD
century ? David's presence at the same city
during his flight from Absalom produced no
effect on the tribe, and they are not mentioned
as having taken any part in the quarrels between
Ephraim and Judah.
Cut off as Gad was by position and circum-
stances from its brethren on the west of Jordan,
it still retained some connexion with them. We
may infer that it was considered as belonging to
the northern kingdom — " Know ye not," says
Ahab in Samaria, " know ye not that Ramoth in
Gilead is ours, and we be still, and take it not
out of the hand of the king of Syria?" (1 K.
xxii. 3). The territory of Gad was the battle-
field on which the long and fierce struggles of
Syria and Israel were fought out, and, as an
agricultural pastoral country, it must have
suffered severely in consequence (2 K. x*. 33).
The " men of Gad " are supposed to be noticed
on the Moabite Stone (1. 10 ; Records of the
Past, New Ser. ii. 208) ; but it is possible thst
" Gad " may have another meaning in this
passage.
Gad was carried into captivity by Tiglath-
pileser (1 Ch. v. 26), and in the time of Jere-
miah the cities of the tribe seem to have been
inhabited by the Ammonites. " Hath Israel no
sons? hath he no heir? why doth Malcham
(i.e. Moloch) inherit Gad, and his people dwell
in his cities? " (Jer. xlix. 1). [G.J [W.J
GAD OJ; raj; Qad\ "the seer" (nihil),
or " the king's seer," i.e. David's — such appears
to have been his official title (1 Ch. xxix. 29 ;
2 Ch. xxix. 25 ; 2 Sam. xxiv. 11 ; 1 Ch. xxi. 9)
— was " a prophet " (N'33), who appears to have
joined David when in " the hold," and at whose
advice David quitted it for the forest of Hareth
(1 Sam. xxii. 5). Whether he remained with
David during his wanderings is not to be ascer-
tained : we do not again encounter him till late
in the life of the king, when he reappears in
connexion with the punishment inflicted for the
numbering of the people (2 Sam. xxiv. 11-19 ;
1 Ch. xxi. 9-19). But he was evidently at-
tached to the royal establishment at Jerusalem,
for he wrote a book of the Acts of David (1 Ch.
xxix. 29), and also assisted in settling the ar-
rangements for the musical service of the " house
of God," by which his name was handed down
to times long after his own (2 Ch. xxix. 25). In
the abruptness of his introduction Gad has been
compared with Elijah (Jerome, Qu. Bebr. on
1 Sam. xxii. 5), with whom he may have been
of the same tribe, if his name can be taken as
denoting his parentage, but this is unsupported by
any evidence. Nor is there any apparent ground
for Ewald's suggestion (Qesch. iii. 116) that he
was of the school of Samuel. If this could be
made out, it would afford a natural reason for
his joining David. [G.] [W.]
GAD O?; fcuMoW. *■ W/«air; fbrtwu).
Properly "the Gad," with the article. In the
A. V. of Is. lxv. 11 the clause " that prepare s
table for that troop "has in the margin instead
of the last word the proper name Gad, which
evidently denotes some idol (cp. the second
clause where the A. V. text "number" j» ">
marg. Stent, and in R. V. " Destiny ")■ That
Gad was the deity Fortune, under whatever
Digitized by
Google
GAS
outward form it was worshipped, is supported
by tie etymology, by the common assent of
commentators, and by the R. V. It is evidently
connected with the Syriac li^», godd, " fortune,
lack," and with the Arabic ,\»., jad, "good
fortune," and Gesenius is probably right in his
conjecture that Gad was the planet Jupiter,
which was regarded by the astrologers of the
East (Pococke, Spec. hist. Ar. p. 130) as the
star of greater good fortune. The name appears
frequently in Phoenician (e.g. DM13) and Pal-
mrrene (e.g. NniTtJ) inscriptions (see MV." ;
Bithgen, BeitrSge x. Semit. Beligionsgeschichte,
p. 77) ; and a trace of the Syrian worship of
Gad is to be found in the exclamation of Leah,
when Zilpah bare a son (Gen. xxx. 11 ; 113,
begad [LXX. ir v^xp], the JCethib reading now
generally preferred to the Keri 11 K3, " Gad,
or good fortune cometh "). The Targum of
Pseudo-Jonathan and the Jerusalem Targum
both render " a lucky planet cometh," and testi-
mony to the worship of Gad among the ancient
Canaanjtes is furnished by the names Baal-Gad,
Migdal-Gad. The name is not Babylonian,
however identical the worship of Gad and Bel
is, by some, thought to have been. Buxtorf
(Let. Talm. s. v.) reports the ancient custom
for each man to have in his house a splendid
couch, which was not used, but was set apart
for " the prince of the bouse ; " that is, for the
star or constellation Fortune, to render it more
propitious. This couch was called the couch
o( Gads, or good-luck (Talm. Babl. Sanhed.
I. 20 a; Sedarm, f. 56 a). Again in Bereahith
Sabba, p. 65, the words '3$ D3p' in Gen. xxvii.
31 are explained as an invocation to Gada or
Fortune, Rabbi Moses the Priest, quoted by
Aben Ezra (on Gen. xxx. 11), says "that ~\lh
(Is. lxv. 11) signifies the star of luck, which
points to everything that is good ; for thus is
the language of Kedar (Arabic) : but he says
that 1J K3 (Gen. xxx. 11) is not used in the
same sense."
Illustrations of the ancient custom of lecti-
stenia (cp. Jer. vii. 18, li. 44) or the placing
a banqueting table in honour of idols will be
found in the table spread for the sun among
the Ethiopians (Her. iii. 17, 18), and in the
least made by the Babylonians for their god
Bel, which is described in the Apocryphal his-
tory of Bel and the Dragon, r. 3 (cp. also
Her. i. 181, &c, and the fact as attested by
Nebuchadnezzar ; see Speaker') Comm. on Bel
*ad the Dragon, v. 3). The table in the temple
of Beias is described by Diodorus Siculus (ii. 9)
» being of beaten gold, 40 feet long, 15 wide,
i»d weighing 500 talents. On it were placed
■wo drinking cups (napxfoia) weighing 30
uknts, two censers of 300 talents each, and
tsree golden goblets, that of Jupiter or Bel
weighing 1200 Babylonian talents. The conch
u*i table of the god in the temple of Zeus
Tripbylius at Patara in the island of Panchaea
«* mentioned by Diodorus (v. 46). Cp. also
T u-j. Aen. ii. 763 :
" Hue undlque Troia gaza
Incenets erepta adytta, mentaeque deorum
Vnieretque auro totidi, captivaque vestis
Congeritur."
GADARA
1097
Other, now obsolete, opinions upon Gad may be
seen in the first edition of this Dictionary. See
the commentaries on Isaiah (I. c.) by Delitzsch 4
and Dillmann,* and the monographs noted there
and by Baudissin in Herzog's HE. 2 s. n.
"Gad." [W. A. W.] [F.]
GAD, RrVEB OF (R. V. "valley of
[marg., touard ; see Driver, Notes on the Heb.
Text of the BB. of Sam. in loco] Gad "), 2 Sam.
xxiv. 5. From its mention in connexion with
Aroer, and " the city that lieth in the midst of
the river," it is evident that the river Arnon
is intended. Riehm, however (HWB. s. v.
Gad), identifies it with the Jabbok. [Arnon ;
Aeoer.] [W.]
GAD' ABA (raoopo; Eth. raSaptis, fern.
TaSapis) is not mentioned in the Bible, but is
evidently referred to in the expression " country
of the Gadarenes," x"P" or ■*fpix , "P°* <rs >>'
Tatafnv&r (Mark v. 1 ; Luke viii. 26, 37). Tr
town would appear, from its name (Gadara =
Geder, Gederah, Gederoth, Gedor), to have been
of Jewish or earlier origin, and, according to a
tradition preserved in the Mishna (Erokhin, ix.
6), it was fortified by Joshua. The first his-
torical notice of Gadara is its surrender to
Antiochus "the Great," after his victory, B.C.
198, over Scopas, the general of Ptolemy, at the
sources of the Jordan (Polyb. v. 71 ; Josephus,
Ant. xii. 3, § 3). But, like other cities in the
debateable provinces of Phoenicia and Coele-
Syria, it must previously have undergone many
vicissitudes during the long war between the
Seleucidae and the Ptolemies. It was taken
from the Syrians by Alexander Jannaeus, early
in his reign (b.c. 105-79), after a siege of ten
months (Ant. xiii. 13, § 3 ; B. J. i. 4, § 2), and
its inhabitants were apparently enslaved (Ii. J.
i. 4, § 3), and compelled to accept the religion
of the Jews (Ant. xiii. 15, § 4). Possibly it was
the scene of Alexander's defeat by the Arabs
(Ant. xiii. 13, § 5) ; but cp. B. J. i. 4, § 4, in
which this battle is said to have taken place
near Golan. Gadara remained in the possession
of the Jews for many years, apparently until it
was destroyed by them (B. J. i. 7, § 7) during
the civil war between Aristobulus and Hy rcanus.
Shortly afterwards Pompey, having taken Jeru-
salem (b.c. 63), rebuilt Gadara to gratify his
freedman Demetrius, who was a Gadarene, and
at the same time made it a free city and restored
it to its own citizens. Like all the other cities
to which Pompey granted self-government, and
freedom and immunity from taxation, it was
placed under the jurisdiction of the Governor
of Syria, and counted from the era of Pompey,
B.C. 64 (Ant. xiv. 4, § 4 ; B. J. i. 7, § 7). When
Gabinius, who was Proconsul of Syria, B.C. 57-55,
instituted five Sanhedrin for the government
of the Jews, he seated one of them at Gadara
(Ant. xiv. 5, § 4 ; B. J. i. 8, § 5).* Augustus
gave the city to Herod the Great (Ant. xv. 7,
§ 3), whose government does not seem to have
given complete satisfaction to the Gadarenes
• Schflrer, GachichU dajudUehen VoUca m ZeitalUr
Chriiti. t. 216, n. 6, ii. 89 aq., partly on the ground that
a Sanhedrin would hardly be located in a free city,
proposes to read Oazara for Gadara, and to place the seat
of the Sanhedrin at Gezer In Judaea.
Digitized by
Google
1098
GADABA
GADAKA
(Ant. xv. 10, §§ 2, 3). On Herod's death it was
transferred back to Syria (Ant. xvii. 11, § 4;
B. J. ii. 6, § 3).
At the very commencement of the Jewish
insurrection, the Jews, enraged at the massacre
of their kinsmen at Caesarea, ravaged the
country round Gadara, and set fire to the villages
that belonged to it. Upon this the Syrian
residents put the most troublesome Jews to
death, and imprisoned others ( Vit. § 9 ; B. J. ii.
18, §§ 1, 2, 5). Not long afterwards the
Gadarenes, with the people of Gabara, Sogane,
and Tyre, would appear to have attacked and
captured Gischala, where the Jews had declared
against the Romans ( Vit. § 10) ; and at a later
period Gadara was taken by Josephus ( Vit. § 15).
It opened its gates to Vespasian * when he
marched against it after having crushed the in-
surrection in Galilee, and the people pulled
down its walls to show that they desired peace
(B. J. iv. 7, § 3). The coins of Gadara are
autonomous and imperial ; and cover the period
from the year 8 (B.C. 56) to the year 303
(a.d. 239). The types are : a female head with
moral crown ; cornucopiae ; the figure of
Astarte crowned ; Jupiter seated in a tetrastyle
temple ; Hercules ; Pallas ; and a trireme with the
legend TAAAPECON NAYMA. The surname
Pompeiaus appears first on a coin of Antoninus ;
the Naumachia must have been held either near
the hot springs or on the Sea of Galilee. Several
ColBofOadata.
bishops of Gadara are mentioned as having been
present at the General Councils of the Church :
Cajanus at Nicaea, Eusebius at Antioch, Theo-
dorus at Ephesus, &c. The Latins in the
Middle Ages called the place Kedar (John of
Wiirzburg, xxv.);and the Arab writer Dimashki
(A.D. 1300) calls it Jedar, i.e. Gadara — a name
which Seetzen, who discovered the ruins in the
present century, found attached to the steep
hillside below them.
Gadara was a strongly fortified city (Ant. xiii.
3, $ 3; B. J. iv. 7, § 3); situated near the
Hieromax, Gadara Hieromace praefluente (Plin.
H. X. v. 16); east of Jordan, and over against
Scythopolis and Tiberias. It stood on n hill,
warm springs and baths (Eusebius and Jerome,
OS.* p. 248, 11 ; p. 219, 78 ; p. 130, 15 ; p. 91, 26 ;
/tin. Ant. Mart. vii.). According to the Jeru-
salem Talmud (Erubin, v. 7) Hamthan (Amatha)
was a Sabbath day's journey from the city
Josephus calls Gadara, at the time of the Jewish
War, the capital of Peraea ; and Polybius says
that it was one of the most strongly fortified
cities in the country (Joseph. B. J. iv. 7, § 3 ;
Polyb. v. 71). It was one of the cities of Deca-
polis (Plin. v. 16) ; and had a district, called
Gadaritis, under its jurisdiction, which, on the
west, had a common boundary with Galilee
(B. J. iii. 3, § 1 ; 10, § 10). This district is
referred to by Strabo (xvi. 2, 45), and ap-
parently corresponds to the "country of the
Gadarenes " in the N. T. Ptolemy (v. 15) and
Steph. Byz. (254) call Gadara a city of Code-
Syria ; and the latter says that it once bore the
names of Seleucia and Antiochia. The position
of the city was one of great strategic importance,
for the roads from Tiberias and Scythopolis to
Damascus and Gerasa passed through it. Gadara
was 16 M. P. from Scythopolis and 16 from
Capitolias (Itin. Ant. ed. Wess. pp. 197, 198),
16 from Tiberias (Tab. Peut.), and 12 from Abila
(OS.* p. 243, 8). Josephus ( Vit. 65) places it
60 stadia from Tiberias, but this is evidently
wrong.
Like all the other cities of Decapolis, Gadara
had a mixed population. After it was rebuilt
and made a free city by Pompey,
the governing and wealthy classes
were probably of Greek origin,
whilst the greater part of the
people, urban and rural, were
Aramaeans, more or less Hel-
lenised. Josephus (Ant. xvii. 11,
§ 4 ; B.J. ii. 6, § 3) calls it a
Greek city, and it may be in-
ferred from what he says that
this was the cause of its re-
transfer to Syria on the death of
Herod. The coins bear Greek
legends, and the Greek inscrip-
tions, found on the site, contain
such names as Theodoras, Pam-
Strabo (xvi. 3) mentions several
e.<j. Philodemas, the
philos, &c.
learned Greek Gadarenes:
Epicurean ; Mcnippus ; Theodorus, the Sophist,
who was tutor to the Emperor Tiberius ;
Apsines, the Rhetorician, &c. There was, how-
ever, a strong Jewish element in the popula-
tion, and possibly many Judaised Aramaeans.
The Midrash (Esther, ch. 1, 2) speaks of a "hall
of justice," perhaps that in which the Sanhedrin
sat; and there is said to have been an important
school at Migdal Gadar (Tal. Bab. Taanith, 2 a).
According to the Talmudists, Mount Gadar was
one of the physical subdivisions of the hill-
country of Peraea, and the site of one of the fire
, aignal-stations (Neubauer, Geog. du Talmud,
at the foot of which, at a place called Amatha pp. 40, 243). Gadara owes its celebrity to its
('EnnaM), 3 M. P. from the city, there were ' hot springs and baths, which were reckoned
I second only to those at Baiae (Eunap. Sardian.
* In B.J. ill. T, $ 1, Vespasian Is said to have taken I
Gadara immediately after his arrival at Ptolemais; but '
the place intended Is evidently Gabara, Kh. Katrra,
which it was necessary to occupy before attacking
Jotapata. Reland (p. Ill), who Is followed by Koblnson,
Hilman, and Scourer, also reads Gabara for Gadara In i
Vit. yy 10, IS. j
ap. Reland, Palaest. p. 775), and are praised bv
Origen (iv. 140) and by Epiphanius ( Adv. Ha* r.
i. 131). They are mentioned in the Itinerary
of Antoninus Martyr (vii.). who calls them the
"Baths of Elias," and by the early Arab
historians and geographers.
The ruins of Gadara, now called Vmm Keis,
Digitized by
Google
OADABA
GAD ABA
1099
cover a hill on the S. side of the Hieromax,
Sheri'atcl-Mandhir, about 6 Eng. miles S.E. of the
Sea of Galilee. The ruins include two theatres,
a basilica, a temple, a fine street with a colon-
nade on each side, of which the columns are
prostrate, the city wall and gates, an aqueduct,
and other buildings. On the pavement of the
main street the nits formed by the chariot
wheels can still be seen. On the eastern side of
the city, the gTound bears the name Jedur Umm
Keis, and here there are numerous rock-hewn
tombs, with their stone doors still swinging on
their hinges, and a large number of basalt sar-
cophagi (for descriptions of the ruins, see Burck-
hardt, Syria, p. 270 sq. ; Schumacher, Northern
'Ajlin, p. 46 sq. ; Wilson, Secovy. of Jerusalem,
p. 373 sq. ; Sepp, Jerusm. u. d. heUige Land, ii.
Tumi] ut Ud.lnr.i
216 sq.; Porter, Hbk. for Syr. $ Pal.). About
2J Eng. miles N. of the ruins, on the right bank
of the Sheri'al el-Jfandhur, are the hot springs.
The water is strongly impregnated with sulphur,
and has a temperature of 110° Fahr. ; its medi-
cinal qualities are highly valued by the Bedawin.
The ruins of baths and houses cover a large area
(Schumacher, The Jaulan, p. 149 sq., and autho-
rities cited above).
It was in the " land of the Gadarenes " that,
•wording to the A. V. of Mark v. 1 (R. V. " Gera-
•raes ") and Luke viii. 26, 37 (R. V. " Gera-
senes"), our Lord healed the demoniac and per-
mitted the devils to enter into a herd of swine,
hi Matt. viii. 28, however, the same miracle is
•aid (A. V.) to have been performed in the " land
oftheGergesenes" (R. V. "Gadarenes"). There
is a remarkable difference in the readings of the
most ancient MSS. in these verses: «. reads
Ta(apiivu¥ in Matt., Ytpaanvuiv in Mark, and
TtfrycaTfrwr in Luke ; in Matt, and Mark the
readings have been altered by a later hand
to agree with Luke; B., which is followed by
R. V., has rab'apriv&v in Matt, and TtpaeTivwv
in Mark and Luke ; A., which is followed by
A. V., has Ttfrjfo-nvuv in Matt, and Ta&aprivuv
in Mark and Luke. Of these readings Tfpa<rr\viv
is manifestly wrong, for Gerasa is about 35
miles from the Sea of Galilee, and is never men-
tioned in connexion with it. The question
therefore lies between Gadara and Gergesa.
The miracle took place " on the other side of
the sea," " over against Galilee," i.e. on the
eastern shore of the lake, near the spot where
Jesus and His disciples landed (Mark v. 2), in
close proximity to a town,
and not very far from
ground sloping steeply
down to the margin of
the lake (Matt. viii. 32 ;
Mark v. 13; Luke viii.
32, 33). The only place
on the E. shore of the
lake which fulfils these
conditions is a spot near
the mouth of Wady
Semakh. There are here
the ruins of a town called
Kersa, and about a mile
to the south "the hills,
which everywhere else
on the eastern side are
recessed from a half to
three-quarters of a mile
from the water's edge,
approach within forty
feet of it ; they do not
terminate abruptly, but
there is a steep even
slope " (Secovy. of Jeru-
salem, p. 368 : cp. Mac-
gregor, Sob Roy on the
Jordan, p. 422 sq. ; Thom-
son, Land and the Book,
ed. 1869, p. 315 sq.).
The pronunciation of the
word Kersa by the Be-
dawin is so similar to
Gergesa as to suggest its
identification with that
place. The word Tepye-
trnvwv seems to be the
same as the Hebrew Will (LXX. Ttpytaatos}
in Gen. iv. 21 and Deut. vii. 1 — the name of
an old Canaanitish tribe [GlROASlHTEs], which
Jerome (in Comm. ad Gen. xv.) locates on the
shore of the Sea of Tiberias. Origen says (Opp.
iv. 140) that there was an ancient city called
Gergesa on the shore of the lake, and that
bordering on the water there was a precipitous
descent which it appears that the swine de-
scended. Eusebius and Jerome (OS. 1 p. 256, 14 ;
p. 162, 18) also allude to Gergesa, which was then
a village on a bill above the lake. Gadara,
situated on a hill 6 m. from the shore of the
lake, cannot be the city referred to by the
Evangelists (the opinion followed by Riehm,
HWB. ». n.); and, though the land of the
Gadarenes probably extended to the lake, there is
Digitized by
Google
1100
GADDI
no topographical feature south of Wddy Fih such
as that indicated in the narrative. It is also
remarkable that the reading Taiafi)niv does not
occur once in the Sinaitic MS. (K). The possi-
bility that the land at the mouth of Wddy
Semakh was under the jurisdiction of Gadara is
slight, for the district of Hippos, Susiyeh, which
ran down to the lake (JB. J. iii. 3, § 1), intervened.
It is more probable that Gergesa, Kersa, was in
Gaulanitis. An iuteresting discussion between
Mr. Gladstone and Professor Huxley on the
nationality of the swine-herds, the character of
the miracle, and the place at which it took place
will be found in the nineteenth Century Maga-
zine, 1890 and 1891. [W.]
GAD'DI (?li = my happiness or fortunate;
TaXSi ; Gaddi), son of Susi ; representative of
the tribe of Manasseh among the spies sent by
Moses to explore Canaan (Num. xiii. 11).
GADDI-EL d?W*li = God is my happiness;
rovSifa ; Gcddiel), son of Sodi ; representative
of the tribe of Zebulun on the same occasion
(Num. xiii. 10).
GA'DI (H| ; B. TcAUi, A. r«M«f, and [u. 17]
raAAn*"; Gadi), father of Menahem, who
seized the throne of Israel from Shallum (2 K.
xv. 14, 17).
GAD'ITES, THE (H»n ; i Tat, 6 ra«M,
01 viol raj; Gad, Gaditae, Gaddi). The de-
scendants of Gad and members of his tribe.
Their character is described under Gad. In
2 Sam. xxiii. 36 for "the Gadite" B. has
roAoaSScf (A. TaSSQ, and the Vulg. de Gadi.
GA'HAM (Dna ; AD. Tad/n ; Gaham), son of
Nahor, Abraham's brother, by his concubine
lieumah (Gen. xxii. 24). No light has yet been
thrown on this tribe. The name perhaps signi-
fies sunburnt or swarthy (see MV.").
GA'HAB ("inj; radp; Gaher). The Bene-
Gachar were among the families of Nethinim
who returned from the Captivity with Zerubba-
bel (Ezra ii. 47 ; Neh. vii. 49). In 1 Esd. the
name is given as Geddub. [W. A. W.] [F.]
GAI'US. [John, Second and Thibd Epis-
tles of.]
GAL'AAD (roAottt), 1 Mace. v. 9, 55 ; Judith
i. 8, xv. 5 ; and the COUNTltY OF Galaad (^
raAoaoiTis ; Galaadttis), 1 Mace. v. 17,20,25,
27, 36, 45 ; xiii. 22, the Greek form of the
word Gilead.
GA'LAL £hi; B. TaKaai, A. r»A<A;
Galal). 1. A Levite, one of the sons of Asaph
(1 Ch. ix. 15). 2. Another Levite of the family
of Elkanah (1 Ch. ix. 16). 3. A third Levite,
son of Jeduthun (Neh. xi. 17; BKA. om.,
!("■«■» IWA ; Galal). [W. A W.] [F.]
GALA'TIA (roAorfo, ToAoTurii, raWoypat-
kIo), a central district of Asia Minor, lying north
of Phrygia and Cappadocia, and consisting of a
broad strip of country about 200 miles in length,
stretching from south-west to north-east. On
the south-west it bordered on Phrygia, Pessinus
being the chief town; on the north-east it
GALATIA
bordered on Pontus and Cappadocia, the chief
town being Tavium ; in the centre was Ancyra,
generally regarded as the capital of the whole
district (Ramsay, Histor. Geography of Asia
Minor, pp. 221-254).
It derives its name from Gallic tribes, who
made a settlement there. The name Galatia
was that by which the country which the
Romans called Gallia was known to the Greeks,
and they gave the same name to the Asiatic
country in which the Gallic tribes settled. In
a time somewhat later than that to which the
Books of Scripture belong, Greek writers made
a distinction between European and Asiatic
Gaul, adopting the Latin names Gallia for the
former and Gallograecia for the latter ; but so
late as the lifetime of St. Paul, the name
Galatia was ambiguous and might denote either
country. Consequently when St. Paul says (2
Tim. iv. 10) that he had sent Crescens to
Galatia, the phrase does not absolutely de-
termine whether it was to European or Asiatic
Galatia that Crescens had been sent ; and to in
the margin of the Revised Version of the New
Testament, the alternative rendering " Gaul "
is given. Several ancient writers suppose that
what we call Gaul was intended. Thus Eusebios
(H. E. iii. 4 ; cp. note in loco, edd. Wace and
Schaff) certainly understood Gaul to be meant
in 2 Timothy. So also Epiphanius (Haer. Ii. 11),
who boldly pronounces it to be an error to
understand Galatia. Theodoret (in loco) reads
Galatia, but interprets, " that is to say, Gaul,
for that was the ancient name of the country,
and so it is still called by those acquainted with
foreign literature." When Christianity came
to be the predominant religion in Gaul, there
was a natural desire of the inhabitants to con-
nect the origin of their Churches with apostolic
times by claiming Crescens as one of their
founders, and it might be expected that French
writers should take the same view. But
Tillemont (St. Paul, Art. 52 and note 81, vol. i.
pp. 312, 584) understands the passage of the
Eastern Galatia, and gives strong reasons for
thinking that the conversion of Gaul belongs to
a later date, and that there is no trace of the
work of Crescens in that country. Accordingly
modern commentators generally reject the in-
terpretation " Gaul."
In the inscription of the First Epistle of St.
Peter, " to the strangers scattered throughout
Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia," &c, the collocation
of the words leaves no doubt that the Asiatic
Galatia is intended.
But there is an earlier passage where Galatia
is mentioned and where some have claimed for
the word the meaning " Gaul." In 1 Mace. viii.
2, among the reasons why Judas Maccabaeus sent
an embassy to the Romans it is stated that he
had heard of their wars with the Galatians, and
how they had conquered them and brought
them under tribute. Here the margin of the
English Version for "Galatians" has "French-
men " ; and in support of the view that the
Western country is intended, it is urged that in
the next verse (1 Mace. viii. 3), immediately
after the mention of the victories of the Romans
over the Galatians, their conquest of Spain is
spoken of; and further that, although the
Romans under Manlius Vulso gained a great
victory over the Galatians (B.C. 189), it does not
Digitized by
Google
GALATIA
appear that he brought them under tribute;
whence it is contended that the Galatians in-
tended must be the Gauls of Northern Italy.
Vet notwithstanding these arguments, it seems
more natural to think of those Galatians whom
Madias had conquered less than thirty years
before the embassy of Judas Maccabaeus. The
Jews would hear with interest of this victory
of Manlius; for Jews had themselves been in
conflict with these Galatians, and could boast of
a victory over them. This we learn from a
reference made in the Second Book of Macca-
bees (viii. 20) to a great victory gained in
Babylonia by Jews over Galatians, and there
can be no doubt that Eastern Galatians are
intended, though we have no other information
»» to the battle in question. It has been
conjectured that it may have been fonght by
Jews serving under Antiochus, king of Syria,
who gained the name of Soter by his victories over
the Galatians.
There can be no doubt that the repression of
Gallic brigandage was a public service which
well deserved recognition. It would not be
relevant to this article to describe what Southern
Europe suffered from successive waves of Gallic
invasion from the time of the burning of Rome
in 390 B.C to the subjugation of Gaul by Julius
Caesar. Here we are only concerned with
Asia, which had its first experience of the
rapacity of the Gauls in B.c. 278, when a large
body of them crossed the Hellespont in search of
plunder. For some fifty years they and those
who followed them levied contributions widely
on the unwarlike inhabitants of Asia Minor.
The first great check was given them, as already
stated, by Antiochus Soter ; bat it was Attalus,
the ruler of Pergamum, who first refused to pay
them tribute, and, having defeated them in a
great battle, confined them to the district
which derived its name from them. The date
of the victory of Attalus is not exactly known,
but he ruled from B.c. 241 to 197, and 230 may
be set down as an approximate date. The
Gallic invaders had consisted of three distinct
tribes, and so the country in which they settled
was divided into three cantons, — the Trocmi
occupying the north-eastem extremity next
Pontus, having Tavium for their capital ; the
Tolistoboii being at the opposite or south-western
extremity, having Pessinus for their capital, and
the Tectosages at Ancyra in the centre. These
Eastern Gauls preserved much of their ancient
character, and something of their ancient lan-
guage (see Mommsen, Provinces of the Soman
i%jxre, i. 341, Eng. tr.). At least Jerome says
that in his day the same language might be
beard at Ancyra as at Treves : and he is a good
witness; for he himself had been at Treves.
The prevailing speech, however, of the district
was Greek. Hence the Galatians were called
Gallograeci ("Hi jam degeneres sunt: mixti,
rt Gallograeci vere, quod appellantur :" Manlius
■* Livy, ixxviii. 17). The inscriptions found at
Ancyra are Greek, and St. Paul wrote his
Epistle in Greek.
These warlike people had more than once
given their services as mercenaries to Syrian
Wngs in their wars with their neighbours, and
they fought on the side of Antiochus the Great
<n his war with the Romans, and took part in
'he last great battle in which he was defeated.
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE 1101
This drew the attention of the Romans on them,
and the Consul Manlius invaded their country
in B.C. 189, and succeeded in bringing them to
complete submission. The account of his cam-
paign is given in the 38th book of Livy, who
also has a reference (xxxiii. 21) to the previous
victory of Attalus.
We have here no concern with the history of
Galatia in the years immediately following ; but
it is important to note that Amyntas, the last
of the independent rulers of the country, had
through favour, first of M. Antonius, afterwards
ot Augustus, been in possession not only of
Galatia, but of a good deal of adjacent territory.
So, when on the death of Amyntas (n.c. 25)
Galatia was made into a Roman province by
Augustus, the province included, in addition to
Galatia proper, Lycaonia, Pamphylia, Pisidia, and
a good deal of Phrygia. The result is to intro-
duce a new ambiguity into the word Galatia,
obliging us to consider, when we meet the word
in the New Testament, whether it is to be
understood as a geographical or as a political
term. In particular, St. Paul speaks (1 Cor. xvi.
1) of the churches of Galatia, and he addresses an
Epistle to the Galatians, and some have thence
inferred that among the travels of the Apostle
must have been one of which St. Luke in the
Acts gives no particulars, in which he evangel-
ized the whole country of Galatia proper, even,
as some would have it, travelling from Pessinus
to Tavium and back ; others understand the
word Galatia in its political sense, and contend
that we are not bound to think of any churches
of Galatia bat those whose foundation by St.
Paul is recorded in the Acts, such as Derbe and
Lystra, Antioch in Pisidia, &c, which, though
not belonging to Galatia proper, were included
in the Roman province of Galatia. The ques-
tion thus raised will be more conveniently dis-
cussed in the next article, the Epistle to the
Galatians. [G. S.]
GALATIANS, THE EPISTLE TO THE.
I. Authorship. — In the case of the Epistle to the
Galatians, we are able to touch lightly on dis-
cussions as to its authorship which require more
serious consideration in the case of other New
Testament Books. That this is a genuine letter
of the Apostle Paul may be accounted as a fact
acknowledged by the best critics of all schools.
It is true that the acknowledgment is not
absolutely universal, but the exceptions are not
important enough to deserve much regard, for
it would evidently be impossible in this Dictionary
to discuss every paradox in maintaining which
critics have exhibited their ingenuity.
The absence of controversy as to the author-
ship of this Epistle is not to be ascribed to its
possessing any great superiority in respect of
external attestation over other New Testament
Books. It is true that it is formally quoted
towards the end of the 2nd century by Irenaeus
(ill. vii. 2, xvi. 2 ; v. xxi. 1, &c), Clement of
Alexandria {Strom, iii. 15, &c), Tertullian (Dc
Monog. vi., tie.), the citations by each writer
being so numerous, that it would be incon-
venient to give a complete list. Somewhat
earlier Celsus, writing against the Christians,
quotes this Epistle as being in general use among
them ; this being, as Origen remarks, Celsus's
only quotation from St. Paul's Epistles (Orig. adv.
Digitized by
Google
1102 GALATIAN8, EPISTLE TO THE
Cels. v. 64). Celsus had been speaking of the
variety of sects among the Christians and their
mutual hostility ; but all of them, he says, you
will hear saying, " The world is crucified unto
me, and I unto the world " (Gal. vi. 14). The
Clementine Homilies, a work exhibiting bitter
hostility to St. Paul, show a knowledge of this
Epistle in a spiteful reference (xvii. 19) to St.
Paul's haying withstood St. Peter (Gal. ii. 11).
There are besides distinct proofs of knowledge of
the Epistle, though without formal quotation of
it, by Justin Martyr (Trypho, 95, 96), Tatian
(Hieron. in Ep. Gal. vi. 8), Polycarp (cc. 3, 5,
12), and Ignatius (Aliignes. 8).' The Epistle
formed part of the heretic Marcion's Apostolicon,
or collection of apostolic letters, in the early
part of the 2nd century. This mass of external
attestation, the enumeration of which does not
profess to be complete, might certainly be held
to afford sufficient evidence of the Pauline author-
ship of the Epistle, if it were not that similar
testimony has not been accepted as conclusive
in the case of other New Testament Books.
But what has silenced controversy is the note
of early date stamped on the Epistle by the
character of its contents. It deals with the
question whether or not it was obligatory on
Gentile converts to Christianity to snbmit to the
rite of circumcision. St. Luke has informed us
(Acts xv.) that this question did give rise to
warm controversy in the Christian Church at an
early period of its history ; but from the nature
of the case it was inevitable that thia question
must give rise to violent controversy the first
time that heathens were proposed for admission
in any numbers into the Church. To become a
Christian was not merely to acknowledge Jesus
of Nazareth as a Divine Teacher, it was also to
become one of a society the members of which
were bound together by close bonds of brotherly
association and mutual love ; and the partaking
of a common meal, which was a familiar insti-
tution in friendly societies at the time, came to
possess in the Christian societies the highest
religious significance. That Jews should enter
into such intimate association with uncircum-
cised persons was opposed to all their prejudices.
St. Luke represents St. Peter as telling Cornelius,
" Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for
a man that is a Jew to keep company or come
unto one of another nation," and as afterwards
having to excuse himself to his countrymen
" because he had gone in to men uncircumcised
and had eaten with them " (Acts x. 28, xi. 2).
Of heathen testimonies to this feature of Jewish
exclusiveness it is enough to cite the description
of Tacitus {Hist. v. 5) : " adversus omnes alios
hostile odium : separati epulis, discreti cubilibus."
Jewish converts to Christianity had been largely
made from the Pharisees, the most exclusive of
the Jewish sects, and the most rigid in its obser-
vance of the Mosaic Law. Thus it might before-
hand have seemed impossible to unite Jews and
Gentiles in such close fraternity as that which
was the rule of the Christian societies ; for the
demand of circumcision as a condition of com-
munion was certain to be made by the Jews,
while very few Gentiles would consent to submit
to an ordinance which was not only painful, but
was regarded as degrading.
Yet, as we know that Gentile Churches were
formed in a number of places at a very early
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
period in the history of Christianity, we can
certainly infer that the controversy concerning
the necessity of circumcision must have been
one of short duration. For this was no specula-
tive question about which men might go on dis-
puting for years ; it was an urgent practical
one which demanded immediate decision: Was
the Church at Jerusalem to recognise as daughter
Churches those new communities in which uncir-
cumcised persons predominated ? Now all our
authorities give what is clearly independent testi-
mony to the fact that the relations between the
Jerusalem Church and the Churches founded by
Paul were not only friendly, but were cemented by
pecuniary obligations ; that just as Jews residing
in foreign countries contributed their half-shekel
to the support of the Temple service, so the
Christian converts among the Gentiles made
contributions for the necessities of the parent
Church at Jerusalem. We are told in the Acts
of two journeys made by St. Paul to Jerusalem as
the bearer of such contributions : we find in the
Second Epistle to the Corinthians (cc viii., ix. ;
see also 1 Cor. xvi. 1, Rom. xv. 25) St. Paul
making elaborate arrangements for the collection
of such contributions from different Churches ;
this Epistle to the Galatians represents St. Pi nl's
mission to the Gentiles as recognised by the lead-
ing Apostles, and describes this collection for the
Jewish poor as having been a condition agreed on
at the time of that recognition. The inference
that the admissibility of uncircumcised persons
to Christian membership was recognised at a
very early period of the Church's history is
confirmed by the fact that there is no trace of
controversy on this subject in any documents
that have come down to us of later date than
that claimed for the Epistle to the Galatians.
It may well be believed that there were some
among the original Jewish members of the
Church to whom the decision to admit uncircum-
cised persona to their fellowship was altogether
distasteful, and who were shocked at St. Paul s
teaching that compliance with the obligations of
the Mosaic Law was a matter of indifference as re-
gards man's salvation. We learn therefore with-
out surprise that hostility to St. Paul's teaching
was not quite extinct in Jewish circles at the end
of the 2nd century. But at that date the attempt
to impose circumcision on Gentiles had been
long abandoned as hopeless. In the account ot
St. Peter's preaching given in the Pseudo-Clemen-
tine Homilies, which of all extant documents
represent to us anti-Paulinism in its strongest
form, Peter'scon verts are always merely baptized,
not circumcised ; nor is there any trace in the
story that Clement himself, the hero of the
romance, was ever circumcised. It is evident
how early must be the date of a document
written when the admissibility of an uncircum-
cised person to the Church was the burning
question of the day.
When the document is recognised to be as
early as the time when St. Paul was in activity,
there is no temptation to look for any other
authorship for it than that which itself claims.
But even if we left out of sight the considera-
tion that the Epistle deals with a controversy
which must have ceased to be disputed
long before St. Paul was dead, it makes such
a revelation of the feelings and character oi
the writer that a critic makes an exhibition oi
Digitized by
Google
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
incompetence if he fancies that the St. Paul whom
. this letter presents to us is no real person, bat
the imaginary creation of a disciple o f a later
generation.
What the letter discloses as to the circum-
stances under which it would seem to have been
written is, that the persons addressed had been
original 1 j heathen (ir. 8), and had been con-
verted by St. Paul at a time when his bodily weak-
ness might have seemed likely to interfere with
his usefulness ; that he had notwithstanding
heen most successful in his preaching to them,
and had been regarded by them with the warmest
affection (it. 13-15); that these converts had ac-
cepted from St. Paul a Gospel which taught that
faith in Christ was the one necessary and suffi-
cient condition for salvation ; that after St. Paul's
departure other teachers had come among them,
claiming to speak with higher authority than
his, namely, with that of the original Apostles,
and that they had been successful in largely
persuading the Galatians that St. Paul's teaching
was imperfect, and that faith in Christ alone
would not suffice for their salvation unless they
were also circumcised and observed the other
precepts of the Mosaic Law. Now we may
pronounce it unlikely that a later Paulinist
would invent such a history as that of a revolt
from the Apostle of his first converts ; but quite
impossible that he should so succeed in giving
adequate expression to the feelings of surprise,
grief, and indignation with which St. Paul re-
ceived the news of the defection of his disciples.
This letter has points of contact with two
other of the Epistles ascribed to St. Paul, which,
though in many respects unlike each other, hare
such features in common with this that we may
confidently say that all are the work of the same
author, and that we cannot reject one without
rejecting all three. The polemic of the Epistle
to the Galatians divides itself into two principal
parts: (a) the writer vindicates his apostolic
authority, claiming to be entirely independent of
those who had been Apostles before him, not
being indebted to themeither for his knowledge of
the Gospel which he preached, or for his apostolic
commission, bat having received them by direct
revelation from Jesus Christ; (6) he expounds
the principles on which he resisted the inculca-
tion of the necessity of circumcision, showing
that the enforcement of the Mosaic Law as
obligatory was subversive of the whole Gospel
which he taught. Now, the Epistle to the
Romans contains a quite similar exposition of
principles, not only akin to that given in the
Epistle to the Galatians in its general line
of argument, but so full of verbal coincidences
with it that we may safely conclude not only
that the two Epistles are the work of the same
author, but also that the composition of the two
wold not have been separated by any great in-
terval of time. But it would seem that St. Paul's
apostolic authority was not disputed by those to
whom the Epistle to the Romans was addressed ;
lor that Epistle contains nothing corresponding
to the section in the Epistle to the Galatians
which asserts and justifies St. Paul's claim to
>postleship. In the Second Epistle to the Corin-
thians, on the other hand, the controversial ex-
Position of the non-necessity of circumcision is
entirely wanting, nor are there nearly so many
verbal coincidences with the Epistle to the
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE 1103
Galatians as in the Epistle to the Romans. But
it has close affinity with the Epistle to the Gala-
tians in all that regards the personal relations
of St. Paul with his disciples. In both cases
the Apostle addresses children in the faith,
who owed their knowledge of the Gospel to
himself, and whom he regards with a father's
affection ; and in both cases he is disappointed by
finding that his love is but coldly returned, and
that newly-arrived teachers threaten to supersede
him in his converts' esteem. The letters written
under these circumstances prove their own
genuineness by making a revelation of the cha-
racter of the writer, beyond the skill of any
forger to produce. The letters show the writer
to have been a proud man to whom self-assertion
and self-vindication are altogether distasteful, and
one of such warm affections as to feel acutely
pained that the necessity of asserting his right-
ful claims should have arisen from the defection
of disciples whom he loved and from whom he
had deserved more confidence. The identity of
character exhibited in the letters to the Corin-
thian and to the Galatian Churches is even a
stronger proof of common authorship than coin-
cidence in forms of expression.
Although the internal evidence for the
genuineness of these letters is decisive on the
grounds already stated, there are some other
considerations that it is worth while to mention.
(1.) We have a note of early date in the fact
that so much of the Epistle to the Galatians
is taken up with an assertion of St. Paul's in-
dependent authority. With the multiplication
of Churches claiming him as their founder, his
authority ceased to be disputed within the pale
of the Christian Church ; nay, from a very
early period he came to be spoken of as the
Apostle, a title which no doubt he owed to the
fact that his letters soon ceased to be the exclu-
sive property of the several Churches to which
they were addressed, and became the manual of
apostolic instruction used in the public reading
of widely separated Churches. It is true that
the Pseudo-Clementine writings show that there
was a small body of persons calling themselves
Christians (though reckoned by the bulk of Chris-
tians as outside their community) who did not
recognise St. Paul's authority ; but these counted
St. Paul, not only as no Apostle, but as a deceiver
and an enemy. The polemic in the Epistles to
the Galatians and Corinthians is not directed
against such a view as this, but only labours to
show that St. Paul was entitled to claim perfect
equality with the elder Apostles. The contro-
versy, therefore, concerning St. Paul's apostleship,
in the form in which we find it in the Epistle
to the Galatians, is like the controversy con-
cerning circumcision, one which could only have
been disputed in the very earliest age of the
Church.
(2.) An argument may be founded on the
agreement between the attitude towards Judaism
and the Old Testament held by the Churches
which claim St. Paul for their founder, and that
presented in the Epistles under consideration.
Any one who studies the history of the rise of
Christianity out of Judaism must be struck by
the paradox that there should be such complete
continuity between the two religions and yet
such an entire break between them. All the
rites and institutions on which the Jews prided
Digitized by
Google
1104 GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
themselves, as placing them on a higher level
than the surrounding Gentiles, are abandoned ;
the wall of separation between Jew and Gentile
is altogether thrown down, yet the authority of
the great Jewish lawgiver is kept unimpaired,
and the sacred books which ordain the Jewish
institutions are held in the highest reverence.
Now among those who, in the 2nd century, re-
sisted the obligations of Judaism, there was a
disposition to take a less favourable view of the
older religion. The great majority of the Gnostic
sects rejected the Old Testament altogether, and
even denied that the God of the Jews was the
same as He by whom Jesus had been sent. In
the system of Marcion hostility to Judaism
received its fullest development, and assumed
the form which gained the widest acceptance.
In one of the oldest of the Christian documents
not received into the Church's Canon, the epistle
which bears the name of Barnabas, though the
authority of the Old Testament is fully acknow-
ledged, yet the Jewish rites are rejected, not
merely as not now binding on Christians, but as
never having been binding on the Jews them-
selves. They are represented as having adopted
them through a misunderstanding of the Divine
precepts, under the influence of an evil angel.
The fact that the opinion concerning the Old
Testament which was held by the Pauline
Churches is that which we hold ourselves, onght
not to prevent us from seeing how singular, and
even inconsistent, it must have appeared when
it was first put forward. It must have seemed
strange that men should side with the Jews
in opposing those who impugned the Divine
authority of the Old Testament, and yet refuse
to regard the institutions which it ordained, as
binding on them. We are bound to account
historically for the wide acceptance in the
Christian Church of such a view. We have the
explanation at once if we acknowledge the
genuineness of the group of Epistles of which
that to the Galatians is one. For it would then
appear that the Pauline Churches but followed
the teaching of their founder, who, in the very
letters in which he resisted most strenuously
the attempt to impose Jewish ordinances on
Gentiles, yet fully acknowledged the authority
of the Jewish Scriptures, and quoted them more
largely than in any other writings ascribed to
him. The historical problem remains without
solution if we reject these Epistles.
But perhaps more has been said than was
necessary in defence of the genuineness of the
Epistle to the Galatians and of the other three
Epistles (Romans and the two Corinthians)
which must stand or fall with it. The argu-
ments urged against these Epistles by extreme
followers of Baur have no force except as ad
hominem ; and though they may prove success-
fully that it is inconsistent to accept these
Epistles and reject those to the Philippians and
the First to the Thessalonians, yet those who can-
not accept both of Baur's decisions will generally
choose to adopt the first rather than the second.
II. Persons addressed. — The Epistle to the
Galatians differs from the rest of Paul's Epistles
to Churches, in being addressed, not, like those,
to the Church of some leading city, but to
the Churches of a district ; and in the article
Galatia it is explained that there is an am-
biguity in this word which may denote either
the geographical district of Galatia, or the
Roman province of that name, which included
besides a good deal of adjacent territory. We
turn, then, to the Acts of the Apostles in order
to discover whether the history therein contained
enables us to determine the question.
Now, although the Book of the Acts is in
accordance with the Epistle to the Galatians in
the testimony which it bears to the existence in
the very early Church of a controversy on the
subject of circumcision which soon came to be
forgotten, yet these two witnesses are clearly in-
dependent. We must presently discuss whether
the variation between the accounts of St. Paul's
history, as given in the Acts and as inferred from
the Epistle to the Galatians, is such as to impair
the credibility of either witness, but certainly
the unlikeness is such that we can say with
confidence that the author of either document
could not possibly have seen the other. From
the 2nd century downwards, St. Paul has been
mainly known to the Christian world as the author
of documents used in the public reading of the
Church. To the writer of the Book of the Acts
St. Paul is known only as an active missionary,
and it is not so much as mentioned that he ever
wrote a letter to a distant Church. Signs of
acquaintance with any of the extant letters are
very doubtful, and it may be pronounced as
certain that the Epistle to the Galatians was
not known to the author of the Acts. It is
evident what an early date this obliges us to
assign to the latter Book, viz. the time before St.
Paul's Epistles had passed, from being the exclu-
sive possession of the Churches to which they
were severally addressed, into general Church
use. It is needless to discuss the untenable
hypothesis that the writer of the Epistle to the
Galatians could have known the Book of the
Acts.
In the account of St. Paul's first missionary
journey given in Acts xiv. we are told of his
having preached the Gospel in Antioch in Pisidia,
in Iconium, in Derbe and Lystra, cities which
belonged to the Roman province of Galatia. St.
Luke never uses the word Galatia in speaking of
these cities : on the contrary, he describes Derbe
and Lystra geographically as cities of Lycaonia ;
but we must admit the possibility that St. Paul's
use of language may have been different from
St. Luke's.
If St. Paul visited Galatia proper, it must have
been on his second missionary journey, recorded
in Acts xvi. ; but the very scantiest account is
there given of the Apostle's labours in the
Galatian district. It strengthens our belief in
the reliance to be placed on the accuracy of St.
Luke's history, when we find how silent he is as
to occurrences at which he was not either actu-
ally present or bad means of full information.
He does give a pretty full account of St. Paul's
first missionary journey : but there is good reason
to think that St. Luke was a resident at Antioch,
and he tells howSt.Paul and St. Barnabas on their
return gathered the Church of that city together
and rehearsed all that God had done with them.
But St. Luke was not St. Paul's companion in the
first part of the Apostle's second missionary
journey : for we find from his use of the pronoun
" we " that he did not join the Apostle until his
arrival at Troas (Acts xvi. 10). Accordingly, of
all that previously took place on that tour he only
Digitized by
Google
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
relate* one incident at length, and for his know-
ledge of that we can easily account. When
St Paul's company arrived at Irons, it included
a member with whom St. Luke appears to have
had no previous acquaintance, viz. Timothy. He
would naturally inquire something as to the
history of this new companion, and accordingly
he relates how St. Paul on his visit to Derbe and
Lystra had found this disciple and chosen him
to be his travelling companion ; but the details of
St Paul's work before he himself had joined him
he does not attempt to record. What we learn
is that on this visit St. Paul's work in Asia Minor
began with Cilicia, and, it is natural to think,
with Tarsus. Then, as has been just mentioned,
we find St. Paul in Derbe and Lystra. We are neit
told that as St. Paul went through the cities he
delivered the decrees which had been ordainei!
by the Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem. We
cannot say with absolute certainty that among
these cities were Iconium and Antioch in Pisidia,
for St. Luke does not expressly say so. But it is
not likely that St. Paul would have been in such
•close neighbourhood of churches which he had
founded on his previous tour, and omit to deliver
to them the apostolic decrees. There was a
reason for St. Luke's special mention of Derbe
and Lystra because the call of Timothy had to
be related. St. Luke next tells of the missionary
party, that " they went through the Phrygianand
Galatian country, having been hindered by the
Holy Ghost from speaking the Word in Asia. And
-when they were come over against Mysia, they
assayed to go into Bithynia,and the Spirit of Jesus
suffered them not. And passing by Mysia they
came down to Troas " (cp. Acts xvi. 6, 7, R. V.).
It appears from this that it had been St. Paul's
original intention to travel westward from
Antioch through the Roman province of Asia,
meaning probably to reach the sea at Ephesus.
We do not know in what way the Divine intima-
tion was given which caused him to alter his
course in a northerly direction, but we may
reasonably conjecture that hindrances to his
journey westward presented themselves which
either he or some other prophetic member of the
party instructed the rest to regard as provi-
dential guidance. We are tempted to connect
with this the statement in Gal. iv. 13, the
most obvious meaning of which is that St. Paul's
work in the Galatian district arose out of
an illness of his. Such an illness may have
caused arrangements which had been made for
his journey into Proconsular Asia to fall through
(and possibly more than once). The question
with which we are immediately concerned is,
What was the country to which St. Paul next
directed his course, and which St. Luke describes
as the "Phrygian and Galatian country "? Renan
concludes that because St. Luke next tells of
St. Paul's being in Mysia, which lies far to the
north-west of Antioch or Iconium, his journey
must have been altogether in that direction, and
that we cannot suppose him to have gone to
fi»l»n» proper, which would be much to the
east of his way. But we have no right to
assume, that when St. Paul's intention to go into
Asia was frustrated, he at once determined to
a>ske for Mysia. He was evidently prepared to
follow God's providential guidance, whitherso-
ever it might lead him. We cannot tell what
jatiiations to join their party he may have
BIBLE D1CT. — VOL. L
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE 1105
received from Jewish acquaintances proceeding
in the Galatian direction, or what assurances of
hospitable reception when they reached their
destination, such as might indicate that this was
where God had opened a door to him. All that St.
Luke tells us is that St. Paul ultimately arrived
on the borders of Mysia ; but as to whether ha
reached that point by a direct or a circuitous
route, he gives us no information.
Other biographers of St. Paul, influenced by
the fact that he wrote an Epistle to the
Galatians, and anxious to find a place in his
history for a complete evangelization of Galatia,
represent him as having been detained by illness,
if not at Antioch in Pisidia, at Synnada, where
the road to Asia branched off, and that he then
travelled to Pessinus, the uearest town of Galatia
proper. So far the suggested route corresponds
sufficiently with St. Luke's narrative. But they
go on to represent him as proceeding north-east-
ward from Pessinus to Ancyra, thence in the
same direction to Tavium, and tbeu of necessity
back again to Ancyra and Pessinus. But cer-
tainly St. Luke's statement that " they went
through the Phrygian and Galatiau country, and
came over against Mysia," is one from which we
should never have gathered that we were to put
a great loop on the course of St. Paul's travels, or
think of him as having made a prolonged stay
in Galatia. When we observe, moreover, that St.
Luke carefully avoids saying that St. Paul went
through "Galatia," not only in the verse al-
ready cited (xvi. 6), but also in the verse (xviii.
23) which describes another visit of St. Paul
to the same region, and where again the phrase
used is "the Galatian and Phrygian country,"
we are led to think of this phrase as meaning
not so much Galatia proper as rather the coun-
try which was geographically Phrygia but poli-
tically Galatia. The result is that St. Luke's
narrative does not warrant us to conclude with
any certainty that St. Paul made any prolonged
stay in Galatia proper, or did much work in
founding Churches there ; though if there be
other evidence that he did, no presumption to
the contrary arises from the silence of a narra-
tive so concise as that in the Acts.
We turn therefore to St. Paul's Epistles, and
first inquire what is meant by the " Churches of
Galatia" (1 Cor. xvi. 1): "Concerning the col-
lection for the saints, as I gave order to the
Churches of Galatia, so also do ye." We are
not entitled to conclude that because St. Luke,
when historically relating the course of St. Paul's
journeys, describes the places visited by their
precise geographical designations, St. Paul may
not have used the word Galatia in a wide sense
when in want of a word to include all the
Churches which he had founded in the Roman
province of Galatia. In fact, if he had wished
to include under one designation the Churches
of Antioch, Iconium, Derbe and Lystra, together
possibly with others in the adjacent district, it
is hard to say what other term he could have
used. There is, as we have said, no certain evi-
dence that St. Paul founded Churches in Galatia
proper; if he did, these of course would be
included among the Churches of Galatia. But
the question is, whether we are bound to under-
stand St. Paul's use of the word as excluding all
Churches save those of Galatia proper? Mow
it is no't likely either that, when he was organ-
4 B
Digitized by
Google
1106 GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
izing a collection for the poor Christians of I
Jerusalem, he would omit to appeal to the
Churches in the Galatian province with which
his relations were so intimate, or that he
would leave those Churches unmentioned when
writing to Corinth. Thus the word as used in
the Epistle to the Corinthians will very well
bear the wider sense.
We turn then to its use in the inscription of
the Epistle to the Galatians. There is some
temptation to understand the word here too in
the wider sense. The occasion of the Epistle was
the temporary success of emissaries from the
Pharisaic section of the Church at Jerusalem,
who inculcated circumcision as necessary for
ail Christians. We know from the Acts that
such teachers had gone to Antioch in Syria, and
it is easy to believe that similar efforts were
made elsewhere; but it is strange if the only
place we hear of their success should be the
most remote corner ot Asia Minor that St. Paul
ever reached. It is therefore a tempting sup-
position that the Jewish teachers starting from
Antioch may have followed St. Paul's own
course, and made converts in the Churches of
Derbe, Lystra, Antioch, and Iconium, which he
had founded. We could then understand the
Apostle's passionate indignation on learning the
falling away of men who had once held him in
such love, that "if it had been possible they
would' hare plucked out their own eyes and
have given them to him." It may also be
taken in favour of this hypothesis, that if we
adopt a common interpretation of Gal. iv. 13,
and understand the verse to imply that St. Paul's
evangelization of the " Galatians " was owing
to his having been detained by sickness in their
country, we must suppose this sickness to have
befallen St. Paul when it had been his intention to
go to some other district. But we cannot with
much probability imagine him to have gone
into Galatia proper merely with such an iuten-
tion, whereas it would harmonize well with the
story in the Acts if we could apply the word
" Galatians " to the people of the place where
the road to Ephesus branched off, and where
the Apostle was constrained, not improbably by
illness, to abandon his intention of proceeding in
that direction.
On the other hand, the strongest argument
for believing the Apostle to have been in Galatia
proper is his exclamation (iii. 1) "0 foolish
Galatians!" — a phrase which it is not easy to
regard as used to people of different nation-
alities. There is no difficulty in imagining
routes for St. Paul which would have brought
him into Galatia proper. Thus he might have
struck north from Iconium to Ancyra, or
perhaps more probably from Synnada to Pessinus.
With each of these Galatian cities Jews had
commercial relations; so that it is easy to
conceive that the Apostle might have received
an invitation to visit either place, and equally
to conceive that other Jews, advocates of the
necessity of circumcision, might have followed
in the same track. But all this is so purely
matter of conjecture, that in the absence of any
positive information from St. Luke we find
ourselves unable to assert with any confidence
that St. Paul was ever in Galatia proper.
We could not arrive at this negative conclu-
sion if we attached much weight to explanations
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
which have accounted for the suddenness of the
Galatian abandonment of the Gospel as taught
by St. Paul, by the fact that these people were
largely of Celtic extraction, — a race proverbial
for fickleness. It may be doubted whether
Celts formed the predominant element in the
Churches of Galatia, even taking that word to
denote the specially Gallic country. Its popu-
lation must have contained a great mixture of
races. The native Phrygian element long
survived; and the Consul Manlius on his
invasion was welcomed by priests of Cvbele.
There long continued to be among them Gauls
speaking their own language, for St. Jerome
tells in the Preface to the second book of his
Commentary on the Galatians that he himself
recognised the language which he heard spoken
there as the same that he had heard spoken at
Treves. But the name Gallograecia attests
how powerful the Greek element had become,
consisting partly no doubt of Gauls who had
learned the language, but in a great measure
also of the numerous Greek settlers who had
taught it to them ; and lastly, the Jewish
element was, as already stated, by no means
inconsiderable. It must have been among the
Greeks and Jews that St. Paul's converts were
made, and it may be doubted whether among
the Christian converts there was any very large
proportion of Celtic blood.
But it is more important to observe that men
of different countries share in a common nature,
and that people often make mistakes in fancying
they see tokens of national peculiarity in what
is but the result of the working of the common
human nature. Thus Bishop Lightfoot thinks
it worth while to point out that the Epistle to
the Galatians enumerates among the " works of
the flesh," drunkenness and revelling*, and that
drunkenness was a darling sin of Celtic peoples ;
that it condemns strife and vainglory, and that
the Gauls were a very irritable people ; that it
exhorts to liberality in almsgiving, advice much
needed by Gauls, who were proverbial for
avarice. But if these indications could be
accepted as proofs, they would establish that
the Epistle to the Ephesians also was addressed
to Gauls (see v. 18; iv. 31, 28). And the
Corinthians, too, are convicted of Gallic fickle-
ness ; for they also, though St. Paul's children in
the faith, largely transferred their allegiance to
new teachers.
But it needs no theory as to the race ex-
traction of St. Paul's converts to account for some
change in their feelings towards him. When
the Galatians were drat converted, they knew
no other Christian teacher than St. Paul ; but
they learned from him to recognise Jerusalem as
the head-quarters of the religion, and they heard
of the Twelve as having received apostleship
from Christ Himself. No wonder that they
were profoundly impressed when teachers came
among them claiming to speak with the
authority of the parent Church, and informing
them that new conditions still must be complied
with before they could be recognised as perfect
Christians. Nor is it strange if, when they
pleaded that St. Paul who had founded their
Church had never insisted on these conditions,
they were staggered at being told that St. Paul
himself was but a new convert, and was not
one whose authority could be set in opposi-
Digitized by
Google
GATtATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
tioa to that of the Apostles whom Christ had
appointed.
With regard to the persons addressed, there
remains still the question whether they were
Jews or Gentiles; bat it is plain from the
whole drift of the Epistle that the writer had
Gentiles principally in view. He protests (vi. 12)
against those who would force circumcision on
them, and declares (v. 2) that if they were
circumcised Christ would profit them nothing.
This clearly does not apply to men who, like
himself, had been circumcised in infancy. And
(it. 8) he expressly speaks of the time when his
readers, " not knowing God, did service to them
which by nature are no gods." The phrase too
" in mine own nation " (i. 14) implies that those
whom he addressed were of a different nation.
On the other hand, we may reasonably believe
that the bulk of the Gentile converts had entered
the Gentile Church through the road of
Judaism. St. Paul's invariable practice was to
commence his missionary work in each city by
preaching in the Jewish synagogue or place of
worship (Acts xiii. 14; xiv. 1; xvi. 13; xvii.
1, 10, 17 ; xriii. 4) ; and, as at Antioch in
Pisidia (Acts xiii. 43) the first Gentile converts
would always be made irom among the " devont
persons" who were in the habit of attending
the Jewish worship. That reverence for the
Old Testament which was common to both
"Jews and proselytes," and was shared by St.
Paul himself, would be taught by him to all the
converts which he made. Consequently, though
appeals to the Old Testament, as a book
familiarly known and held In authority by all
his readers, are frequent in the Epistle to the
Galatians, this affords no ground for doubting
the predominance of the Gentile element in the
Oalatian Churches.
HI. Date of the Epistle. — The most generally
accepted chronology of the part of St. Paul's
life with which we are here concerned, is as
follows: — The second missionary journey, in
which the Apostle went through the " Phrygian
and Galatian country," is assigned to the years
51 and 52 ; the third journey, in which he
visited the same district again, to the year 54.
Then succeed three years at Ephesus ; shortly
before leaving which place in 57, he writes the
First Epistle to the Corinthians. From Ephesus
be travels through Macedonia, and arrives at
Corinth ; before leaving which place in 58, he
writes the Epistle to the Romans. For our
present purpose it is immaterial whether we are
wrong in accepting these dates as approximately
correct, since we are concerned to determine,
not in what year of our Lord the Epistle to the
Gxlatians was written, but in what part of
St Paul's life.
In St. Paul's first missionary tour we read (Acts
liv.) of his having evangelized Derbe, Lystra,
Iconium, and Antioch ; and it has been already
explained that the Churches so formed might in
a certain sense be described as Churches of
Galatia. It has been suggested that, by thus
UBasrstanding the phrase, wo could account for
the illness which- led to the Apostle's work in
Galatia, aa resulting from injuries sustained
by him when he was stoned in Lystra. If we
nuld imagine the Epistle to the Galatians to
save been written from Antioch after his return
•rem his first tour, we could account for the ab-
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE 1107
sence in the letter of any reference to the conclu-
sions come to at Jerusalem, as recorded in Acts xv.
But the attempt to assign so early a date collapses
in face of the mention in the Epistle (ch. ii.) of
a visit made by St. Paul to Jerusalem, at least
14 years, perhaps 17 years, after his conversion.
The visit, recorded in Acta xi. 30, took place be-
fore any of St. Paul's missionary journeys, and at
a time when controversy concerning the necessity
of circumcision is not likely to have arisen. St.
Luke places it before the death of Herod ; that is
to say, before the year 44, and this would leave
no room for the 14 or 17 years. We are therefore
constrained to agree with the great majority of
commentators in identifying the visit referred
to in Gal. ii. with that recorded in Acts xv.
This would oblige us to place the letter after
A.D. 51 ; and on other grounds we have come to
the conclusion that the Churches addressed had
been formed on St. Paul's second missionary
journey, a.d. 52. Thus, then, we have a limit
in one direction to the date of the Epistle.
Expressions in the Epistle which have been
used to fix the date more closely cannot be relied
on as decisive. Thus it has been held that the
words (i. 6) " I marvel that ye are so soon re-
moved f" so quickly removing," R. V.] from him
that called you into the grace of God," oblige us
to assign the earliest possible date to the
Epistle. But "soon" is an indefinite phrase,
and the limits within which the date of the
Epistle must lie are narrow ; so that Paul
might conceivably have spoken of the Galatian
apostasy as rapid, even at the latest date we
can assign to the letter.
On the other hand, the words (ir. 13) " how I
preached the Gospel at the first " (to wpeVsoor)
are translated in the Revised Tension " the first
time " or " the former time," aad it has been
inferred that St. Paul refers to two visits to
Galatia ; in other words, that his Epistle was
written after his second visit. The argument
is not absolutely decisive, because in view of the
passages, John vi. 62, ix. 8, 1 Tim. i. 13, it must
be admitted that to wooVfOov need not neces-
sarily mean, on the former of two occasions, but
might mean simply " formerly." Yet, if we
suppose the Epistle to have been written after
the first visit and before the second, the period
of which he is speaking could not have been
more than a year or two previously, and to
TooVcpov is not a phrase which we should expect
to be used in referring to it. Thus the pre-
sumption remains that the Epistle was written
after the second visit. Another ambiguous
passage bearing on the present qnestion is
(i. 8, 9): " though we or an Angel from heaven
should preach unto you any Gospel other thaa
that which you received, let him be. ana-
thema. As we have said before, so say I now
again, If any man preach unto you any Gospel
other than that which you received, let him be
anathema." The question is, Do the words in
v. 9, " as we have said before," refer merely to
what has been said in ». 8, or do they refer to
something said by word of mouth when the
Apostle was in Galatia? Against the former
supposition may be urged, that if the Apostle
thought it necessary for greater emphasis to
repeat a second time what he had said, we
should expect him to speak rather more strongly
the second time than the first. Thus, after he
4 B 2
Digitized by VjOOQIC
1108 GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
had bidden tbem not to receive any one who
preached a different Gospel, we could under-
stand his going on to say, " Yea, if even an Angel
from heaven were to preach a different Gospel,
let him be anathema." But there is something
of an anticlimax when the "Angel from heaven "
occurs in the first verse, " any one " in the
second. Again, it is to be noted that after the
opening salutation, in which " all the brethren
that are with me" are included, St. Paul, in v. 6,
uses the first person singular, I, and continues it
throughout the Epistle. Therefore, if in v. 9 he
were merely repeating what had been said in
v. 8, we should expect him to say, "as 1 have
said before." There are therefore grounds for
considering the " we " of r. 9 to be really used
in a collective sense, and for supposing that
reference is made to a warning given by the
missionary party when present in Galatia. If
this be so, this warning is more likely to have
been given on the second visit than on the first
evangelization of the Church, at which time
there would be no rival teachers against whom
warning would be necessary.
In order to determine more accurately the
place of the Epistle to the Galatians in the series
of St. Paul's letters, it is necessary to compare it
with other letters written about the same period,
as we may judge from their exhibiting the
Apostle's mind occupied with the same contro-
versies.
The Epistle to the Romans. — This Epistle not
only has coincidences with that to the Galatians
in a number of phrases and statements common
to both, but the exposition of the Apostle's rea-
sons for resisting the imposition of circumcision
as necessary to salvation is so much alike in the
two that we might equally draw an account of
these reasons from one or the other. The choice
his readers had to make was whether they would
seek for justification through the works of the
Law or through faith in Christ. Now by the
former method success was impossible. The Law
demanded complete obedience. The conditions
on which it offered life were stated in words of
Moses, quoted in both Epistles (Gal. iii. 12, Rom.
x. 5) : " The man that doeth these things shall
live in them." It pronounced a curse on all who
came short of complete obedience : " Cursed is
every one who continueth not in all things that
are written in the Book of the Law to do them"
(Gal. iii. 10). In point of fact no one, either
Jew or Gentile, has succeeded in yielding this
perfect obedience. The detailed proof of this
occupies the first three chapters of the Epistle
to the Romans. And the conclusion is given in
almost identical words in the two Epistles : " By
the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified "
(Rom. iii. 20 ; Gal. ii. 16).
The Apostle does not content himself with the
negative statement that justification could not
be obtained through the Law of Moses ; he shows
that the Old Testament had pointed out a dif-
ferent way : " That no man is justified by the
Law in the sight of God, it is evident, for ' The
just shall live by faith'" (Gal. ii. 11; Rom.
i. 17). And this way was the earlier. The
covenant of promise was made with Abraham
because of his faith. " Abraham believed God,
and it was counted unto him for righteous-
ness " (Rom. iv. 3 ; Gal. iii. 6). That promise
was 430 years earlier than the giving of the Law
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
to Moses, and could not be disannulled by an
institution so much later (Gal. iii. 17). Nay, it
was anterior to the institution of the rite of cir-
cumcision ; for the statement that faith wss
reckoned to Abraham for righteousness refers to
an earlier period of Abraham's life, and he only
received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the
righteousness which he had bad before he was
circumcised (Rom. iv. 11).
But the promise made to Abraham was not to
himself alone. It was to him and to his sttd.
That seed was Christ, and they are to be so-
counted the true seed of Abraham who are
Christ's, and who have the faith of Abraham
(Gal. ii. 16). For Abraham was not the father
of the Jews only. It is written that he was to
be the father of many nations ; and so he wss
the father not of the circumcision only, bat of
all them that believe, circumcised or not (Bom.
iv. 11). Nay, those Israelites after the flesh who
were under bondage to the Mosaic Law, though
they might be children of Abraham, were not
heirs of the promises to Abraham. Abraham
had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other
by a free woman : the one born after the flesh,
the other through the promise. As then, »
now, he that was bom after the flesh persecuted
him that was born after the Spirit. But what
saith the Scripture? "Cast out the bondmaid
and her son, for the son of the bondmaid shall
not be heir with the son of the free woman
(Gal. iv. 28-30).
But if it has been proved that the Law J»
ineffectual as a means of justification, does it
follow that it was useless and not divinely
instituted? Nay, there was a time when it
had served an important use. /The heir, as
loug as he is a child, is under subjection to
tutors and governors appointed by the father.
Such a tutor had the Law been to the heirs of
promise. It had made them conscious of sin, and
pronounced a curse on disobedience from which
itself was powerless to deliver ; and thus trained
those who were under its tutorship to look for
justification through faith in Christ, Who has
redeemed ua from the curse of the Law, being
made a curse for us. This reconciliation of the
rejection of the Mosaic Law with an acknow-
ledgment of its excellence and of the uses which
it served is common to Rom. vii. and Gal. in.
21-26. And, lastly, the Apostle protests that
the liberty to which his disciples were called
must not degenerate into licence ; teaching
them, in words common to both Epistles, how
the love which springs from faith in Christ
secures the complete fulfilment of the La*>
" For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even
in this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy-
self" (Gal. v. 14; Rom. xiii. 8-10).
Besides the general agreement in the exposi-
tion of theory, the two Epistles are full ol
coincidences in phrases and forms of expression.
Notice has already been taken that the same
passages from the Old Testament are quoted in
both (Gen. xv. 5 ; Lev. xviii. 5 ; Pa. oxliii. 2 ;
Heb. ii. 4) ; and it may be added that in
both occurs the same formula of Old Testa-
ment citation, " what saith the Scripture ?
(Rom. iv. 3; Gal. iv. 30,) and that in the
quotation of Ps. cxliii. 2 there are variations
from the LXX. in which both Epistles agree;
vix., the phrase "the works of the Law" »»
Digitized by
Google
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
introduced. and " no flesh " is substituted for
"go man living."
We add two or three out of a great number
of parallel passages :
Gal. It. 6-7.
" That we might receive
the adoption of sons. And
because ye are eons, God
sent forth the Spirit of His
Son Into our hearts, crying,
Abba, Father. So that
thou art no longer a bond-
servant, but a son ; and if
a son, then an heir through
God."
Ron. vlil. 14-17.
M For as many as are led
bythe Spirit of God, these
are sons of God. For ye
received not the spirit of
bondage again unto fear;
but ye received the spirit
of adoption, whereby we
cry, Abba, Father. The
Spirit Himself beareth wit-
new with our spirit that
we are children of God :
sad if children, then heirs ;
betrs of God, and Joint-
stirs with Christ,"
Row. vi. 6-8.
" Oar old man was crad-
led with Him. ... But if
we died with Christ, we
believe that we shall also
Ik with Him."
Boh. vii. «. Gal. 11. It.
"Ye also were made " For I through the law
tad to the Law . . . that died unto toe law, that I
we might bring forth fruit might live unto God."
unto God."
Row. vii. 33-2$.
"I see a different law
in my members, warring
against the law of my
mind ... I myeelf with
the nrind serve the law of
God, but with the flesh the
law of sin."
Gal. li. 20.
"I nave been crucified
with Christ: yet I live;
yet no longer I, but Christ
liveth in me "
Son. vii. IS.
"Not what I would, that
do I practise ; but what I
bale, that I do."
Gal. v. 17.
" The flesh lmteth against
the Spirit, and the Spirit
against the flesh: for these
are contrary the one to the
other: that ye may not do
the things that ye would."
It is needless to multiply quotations ; for the
proofs already alleged amount to a demonstration
of the common authorship of the two Epistles.
And writers are generally agreed that the
Epistle to the Galatians must be the earlier of
the two. This Epistle is a vehement argument
truck out under the immediate needs of a
pressing controversy; the other is a calm pre-
sentation of the same argument in a complete
and systematic form. We may then take the
year 58, to which the Epistle to the Romans is
commonly assigned, as a lower limit to the date
of the Epistle to the Galatians.
The great resemblance in phraseology between
the Epistles gives us a right to infer that they
eoold not have been separated by any long in-
terval of time. This argument is not so strong
»• in the case of the Epistles to the Ephesians
and Colossians, which we otherwise know to
aave been written at the same time and sent
by the same messenger, and where the nature of
the topics is not such as to make it likely that
the same thoughts would for a long time so
occupy the writer's mind as to find expression in
the same words. But as long as the controversy
concerning circumcision was going on, the Apostle
would be likely on different occasions to use the
*ame arguments, and perhaps without much
reriety of expression. Still, when we observe
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE 1109
what great variety of style there is in St. Paul's
letters, — even in the four letters written while
the controversy concerning circumcision was
going on ; how different these are from the
Epistles to the Thessalonians, and these again
from the Epistle to the Philippians, from the
Epistles to the Colossians and Ephesinns, and
from the Pastoral Epistles, — it becomes hard to
believe that long time could have passed over
without producing more change of style and
topics than we find between the Epistles to the
Romans and to the Galatians.
There is no necessity to believe that the
controversy concerning circumcision was of long
duration : we can even see that it was dying
out when the Epistle to the Romans was written.
If the Epistle to the Galatians had been the only
one to come down to us, the verse (v. 2) " If ye
be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing,"
might lead us to think that the Apostle alto-
gether condemned the observance of the Mosaic
Law by Christians. Yet in the Epistle to the
Romans (chs. xiv., xv.) we find the observance
of Jewish distinctions of days and of meats
treated as a matter of indifference, with regard
to which it is a duty to be tolerant, and even
to abstain from using our own liberty in such
a way as to lead others to do what their con-
sciences condemn, though in our eyes it might
be innocent. On looking more closely at the
Epistle to the Galatians, we find that what
the Apostle condemns (ch. v.) is not the obser-
vance of Jewish ordinances, but the insisting on
them as necessary to justification. To seek for
justification in such a way was an abandonment
of the only possible way of justification, that
through faith in Christ ; for if we attempted it
by the Law we made ourselves debtors to observe
the whole of it, an undertaking in which
success must be impossible. But though the
more tolerant attitude of the Epistle to the
Romans is quite reconcilable with the doctrine
of that to the Galatians, it would scarcely
have been assumed until the strain of the conflict
with the Judaizera had somewhat relaxed.
The First Epistle to the Corinthians.— On
the other hand, that conflict appears hardly
to have begun when the First, Epistle to the
Corinthians was written. Considering the great
variety of topics dwelt on in that letter, it is
quite remarkable that that topic which was
uppermost in the Apostle's thoughts when he
wrote the Galatian letter is altogether in the
background in the Corinthian letter. There
are many traces that the Apostle's view of the
way of salvation was at both times the same
(1 Cor. i. 30; vi. 11 ; xv. 3, 56). In the Corin-
thian as well as in the Galatian letter he treats
circumcision or uncircumcision as amatterof com-
plete indifference as far as salvation is concerned
(1 Cor. vii. 19 ; Gal. v. 6). But in the Corinthian
letter this is taken for granted, and is not the
subject of laborious argumentation : he is there
occupied less with exposition of dogma than with
questions of practical morality. It is true that
St. Paul's Authority at Corinth seems already
to have suffered something from the rivalry of
other teachers; but only because they were
imagined to outshine him in eloquence or learn-
ing, and there is no trace that tbey differed from
him in doctrine, seeing that he feels himself
under no necessity to enter on the task of refuta-
Digitized by
Google
1110 GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
tion. There is very little parallelism between
1 Corinthians and Galatians, beyond that be-
tween the verses (1 Cor. vii. 19 ; Gal. v. 6) just
quoted, and the fact that in both Epistles the
proverb is quoted, " A little leaven leaveneth
the whole lump " (1 Cor. v. 6 ; Gal. v. 9).
The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. — But
parallels are extremely numerous between Gala-
tians and the Second Epistle to the Corinthians ;
and the fact that the Galatian letter is so
much more akin to the Second Corinthian
letter than to the First, is a strong argument
for placing it in order of time later than the
First. During the interval between the two
Corinthian letters the influence of teachers in
that Church rival to St. Paul appears to have
largely increased ; for while in the First Epistle
the Apostle contents himself with deprecating
schisms, and protesting against making the
reception of the Gospel depend on. the excel-
lence of the human teachers who promulgated
it, in the Second Epistle he finds himself under
the necessity of vindicating his own authority,
and comparing his claims on his disciples'
regards with those of the teachers who had
been put forward as his rivals. But the neces-
sity of this self-vindication gives the Apostle
much pain, and that chiefly on account of the
contrast between the affection his disciples had
formerly borne him and their present with-
drawal of confidence. In the exhibition of the
writer's pain at ill-returned affection we have
the closest affinity between the Epistle to the
Galatians and the Second to the Corinthians.
In the former the Apostle recalls (iv. 15) how
the Galatians had first received him as an
Angel of God, when if it had been possible they
would have plucked out their own eyes and
have given them to him ; in the latter (xii. 15)
their distrust forces from him the bitter com-
plaint, "The more abundantly I love you, the
less I be loved." Other coincidences enume-
rated by Lightfoot, some of them very striking,
are Gal. i. 6, 2 Cor. xi. 4; Gal. i. 9, 2 Cor.
xiii. 2; Gal. i. 10, 2 Cor. v. 11; Gal. iii. 3,
2 Cor. viii. 6 ; Gal. iii. 13, 2 Cor. v. 21 ; Gal.
iv. 17, 2 Cor. xi. 2; Gal. v. 15, 2 Cor. xi. 20;
Gal. vi. 15, 2 Cor. v. 17.
In the Second Epistle to the Corinthians St.
Paul relies entirely on his personal authority
for suppressing the rivalry of other teachers,
and does not give, as he does in the Epistle to
the Galatians, an argumentative refutation of
their teaching. Possibly he had received no full
report of their teaching at the time when he
wrote the former letter. But whereas in 1 Cor.
the tendency of the Corinthians to form parties
in their Church is merely rebuked, without any
hint as to doctrinal differences between the
parties, we find traces in 2 Cor. that the
Apostle's most formidable rivals belonged to the
Jewish section of the Church. We gather this
from his appeal (xi. 22) : " Are they Hebrews ?
so am I. Are they Israelites? so am I. Are
they the seed of Abraham ? so am I." And it
seems not improbable that both in the case of
the Churches of Corinth and of Galatia the
rival teachers had come down with some mission
from the Church of Jerusalem which authorized
them to describe themselves as far6crro\ai. This
title had been given among the Jews to emis-
saries sent to collect the Temple tribute, and we
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
learn from the Didachf that it continued to be
used in the Christian society of representatives
sent by one Church to another. In this sense
the word occurs (2 Cor. viii. 23 ; Phil. ii. 25).
If we suppose the rival teachers to have been
able to claim this title, we have the explanation
why the Apostle, in the opening of the Epistle
to the Galatians, claims to be himself an
Apostle, but one sent not by men, but by
Jesus Christ Himself; and we may conjecture a
reference to these teachers in those who are
described (2 Cor. xi. 5, xii. 11) as ol urtp\iar
diroVro\oi. On the whole, then, we seem to
have the most probable account of the origin of
the Galatian letter by supposing that some
little time after the Apostle had written the
Second Epistle to the Corinthians, and while he
was still uneasy as to the result of the attempts
to undermine his authority at Corinth, his
anxieties were brought to a climax by tidings
that Judaizing emissaries had penetrated so far
as to the remote Churches which he had founded
in Galatia, who, disparaging his authority in
comparison with that of the Apostles whom
they claimed to represent, had succeeded in
causing among those simple disciples a large
defection from the Gospel which St. Paul had
preached, of salvation through faith in Christ
without the works of the Law. The actual
letter well corresponds with what might hare
been written under the tumult of feelings ex-
cited by this intelligence.
Galatians and the Acts of the Apostles. — In
the first two chapters of the Epistle to the
Galatians, which contain the Apostle's vindica-
tion of his personal authority, he gives an auto-
biographical sketch of his previous history,
differing in so many respects from the account
given in the Acts of the Apostles, that we have
already pronounced it to be impossible that the
author of that Book could have seen the Gala-
tian letter. But there are those who have con-
tended that the discrepancies are so great that
the account in the Acts cannot be accepted as
truthful, and must be regarded as the dishonest
attempt of a writer of the 2nd century to
suppress the true history of early dissensions in
the Church. But it is scarcely possible that a
writer of the 2nd century could be so un-
acquainted with the Epistle to the Galatians as
the author of the Acts manifestly is. And it is
certainly inconsistent that objectors who hold
no theory of verbal inspiration should apply
different rules in their judgment of the New
Testament Books and of other books of like
character. If we had to compare the account
given by a veteran statesman of transactions in
which he had taken part fourteen years or
more previously with an independent history of
the same transactions written by a younger
member of his party several years still later, it
is likely enough that we should find discrepan-
cies which we might attribute either to imper-
fect recollection in the one case or imperfect
information in the other, yet feel no inclination
to doubt either the authorship of either docu-
ment or its importance to any one desirous to
study the history of the period. For example,
the authenticity of the Acts has been impugned
because the Book makes no mention of St. Paul s
retirement to Arabia, of which he tells in Gnl^J-
17. But, in the parallel case we have imagined
Digitized by
Google
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
the fact that the younger writer appeared to be
unacquainted with some incidents in the early
life of his leader would not be felt as a reason
lor doubting his ability to give a trustworthy
account of those pnblic acts which came under
the narrator's cognizance. On the other hand,
the Acts (xi. 30) relate a visit to Jerusalem
made by St. Paul and St. Barnabas as bearers of
a money contribution, of which visit no mention
is made in the Epistle to the Galatians. But in
that Epistle the writer's object is to prove his
independence of the elder Apostles, and for this
purpose to tell how little in point of fact he
had seen of them. Now it appears from the
narrative in the Acts that the Apostles were
absent from Jerusalem at the time of this visit,
and that the contribution was handed not to
them, but to ** the Elders." If this were profane
history, we should not trouble ourselves much to
speculate how the two accounts were to be re-
conciled ; whether it was that St. Paul thought
it irrelevant to mention a very short visit to
Jerusalem in which he had no interview with
Apostles, or that he had even forgotten that
visit when he was writing, or that the contribu-
tion, though entrusted to St. Paul and St. Barna-
bas, had actually been delivered by the latter.
Again, there seems every reason to believe
that the visit to Jerusalem, of which St. Paul
speaks in Gal. ii., is the same as that of which
St. Luke tells in Acts xv. : but there are dis-
crepancies. St. Paul says that he went up " by
revelation," St. Luke that he went up by
appointment of the brethren at Antioch : St.
Luke only tells of a public meeting of the
Church at Jerusalem, St. Paul of private con-
sultation between himself and the elder Apostles.
Yet there is no difficulty in receiving both
accounts and regarding them as supplementary.
We can accept the statement of St. Luke that
St. Paul appeared in Jerusalem as commissioned
by the Chorch of Antioch, and also St. Paul's own
statement that it was by revelation the idea
had been suggested to him that the way to put
an end to the dissensions raised at Antioch by
emissaries who claimed to speak with the
authority of the Church at Jerusalem, was to
send a deputation to the parent Church m
■order to ascertain whether that claim was well
founded. It appears from Acts xv. 3 that in
order that the report of the deputation might
be above all suspicion "certain others" were
joined on it with St. Paul and St. Barnabas.
Again, we tan readily believe on the authority
•>f Gal. ii., that before the public meeting of
which St. Luke tells, St. Panl had, as prudence
would suggest, held a conference with the lead-
ing Apostles, and had come to an agreement
with them as to the line that was to be taken.
There would be nothing surprising if St. Luke
were not acquainted with what had taken place
in such private conference ; and, on the other
hand, St. Caul's words (Gal. it 2) do not exclude
allusion to a conference with the Church gene-
rally, though it is most to his purpose to dwell
on the sanction given to his course of action by
the leading Apostles. Clearly discrepancies of
the kind here noticed, though they would need
to be carefully considered if we were discussing
whether the inspiration granted to the sacred
writers was such as to preclude the possibility
of the smallest inaccuracy, and though the
GALATrANS, EPISTLE TO THE 1111
possibility of diversely reconciling them may
leave room for doubt or difference of opinion
as to some details of the history, yet afford no
grounds for suspicion of the good faith of the
narrator of either of the accounts we are com-
paring.
But the criticism which is really worth con-
sidering is that which, not content with striving
to make capital out of small discrepancies, en-
deavours to show that the Book of the Acta en-
tirely misrepresents St. Paul's method of preach-
ing the Gospel and his relations to the elder
Apostles. In the Acts St. Paul is represented as
following the fixed rule of addressing himself
to the Jews first, and never feeling himself at
liberty to go to the heathen until the Jews
have rejected him. In every city he comes to
he makes his first visit to the Jewish syna-
gogue, and only turns to the Gentiles when
repulsed there (Acts xiii. 45, xviii. 6). Nor
even do we find him adopting a different method
at Athens (see Acts xvii. 17), where there were
facilities for entering into direct discussion with
heathen philosophers such as did not exist else-
where. But we are told that " the real Panl "
was from the first profoundly conscious of being
distinctly Apostle to the heathen (Gal. i. 15),
and would not hear of any distinction of Jew
from Gentile, or any privilege of the former
over the latter. Again, St. Paul is represented in
the Acts as only solicitous to relieve the Gen-
tiles from the yoke of submission to the Jewish
Law, but as quite willing that that Law should
be observed by those who were Jews by birth ;
nay, as observing it himself. He goes up to
Jerusalem to attend the Jewish feasts (Acts
xviii. 21, xx. 16); he circumcises Timothy (xvi.
3); he makes a vow and shaves his head at
Cenchrea (xviii. 18); and he finally loses his
liberty in consequence of having shown himself
in the Temple joining in the offerings made by
four other men who had a vow. But we are
told that such concessions could never have been
made by "the real Paul," who held that men
even of Jewish birth ought not to observe the
Law, circumcision and salvation being incom-
patible, for be had told his disciples that if they
should be circumcised Christ should profit them
nothing. Finally, the sermons ascribed to St.
Paul in the Acts only treat of the Messiahship
of Jesus and of the doctrine of the Resurrection,
and are silent on the topic of which St. Paul's
mind was full, viz. justification by faith with-
out the works of the Law, while the language
put in the mouth of St. Peter is thoroughly Paul-
ine. And generally the representation given in
the Acts of the friendly attitude of St. Peter and
St. James towards St. Paul and his preaching is
said to be incredible in view of what the Epistle
to the Galatians reveals as to the hostility
between St. Paul and the elder Apostles.
Now, if we had to admit the interpretation
of the Epistle to the Galatians to be correct,
which represents St. Paul as from the first con-
ceiving his mission to he exclusively to the
Gentiles, we should be forced to agree with the
extreme critics of Baur's school, who, holding
with their master that the representations in
the Acts and in the Galatians are irreconcilable
with each other, declare that the former are so
much the more credible that if we have to reject
one or other we must reject the latter. In fact
Digitized by
Google
1112 GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
the method of preaching ascribed to St. Paul by
St. Luke, namely that of beginning by preaching
in the Jewish synagogues, is exactly that which
a Christian missionary might have been expected
to adopt. Even if he had the conversion of
Gentiles solely in view, it was in the synagogues
that he would find Gentiles already convinced of
the folly of polytheism, and acquainted with the
Jewish prophecies, and thus prepared to follow
the proof that these prophecies were fulfilled in
Jesus. But it is not credible that one who loved
his own nation so ardently as St. Paul (Rom. ix.
3) would make no effort for the conversion of at
least some of them ; and the rule of preaching
ascribed to him in Acts xiii. 46, " It was necessary
that the word of God should first be preached
to you," is in perfect harmony with Rom. i. 16,
" to the Jew first and also the Gentile." In
any case, we can assert with certainty that the
Gentile converts, addressed in the Galatian
letter, had been made through the road of
Judaism. They are all assumed to be well
acquainted with the Old Testament and to
acknowledge its authority, nor could the success
with them of the Jewish inculcators of circum-
cision be credible if they had not been previously
well affected towards Judaism. They were then
exactly such converts as would have been made
if St. Paul's method of preaching had been such
as St. Luke describes.
Again St. Luke's account that St. Paul was led
on to realize his commission as Apostle to the
Gentiles only gradually, and through the provi-
dential leading of events, is far more credible
than that he assumed this attitude at once on
his conversion. Surely the transition to becom-
ing a preacher from having been a persecutor of
Jesus Christ was startling enough to fill one
period of the Apostle's life, and we ought in
all reason to allow him a considerable time to
familiarize himself with his new position before
expecting him to make a second change equally
startling, that from having been a bigoted Jew
to one who rejected all the rules of Judaism,
and made no difference between circumcised and
uncircumcised. If St. Paul had made this change
at once, he would have found himself in a
position of complete isolation and without a
single sympathizer. But no oue could less afford
to dispense with sympathy than St. Paul. His
Epistles reveal him as a man of the strongest
affections, always accompanied in his missionary
travels by a band of fellow- workers, unhappy
when left alone by them, and, we may well
believe, roused to the highest indignation against
the Judaizers, through his strong affection for
his Gentile converts, on whom it was proposed
to lay an intolerable burden.
Again, it is a complete misunderstanding of
the doctrine of St. Paul's Epistles to imagine
that he censured the observance of Jewish rites
by men of Jewish birth. His doctrine all through
is that such observance is, as far as salvation is
concerned, a thing indifferent; that compliance
with national customs is not a duty and not a
sin. Those who had not been circumcised need
not be circumcised ; those who had were not to
obliterate the mark of circumcision (1 Cor. vii.
18). He himself (1 Cor. ix. 20) gives direct
confirmation to St. Luke's account of his conduct,
declaring that to the Jews he had become as a
Jew, to those under the Law as under the Law,
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
becoming all things to all men that he might by
all means save some. It is quite intelligible
that a man holding these principles should refuse
to circumcise Titus when the rite was insisted
on as a necessity, but be willing to circumcise
Timothy, who by the mother's tide was of Jewish
birth, when his uncircumcision put a bar to his
usefulness as a preacher of the Gospel. It may
be added that no statement in the Acts is more
trustworthy than that of the circumcision of
Timothy, since, as we have already remarked, an
attentive study of the whole section shows
that St. Luke must have got his information
from Timothy himself.
Lastly, with regard to St. Luke's report of St.
Paul's preaching, surely no wise missionary to
heathen would begin by entangling them in con-
troversies internal to Christians. Hen must be
made to believe that Jesus was the Messiah and
that He rose from the dead before they could be
expected to take interest in the question whether
or not he had included in his Gospel the condi-
tion of compliance with Mosaic ordinances. St.
Luke's narrative might justly have been sus-
pected if he had represented St. Paul as pursuing
a different course in such sermons as he has re-
ported. For St. Paul himself has named these
two fundamental points as the essential condi-
tions of salvation, "If thou shalt confess with
thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in
thine heart that God hath raised Him from the
dead, thou shalt be saved " (Rom. x. 9). Since
the Epistle to the Galatians reports that James,
Cephas, and John had acquiesced in St. Paul's
mission to the heathen, no apology is necessary if
St. Luke in his report of their public utterances
represents them as in accordance with St. PauL
The Council of Jerusalem. — Although St.
Luke's narrative in Acts xv. admits of easy
reconciliation with Gal. ii., there remains the
difficulty that no mention is made in Galatians
of the letter which St. Luke reports as sent to
different Churches, stating the obligations to
which it was agreed on at the Jerusalem con-
ference that Gentiles should be subjected ; and
further that when St. Paul himself (1 Cor. viii.
x. ; Rom. xiv.) discusses the lawfulness of eating
meat offered to idols, he completely disregsrds
the injunctions of that apostolic letter. Here it
must bo owned that the Pauline Epistles enable
us to correct the impression which the nsrrs-
tive in the Acts, if it stood alone, would convey.
It has been common with Church writers to
speak of the meeting related in Acts xv. as the
" first general council ; " and, one might thence
infer, as having made ordinances binding on the
Church in all times and all places. But in point
of fact the prohibition against eating blood i»
not only obsolete among ourselves, but had
become so in the time of St. Augustine (Cont.
Faust, xxxii. 13), where he tells that those who
were scrupulous in this matter were then only
laughed at. And he explains the prohibition as
one temporarily necessary when Jewish members
of the Church were numerous, who could not
join in a common meal with those that did
not observe it, but as needless where Jewish
Christians were scarcely to be found. Vet in
the 2nd century this prohibition was observed,
and probably derived its authority from this very
chapter of the Acts. One of the Lyons martyrs
of the year 177 (Euseb. H. E. v. i. 27> when
Digitized by
Google
GALATIAN8, EPISTLE TO THE
questioned concerning the stock calumny that
Christians at their meetings drank human
blood, exclaimed, " How could we drink the blood
of men, who do not think it lawful to drink the
blood of beasts ! " (see also Tert. Apol. 9.) The
juxtaposition also in Rev. ii. 14, 20, of com-
mitting fornication and eating things sacrificed
to idols, falls in completely with St. Luke's
account, that an apostolic letter containing these
two prohibitions in close sequence hud been
widely circulated. The letter itself, however,
as given by St. Luke, is only addressed to the
" brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch
and Syria and Ciliria"; and it appears from
St. Paul's Epistles that he did not think himself
bound to give it a wider application. While he
gladly accepted the relief from the necessity of
circumcision which that letter gave to Gentile
converts, he himself regarded the use of meat
ottered to idols as a thing in itself indifferent,
and which only became unlawful on account of
the scandal which it might cause.
We must be struck with the modernness of
the Apostle's views on this subject. The
opinions widely current at the time are most
fully exhibited in the Pseudo-Clementine writ-
ings. They teach that food offered in an idol
temple was taken possession of by the demon
who really was the divinity there worshipped :
that consequently that food became so changed
in its character that any one who partook of it,
whether he knew what had befallen it or not,
was liable to be taken possession of by the same
demon. These ideas passed into the Christian
Church, and the benediction of food before use
was felt by many to be not merely, as we
regard it, an act of thanksgiving to God for
His bouuty, bnt also a protection against de-
monic power. Thus Gregory the Great in. his
Dialogues tells of a nun who in a garden inad-
vertently ate a lettuce without crossing herself,
and so became possessed by a demon who chanced
to be on the lettuce at the time (Dial. i. 4).
To our feelings the advice given by St. Paul
to his converts commends itself as what would
naturally be given by a man wise and sensible
at well as pious, and as not involving any matter
of controversy. His advice in substance was,
" Do not trouble yourself with anxious scrupu-
losity about the food you eat. Heat will not
make you better or worse. If it has even been
brought into the idol temple, it cannot com-
municate to you any pollution it may have
received there. But if it appears that your
partaking of these dedicated meats will be con-
rtrued by your heathen hosts into homage or
adherence to false gods ; or if, though intending
no such homage yourselves, you influence by
your example brother Christians, not so well
instructed as yourselves, to do what to their
mind implies adherence to idolatry, then what
bad before been indifferent becomes unlawful."
This advice takes for granted that meat offered
t° idols has not in itself the power of com-
municating pollution or causing injury to the
tecipient, and that, if we are bound to abstain,
it is not for our own sake but for that of others.
But, however readily we might grant this, it
»as no matter of course that it should be con-
wled in St. Paul's time. In fact the opposite
theory is maintained in books written not long
*ft*r his time by men of good natural gifts, well
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE 1113
acquainted with the philosophy of their day, of
varied knowledge and considerable intellectual
acuteness. Our Lord however, when asked about
certain foods supposed to be polluting, threw His
answer into a pointed form well adapted to fix
itself on the memory of the hearers : " Mot that
which goeth into the mouth, but that which
cometh outofthe mouth,defilethaman." Though
St. Paul was not a personal hearer of our Lord,
this maxim of His could scarcely have been un-
known to him, and it may well have influenced
the advice he gave his converts. Looking on the
question in the light he did, it is intelligible
that he would not care to extend the absolute
prohibition of the Jerusalem conference further
than to the Churches to which it was addressed,
and that he wonld feel himself free to permit
Christians elsewhere to use their liberty provided
it were so done as to canse no hurt to others.
The Conflict with St. Peter. — Although it would
be impossible in this article to discuss all the
passages in the Epistle on which serious con-
troversy has arisen, it would not be right to
leave unnoticed a passage which has attracted
so much attention as that (ii. 11 sq.) which
reveals the fact that at one time two leading
Apostles were at open variance with each other.
Porphyry used it to undermine the credit of
both Apostles, arguing that either St. Peter is
convicted of ignorance of the religion which he
professed to teach, or St. Paul of gross disrespect
towards an elder Apostle. The Pseudo-Cle-
mentine romance of which St. Peter is the hero,
regards opposition to him as only possible to
have been made by an enemy; and though in re-
ferring to the transaction it suppresses St. Paul's
name and substitutes that of Simon Magus, yet
coincidences of language with the Epistle to
the Galatians clearly show, that St. Paul was in-
tended. Clement of Alexandria appears to have
felt that disagreement between Apostles was
impossible ; and he solved the difficulty by the
hypothesis that Cephas, under which name the
teacher rebuked by St. Paul is designated in
the Galatians, was not Peter the Apostle, but
only one of the seventy disciples (Luke x.). The
arguments in favour of this view were that
St. Peter had in the case of Cornelius eaten with
men uncircumcised, and would be unlikely after-
wards to be ashamed to act in the same way ;
that the Acts make no mention of any public
difference between St. Paul and St. Peter ; and
that the words in Gal. ii. 13, "even Barnabas
was carried away by their dissimulation," imply
that the Cephas spoken of was a person inferior
to St. Barnabas, since if St. Peter had been in-
tended we should not have expected to read "not
only Peter, bnt even Barnabas." However much
such a solution had to recommend it to Church
writers, it was found impossible to maintain it
when it was fairly compared with the context
in the Epistle. Origen then devised a new way
of understanding the transaction, which for a
couple of centuries or more held its ground in
the East as the true explanation of what had
taken place. Origen's work has been lost, but we
have a full exposition of his theory in a sermon
by St. Chrysostom on the passage. We can well
adopt his account of the circumstances of the
case. The Apostles in Judaea would not run
the risk of disturbing the infant faith of their
disciples by a premature pulling up of the
Digitized by
Google
11 14 GALAT1ANS, EPISTLE TO THE
practices in which they had been rooted from
their earliest years, i t was otherwise with St.
Paul when he preached to the Gentiles, who had
never been accustomed to such rules. Thus
quite naturally St. Peter and his Churches in
Judaea observed the Jewish practices; St. Paul
and his Gentile converts did not. When St.
Peter came down to Antioch, he naturally con-
formed to the practices which he found estab-
lished there, as St. Paul conformed to Jewish
practices when he went to Jerusalem. But when
Jerusalem Jews came down to Antioch, St. Peter,
not to shock their weak faith, went back to the
mode of living which they had always known
him to use ; and then certain of the permanent
members of the Church of Antioch were led to
follow St. Peter's new example, and thus gave
rise to the scene described in the Epistle. St.
Chrysostom will not believe that there was any
real disagreement between the Apostles ; but ho
regards St. Paul's public rebuke and St. Peter's
submission to it as a scene arranged between
them in order that St. Peter might be justified in
the eyes of the Jerusalem visitors. Just, he says,
as those whose duty it is to collect taxes shrink
from the odium attending the disagreeable task
of pressing severely on their debtors, and have
recourse to the expedient of getting their superiors
publicly to press them for what they are bound
to bring in, and to bitterly revile them for their
remissness, so that they can then do their work
without offence, it being plain to all that the
rigour they exercise is forced on them and not
their own choice. Thus we are to understand
the scene between St. Peter and St. Paul as an
arranged apology to excuse the former for a
change in his course of action, which would
have given great offence if supposed to be made
altogether of his own choice.
St. Jerome, who adopts this theory, adds a more
offensive illustration. He tells how often he
had seen in the Roman law courts two counsel
reviling each other with the utmost bitterness,
who yet might be seen a little after out of court
walking together the best possible friends. To
this illustration St. Jerome added a more ques-
tionable defence of the lawfulness of temporary
simulation; and it is not wonderful that this
line of exposition grated harshly on the deep
religious feeling of St. Augustine, whose corre-
spondence with St. Jerome about this passage
constitutes one of the most interesting specimens
of patristic Biblical criticism. St. Augustine
reduces the question to this: Is it better to
maintain that the Apostle Paul wrote something
that was not true or that the Apostle Peter did
something that was not right ? To say that St.
Peter on this occasion did no wrong is to give
the lie to St. Paul, who tells that " Peter walked
not uprightly after the truth of the Gospel."
And if we can imagine this statement of St. Paul
to be false, we lose all confidence in the truth of
any passage of Scripture.
The result of this controversy was to bring
about a general agreement that there was a real
difference of opinion between the Apostles, and
that St. Paul was justified in rebuking St. Peter,
not as erroneous in his doctrine, but as faulty in
his practice. But it must be mentioned that
the earliest Western writer who dealt with the
passage had taken St. Peter's side. Marcion had
justified his rejection of the authority of the
GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO THE
elder Apostles by quoting St. Paul's accusation
of St. Peter as having walked " not uprightly
according to the truth of the Gospel;" and
Tertullian, whose impulse in controversy always
is to catch at the first weapon near at hand,
replies : " True, but this was when St. Paul was
still young in the faith, still uncertain whether
he had run or might be still running in vain.
His expostulation with Peter was but the out-
break of the zeal against Judaism of a new
convert, which Paul himself retracted when he
became older and bad learned to become all things
to all men, and even to the Jews to become a
Jew " (Adv. Marc. i. 4). But when Tertullian
recurs to the subject, he drops this apology,
which is hardly consistent with the reverence
for St. Paul which he always exhibits, and takes
the usual ground that it was only St. Peterls
practice which was faulty, and that no question
of doctrine was involved.
Modern critics who contend that St. Peter's
conduct manifests a real difference of doctrine
from St. Paul, exhibit inability to enter into the
feelings of the people of the time. Some help
towards this is given by our knowledge of the
caste system of our Indian Empire. Different
views have been taken by missionaries as to
whether they ought to tolerate the observance
of caste by their converts, as a mere national
custom, belonging to the secular sphere with
which religion has no concern, or whether they
should demand of their converts the abandon-
ment of caste on pain of rejection or excom-
munication. Evidently the possibility of carry-
ing out the former plan depends much on
whether or not there is a mixture of races in
the Church. In Palestine in the first age of
Christianity the members of the Church were
all Jews, and there seemed no reason why they
should forsake their national customs. By
compliance with them (if that can be called
compliance which was not so much a con-
cession to the feelings of others as a satisfaction
to the feelings and prejudices in which they
themselves had been brought up), Jews in
Palestine, who believed in the Messiahship of
Jesus, could preserve the friendship and esteem
of their unconverted brethren. This, we are told,
was the case with St. James the Just. But it
was otherwise where races were mixed ; and the
Indian caste system enables us to understand
the difficulties felt by a Christian Jew on finding
himself obliged to mix with Gentiles as brethren
and on the most intimate terms. A Jew hke
St. Paul, who quite cast off his national ei-
clusiveness, would be looked on as having lost
caste, and so would be regarded by unbelieving
Jews as a renegade more deserving of hatred
than a Gentile; while even Christian Je«
could not conquer their dislike at such 'j" 1 '?'
feeling towards it much as Queen Elixabe ") *^
other non-Romanists did to a married priesthood.
Feelings cannot be altered in a moment, and tne
heart will still revolt at what the intellect can
give no good reason for condemning. ,
English residents abroad who have persusow
themselves that there is no harm in confo ™^°
to some foreign customs condemned by t0 *?~
of English propriety, will still feel uncomfoiv
able when their laxity comes under the ey«
their own countrymen. And nothing can be iinore
natural than that St. Peter, though convinced in
Digitized by
Google
GALATIANS. EPISTLE TO THE
theory that there was nothing wrong in his ;
conforming to the practices of the Church of
Antioch in associating with Gentiles, should feel
mach ashamed when detected in his laxity by
visitors from Jerusalem. On the other hand,
the natural effect of his conduct was that the '
Gentile converts, whom so great an Apostle pro- '
nounced to be unfit for his society, were put
under strong temptation to do whatever might
be necessary to raise themselves to the higher
level ; and this naturally drew strong remon-
strance from St. Paul. But there is no reason
to understand the " compulsion " spoken of in
his question, " Why compellest thou the Gentiles
to live as do the Jews ? " as of any other kind
than that necessarily exercised by his practice
and example. [G. S.]
r IV. Bibliography. — For coram, which embrace
the whole of the Pauline Epp., see 2 Corim-
TH1AN8 tab fin. Patristic comm. on Galatians
abound : a valuable notice of them is given in an
app. to his com. by Bp. Lightfoot, who refers to
Cave, Script Ecclet. Hist. Liter., Oxon. 1740;
Fabricius, Bibl. Graeca; SchrBckh, Christiiche
KirckengeschichU ; Simon, Histoire critique des
prmripaux Commentateurs rfu If. T., 1693;
Kosenmuiler, Historia Interpretations Librorum
Sacrorum, 1796-1814; and Augustin in Nosselt,
Opusc. iii. p. 321. The earlier patristic comm.
" bare for the most part an independent value ;
the later are mere collections or digests of the
labours of preceding writers." Qreek: Of
Origen's vast comm. on Galatians only three
fragments remain in a Latin tr. of Pamphilus'
Defence of him ; but probably "all subsequent
writers are directly or indirectly indebted to
him to a very large extent." St. Chrysostom's
com. (c. A.D. 390) is less homiletic and more
continuous than his other treatises on the N. T .,
Eng. tr. in Library of the Fathers, Oxf. 1840.
The com. of Theodore of Mopsnestia (c. 420), the
best representative of the School of Autioch, is
extant in a Latin version: Dom Pitra, Spicil.
Sntesm. i. p. 49, 1852; Swete, Camb. 1880-82.
Theodoret's (c 450) is avowedly a reproduction
of St, Chrvsostom and Theodore : but it is highly
praUed. Latin; The com. of Victorinus Afer
(c 360), like that of the unknown Hilary com-
monly called Ambrosiaster (c. 375), supplies
valuable material for criticism of the Old Latin
text of the Bible ; but while Hilary's is one of
the best Latin comm., that of Victorinus is one
of the worst : its obscurity is universally con-
demned. .St. Jerome's com. (c. 387) was written
in haste (Pref. to B. iii.), like most of his works,
and is partly a digest of previous expositions.
" Though abounding in fanciful and perverse
interpretations, violations of good taste and good
feeling, faults of all kinds, this is nevertheless
the most valuable of all the patristic comm. on
the Ep. to the Gal." St. Augustine's Exposith
of the Ep. is thought to be all his own ; but it
does not rank among his best works. As a
sample of later comm. that of Claudius of Turin
(c 815) may be taken. He professes merely to
compare; and his choice is determined by his
fondness for allegorical interpretation. Of the
K. T. catenae that on Gal. alone is printed
entire ; Paris, 1542 ; Bibl. PP. max. xiv. p. 139 ;
Mag*. Bibl. Vet. Patr. it, p. 66 ; Migne, Patrol.
IM. civ. p. 838. For a good list of comm.,
from Luther onwards, see Meyer's Com. Eng. tr.,
GALBANTJM
1115
Edinburgh, 1873, and add to it the following : —
Latin: Lorentz, Arg. 1747; Semler, Halae, 1779;
Fischer, Long. 1808; Niemayer, Gott. 1827.
Entjlish: B. Jowett, Murray, 1859; J. Venn,
Nesbit, 1878; H. Cowles, New York, 1879;
W. Sanday in Ellicott's N. T., Cassells, 1879;
J. S. Howson in Speaker's Comm. on If. 71,
Murray, 1881; A. Beet, Hodder, 1885; J. S.
Exell, Nisbet, 1889; E. Huxtable in /Vjrf*
Com., Kegan Paul, 1889; Find lav, H dder,
1889; Sadler, Bell, 1890 (homiletic and
devotional). German: Zschokke, Halle, 1834;
Baumgarten-Crusius, Leip. 1846 ; Ewald, Gett-
ing. 1857; VOmel, 1865; Besser, Halle, 1869;
Brandes, Wiesbaden, 1869; Sieffert, Giitting.
1886 ; Steck, 1888 ; Zimmer (on the Old Latin
text), 1888; Schaefer (lioman Catholic), Miinster,
1890 ; V61ter, Die Comp. d. Paulin. Hauptbriefe :
I. " Der Romer und Galaterbrief," Tubingen,
1890, 175 S., reviewed by Holtzmann in the
Theol. Literaturztg., Aug. 23, 1890, "Der
Galaterbrief ist ihm vollstiindig unecht. Auch
sind lnterpolationen haufig;" Lipsius, Freiburg
i. B. 1891. French: Rieu, Paris, 1829; Barren,
Mont. 1842. The student -will derive great
help from Ellicott, Longmans, 1867 (grammatical
and exegetical, with criticism of editions in the
preface); Lightfoot, Macmillan, 1887 (indis-
pensable); Meyer; Wieseler, Gotting. 1850
(historical and chronological ; chief defender of
the Teutonic origin of the Galatians) ; Sieffert ;
and Lipsius. In Field, Otium Iforvicense, iii.,
Oxf. 1881, are notes on ii. 11, vi. 10, 11 ; in
Jahrb. f. prot. Theol. ii. p. 188, Lipsius on
vi. 6-10. The literature on the relation of
Gal. ii. to Acts xv. is considerable; for refer-
ences, see Reuss, Gesch. d. heil. Schr. A'. T-,
Braunschweig, 1887, § 65, Eng. tr. Clark,
1884, p. 58. The literature on iii. 20 is
immense; for references, see Meyer in loco.
Expositor, 1st Series: Gal. i. 19 in vol. x.
p. 162 ; ii. 3-5 in xi. 201 ; ii. 18 in ix. 392 ; ii.
20 in iii. 62 ; vi. 1-5 in x. 81. 2nd Series : Ep.
in ii. 287 ; iii. 8 in vi. 98. 3rd Series : Ep. in
iv. 131 ; the Judaizers in x. 52, 107 ; ii. 1-5 in
vi. 435; iii. 16 in ix. 18; iii. 19, 20 in x. 52,
107. [A. P.]
GALBANUM (fUS^n, chdb'nah), one of the
perfumes employed in the preparation of the
sacred incense (Ex. xxx. 34). The similarity of
the Hebrew name to the Greek xuAjSdVi) and the
Latin Galbanum has led to the supposition that
the substance indicated is the same. The gal-
banum of commerce is brought chiefly from
India and the Levant. It is a resinous gum of a
brownish yellow colour, and strong, disagreeable
smell, usually met with in masses, but some-
times found in yellowish tear-like drops. The
ancients believed that when burnt the smoke of
it was efficacious in driving away serpents and
gnats (Plin. xii. 56, xix. 58, xxiv. 13; Virg.
Georg. iii. 415). But, though galbanum itself
is well known, the plant which yields it has not
been exactly determined. Dioscorides (iii. 87)
describes it as the juice of an umbelliferous
plant growing in Syria, and called by some
UtTdmov (cp. i. 71). Kiihn, in his commentary
on Dioscorides (ii. p. 532), is in favour of the
Ferula ferulago (L.), which grows in North Africa,
Crete, and Asia Minor. According to Pliny
(xii. 56) it is the resinous gum of a plant called
Digitized by
Google
1116
GALEED
stagonitis, growing on Mount Amanus in Syria ;
while the metopion is the product of a tree near
the oracle of Ammon (xii. 49). The testimony
of Theophrastus (Hist. Plant, ix. 7), so far as it
goes, confirms the accounts of Pliny and Diosco-
rides. It was for some time supposed to be the
product of the Bubon gatbanum of Linnaeus, a
native of the Cape of Good Hope. Don found in
the galbanum of commerce the fruit of an um-
belliferous plant of the tribe Silerinae, which he
assumed to be that from which the gum was
produced, and to which he gave the name of
Galbanum officinale.* But his conclusion was
called in question by Dr. Lindley, who received
from Sir John Macneil the fruits of a plant
growing at Durrood, near Nishapore, in Kho-
rassan, which he named Opoidia galbanifera, of
the tribe Smy rneae. This plant has been adopted
by the Dublin College in their Pharmacopoeia, as
that which yields the galbanum (Pereira, Mat.
Med. ii. pt. 2, p. 188). M. Buhse, in his Persian
travels (quoted in Royle, Mat. Med. pp. 471,
472), identified the plant producing galbanum
with one which he found on the Demawend
mountains. It was called by the natives Khas-
such, and bore a very close resemblance to the
Ferula erubeacens, but belonged neither to the
genus Galbanum nor to Opoidia. It is believed
that the Persian galbanum, and that brought
from the Levant, are the produce of different
plants. But the question remains undecided.
If the galbanum be the true representative of
the chelb'nah of the Hebrews, it may at first
sight appear strange that a substance which,
when burnt by itself, produces a repulsive
odour, should be employed in the composition of
the sweet-smelling incense for the service of
the Tabernacle. We have the authority of
Pliny that it was used, with other resinous
ingredients, in making perfumes among the
ancients; and the same author tells us that
these resinous substances were added to en-
able the perfume to retain its fragrance
longer. " Resina aut gummi adjiciuntur ad
continendum odorem in corpore " (xiii. 2).
Galbanum was also employed in adulterating
the opobalsamum, or gum of the balsam plant
(Plin. xii. 54). [W. A. W.]
GAL-EED Cw?l =heap of witness; A. 0uu-
vbs liiprvs; Acervus tettimunii Qalaad). The
name given to the heap which Jacob and Laban
made on Mount Gilead, in witness of the cove-
nant between them (Gen. xxxi. 47, 48 ; cp.
m. 23, 25). [Gilkad ; Jegar-saha-dctha.]
G AUG ALA (rdA-voAo; Galgnla), the ordi-
nary equivalent in the LXX. for Gilgal. In the
E. V. it is named only in 1 Mace. ix. 2, as desig-
nating the direction of the road taken by the
army of Demetrius, when they attacked Masaloth
in Arbela — " the way to Galgala " (bbbv rijv fu
rdA-yaAa). The army, as we learn from the
statements of Josephus (Ant. xii. 11, § 1), was
on its way from Antioch, and there is no reason
to doubt that by Arbela is meant the place of
that name in Galilee now surviving as Irbid.
* 1 have not been able to discover either Galbanum
officinale or Opoidia galbanifera growing in Syria.
There is a specimen of the latter In the Herbarium at
Cambridge from Northern Per la, which Is probably the
true borne of the plant.— {H. B. TO
GALILEE
[Arbela.] The ultimate destination of the
army was Jerusalem (1 Mace. ix. 3), and
Galgala may therefore be either the upper
Gilgal near Bethel, or the lower one near
Jericho, as the route through the Ghor or that
through the centre of the country was chosen
(Ewald, Qesch. iv. 370). Josephus omits the
name in his version of the passage. It is a
gratuitous supposition of Ewald's that the
Galilee which Josephus introduces is a corruption
of Galgala ; on the other hand, Galilee may be
the correct reading in 1 Mace. ix. 2. [G.] [W.]
GALILAE'AN (roAiAoToj ; Galilaeus), an in-
habitant of Galilee (Matt. xxvi. 69 in R. V. only ;
Mark xiv. 70 ; Luke xiii. 1, 2, xxii. 59, xxiii. 6 ;
John ir. 45 ; Acts ii. 7 ; also in the Greek in
Acts i. 11, v. 37). [W.]
GALILEE (roA.Xoio). The Hebrew word
W>|, GalU, rendered " Galilee " (LXX. TaXiKala)
in the O. T. — probably to keep up the corre-
spondence with the H. T. — is derived from a root
773 " to roll." In the plural form, Geltlotii
(A.'V. " borders," " coasts ; " R. V. " regions "),
it occurs five times in the 0. T., and is applied on
each occasion to level or slightly undulating
districts, such as Philistia and the Jordan Valley
near Jericho. GalU would appear then to signify
level or undulating ground, and was perhaps
used in this sense in Josh. xx. 7, xxi. 32, 1 Ch.
vi. 76, to indicate the plain in which Kadesh
Naphtali was situated. At a later period the
word was apparently used in a wider sense to
denote a district. The " land of Galilee," which
probably lay close to the borders of Hiram's
kingdom, contained twenty cities (IK. ix. 1 1-13) ;
and, in 2 K. xv. 29, Galilee is mentioned as s>
distinct locality, whence the people were carried
away captive to Assyria. The expression
" Galilee of the nations," or "of the Gentiles "
(Dtyn 7^>J, Is. ix. 1 ; in Matt. iv. 15, ToAiWa
twy iSvav; in 1 Mace. r. 15, TaAiAala a\Xo~
<pvXwy), indicates a still more extended area r
but it is by no means clear that it refers to a
region with fixed geographical limits.
The northern tribes established themselves
slowly in their possessions, and did not drive
out the Canaanites, who continued to dwell
amongst them (Judg. i. 30-33; ir. 2). Even
under the monarchy the heathen element in the
population was strong ; the cities given by
Solomon to Hiram must have been heathen
cities ; and Isaiah (ix. 1) uses the term " Galilee
of the nations." After the people of Upper
Galilee had been taken captive by Tiglath-pileser
(2 K. xv. 29 ; Jos. Ant. ix. 11, § 1), the country-
was probably occupied by heathen, and there
is no record of its having been re-settled by
Hebrews after the return from the Captivity.
The period at which Galilee was constituted a
separate administrative district is uncertain, but
it was possibly during the time of the Persian
domination. It is first mentioned, with Judaea
and Samaria, in the letter from Demetrius to
Jonathan Maccabaeus (1 Mace. x. 30; Jos. Ant.
xiii. 2, § 3) ; and was then a toparchy, having-
approximately the same limits as the later dis-
trict under the Herods. In Judith i. 8 there is
an indication of the topographical division into
Digitized by
Google
GALILEE
Upper awl Lower Galilee. At the commencement
of the Asmonaean revolt the number of Jews
in Galilee must hare been small. They took no
part in the rebellion, and it was only after Judas
Uaccabaeus had established himself in Judaea,
and had restored the Temple service, that the
war spread to Galilee. The Galilaeao Jews,
being oppressed by the heathen amidst whom
they lived, appealed to Jndas for protection, and
Simon Maccabaens was sent to their assistance.
After a successful campaign Simon returned to
Judaea, taking with him the Jews he had
rescued, " with their wives and their children,
and all that they had " (1 Mace. v. 14, 15, 17, 20,
21, 23, 55; Jos. Ant. xii. 8, § 2). The object
of this deportation was probably to strengthen
the position of the insurgent Jews in the hill-
GALILEE
1117
country of Judaea. Under Jonathan Maccabaens
the power of the Asmonaeans rapidly increased
and apparently extended over Galilee (Jos. Ant.
xiii. 2, § 3 ; 4, § 9 ; 5, § G). Jonathan defeated
•lie generals of Demetrius at Kadesh in Galilee
(1 Mace xi. 63-74; Jos. Ant. xiii. 5, § 6); and
it was in Galilee that he fell into the fatal snare
bid for him by Tryphon (1 Mace. xii. 47, 49 ;
Jos. Ant. xiii. 6, § 2). Galilee formed part of
tlie Jewish state founded by the Asmonaeans,
Mid no doubt partook of the general prosperity
«nder the rule of Hyrcanus. It was perhaps
it this time that the Jews began to settle in
Galilee; and the richness of the country and
the facilities it offered for trade must have at-
tracted large numbers of emigrants from the less
fertile hills of Judaea, for, during the Herodian
period, Jews and Judaised Aramaeans formed a
large majority of the population. In B.C. 47
Antipater, having been made procurator of
Judaea by Julius Caesar, entrusted the govern-
ment of Galilee to his son Herod (Jos. Ant. xiv.
9, § 2) ; and the district afterwards, B.C. 40,
formed part of the dominion over which Herod
was made king. On Herod's death, B.C. 4, Herod
Antipas was made tetrarch of Galilee and Perea
(Ant. xvii. 8, § 1), and he retained the govern-
ment until his banishment in A.D. 39 — a period
that included the whole life of Christ (Luke
xxiii. 7). Galilee now passed to Herod Agrippa I.
(Ant. xviii. 7, § 2), who died suddenly, a.d. 44,
at Caesarea; it was then placed under the
Roman procurator of Judaea, and, with the ex-
ception of Tiberias, Tarichaeae, and a small
adjoining district, which were given to Herod
Agrippa 11. (Ant. xx. 8, § 4), so remained until
the outbreak of the final war in a.d. 66.
Galilee, in the time of Christ, was the most
northern of the three districts into which Pales-
tine west of the Jordan was divided (Luke xvii.
11; Acts ix. 31 ; Jos. B. J. iii. 3, § 1); and in-
cluded, roughly speaking, the territories assigned
to Issachar, Zebulun, Asher, and Naphtali. It
was bounded on the S. by Samaria, and stretched
from the foot of the Samaritan hills northwards
to the river Leontes ; on the W. it was separated
from the sea by the territories of Ptolemais and
Tyre, and on the E. it extended to the Jordan
and the Sea of Galilee or Tiberias. Its limits
were at one time close to Ptolemais (1 Mace. v.
55), Carmel once belonged to it (Jos. B. J. iii.
3, § 1), and according to the Talmudists (Neu-
j bauer, Geog. du Talmud, pp. 236, 240, 242) it
embraced Caesarea Philippi, Gamala, and the
country above Gadara. Josephus (B. J. iii. 3,
§ 1) divides Galilee into " Lower Galilee,"
which extended from Tiberias, on the E., to
Zebulun, perhaps Sh'aib, on the W., and from
Xaloth, Iksal, on the plain of Esdraelon, to
Bersabe ; and " Upper Galilee," which stretched
northwards from Bersabe to Baca, on the Tyrian
frontier, and from Meloth, perhaps M'alii, on
the W., to Thella, near the Jordan. We learn,
incidentally, that Lower Galilee extended as far
as the village of Ginaea, the modern Jenin, on
the extreme southern side of the plain of Es-
draelon (Ant. xx. 6, § 1 ; B.J. iii. 3, § 4); that
Chabolo, Kabul, was on the confines of Ptolemais
(Fit. 43); and that Arbela (Irbid) and Jotapata
(Jef'at) were in Lower Galilee ( Yit. 37 ; B. J.
ii. 20, § 6). The Mishna (S/ubiith, ix. 2) adds
a third division, " the valley " or district of
Tiberias; and defines Upper Galilee as the
country beyond Kefr Hananiah, Kefr 'Anan, in
which the sycamore does not grow, and Lower
Galilee as the district, below that village, in
I which it flourishes. The division is a natural
I one, and easily understood, for, beyond Kefr
I 'Anan, the range of Jebel Jurtnuk rises, almost
! like a wall, for about 2,000 feet, and separates
I the rugged hills of Jebel Safed and the Belad
Besharah from the rich open country to the
' south. The Mishna (Gittin, vii. 8) places Kefr
Utheni, or Uthnai, perhaps Kefr Addn, N.W. of
Jenin, on the frontier between Galilee and
Samaria ; and, according to Tal. Bab. Gittin,
7 b, Kezib (ez-Zib) was the last town of Galilee
towards the north-west. Eusebius (OS.' p. 256,
90) appears to call Upper Galilee "Galilee of
Digitized by
Google
1118
GALILEE
the nations," in which he places Capernaum
(OS* p. 272, 96).
Upper Galilee is a mountainous district, " the
mount Naphtali" of the 0. T. (Josh. xx. 7),
parted from the lofty range of Mount Leba-
non, of which it is a southern prolongation,
by the deep ravine of the Leontes. The
highland plateau is diversified by picturesque,
deeply-cut valleys, small but rich upland plains,
and steep hills, clad with brushwood, that often
attain an altitude of over 3,000 feet, and culmi-
nate in Jebel Jermuk, 3,934 feet. It is in places
well wooded with dwarf oak, intermixed with
tangled shrubberies of hawthorn and arbutus;
but it is above all "a land of brooks of water, of
fountains and depths that spring out of valleys
and hills" (Deut. viii. 7). On the & the
plateau ends with an abrupt descent to the
Jordan valley, and the rich plain of Ardel-Klieit
that borders the el-Hileh Lake ; and on the W.
it gradually breaks down to the Phoenician
plain. It was once covered with frnitful fields
and vines; and its fruits were renowned for
their great sweetness (Tal. Bab. Megilla, 6 a);
and it is still well cultivated by a numerous and
industrious population. The plateau is so cut
up by an intricate system of valleys that no im-
portant trade routes could ever have crossed it,
and communication must always have been
difficult. The ancient main roads were : (1) from
Tyre by Kul'at Mdrun and Abrikha to Dan and
Caesarea Philippi ; (2) from the Sea of Galilee
up the Jordan Valley ; and (3) from Safed by
Kades, Kedesh Naphtali, and Hunin to the bridge
over the Leontes. On the plateau are the ruins
of Kedesh (Josh. xx. 7, apparently the " Nephthali
in Galilee " of Tobit i. 2) ; of Gischala, el-Jish,
a city fortified by Josephus, and the last place
in Galilee to hold out against the Romans
(A J. ii. 20, § 6 ; iv. 1, § 1 ; 2, §§ 1-5); and of
several towns with large synagogues. The chief
town is now Safed, which has a large population
of Jews, and is one of the four holy Jewish
cities of Palestine.
Lower Galilee a characterised by the number
and richness of its plains, and is one of the
most beautiful and fertile districts in Palestine.
The soil is especially favourable to agriculture,
and here and there are spots well wooded with
oak and other trees. The hills sink down in
graceful slopes to broad windiug vales of the
richest green; the outlines are varied, the
colours soft ; and the whole landscape is one of
picturesque luxuriance. Kenan describes it in
glowing terms as " un pays tres-vert, tres-
ombrag£, t res-sou riant, le vrai pays du Cantiquo
des cantiques et des chansons du bien-aime "
( Vie de Je~siis, p. 43). The plains commence with
that oter-Sameh, 1250 feet above the sea, at the
foot of Jebel Jermuk. To the south of this is the
Sahel el'Buttauf, tho " great plain of Asochis "
(Jos. Vit. 41), from the eastern end of which
there is a rapid descent to the plain of Genne-
surcth, celebrated alike for its beauty and the
fruitfulness of its soil (JB. J. iii. 10, § 8). Above
Tiberias is the Sahel el-Ahma, with its rich
volcanic soil ; and, towards the southern ex-
tremity of the district, the hills fall rapidly to
the great plain of Esdraelon, to enjoy which
Issacbar was content to become " a servant unto
tribute" (Gen. xlix. 15). The blessings pro-
mised to Zebulun and Asher (Gen. xlix. 13, 20 ;
GALILEE
Deut. xxiii. 18, 19, 24) seem to be inscribed on
the features of the country ; it is " a land of
wheat and barley, and vines and fig-trees, and
pomegranates ; a land of oil olive, and honey "
(Deut. viii. 8). Josephus describes the soil of
Galilee as "universally rich and fruitful, and
planted with trees of all sorts, so that by its
fruitfulness it invites even the most slothful to
take pains in its cultivation "(A J. iii. 3, §§2, 3),
According to the Talmudiats, the country for 16
miles round Sepphoris was fertile, " Mowing with
milk and honey " (Tal. Bab. Megilla, 6 a); and
the fruits of Gennesareth were so luscious that
they were not sent to Jerusalem at the time of
Feasts, lest men should be tempted to go up to
the Feasts for the sake of eating them (Tal. Bab.
Pcsakhim, 86). The productions of Galilee were
of the most varied description ; oil was plentiful
(Jos. Vit. 13, 30; B. J. ii. 21, § 2); and the
climate was so favourable to the growth of the
olive-tree, that according to the Talmud it was
easier to raise a forest of olive-trees in Galilee
than a child in Jndaea (Neubauer, Geog. du Tal.
p. 180). At Achabara pheasants were raised;
Arbela was noted for its cloth ; Bethshean, " the
gate of Paradise," for its linen, its olives, and its
exuberant fertility; Capernaum and Choraxin
were celebrated for their wheat, Safed for its
honey, Shikmonah for its pomegranates, Sigona
for its wine, and Kefr Hananiah for its pottery.
The indigo plant was cultivated near Magdali;
in the spring the ground was carpeted with
flowers, and the vine, the fig, the walnut, the
almond, the oleander, the myrtle, the balsam,
the palm, and many other trees, shrubs, and
aromatic plants flourished in this " garden that
has no end " (Neubauer, pp. 180-240; Jos. B.J.
iii. 3, §§ 2, 3 ; 10, § 8). The fisheries of the
Sea of Galilee provided occupation for large
numbers of fishermen ; Tarichaeae, " the salting
station," supplied the best fish for salting
(Strabo, xvi. 2, § 45) ; and the salt fish was sent
to all parts of the country, especially to Jeru-
salem at the time of the great Feasts, when it
was possibly sold outside the "Fish Gate."i
Lower Galilee was well provided with roads:
one ran from Acre to er-Sameh, and then, climb-
ing the high hills, joined the road northwards
from Safed through Upper Galilee ; another ran
from Acre by Sepphoris to Tiberias and the
Jordan valley ; and a third, over which grain
was brought down from the fertile plains east
of Jordan to the sea, crossed the great plain of
Esdraelon to Jezreel, and passed on by Scytho-
polis and Gadara to the Haurau. The great
trade route that connected Egypt with Damascus
and Syria entered Lower Galilee at Megiddo, and
running on past the Sea of Galilee, crossed the
Jordan at Jitr Benat Yakub. No small portion
of the commerce between the east and the west
passed over these roads, of which one was known
as the " way of the sea," the via maris of the
Middle Ages, and added to the wealth of the
district. The chief towns of Lower Galilee were
Tiberias, Tarichaeae, Sepphoris, Gabara, Gischala,
Zebulun ; the fortresses of Jotapata and Mount
Tabor; and those mentioned in N. T. history,
Nazareth, Cana, Capernaum, and Choraxin.
It is evident from the Gospels and also from
Josephus, that, in the time of Christ, Galilee was
densely populated and thickly covered with towns
and villages. Josephus states that there were
Digitized by
Google
GALILEE
20+ cities and Tillages, the very least of which
contained more than 15,000 inhabitants ( Vit. 45 ;
B. J. iii. 3, § 2) ; that on one occasion 100,000
aimed men assembled in a single night (B. J. ii.
21, § 3) ; and that Herod Antipas had armour
{or 70,000 men in his armoury {Ant. iviii. 7, § 2).
The Sea of Galilee was covered with ships and
boats : Josephus collected 230 on one occasion at
Tirichaeae (B. J. ii. 21, § 8) ; and " the whole
bum most have been a focus of life and energy ;
the surface of the lake constantly dotted with
the white sails of vessels, flying before the
mountain gusts, as the beach sparkled with the
houses and palaces, the synagogues and the
temples of the Jewish or Roman inhabitants "
(Stanley, S. and P. p. 376). The numbers of
Josephus are possibly exaggerated, but apart from
these the extensive ruins at Tell Hum, Kerazeh,
and other places, and the numerous ruined syna-
gogues, such as those at Kefr Bairn, Meiron, &c,
attest the former prosperity of the district.
Jews and Aramaeans and others who had ac-
cepted the Law of Moses, formed a large
majority of the population ; but there were
numbers of Greeks, Egyptians, Arabs, and
Phoenicians intermingled with them (Jos. Vit.
6,12; Strabo, xvi. 2, § 34). The people were
industrious and enterprising, and engaged in
agriculture and commerce. They were courageous
and warlike, a heritage of olden times (Judg. v.
18), and regarded honour more than money
(Tal. Jer. Ketuboth, iv. 14). Cowardice was
never a failing of the Galilaeans, who were
inured to war from infancy (Jos. B. J. iii. 3,
L2); and during their last struggle with the
mans, they constantly showed a supreme
contempt for death. The independent spirit of
the Galilaeans sometimes showed itself in armed
opposition to the constituted authority (B. J. i.
1$> S 5) i and tne people of Tiberias are described
as being " by nature disposed to changes, and
delighting in seditions " ( Vit. 17). During the
disorders that followed the death of Herod the
Great, Judas, son of Hezekiab, raised some men
and seized Sepphoris (Ant xvii. 10, § 5). Judas
the Galilaean, the founder of the sect of the
Galilaeans, who taught that God alone was Lord
and Master, and that no one should submit to
mortal men as masters, raised a revolt in Judaea,
whilst Coponius was procurator (Acts v. 37;
Jos. Ant. xviii. 1, §§ 1, 6 ; B. J. ii. 8, § 1).
They were Galilaeans, perhaps rebels, who were
pat to death by Pilate at the time of the sacrifice
(Lake xiii. 1) ; and, at a later period, Galilee
was the centre of the rebellion which ended in
tie capture and destruction of Jerusalem. Some
of the most noted of the defenders of the Holy
City during the last siege were Galilaeans, as
Qeazar, who perished at Masada, and John of
Gischala. The Talmud (Neubauer, G4og. du Tal.
p. 182) mentions certain differences between the
religious ceremonies as practised in Galilee and
Judaea ; and it would seem, from Matt. xv. 1,
»here the Pharisees appear as emissaries from
the dominant party of Jerusalem, that the
Galilaeans lacked the narrow prejudices of the
people of Judaea, and maintained a certain in-
dependence in religious matters. They also
differed in speech. A Galilaean was known by
his accent, or dialect (Matt. xxvi. 73 ; Mark xiv.
10; Acts ii. 7 ; Tal. Bab. Erubin, 53 a ; Light-
foot, 0pp. ii 141), and appears in the Talmud
GALILEE
1119
as a lout or boor (Erubin, 53 o). There seems
to have been a settled belief that Galilee could
produce no prophet (John vii. 52) ; and the
reputation of Nazareth may be inferred from
the question, " Can there any good thing come
out of Nazareth ? " (John i. 46). It is possible
that Galilee was regarded as a subject or inferior
district, by the descendants of the men who
had risen and won their freedom under the
Asmonaeans, and that the Jews of Judaea and
Jerusalem considered themselves superior to the
Galilaeans. But there is no evidence in the Bible
or in Josephus to show that Galilee and the
Galilaeans were, as is sometimes stated, looked
upon with contempt. That such feelings arose
and were freely expressed at a later date, when
Christianity was spreading amongst Jews and
Gentiles, is very probable, for the new religion
was often connected with the home of its Pounder.
The Emperor Julian is said to have called the
Christians "Galilaeans" in his edicts, in order to
cast dishonour on them, and to have cried out
on receiving his death-wound, " Galilaean ! thou
hast conquered I " (Theodoret, Hist. Eccl. iii. 8,
21, 25. The accounts about his death and of
his last words are, however, very diverse. See
Diet, of Christ. Biog. s.n.)
Galilee first acquired a world-wide interest
through " Jesus the Galilaean " (Matt. xxvi. 69,
R. V.). It was at Nazareth that the child Jesns
"grew and waxed strong in spirit, filled with
wisdom ; " and at Cana that He performed His
first miracle (John ii. 11). It was the scene
of the greater part of our Lord's private
life and public acts; here were Capernaum,
"His own city," in which He dwelt (Matt,
iv. 13 ; ix. 1), and " the cities wherein most
of His mighty works were done " (Matt. xi.
20); and here He showed himself to His dis-
ciples after His Resurrection (Matt, xxviii. 7, 16;
John xxi. 1). The Apostles were also either by
birth or residence chiefly Galilaeans (Acts i. 11 ;
ii. 7).
It may be remarked that the first three
Gospels are chiefly taken up with our Lord's
ministrations in Galilee; while the Gospel of St.
John dwells more upon those in Judaea. The
nature of our Lord's parables and illustrations
was greatly influenced by the peculiar features
and products of the country. The vineyard, the
rig-tree, the shepherd, and the desert in the
parable of the Good Samaritan, were all appro-
priate in Judaea ; while the corn-fields (Mark iv.
28), the fisheries (Matt. xiii. 47), the merchants
(Matt. xiii. 45), and the flowers (Matt. vi. 28),
are no less appropriate in Galilee. After the
destruction of Jerusalem Galilee became the
chief seat of Jewish schools of learning, and the
residence of their most celebrated Kabbins. The
National Council or Sanhedrin was taken for a
time to Jabneh in Philistia, but was soon re-
moved to Sepphoris, and afterwards to Tiberias
(Lightfoot, Opp. ii. p. 141). The Mishna was
here compiled by Rabbi Judah Hakkodesh
(c. a.d. 109-220) ; and a few years afterwards
the Gemara was added (Uuxtorf, Tiberias, p.
19). Remains of splendid synagogues still
exist in many of the old towns and villages,
showing that from the 2nd to the 7th cen-
tury the Jews were as prosperous as they were
numerous (PEF. Mem. vol. i. ; Conder, Hand-
book to Bible, pp. 301-314; Porter, Handbook:
Digitized by
Google
1120 GALILEE, MOUNTAIN IN
Stanley, S. f P. pp. 361-387 ; Merrill, Galilee
in the time of Christ ; Riebm, s. v. ; Guenn,
Galilee). [W.]
GALILEE, MOUNTAIN IN (M»tt. xxviii.
16), where Jesus manifested Himself to His dis-
ciples after His Resurrection. The particular
mountain referred to is unknown. It may possibly
have been the " Mount of Beatitudes " (Matt.
t. 1), or the high mountain of the Transfiguration
(Matt. xvii. 1). The view that it was one of
the knolls on the ridge of Olivet is evidently
wrong, for it is distinctly stated that the dis-
ciples went into Galilee. Some have supposed
that St. Paul refers to this manifestation of
■Christ in 1 Cor. xv. 6. [W.]
GALILEE, SEA OF. [Gennesabeth.]
GALL, the representative in the A. V. of the
Hebrew words mtrerah or mirdrah, and roth.
1. Mlrerah or mirdrah fimO or flTlD:
t •* : ~ :
X»A4 ; fel, amaritudo, viscera mea) denotes ety-
mologically "that which is bitter"; see Job
xiii. 26, " thou writest bitter things against
me." Hence the term is applied to the " bile "
or " gall " from its intense bitterness (Job
xvi. 13 ; xx. 25) ; it is also used of the "poison"
of serpents (Job xx. 14), which the ancients
erroneously believed was their gall ; see Pliny,
N. H. xi. 37, " No one should be astonished that
it is the gall which constitutes the poison of
serpents."
2. Bdsh {&h or enl; x°*4, rucpla, typo-
oris ; fel, amaritudo, caput), generally translated
" gall " by the A. V., is in Hos. x. 4 rendered
"hemlock ": in Deut. xxxii. 33, and Job xx. 16,
rdsh denotes the " poison " or " venom " of
serpents. From Dent. xxix. 18, "a root that
beareth rdsh" (margin "a poisonful herb"),
and Lam. iii. 19, "the wormwood and the
rdsh" compared with Hos. x. 4, "judgment
springeth up as rdsh," it is evident that the
Hebrew term denotes some bitter and perhaps
poisonous plant, though it may also be used, as
in Ps. Ixix. 21, in the general sense of "some-
thing very bitter." Celsius (Hierob. ii. pp. 46-
52) thinks that hemlock (fionium maculatum) is
intended, and quotes Jerome on Hosea in support
of his opinion, though it seems that this com-
mentator had in view the couch-grass ( Triticum
repens) rather than " hemlock." Rosenmuller
{Bib. Bot. p. 118) is inclined to think that the
Lolium temulentum best agrees with the passage
in Hosea, where the rish is said to grow "in
the furrows of the field."
Other writers have supposed, and with some
reason (from Dent, xxxii. 32, " their grapes are
grapes of rdsh "), that some berry-bearing plant
must be intended. Gesenius (Thcs. p. 1251)
understands "poppies "; Micbaelis (Suppl. Lex.
Heb. p. 2220) is of opinion that rdsh may be
either the Lolium temulentum, or the Solanum
('• night-shade "). Oedmann ( Verm. Sam. pt. iv.
c. 10) argues in favour of the Cotoct/nth. The
most probable conjecture, for proof there is
none, is that of Gesenius : the capsules of the
Papaverwxac may well give the name of rdsh
(" head ") to the plant in question, just as we
speak of poppy-Aciwfo. The various species of
this family spring up quickly in corn-fields, and
the juice is extremely bitter. At least > nine
GALL
species of poppy are found in Palestine: our
corn-field red poppy (Papaver rhoeas) is as
abundant and universal there a* in Britain.
The opium poppy (Papater somniferum) is only
there found cultivated. A steeped solution of
poppy-heads may be " the water of gall " of
jer. viii. 14, unless, as Gesenius thinks, the
t5>tO '£> may be the poisonous extract, opium ;
but nothing definite can be learnt.
The passages in the Gospels which relate the
circumstance of the Roman soldiers offering our
Lord, just before His crucifixion, " vinegar
mingled with gall," according to St. Matthew
(xxvii. 34), and " wine mingled with myrrh,"
according to St. Mark's account (xv. 23), require
some consideration. The first-named Evangelist
uses x<>*4> which is the LXX. rendering of the
Heb. rdsh in the Psalm (lxix. 21) which foretells
the Lord's sufferings. St. Mark explains the
bitter ingredient in the sour vinous drink to be
" myrrh " (ofros l<riuiprurp.iyos), for we cannot
regard the transactions as different. "St.
Matthew, in his usual way," as Hengstenberg
(Comment, in Ps. Ixix. 21) remarks, "designates
the drink theologically : always keeping his eye
on the prophecies of the 0. T., he speaks of gall
and vinegar for the purpose of rendering the ful-
filment of the Psalms more manifest. St. Mark
again (xv. 23), according to his way, looks rather
at the outward quality of the drink." Bengel
takes quite a different view ; he thinks that both
myrrh and gall were added to the sonr wine:
" myrrha conditus ex more ; felle adulteratus ex
petulantia"('»'m»n.A T OB. Test. Matt. I.e.). Heng-
stenberg's view is far preferable ; nor is "gall"
(xoA))) to be understood in any other sense than
as expressing the bitter nature of the draught.
As to the intent of the proffered drink, it is
generally supposed that it was for the purpose
of deadening pain. It was customary to give
criminals just before their execution a cup of
wine with frankincense in it, to which reference
is made, it is believed, by the otvos Karayi((a>i
of Ps. Ix. 3 ; see also Prov. xxxi. 6. This, the
Talmud states, was given in order to alleviate
the pain. See Buxtorf (Lex. Talm. p. 2131),
who thus quotes from the Talmud (Sanhed.
fol. 43, 1): " Qui exit at occidatur (ex sententia
judicis) potant eum grano thuris in poculo vim
ut distrahatur mens ejus." Rosenmuller (Bib.
Bot. p. 163) is of opinion that the myrrh was
given to our Lord, not for the purpose of alle-
viating His sufferings, but in order that He
might be sustained until the punishment was
completed. He quotes from Apuleius (Metamorp.
viii.), who relates that a certain priest "dis-
figured himself with a multitude of blows,
having previously strengthened himself by
taking myrrh." How far the frankincense
in the cup, as mentioned in the Talmud, was
supposed to possess soporific properties, or in
any way to induce an alleviation of pain, it is
difficult to determine. The same must be said
of the otvot ivixvpvionivos of St. Mark ; for
it is quite certain that neither of these two
drugs in question, both of which are the produce
of the same natural order of plants (Amyri-
daceae), is ranked among the hypnopoietics by
modern physicians. It is true that Dioscorides
(i. 77) ascribes a soporific property to myrrh,
but it does not seem to have been so regarded
by any other author. Notwithstanding, there-
Digitized by
Google
GALLERY
fore, the almost concurrent opinion of ancient I
and modern commentators that the "wine i
mingled with myrrh " was offered to onr Lord
u an anodyne, we cannot readily come to the
same conclusion. Had the soldiers intended a
mitigation of suffering, tbey would doubtless
hare offered a draught drugged with some sub-
stance having narcotic properties. The drink
in question was probably a mere ordinary beve-
rage of the Romans, who were in the habit of
seasoning their various wines — which, as they
contained little alcohol, soon turned sour — with
various spices, drugs, and perfumes, such as
myrrh, cassia, myrtle, pepper, &c. (Diet, of Or.
<md Bom. Antiq., art « Vinum "> [W. H.]
GALLERY, an architectural term, describ-
ing the porticoes or verandahs which are not
uncommon in Eastern houses. It is doubtful,
however, whether the Hebrew words, so trans-
lated, have any reference to such an object.
(1.) In Cant. i. 17 (A. V. and R. V. "rafters,"
A. V. marg. galleries), the word rachit (O'rn)
means " panelling," or " fretted work," and is
so understood in the LXX. and Vulg. (^cErm/ia,
laqneare). The sense of a " gallery " appears to
be derived from the marginal reading rahit
(0'n*\ JCeri), which contains the idea of " run-
ning," and so of an ambulatory, as a place of
exercise: this sense is, however, rejected by
most commentators. (2.) In Cant. vii. 6 (E. V.
«. 5. A.T." The king is held in the galleries " ;
B. V. " . . . held captive in the tresses thereof,"
ije. of the hair), rahit is applied to the hair ;
the regularly arranged, flowing, locks being
compared by the poet to the channels of running
water seen in the pasture-grounds of Palestine.
[Hair.] (3.) In Ezek. xli. 15, 16 ; xlii. 3, 5,
the word attih (p'FIN, A. V. text and R. V.
"gallery," A. Y. marg. v. 15, several walks or
watts with pillars : Cornill [in loco] has a dif-
ferent reading) seems to mean a pillar, used for
the support of a floor. The LXX. and Vulg.
pre in ilii. 3 ntplirrvKov and portions, but a
comparison of w. 5 and 6 shows that the " gal-
leries " and " pillars " were identical ; the reason
of the upper chambers being shorter is ascribed
to the absence of supporting pillars, which
allowed an extra length to the chambers of the
lower story (see R. V.). The space thus in-
cluded within the pillars would assume the
corner of an open gallery. [W. L. B.]
GALLEY. [Ship.]
GALTiIM (B*?l = heaps, or possibly springs;
roMdu [Is.] ; Gallim), a place which is twice
mentioned in the Bible:— (1.) As the native
place of the man to whom Michal, David's wife,
was given — "Phalli the son of Laish, who
was from Gallim" (D^JD, 1 Sam. xxv. 44).
The LXX. has B. *Po^ui, A. TaKKtl, A*(?).
r«W«(, and Josephus TtB\i; but there is no clue
m either to the situation of the place. In 2 Sam.
iii- 15, 16, where Michal returns to David at
Hebron, her husband is represented as following
her a» far as Bahurim, i>. on the road between
the Mount of Olives and Jericho (cp. 2 Sam.
tri. 1). But even this does not necessarily
point to the direction of Gallim, because Phalti
may have been at the time with Ishbosheth at
Mahanaim, the road from which would naturally
bible WCT. — you J.
GALLIO
1121
lead past Bahurim. (2.) The name occurs again
in the catalogue of places terrified at the approach
of Sennacherib (Is. x. 30) : " Lift up thy voice,
daughter (i.e. inhabitant) of Gallim I attend,
Laish ! poor Anathoth 1 " The other towns
in this passage — Aiath, Michmash, Raman,
Gibeah of Saul— are all, like Anathoth, in the
tribe of Benjamin, a short distance north of
Jerusalem. It should not be overlooked that in
both these passages the names Laish and Gallim
are mentioned in connexion. Possibly the Ben-
Laish in the former implies that Phalti was a
native of Laish, that being dependent on Gallim.
Among the names of towns added by the LXX.
to those of Judah in Josh. xv. 59, Galem (TaXifi,
A. raAAfp) occurs, between Karem and Thether.
In Is. xv. 8, the Vulgate has Gallim for Eglaitn,
among the towns of Moab.
The name of Gallim has not been met with in
modern times. Conder (PEF. Mem. iii. 20)
proposes to identify it with Beit Jala, near
Rachel's Tomb, to the south of Jerusalem ; but
this is too far from the other towns mentioned
in Is. x. 30. Eusebius, from hearsay (Aeyrrai),
places it near Akkaron (Ekron). [G.] [W.]
GALXIO (roAXiow; Oallio\ proconsul of
Achaia when St. Paul was at Corinth, probably
A.D. 53. u Proconsul " (ovOuwarof , A. V. deputy)
was the title of the governor of senatorial
provinces, and is therefore used by St. Luke
of the governors of (1) Cyprus, Acts xiii. 7 ;
(2) Asia, Acts xix. 38; and (3) Achaia, Acts
xviii. 12. Achaia had been an imperial province,
but was restored to the senate by Claudius
(Suet. Claud, xxv.). [See Achaia.] The de-
scription of Gallio as proconsul (R. V.) is
therefore an important instance of St. Luke's
historical accuracy.
When the Jews accused St. Paul, Gallio,
without asking for his defence, dismissed the
charge. Encouraged by the action of the
proconsul, the Greek bystanders fell on Sos-
thenes (one of the accusers) and beat him in the
precincts of the court. Gallio took no notice
of this. The indifference ascribed to him in the
words " Gallio cared lor none of these things,"
is not an indifference to religious questions as
such, but to the outbreak of Greek spite against
the Jews. For another view of the incident,
see Ewald, Hist. Isr. vii. p. 380. Mo stress
must be laid on the words " the Greeks " (v. 17,
A. V.) in determining the sense; for although
probably correct as an explanation of " all"
(wdVrct), they have no right to stand in the
text, and are omitted by R. V. [See Sosthknes.]
Gallio belonged to a great literary family.
He is known to Roman history as the brother
of L. Annaeus Seneca, the tutor of Nero. His
father, a famous professor of rhetoric, was a
Spaniard from Corduba. His nephew Lucan
has left us the great poem of the Pharsalia.
Gallio's original name was Marcus Annaeus
Novatus, anil he took the names of Junius Gallio
on adoption by L. Junius Gallio, a friend of his
father's, and, like him, a great rhetorician.
Gallio's brother Seneca speaks most affectionately
of him. In a striking passage (Seneca, Nat.
Quaest. iv. praei".) he describes the extraordinary
charm of his disposition nnd manner, and the
gentle firmness with which he always put aside
flattery. Tnere is nothing in the temperate
4C
Digitized by
Google
1122
GALLOWS
words with which Gallic* rejects the Jewish
accusation which is inconsistent with this
character. A Tertullus would have had no
chance with him. Some writers (e.g. Kreyher,
Seneca und seine Bcziehungen turn Urchris-
tenthum) hare seen in Gallio's favour to St.
Paul a link in the supposed connexion between
St. Paul and Seneca; but see Bp. Lightfoot,
Philippians* "St. Paul and Seneca," p. 299.
Gallio's conduct is only one among the many
illustrations which the Book of the Acts collects
to show the friendly, or at worst the impartial,
attitude of the Roman authorities towards
Christianity in its early days. Hansrath with
some reason considers that the course taken by
Gallio opened the way for the rapid and ex-
traordinary growth of the Chnrch of Corinth.
The trial before Gallio was a crisis in its history.
See his very full article "Gallio" in Schenkel's
Bibel-Lex.
For other notices of Gallio in Roman literature,
see Seneca, Ep. 104, where his residence in
Achaia is mentioned, and Plin. N. H. xxxi. 33.
For his character and Spanish origin, see
Statius, Stlvae, II. vii. 32. He was involved in
the ruin of his brother Seneca under Nero, and
though spared at first (Tnc. Ann. xv. 73)
perished later, probably by his own hand (Dio
Cass. lxii. 25; and Euseb. Chron. 01. 211).
Wieseler uses what is known of Gallio as
evidence to strengthen his system of chronology
(Wieseler, Chron. Apost. Zeit. pp. 119-20).
[E. R. B.]
GALLOWS. [Punishment.]
GAM'A-EL (B. Ti/triKos, A. To/ua^A; Atne-
wus), 1 Esd. viii. 29. [Daniel, 3.]
GAMA'LIEL (^K^D? = God's recompense
or care ; rajiaAiijA ; Gamaliel), son of Pedabzur ;
prince or captain (tOEO) of the tribe of Manas-
seh at the census at Sinai (Num. i. 10 ; ii. 20 ;
vii. 54, 59), and at starting on the march
through the wilderness (x. 23). [W. A. W.]
GAMA'LIEL (rojKoAdjA; Gamaliel: for the
Hebrew equivalent, see preceding article), de-
scribed in Acts v. 34 as " a Pharisee, a doctor of
the Law, had in honour with all the people."
This description exactly corresponds with that
given in the Mishna of Rabban Gamaliel I., who
died about A.D. 57, and was at the height of his
influence nt the time of the trial described in
Acts v. He belonged to the milder and more
liberal school of Hillel, whose grandson he is
said to have been. Some of his decisions are
quoted by Hamburger, Real Encyc. Talmud. ; but
though all on the side of relaxation, yet they
relate to such trifling details that it is difficult
to gain from them any picture of the man.
They are more fully given in Jost, Geschichte
ii. Judenthums, i. 281 sq. However, the ascrip-
tion to him (Hamburger, I. c.) of the following
precepts, is of interest when we remember that
he was the teacher of St. Paul, the Apostle of the
Gentiles (Acts xxii. 3). He is said to have
taught that the poor of the heathen should
share with Israelites the gleaning and the corn
left standing in the corners of the fields ; and
that it was a duty for Israelites to inquire after
their welfare, sustain them, visit their sick,
and bury them. He is described as president
GAMES
of the Sanhedrin, but this is probably a late
and untrustworthy tradition (see Schiirer,
Jewish People, Div. II. vol. i. p. 181); and in
the narrative of Acts v. he appears as as
ordinary member, though having great weight.
The influence which enabled him to carry the
Sanhedrin with him (Acts v. 40) is illustrated
also by the proviso that a certain decision of
the Sanhedrin passed in his absence should only
have force if it obtained his approval (Edai-
joth, 77, quoted by Hamburger). With the
exaggeration of eulogy, it was said that at his
death reverence for the Thora ceased, and the
observance of the laws of purity and separation
came to nought. He was the earliest teacher to
whom the title of Rabban was given, a higher
degree than Rab or Rabbi. His discourse in
Acts v. 35-39 seems to regard the question of
"this counsel" being from men or from God,
as an open one, without betraying a leaning to
one side or the other. Still the syntactical
connexion of " let them alone," with the words
" lest haply ye be found fighting against God,"
may be held to show an inclination to the
Christian side, which is not inconsistent with the
probable attitude of the Pharisees at this period as
contrasted with the active persecuting zeal of the
Sadducees. Ecclesiastical mythology has seised
with its usual eagerness on this indication, and
Clem. Recog. i. 65 represents him as a Christian.
" He was secretly our brother in the faith, but
by our advice kept his place among them," it.
the Sanhedrin. It is unnecessary to follow hen
the development of this legend, so inconsistent
with the honour in which he was held by Jewish
tradition; but full references are given in
Schiirer, Jewish People, Div. II. vol. i. p. 364.
Besides authorities already quoted, see Dereih
bourg, Hist, et Geog. Pal. xv. [E. R. B.]
GAMES. Of the three classes into which
games may be arranged, — juvenile, manly, and
public, — the first two alone belong to the Hebrew
life ; the latter, as noticed in the Bible, being
either foreign introductions into Palestine or
the customs of other countries. With regard
to juvenile games, the notices are very few. It
roust not, however, be inferred from this that
the Hebrew children were without the amuse-
ments adapted to their age. The toys and
sports of childhood claim a remote antiquity;
and if the children of the ancient Egyptians
had their dolls of ingenious construction, and
played at ball (Wilkinson, Anc. Egypt «• 19?
[1878]), and if the children of the Romans
amused themselves much as those of the present
day —
" Aediflcare casts, pkwtello adjungere mares,
Ludcre par tmpar, equftare In arnndine long* "
(Hor. t Sal. 111. M»)-
we may imagine the Hebrew children doing the
same, as they played in the streets of Jerusalem
(Zech. viii. 5). The only recorded sports, how-
ever, are keeping tame birds (Job xli. 5; cpj
Catull. ii. 1, Passer, deliciae meae puellae) and
plaving at marriages or funerals (Matt. xi. I*>
With regard to manly games, they were not
much followed up by the Hebrews; the natural
earnestness of their character and the influence
of the climate alike indisposed them to active
exertion. The chief amusement of the me"
appears to have consisted in conversation and
Digitized by
Google
GAMES
GAMES
1123
joking (Jer. xv. 17 ; Prov. xxvi. 19). A military i
eiercise seems to be noticed in 2 Sam. ii. 14, '
bat the term under which it is described (pTK?) I
ii of too general an application to enable us to '
form an idea as to its character : if intended as
i sport, it must have resembled the G'erid, with
the exception of the combatants not being j
mounted ; but it is more consonant to the sense
of the passage to reject the notion of sport and >
give sichek the sense of fencing or fighting
(Thenius, Comm. in loc). In Jerome's day the
waal sport consisted in lifting weights as a
trial of strength, as also practised in Egypt
(Wilkinson, L 207 [1878]). Dice are mentioned
by the Talmudists (Mishna, Sanhedr. 3, A ; Shabb.
23, 2), probably introduced from Egypt (Wilkin-
son, ii. 424 [1878]); and if we assume that the
Hebrews imitated, as not improbably they did,
other amusements of their neighbours, we might
add such games as odd and even, mora (the
aicart digita of the Romans), draughts, hoops,
cstching balls, isc (Wilkinson, i. 188 [1878]). If
it be objected that such trifling amusements were
inconsistent with the gravity of the Hebrews,
it may be remarked that the amusements of the
Arabians at the present day are equally trifling,
such as blind man's buff, hiding the ring, &c.
(Wellsted's Arabia, i. 160).
Public games were altogether foreign to the
spirit of Hebrew institutions : the great religious
Festivals supplied the pleasurable excitement
and the feelings of national union which rendered
the games of Greece so popular, and at the same
time inspired the persuasion that such gatherings
should be exclusively connected with religious
duties. Accordingly the erection of a gymnasium
by Jason, in which the discus was chiefly prac-
tised, was looked upon as a heathenish proceeding
(1 Mace. i. 14; 2 Mace. iv. 12-14), and the
subsequent erection by Herod of a theatre and
amphitheatre at Jerusalem (Joseph. Ant. xv. 8,
§ 1), as well as at Caesarea {Ant. xv. 9, § 6 ;
B. J. I 21, § 8) and at Berytus (Ant. xix. 7,
§ 5), — in each of which a quinquennial festival in
honour of Caesar was celebrated with the usual
contests in gymnastics, chariot-races, music, and
with wild beasts, — was viewed with the deepest
aversion by the general body of the Jews (Ant.
»-8.§l).
The entire absence of verbal or historical
reference to this subject in the Gospels shows
now little it entered into the life of the Jews :
•one of the foreign Jews, indeed, imbibed a
•«»te for theatrical representations; Josephus
(I'tfa, 3) speaks of one Aliturus, an actor of
■wees (lUitoAo-yos), ' who was in high favour
*Hh Nero. Among the Greeks the rage for
theatrical exhibitions was such that every city
of any size possessed its theatre and stadium.
At Ephesos an annual contest (byi»> xal •yufwuebs
■al iumruc6t, Thucyd. iii. 104) was held in
honour of Diana, which was superintended by
°Ec«rs named 'Ao-id>x<u (Acts xix. 31; R. V.
"chief officers of Asia "). [AsIABCHAE.] It is
Portable that St. Paul was present when these
8»aies were proceeding, as they were celebrated
« the month of May (cp. Acts xx. 16 ; Cony-
<**n and Howson's St. Paul, ii. 81). A direct
reference to the exhibitions that took place on
!w.° CCM ' 01ls a ma ^ ie m tn * term anptOf^XV
U Cor. xv. 32). The ffijpio^dx ' were some-
*"**» professional performers, but more usually
criminals (Joseph. Ant. xv. 8, § 1), who were
exposed to lions and other wild beasts without
any means of defence (Cic. Pro Sext. 64; Tertull.
Apoi. 9). Political offenders were so treated,
and Josephus (B. J. vii. 3, § 1) records that no
less than 2,500 Jews were destroyed in the
theatre at Caesarea by this and similar methods.
The expression as used by St. Paul is usually
taken as metaphorical, both on account of the
qualifying words kcit' twOptmov, the absence of
all reference to the occurrence in the Acts, and
the rights of citizenship which St. Paul enjoyed
(cp. Evans in Speaker's Comm., Schnedermann
in Strack u. ZSckler's Kgf. Komm.). Certainly
St. Paul was exposed to some extraordinary
suffering at Epbesus, which he describes in
language borrowed from, if not descriptive of, a
real case of Bnpiofiaxla ; for he speaks of himself
as a criminal condemned to death (4xiSayarlovs,
1 Cor. iv. 9 ; airoVpi/ta toC favdVou iax^KO/ity,
2 Cor. i. 9), exhibited previously to the execu-
tion of the sentence (i.x4Sti(tr, 1 Cor. I. a),
reserved to the conclusion of the games («Vx<£~
rovs), as was usual with the theriomachi (" novis-
simos elegit, velut bestiarios," Tertull. de Pudic.
14), and thus made a spectacle (iiarpov tytrfi-
Onitev). Lightfoot (Exercit. on 1 Cor. xv. 32)
points to the friendliness of the Asiarchs at a
subsequent period (Acts xix. 31) as probably
resulting from some wonderful preservation
which they had witnessed. Nero selected this
mode of executing the Christians at Rome, with
the barbarous aggravation that the victims
were dressed up in the skins of beasts (Tac.
Ann. xv. 44). St. Paul may possibly allude to
his escape from such torture in 2 Tim. \v. 17.
Cp. Diet, of Gr. and Rom. Ant. art. "Bestiarii."
St. Paul's Epistles abound with allusions to
the Greek contests, borrowed probably from the
Isthmian games, at which he may well have been
present daring his first visit to Corinth (Cony-
beare and Howson, ii. 206). These contests
(o iy&v — a word of general import, the fight , as
the R. V. has it, 2 Tim. iv. 7 ; 1 Tim. vi. 12)
were divided into two classes, the pancratium,
consisting of boxing and wrestling, and the
pentathlon, consisting of leaping, running, quoit-
ing, hurling the spear, and wrestling. The
competitors (t aywvi(6ptros, 1 Cor. ix. 25 ; tar
iflAp ris, 2 Tim. ii. 5) required a long and
severe course of previous training (cp. ow/iotm))
yviwaoia, 1 Tim. iv. 8), during which a parti-
cular diet was enforced (a-cura iyKpardtrau
SovXaytiyu, 1 Cor. ix. 25, 27). In the Olympic
contests these preparatory exercises (wpoyvuvi-
aiia.ro) extended over a period of ten months,
during the last of which they were conducted
under the supervision of appointed officers. The
contests took place in the presence of a vast
multitude of spectators (npiKtlfLtrov vi<pos
fiaoripay, Heb. xii. 1), the competitors being
the spectacle (iia,Tpor-=iiapa, 1 Cor. iv. 9;
iea&fievoi, Heb. x. 33). The games were opened
by the proclamation of a herald (icnpi^as, 1 Cor.
ix. 27), whose office it was to proclaim the name
and country of each candidate, and especially to
announce the name of the victor before the
assembled multitude. Certain conditions and
rules were laid down for the different contests,
as, that no bribe be offered to a competitor:
that in boxing the combatants should not lay
hold of one another, &c. : any infringement of
4 C 2
Digitized by VjOOQlC
1124
GAMES
these rales (iiw nh mulfuts aSA^o-p, 2 Tim. ii.
5) involved a loss of the prize, the competitor
being pronounced disqualified (aSoxi/uu, 1 Cor.
ix. 27 ; indignus brabeo, Bengel). The judge
Was selected for his spotless integrity (A Sfmuot
Kpirfo, 2 Tim. iv. 8) : his office was to decide
any disputes (Bpafiiviru, Col. Hi. 15 ; A. V. and
R. V. " rule," R. V. marg. Gr. arbitrate) and to
give the prize (to &paf}f?ov, 1 Cor. ix. 24 ; Phil,
iii. 14), consisting of a crown (arity&os, 2 Tim.
ii. 5, ir. 8) of leaves of wild olive at the Olympic
games, and of pine or, at one period, ivy at the
Isthmian games. These crowns, though perish-
able (tfaprir, 1 Cor. ix. 25 ; cp. 1 Pet. v. 4),
were always regarded as a source of unfailing
exultation (Phil. ir. 1 ; 1 Thess. ii. 19) : palm
lgthmlftii crown*.
branches were aiso placed in the nanus or tne
victors (Rev. vii. 9> St. Paul alludes to two
only out of the five contests, boxing and running,
more frequently to the latter. In boxing (rvyuij ;
cp. wvmtiu, 1 Cor. ix. 26), the hands and arms
were bound with the cestui, a band of leather
studded with nails, which very much increased
the severity of the blow, and rendered a bruise
inevitable (toromAfy 1 Cor. /. c. ; 6w<i*ia=Ta
ixb robs &* as t&v v\irySr fxni, Pollux, Onom.
ii. 4, 52). The skill of the combatant was
shown in so avoiding the blows of his adversary
that they were expended on the air (o4« ait iipa
Sipar, 1 Cor. I. ft). The foot-race (tpiuos,
2 Tim. iv. 7, a word peculiar to St. Paul ; cp.
Acts xiii. 25, xx. 24, rendered " coarse " by A. V.
und R. V.) was run in the stadium (ir aratia ;
A. V. and R. V. "race" [R. V. marg. Gr. race-
course] ; 1 Cor. ix. 24), an oblong area, open at
one end and rounded in a semicircular form at
the other, along the sides of which were the
raised tiers of seats on which the spectators sat.
ThtKaoa.
The race was either from one end of the stadium
to the other, or, in the SiouAor, back again to
the starting-post. There may be a latent re-
ference to the SiavXos in the expression ipxnyey
(tol <nknm4p (Heb. xii. 2); Jesus being, as it
GAMUL
were, the starting-point and the goal, the locus
a quo and the focus ad quern of the Christian's
course. The judge was stationed by the "goal"
(R. V. axowir; A. V. "mark"; PhiL iii. 14),
which was clearly visible from one end of the
stadium to the other, so that the runner could
make straight for it (ovk &•$ A!^\»s, 1 Cor. ix.
26). St. Paul brings vividly before oar minds
the earnestness of the competitor, having cast
off every encumbrance (tyicov arotiufvoi norm),
especially any closely-fitting robe (tfanpfora-
rov, Heb. xii. 1 ; cp. Conybeare and Howson, ii.
543), holding on his course uninterruptedly
(Si&ku, Phil. iii. 12), his eye fixed on the distant
goal (atf>oouvT«, ari&Xttt, Heb. xii. 2, xi. 26 ;
orb notat longe, Bengel), unmindful of tbe
space already past (to pir Matt ivthavisai-
usvos, Phil. /. c), and stretching forward with
bent body (toij Si fprpoaSty imertuiiiumt),
lis perseverance (Si' inroiiorris, Heb. xii. 1), bis
joy at the completion of the course (u«ra xi" 3 *
Acts xx. 24), his exultation as he not only
receives (tKa&oy, Phil. iii. 12) but actually
;rasps (KaraXd$tt, "apprehend," in A. V. ana
B. V. Phil.; f»iAo/3oD, 1 Tim. vi. 12, 19) the
crown which had been set apart (oWmirai,
2 Tim. iv. 8) for the victor. Cp. Dean Howson's
4th Essav on "The Metaphors of St. Paul"
Sunday Magazine, 1866-7). [W. L. fi.]
GAMMA'DIMS (Dn©J). This word occurs
only in Ezek. xxvii. 1 1, where it is said of Tyre,
"the Gammadims were in thy towers." A
variety of explanations of the term (some ob-
solete, like the Vulg. Pygmaei; see first edit.
of this work) have been offered. (1.) Some
treat it as a geographical or local term ; reading
(a) D'IDJ (Gen. x. 2, Cappadocians ; so La-
garde), or (b) D'lDj; (Gen. x. 18, a Canasnitish
people ; so Cornill). (2.) Others retain the
present reading and give a more general sense
to the word. Gesenius (Thesaur. p. 292) con-
nects it with *T!?3, a staff, whence the sense of
brave warriors, hastes arborum instar caedentes ;
and Roediger supports the signification of
warriors from the Syriac r^\l (Add. ad Gcsen.
Thes. p. 79). After all, the rendering in the
1,XX., (pvKttKfs, furnishes the simplest explana-
tion : and the Lutheran translation has followed
this, giving Wdchter. The following words of
asaa
aa.aa
n
CuUo of w. maritime people, with the (ibieldj h _ _
w»U». (From « taiMrfiof at KonjTiiiJik. Uymt*-)
the verse — " they hanged their shields upon the
walls round about "—are illustrated by one of
the bas-reliefs found at Kouvunjik (see pre-
ceding cut). ['W. I»B.] [r'-J
GA'MXJL <3>?OJ = weaned ; B. t roaoiA-
A. "laxefr; Gamut), a priest; the leader of the
22nd course in the service of the sanctuary
(1 Ch. xxiv. 17).
Digitized by
Google
GAR
GAB (r<£»; Sams). "Sons of Gar" are
named among the " sons of the servants of
Solomon " in 1 Esd. r. 34. There are not in the
lists of Ezra and Nehemiah anj names corre-
sponding to the two preceding and the six
succeeding this name. The form of the name
in the A. V. is derived from the Aldine text
(aee Speaker's Coram, in loco). [F.]
GARDEN (}), n||, nj? ; «*roj). Gardens
in the East, as the Hebrew word indicates, are
inclosures, on the outskirts of towns, planted
with rations trees and shrubs. From the allu-
sions in the Bible we learn that they were
surrounded by hedges of thorn (Is. v. 5), or
•alls of stone (Prov. xxiv. 31). For further
protection lodges (Is. i. 8 ; Lam. ii. 6) or watch-
towers (Hark xii. 1) were built in them, in
which aat the keeper (1)fb, Job xxvii. 18) to
drire away the wild beasts and robbers, as
is the case to this day. Layard (Nin. d- Bab.
p. 365) gives the following description of a
scene which he witnessed: — "The broad silver
river wound through the plain, the great ruin
cast its dark shadows in the moonlight,
the lights of ' the lodges in the gardens of
cucumbers ' flickered at our feet, and the deep
silence was only broken by the sharp report of
a rifle fired by the watchful guards to frighten
away the wild boars that lurked in the melon
beuV." The scarecrow also was an invention
not unknown (Tpofiaaic4yioi>, Bar. ri. 70).
The gardens of the Hebrews were planted
with flowers and aromatic shrubs (Cant. vi. 2,
ir. 16), besides olives, fig-trees, nuts, or wal-
nuts (Cant. vi. 11), pomegranates, and others
for domestic use (Ex. xxiii. 11; Jer. xxix. 5;
Amos ix. 14). The quince, medlar, citron,
almond, and service trees are among those
enumerated in the Mishna as cultivated in
Palestine ( KSaim, i. § 4). Gardens of herbs, or
kitchen-gardens, are mentioned in Dcut. xi. 10
and 1 K. xxi. 2. Cucumbers were grown in
them (Is. i. 8 ; Bar. vi. 70), and probably also
melons, leeks, onions, and garlic, which are
spoken of (Num. xi. 5) as the productions of a
neighbouring country. In addition to these,
the lettuce, mustard-plant (Luke xiii. 19),
coriander, endive, one of the bitter herbs eaten
with the Paschal lamb, and rue, are particu-
larised in the precepts of the Mishna, though
it is not certain that they were all, strictly
speaking, cultivated in the gardens of Palestine
{KSaim, i. §§ 2, 8). It is well known that, in
the time of the Romans, the art of gardening
w»s carried to great perfection in Syria. Pliny
(n. 16) says, " Syria in hortis operosissima est ;
■adeqne proverbium Graecis, ' Multa Syrorum
olera; '" and again (xii. 54) he describes the
bakam plant as growing in Judaea alone, and
*kere only in two royal gardens. Strabo (xvi.
p. 763), alluding to one of these gardens near
Jfrichp, calls it 6 too PaKtri/tov wapdStiiros.
Toe rote-garden in Jerusalem, mentioned in the
Mishna (Maaseroth, ii. § 5), and said to have
ben situated westward of the Temple-mount, is
ftmarkable as having been one of the few
gardens which, from the time of the Prophets,
•xisted within the city walls (Lightfoot, Hot.
#«*. on Matt. xxvi. 36). They were usually
planted without the gates, according to the
gloss quoted by Lightfoot, on account of -the
GARDEN
1125
fetid smell arising from the weeds thrown out
from them, or from the manure employed in
their cultivation.
The gate Gennath, mentioned by Josephus
(5. /. v. 4, § 2), is supposed to have derived its
name from the rose-garden already mentioned,
or from the fact of its leading to the gardens
without the city. It was near the garden-
ground by the Gate of the Women that Titus
waa surprised by the Jews while reconnoitring
the city. The trench by which it was sur-
rounded cut off his retreat (Jos. B. J. v. 2, § 2).
But of all the gardens of Palestine none is
possessed of associations more sacred and im-
perishable than the garden of Gethsemane,
beside the oil-presses on the slopes of Olivet.
Eight aged olive-trees mark the site which
tradition has connected with that memorable
garden- scene, and their gnarled stems and
almost leafless branches attest an antiquity as
venerable as that which is claimed for them.
[Gethsemane.]
In addition to the ordinary productions of the
country, we are tempted to infer from Is. xvii.
10, that in some gardens care was bestowed on
the rearing of exotics. To this conclusion the
description of the gardens of Solomon in the
Targum on Eccles. ii. 5, 6 seems to point : " I
made me well-watered gardens and paradises,
and sowed there all kinds of plants, some for
use of eating, and some for use of drinking, ami
some for purposes of medicine; all kinds of
plants of spices. I planted in them trees of
emptiness (i.e. not fruit-bearing), and all trees
of spices which the spectres and demons brought
me from India, and every tree which produces
fruit ; and its border was from the wall of the
citadel, which is in Jerusalem, by the waters of
Siloah. I chose reservoirs of water, which
behold 1 are for watering the trees and the
plants, and I made me fish-ponds of water, some
of them also for the plantation which rears the
trees to water it."
In a climate like that of Palestine the
neighbourhood of water was an important
consideration in selecting the site of a garden.
The nomenclature of the country has per-
petuated this fact in the name En-gannim —
" the fountain of gardens " — the modern Jenin
(cp. Cant. iv. 15). To the old Hebrew poets
" a well-watered garden," or " a tree planted by
the waters," was an emblem of luxuriant fer-
tility and material prosperity (Is. lviii. 11; Jer.
xvii. 8, xxxi. 12); while no figure more
graphically conveyed the idea of dreary barren-
ness or misery than "a garden that hath no
water" (Is. i. 30). From a neighbouring
stream or cistern were supplied the channels or
conduits by which the gardens were intersected,
and the water was thus conveyed to all parts
(Ps. i. 3 ; Eccles. ii. 6 ; Ecclus. xxiv. 30). It is
matter of doubt what is the exact meaning of
the expression "to water with the foot" in
Deut. xi. 10. Niebuhr (Descr. de TArdbk,
p. 138) describes a wheel which is employed for
irrigating gardens where the water is not dee]),
and which is worked by the hands and feet after
the manner of a treadmill, the men "pulling
the upper part towards them with their hands,
and pushing with their feet upon the lower
part" (Robinson, ii. 226). This mode of irri-
gation might be described as "watering with
Digitized by
Google
1126
GARDEN
the foot." Bat the method practised by the
agriculturists in Oman, as narrated by Wellsted
( Irav. i. 281), answers more nearly to this de-
scription, and serves to illustrate Prov. xxi. 1 :
" After ploughing, they form the ground with a
spade into small squares with ledges on either
side, along which the water is conducted . . .
When one of the hollows is filled, the peasant
stops the supply by turning up the earth
with his foot, and thus opens a channel into
another."
The orange, lemon, and mulberry groves
which lie around and behind Jaffa supply, per-
haps, the most striking peculiarities of Oriental
gardens — gardens which Maundrell describes as
being "a confused miscellany of trees jumbled
GARDEN
together, without either posts, walks, arbours,
or anything of art or design, so that they seem
like thickets rather than gardens " (Early Trm.
in Pat. p. 416). The Persian wheels, which are
kept ever working, day and night, by moles, to
supply the gardens with water, leave upon the
traveller's ear a most enduring impression
(Lynch, Exp. to Jordan, p. 441; Siddon's
Memoir, p. 187).
The law against the propagation of mixed
species (Lev. xix. 19 ; Dent. xxii. 9, 11) gave rise
to numerous enactments in the Mishna to ensure
its observance. The portions of the field or
garden, in which the various plants were sown,
were separated by light fences of reed, ten palms
in height, the distance between the reeds being
WKMMMMWm
%hY*t9f*tif*tfftii&UMiUti£*i
An Egyptian gnrdou, with the »intjjrapl tinj oth»r tnclosurea. tanks of mu r. a bmplo or chapel, and a small bona*. (Bcaclliol .
not more than three palms, so that a kid could
enter (Kilaim, iv. §§ 3, 4).
The kings and nobles had their country-houses
surrounded by gardens (1 K. xxi. 1 ; 2 K. ix. 27),
and these were used on festal occasions (Cant,
v. 1). So intimately, indeed, were gardens
associated with festivity that horticulture and
conviviality are, in the Talmud, denoted by the
same term (cp. Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. s. r.
fflD'TK). It is possible, however, that this
may be a merely accidental coincidence. The
garden of Ahasuerus was in a court of the
palace (Ksth. i. 5), adjoining the banqueting-
hall (Esth. vii. 7). In Babylon the gardens and
orchards were inclosed by the city-walls (Layard,
.fin. ii. 246). Attached to the house of Joachim
was a garden or orchard (Sus. u. 4) — " a garden
inclosed" (Cant. iv. 12)— provided with baths
and other appliances of luxury (Sus. v. 15 ; cp.
2 Sam. xi. 2).
In large gardens the orchard (DT!?» "r*
Seio-os) was probably, as in Egypt, the indosure
set apart for the cultivation of date and sycamore
trees, and fruit-trees of various kinds (Cant it.
13 ; Eccles. ii. 5). Schroeder, in the preface to
bis Thesaurus Linguae Armenicae, asserts that
the word " pardes "is of Armenian origin, a™
denotes a garden near or round a house, planted
with herbs, trees, and flowers (see MV."). »
is applied by Diodorus Siculus (ii. tO) a " J
Berosus (quoted by Jos. Ant. x. 2, § 1) t» ™ e
famous hanging gardens of Babylon. Xenophon
(Anab. i. 2, § 7) describes the "paradise" at
Celaenae in Phrygia, where Cyrus had a palacf, j
Digitized by
Google
GAKDEN
as a large preserve fall [ot wild beasts ; and
Aulas Gellius (ii. 20) gives "vivaria" as the
equivalent of *apa$il<ros (cp. Philostratus, Kit.
Apoll. Tyan. i. 38). The officer in charge of
such a domain was called "the keeper of the
paradise " (Neh. ii. 8).
The ancient Hebrews made use of gardens as
places of burial (John xix. 41). Manasseh and
his son Amon were buried in the garden of their
palace, the garden of Dzza (2 K. xxi. 18, 26 ;
4r Tots avrov -rapdSetaotSy Jos. Ant. x. 3, § 2).
The retirement of gardens rendered them
favoarite places for devotion (Matt. xxvi. 36 ;
John xviii. 1 ; cp. Gen. xxiv. 63). In the
degenerate times of the monarchy they were
selected as the scenes of idolatrous worship
GARDEN
1127
(Is. i. 29 ; lxv. 3 ; lxvi. 17), and images of the
idols were probably erected in them.
Gardeners are alluded to in Job xxvii. 18 and
John xx. 15. But how far the art of gardening
was carried among the Hebrews we have few
means of ascertaining. That they were ac-
quainted with the process of grafting is evident
from Rom. ii. 17, 24, as well as from the minute
prohibitions of the Mishna ; * and the of method
propagating plants by layers or cuttings was
not unknown (Is. xvii. 10). Buxtorf says that
I'D'IK, 'Srisin (Mishna, Biccurim, i. § 2), were
gardeners who tended and looked after gardens
on consideration of receiving some portion of
the fruit (Ltx. Talm. s. v.). But that gardening
was a special means of livelihood is clear from a
AmjtUh icarfeB ud <W>poud. (KonyunJIk.)
proverb which contains a warning against rash
speculations : " Who hires a garden eats the
birds ; who hires gardens, him the birds eat "
(Dukes, Bobbin. Blumenlese, p. 141).
The traditional gardens and pools of Solomon,
•apposed to be alluded to in Eccles. ii. 5, 6, are
shown in the Wddy Urtds (i.e. Hortus), about
an hour and a quarter to the sooth of Bethlehem
(cp. Jos. Ant. viii. 7, § 3). The Arabs per-
petuate the tradition in the name of a neigh-
bouring hill, which they call " Jebel-el-Furei-
dit," or " Mountain of the Paradise " (Stanley,
Sin. H Pal. p. 166). Maandrell is sceptical on
the subject of the gardens {Early Trav. in Pal.
p. 457), but they find a champion in Van de
Velde, who asserts that they " were not confined
to the Wddy Urtds; the hill-slopes to the left
and right also, with their heights and hollows,
must have been covered with trees and plants,
as is shown by the names they still bear, as
' peach-hill,' ' nut-vale,' ' fig-vale,' " &c. (Syria
$ Pal. ii. 27).
The " king's garden," mentioned in 2 K. xxv.
4, Neh. iii. 15, Jcr. xxxix. 4, lii. 7, was near
the pool of Siloam, at the mouth of the Tyro-
poeon, north of Bir Eyub, and was formed by
the meeting of the valleys of Jehoshaphat and
Ben Hinnom (Wilson, Lands of the Bible, i. 498).
• It was forbidden to graft trees on trees of a dif-
ferent kind, or to graft vegetables on trees or trees on
vegetables (A"ilaim, 1. yy 7, 8). .
Digitized by
Google
1128
GABEB
Josephus places the scene of the feast of Adonijah
at En-rogel, " beside the fountain that is in the
royal paradise " {Ant. vii. 14, § 4 ; cp. also ix.
10, § 4). [W- A. W.]
GA'BEB (!HJ ; TaptP), one of the heroes of
David's army (2 Sam. xziii. 38). He is described
as the (A. V. " an ") Ithrite ; et ipse Jetkrites,
Vulg. This is generally explained as a patrony-
mic = son of Jether, a family of Kirjath-jearim.
It may be observed, however, that Ira, who is
also called the Ithrite in this passage, is called
the Jairite in 2 Sam. xx. 2<i, and that the read-
ings of the I.XX. vary in the former passage
(see Swete in loco). These variations support
the sense given in the Syriac Version, which
reads in 2 Sam. xx. 26 '"W'n, ue. an inhabitant
of Jattir in the mountainous district of Judah
(see Driver, Notes on the Heb. Text of the BB.
of Samuel, in loco). |W. L. B.] [F.]
GA'BEB, THE HILL (3n» W2i=soabbed,
leprous, Ges., Fiirst ; fhwal Taptf) ; collis Gareb\
named only in Jer. xxxi. 39. A hill outside
Jerusalem, mentioned next to " the gate of the
corner " as a point on the boundary of the re-
stored city in the latter times. From the context
it must have been on the north side of Jerusalem,
for the Prophet, in describing the limits of the
city, commences at the N.E. (v. 38), and then
goes round to the N. and N.W. (v. 39), and the
S.W., S., and E. (v. 40). Possibly in Jeremiah's
time it was the dwelling-place of the lepers
(Lev. xiii. 46). Riehm (». v.) places it to the
S.W. of Jerusalem, and Graf, quoted by Riehm,
identities it with the hill which separated the
valleys of Hinnom and Rephaim (Josh. xv. 8 ;
xviii. 16). Gesenius (Add. ad Thesaur. p. 80)
thinks it may have been Bezetha. Ewald
(Qesch. Christus, p. 485) identifies it with Gol-
gotha. It is very possibly the hill above Jere-
miah's grotto, outside the Damascus Gate, which
is supposed by some authorities to be Golgotha,
and near which there appears to have been, at an
early period, a leper's hospital, and perhaps the
houses of the lepers. [W.]
GABIZ'Qf (T». rapiQy, A. TaptCtU; Gari-
zi'n), 2 Mace. v. 23 ; vi. 2. [Geriziu.]
GARLANDS (ffT^mo). The wreaths
brought with oxen by the priest of Jupiter at
Lystra, when the people were about to worship
Paul and Barnabas (Acts xiv. 13). Priests,
altars, victims, and votaries were all decked with
them. Cp. Tertullian, de Corona, x. ; and see
Speaker's Comm. in loco. [F.]
GABLICK (DIB', shim; to aripta; allia;
Arab. *y, thum; Num. xi. 5) is mentioned
among the vegetables and good things of Egypt
which the Israelites remembered with regret and
murmuring at Taberah in the wilderness (Num.
xi. 5). The cultivated garlic of Egypt is identical
with our own Allium sativum, which is grown
throughout the world, but especially in semi-
tropical regions. Its importance as an article of
food, or rather as a condiment, in Egypt, is
shown by the statement of Herodotus (ii. 125),
that an inscription on the Great Pyramid
GABBISON
recorded that 1600 talents of silver were
expended on radishes, onions, and garlic, for
the workmen employed in its construction.
The outer casing of the Pyramid having been
long ago stripped off, there is now no means of
proving or disproving the historian's statement,
which, however, contains nothing improbable.
The fondness of the Jews for garlic was
proverbial among the ancients, and was cast in
their teeth as a reproach. Rabbi Solomon, aa
quoted by Celsius, says : " Hoc proprium genti
Ebraeae cacoeithes esse solet, ut comesto allio
hircorum more incredibilem foetorem exhalent."
Another commentator on the Talmud, Salomon
Zevi, pleads in reply that the taste for garlic
had come down from their ancestors in the
wilderness, and that the Talmud had decided it
to be a most wholesome food. Besides the
cultivated garlic, no less than 36 species of
this family of plants have been enumerated as
found wild in various parts of Palestine (see
MV. n ). The roots of all of them have the same
character, but of many the blossoms are very
handsome, pink as well as white, and a few
exhale a very grateful perfume. [H. B. T.]
GABMENT. [Dbess.]
GABTMTE, THE ODWI; LXX. [ed.
Swete] is altogether different ; Garmi). Eeilah
the Garmite, i.e. the descendant of Gerem (see
the Targum on this word), is mentioned in the
obscure genealogical lists of the families of Judah
(1 Ch. iv. 19). Keilah is apparently the place
of that name ; but there is no clue to the reason
of the soubriquet here given it. [G.]
GARRISON. The Hebrew words so rendered
in the A. V. are derivatives from the root nisab,
"to place, erect," which may be applied to a
variety of objects. (1.) MassSb and massabah
(3-VO, rOV?) undoubtedly mean " a garrison "
(A.' V. and R. V.\ or fortified post (1 Sam.
xiii. 23, xiv. 1, 4, 12, 15; 2 Sam. xxiii. 14).
(2.) Nlsib (3'V?) '» »•«<> used for " a garrison "
(A. V. and R. V. in 1 Sam. x. 5, xiii. 3; 1 Ch.
xi. 16) ; but some prefer the sense of a " column "
erected in an enemy's country as a token of
conquest, like the stelae erected by Sesostris
(Her. ii. 102, 106 ; cp. the LXX. arierrnim. in
1 Sam. x. 5): and think that what Jonathan
broke in pieces was a column which the Philis-
tines had erected on a hill (1 Sam. xiii. 3).
(3.) The same word is elsewhere taken to mean
"officers" placed over a vanquished people
(2 Sam. viii. 6, 14; 1 Ch. xviii. 13; 2 Ch. xvii.
2) ; but there seems no necessity for departing
in these cases from the larger term " garrison "
(A. V. and R. V.), if the translation "officers "•
be adopted in 1 K. iv. 17, 19. (4.) The A. V.
translates by "garrisons" the ni3XD of Ezek.
xxvi. 11, but the R. V. "pillars" (marg. Or,
obelisks') expresses more accurately the reference
to those monolithic pillars which were visible
symbols or embodiments of the presence of the
deity. Thus Melcnrth was worshipped at Tyre
in the form of two pillars (Robertson Smith,
Religion of the Semites, i. pp. 186 sq., 190-1),
and the beautiful pillars of the Tyrian temples
attracted the attention of Herodotus (ii. 44).
In the Book of the Acts a garrison evidently
occupied the "castle" or barracks connected
Digitized by
Google
GASHMU
With the Tower of Antonia at Jerusalem (xxi.
34, 37). lu officer and soldiers were the means
of rescuing St. Paul, and in its prison he fonnd
refuge. On very nearly the same site the present
Turkish garrison stands. Some have thought
that this garrison was Pilate's praetorium, and
therefore the place where Jesus Christ was
arraigned before the Roman governor.
In Acta xi. 32 the A. V. "the governor kept
the city . . . with a garrison " is more correctly
rendered by the R. V. «' guarded (Jfpoipti) the
city." See*. i>.,Amer.ed. [W. L. B.j [F.J
GASH'MTJ ODB>J; Qossem), Neh. vi. 6.
Assumed by all the lexicons to be a variation of
the name of Gesheh (see vv, 1, 2). The words
" and Gashmu saith " are omitted in BA, but
occur in N" "*, itol roal/j. thrtv. [F.]
GA'TAM (DFI5?J j roflo> [Gen.], B. Toa-SaV,
A. Totin [Ch.]; Qatham, Gathan), the fourth
son of Eliphaz the son of Esau (Gen. xxxvi. 11 ;
1 Ch. i. 36), and one of the " dukes " of Eliphaz
( Gen. xxxvi. 16). Nothing is known about
him. [F.j
GATE. 1. TK5>, from fB&, to divide, Gesen.
p. 1468 ; *t\t) ; porta, iniroitus. 2. finB, from
nne, to open, Ges. p. 1138 ; Dipa, rikn ; ostium,
a " doorway." 3. t|D, a vestibule or gateway ;
abKfi, vraBuit; limen, pontes. 4. 1HFI, Chald.,
only in Ezra and Daniel; aiiK-ll, Bipa; ostium,
fores. 5. J171, from POT, to hang down ; Gesen.
p. 339, a door ; $ipa ; valva, ostium, fores, the
" door " or valve.
The gates and gateways of Eastern cities
anciently held, and still hold, an important part,
not only in the defence, but in the public
economy of the place. They are thus sometimes
taken as representing the city itself (Gen. xxii.
17, xxiv. 60 ; Dent. xii. 12, xvi. 5; Judg. v. 8 ;
Ruth i v. 10 ; Ps. lxxxvii. 2, cxxii. 2). Among the
special purposes for which they were used may
be mentioned — 1. As places of public resort,
either for business, or where people sat to con-
verse and hear news (Gen. xix. 1, xxiii. 10, xxxiv.
20, 24 ; 1 Sam. iv. 18 ; 2 Sam. xv. 2, xviii. 24 ;
Ps. lxix. 12; Neh. viii. 1, 3, 16; Shaw, Trav.
p. 207). 2. Places for public deliberation, ad-
ministration of justice, or of audience for kings
and rulers, or ambassadors (Dent. xvi. 18, xxi.
19, xxv. 7 ; Josh. xx. 4; Judg. ix. 35 ; Ruth iv.
1 ; 2 Sam. xix. 8; 1 K. xxii. 10; Job xxix. 7 ;
Prov. xxii. 22, xxiv. 7; Jer. xvii. 19, xxxviii. 7;
Lam. v. 14; Amos v. 12; Zech. viii. 16; Polyb.
xv. 31). Hence came the usage of the word
" Porte " in speaking of the government of Con-
stantinople (Early Trap. p. 349). 3. Public
markets (2 K. vii. 1; cp. Aristoph. Eq. 1243,
ed. Bekk.; Neh. xiii. 16, 19). [Cities.] In
heathen towns the open spaces near the gates
appear to have been sometimes used as places
for sacrifice (Acts xiv. 13; cp. 2 K. xxiii. 8).
Regarded therefore as positions of great im-
portance, the gates of cities were carefully
guarded and closed at nightfall (Dent. iii. 5 ;
Josh. ii. 5, 7 ; Judg. ix. 40, 44 ; 1 Sam. xxiii. 7 ;
2 Sam. xi. 23 ; Jer. xxxix. 4 ; Judith i. 4 : see
Rev. xxi. 25). They contained chambers over
the gateway, and probably also chambers or
GATE
1129
recesses at the sides for the various purposes to
which they were applied (2 Sam. xviii. 24;
Layard, Nin. 4- Sab. p. 57, and note).
At
Js/V*A*
00
fAAA^
(T\
an
Q
jUutyriaii Gate*. (Layard.)
The gateways of Assyrian cities were arched
or square-headed entrances in the wall, some-
times flanked by towers (Layard, Nineveh, ii.
388, 395, Am. $• Bab. 231, Jfons. of Nin. Pt. 2,
pi. 49 ; see also Assyrian bas-reliefs in Brit. Mus.
Nos. 49, 25, 26). In later Egyptian times, the
gates of the temples seem to have been intended
as places of defence, if not the principal fortifi-
KKTPtlan Doon.-H*. 1. Th« ttppor jtojoa which ttn *wr tamed.
Jig. 1 Lowar pin. (Wmdnaon.)
cations (Wilkinson, Anc. Eg. i. 409 [1878]).
The doors themselves of the larger gates men-
tioned in Scripture were two-leaved, plated with
metal, closed with locks and fastened with metal
1
!
I
•
i
An Egyptian Foldlns-door.
bars (Deut. iii. 5 ; Judg. xvi. 3 ; 1 Sam. xxiii.
7; IK. iv. 13; 2 Ch. viii. 5; Neh. iii. 3-15;
Ps. cvii. 16; Is. xlv. 1, 2 ; Jer. xlix. 31). Gates
not defended by iron were of course liable to be
set on fire by an enemy (Judg. ix. 52).
The gateways of royal palaces and even of
Digitized by
Google
1130
GATE
private houses were often richly ornamented.
Sentences from the Law were inscribed on and
abore the gates, as in Mohammedan countries
sentences from the Kuran are inscribed over
. doorways and on doors (Dent. vi. 9 ; Is. liv. 12 ;
Rev. xxi. 21 ; Maundrell, E. T. p. 488 ; Lane,
Mod. Eg. i. 29 ; Kauwolff, Travel*, Pt. iii. c. 10 ;
Modem EVyptlen Door. (Lane.)
Ray, ii. p. 278). The principal gate of the royal
palace at Ispahan was in Chardin's time held
aacred, and served as a sanctuary for criminals
(Chardin, vii. 368), and petitions were presented
to the sovereign at the gate (see Esth. iv. 2,
Modem Xrjptian Door. (Leao.)
and Herod, iii. 120, 140). The gateways of
Nimroud and Persepolis were flanked by colossal
figures of animals.
The gates of Solomon's Temple were very
massive and costly, being overlaid with gold
and carvings (1 K. vi. 34, 35 ; 2 K. xviii. 16).
Those of the Holy Place were of olive-wood,
two-leaved, and overlaid with gold; those of
GATE
the Temple of fir (1 K. vi. 31, 32, 34 ; Ezek. xli.
23, 24). Of the gates of the outer court of
Herod's temple, nine were covered with gold and
silver, as well as the posts and lintels, but the
onter one, the Beautiful Gate (Acts iii. 2), was
made entirely of Corinthian brass, and was con-
sidered far to surpass the others in costliness
(Joseph. B. J. v. 5, § 3). This gate, which was
Ancient Egyptian Door. (Wilkinson.)
so heavy as to require.twenty men to close it, wns
unexpectedly found open on one occasion shortly
before the close of the siege (Joseph. B. J. vi. 5,
§3;c. Ap. 9).
The figurative gates of pearl and precious
stones (Is. liv. 12; Rev. xxi. 21) may be re-
garded as having their types in the massive
£?. ■i-.'-X'J. ^ i »V- iS^'T-l-f, ? m
-■=■■*■. t'iilr-J-g^^g
=^B
Ancient Egyptian Door. (WOMnBon.)
stone doors which are found in some of the
ancient houses in Syria. These are of single
slabs several inches thick, sometimes 10 feet
high, and turn on stone pivots above and below
(Maundrell, Early Trav. p. 447 ; Shaw, p. 210 ;
Burckhardt, Syria, pp. 58, 74 ; Porter, Damas-
cus, ii. 22, 192 ; Ray, Colt, of Trav. ii. 429).
Egyptian doorways were often richly oma-
Digitized by
Google
GATE, BEAUTIFUL
merited. The parts of the doorway were the
threshold (f|D, Judg. xix. 27 ; xpodupov, limeri)
the sideposts (JlllR? ; eraSf/tol ; uterque posits),
the lintel ((S|ip55'D; ipKtd, tuperliminare, Ex.
xii. 7). It was on the lintel and side-posts that
the blood of the Passover lamb was sprinkled
(Ex. xii. 7, 22). A trace of some similar prac-
tice in Asavrian worship seems to hare been dis-
covered at Nineveh (Layard, Nini ii. 256).
The camp of the Israelites in the desert
appears to have been closed by gates (Ex. xxxii.
27).
The word " door " in reference to a tent ex-
presses the opening made by turning up the
cloths in front of the tent, or dispensing with
them altogether, and the tent is then supported
only by the hinder and middle poles (Gen. xviii.
2 ; Burckhardt, Notes on Bed. i. 42 ; Robinson,
ii. 571).
In the Temple this duty was discharged by Le-
vites ; and in the houses of the wealthier classes,
and in palaces, persons were especially appointed
to keep the door (2 K. xii. 9, xxv. 18 ; 1 Ch. ix.
18, 19; Esth. ii. 21; Jer. xxxv. 4; D'TTB';
Bvpapol, TvAupol; portarii, janitores). In the
A. V. these are frequently called " porters," a
word which has now acquired a different meaning.
The chief steward of the household in the
palace of the Shah of Persia was called chief of
the guardians of the gate (Chardin, vii. 369).
[Cubtaik; House; Temple.] [H. W. P.]
GATE, BEAUTIFUL, of the Temple (Acta
iii. 2). [Temple; Jerusalem.]
GATH (nj ; Tie [1 Sam.], Josephus rim),
one of the five Philistine strongholds (Josh. xiii.
3 ; 1 Sam. vi. 17). The name is usually rendered
"wine press" (cp. Joel iv. 13; Neh. xiii. 15;
Lam. i. 15), an abbreviated form of 113 J, accord-
ing to Gesenius (Lex.). The ethnic form is
»fl|, "Gittite" (2 Sam. vi. 10, &c); in the
feminine, JVFI3 (Ps. viii. 1 , &c). In Arabic the
name might be expected to survive as Jett or
Jenneta, but no site is known in the required
position bearing such a name ; and the position
of Gath is still a matter of uncertainty. The
generally accepted view is that advocated by
Dr. Porter in 1857 and by others, which places
this stronghold at the important fortress of
Tell es-Sdji, north of Beit Jibrin (see PEF.
Mem. ii. p. 415, sheet 16). According to
Josephus (Ant. v. 1, § 22) Gath was in the
territory of Dan and in the vicinity of Jamnia.
It is not enumerated in the geographical chapters
of the Book of Joshua as belonging to any tribe
in particular, and in one passage (Josh. xi. 22) it
appears to have remained unconquered in the
hands of the Anakim. In the time of David it
was still an important Philistine fortress, the
native place of the giant Goliath (1 Sam. xvii.4).
After the battle in the Valley of Elah (Wddy
Surrir) the Philistines fled " by the way to
Shaaraim (' gates ') even unto Gath and unto
Ekron." This expression seems to agree with
the passage from Josephus already quoted, in
placing Gath near the northern limits of the
Philistine region, and Gath is enumerated next
to Ekron in an earlier passage (1 Sam. vi. 17 ;
cp. 2 Sam. i. 20). Obed-edom the Gittite (2 Sam.
GATH
1131
vi. 10) was no doubt a native of Gath, but there
is nothing to show that he was a Philistine.
The Gittites who followed David from Gath
(2 Sam. xv. 18) are mentioned with the Pele-
thithes and Cherethites, who appear also to have
come from Philistia, but of whose nationality
nothing is known. Achish, king of Gath in
David's earlier days (1 Sam. xxi. 10), bears a
name perhaps not Semitic, and having no known
Semitic derivation — a remark which applies to
other Philistine names as well. His father's
name was Maoch (1 Sam. xxvii. 2, 3) or Maachah
(1 K. ii. 39), and he was still independent in
Solomon's time. Whether the Philistine Gath
was the city taken by Hazael, king of Syria
(2 K. xii. 17), may be doubtful, though not im-
probable. According to 1 Ch. xviii. 1, David
himself took Gath, but his conquest, like those
of many other monarchs, Assyrian or Egyptian,
had little effect on the permanent history of
the town. In the corresponding passage in
Samuel (2 Sam. viii. 1 ; see Wellhausen in loco)
Metheg-Ammah stands instead of Gath. Reho-
boam is said to have fortified Gath (2 Ch. xi. 8)
with other cities on the borders of his kingdom.
These works are not mentioned in the parallel
passage in Kings (1 K. xii. 21). Uzziah " brake
down the wall of Gath " (2 Ch. xxvi. 6) when
pushing his conquests over Philistia ; but Amos.
writing in the same reign (Amos vi. 2), still
speaks of Gath as a Philistine city. In the later
prophets (Zeph. ii. 4 ; Zech. ix. 5, 6), when Philis-
tine cities are enumerated Gath is not among
them. It may have been ruined in the later
invasions from Babylon, or by the Persians, but
during the days of the Hebrew kings it was
always a thorn in the side of Israel.
The references to Gath in monumental records
are as yet few and doubtful. In the list of
towns in Palestine conquered by Thothmea III.
about 1600 B.C. one bears the name Kenetu
(No. 93), but this may be the modern Jennata,
much further south ; No. 63 Jenet is Eefr
Jennis, which is again too far north ; No. 70
Jenet is more possibly Gath. In the time of
Amenophis IV., about 1450 B.C., a city named
Gimti is noticed in one of the letters from Tell
Amaraa, and in an inscription of Sargon's it is
connected with Ekron. It is mentioned in the
above letter with Gedor and Keilah, and may
perhaps, as Delitzsch supposes, be Gath. It
appears to have been a place of importance,
since the " forces of the city of Gimti " were
commanded by a prince who successfully drove
out the Egyptian garrison. Such notices, bow-
ever, do not aid us to fix the exact site. Nor is
it certain that the true site was known in the
time of Eusebius. In the Onomasticon, however
(OS.' p. 254, 20), he states that Gath was 5 miles
from Eleutheropolis, on the way to Diospolis.
Jerome (OS.* p. 159, 15) adds nothing to this,
bnt in another work (Com. ad Mic. i., in Reland,
Pal. ii. p. 286) he says that Gath was still a
large village, on the way from Eleutheropolis to
Gaza. We may suspect that Gazara, or Gezer,
should here stand for Gaza, in which case
Jerome's notice would agree with that of Euse-
bius, which he accepts in translating in the Ono-
masticon. Under the head of Gath-Rimmon
(reBptfiiuiv), Eusebius (OS.' p. 255, 38) speaks
of the town so called in Dan as being 12 mile-
from Diospolis (Lydda) on the way to Eleutheros
Digitized by
Google
1132
GATH-HEPHER
polis. If the same site is intended, the distance
from Eleutheropolis to Diospolis is made to be
17 Roman miles in all. The true distance is 24
English miles ; but as this route is not one of
the great Roman highways, it is possible that
we have to deal with mere estimates of distance.
There is no remarkable site 5 Roman miles
north of Eleutheropolis, Tell es-Sifi being 7
English miles distant from the site of Eleuthero-
polis (Beit Jibrin). Thus, though the indications
favour the usually accepted site, there is no
absolute identification, as yet, of Gath. The
Onomasticon (OS* p. 255, 73) makes a false
distinction between the Philistine stronghold
and the Gath to which the Ark was taken from
Ashdod (1 Sam. v. 8) on the way to Ekron. This
site is said by Eusebius, and by his translator
Jerome, to be between Antipatris (Bas el 'Ain)
and Jamnia (1'efrna)— » vague indication, but
one which does not agree with the site already
more carefully defined. The authors of the
Onomasticon (OS.* p. 255, 76) add that there
was " another place called Geththim," perhaps
meaning Gittaim (Neh. zi. 33).
The site at Tell es-Sifi is remarkably strong
and important. A white chalk cliff stands up
on the south 300 feet above the open valley of
Elah, and nearly 700 feet above the Mediterranean.
The modern village is on the top with a sacred
w
place outside. The name /iUa]\ .V) signifies
" white (or shining) hill," * and the cliff is con-
spicuous at a considerable distance. The houses
are of mud ; the water supply is from a well in
the valley to the north. A few foundations
with drafted stones remain, being traces of the
important mediaeval castle of Blanchegarde
(Alba Specula), which was erected in 1144 A.D.
by Koike of Anjou. It was dismantled by
Saladin (Will, of Tyre, xv. 25), and had four
towers of equal size. It is mentioned as a castle
in 1191 a.d. (/tin. Sic. IV. zxiii. xxxii.), when
three hundred Saracens formed the garrison.
If this identification of Gath be correct, it seems
to hare long retained its importance. A good
account of the site is given by Robinson (Bib.
Bes. ii. pp. 29-32). El Mukaddasi (11th cent.
A.D.) says the place had a governor of its own.
Yakut (14th cent.) also speaks of it as an im-
portant place (see Le Strange, Palestine under
Moslems, pp. 41, 544). Mo antiquities of im-
portance have, however, as yet been found at
the site. [C. R. C]
OATH HEPHER or GITTAH-HEPHER
("IDrjn nj, 2 K. xiv. 25). The second spelling,
IBn nnj (Josh. 111. 13), is merely the locative
case of the name, and is correctly changed to
Gath-hepher in the R. V. The name is usually
translated " vine press of the pit." This town
was on the border of Zebulun and Naphtali, and
was the home of Jonah. The site is not identified
in the Onomasticon, but Jerome (Comm. on Jonah,
quoted by Reland, Pal. ii. p. 786) places it in
• In literary notices of this town it Is always spelt
w
&jjLoJ\ (\j • bo* the name as taken down from
the peasantry omits the last letter, which la not a
radical.
GAZA
the second mile from Saphorim, or Diocaesarea,
on the road to Tiberias. He says it was a small
village where the tomb of Jonah was still shown.
Benjamin of Tudela (12th cent.) also says that
the tomb of Jonah was shown in his time near
Sepphoris (Early Travels in Pal. p. 89) ; and
Isaac Chelo (14th cent.) says that the modern
name of Gath-hepher in his time was Mesh-had
(Carmoly, Jtin. p. 256): it was then a small
place, inhabited by a few poor Moslems, but he
appears to confound it with Kefir Kenna, where
he says that a mosque covered the tomb of Jonah,
one of the seven prophets buried in Palestine
whose tombs were known. In the Talmud (Tal.
Jer. Shebiith, vi. 1; Neubauer, Geog. da Tal. p. 201)
it is apparently the same site that is mentioned
as 1BI1, in connexion with Sepphoris (cp. Bere-
shith Babba, 98), as a place standing high, and
apparently 3 miles distant.
There is no doubt that these references
all point to the present village el Mesh-hed
(PEF. Mem. i. pp. 363, 367, sheet vi.), where
one of several supposed tombs of Jonah is still
venerated. It is now a small village with a
Makam, or sacred place, surmounted by two
domes, and with a population of some 300
Moslems. Sepphoris (Sefrarieh) is about 21
English miles to the west ; Kefr Kenna is half
a mile to the north-east. The tomb of Neby
Yunis stands high (1250 feet above the Mediter-
ranean), overlooking the plain on the north.
Robinson (Bib. Bes. ii. p. 350) adopts the tra-
ditional view as possible. The site is of great
importance as defining the boundary of Zebulun.
[C. R. C.J
GATH-BIMMON (jto"l Dl), "wine press
of the pomegranate," according to Gesenius
(Lex.), but perhaps connected with the name of
Rimmon, " high " (cp. Gesenius s. a). There
are two places so called in the Bible.
1. A city in the territory of Dan (Josh. xxi.
24 ; 1 Ch. vi. 69), situated in the vicinity of
Bene Berak and Jehud (Josh. xix. 45) or north-
east of Joppa. It is with this town that the
Onomasticon (OS.* p. 255, 58) identifies a village
2 1 miles south of Lydda [Gath]. The site is
quite unknown.
2. A city of Manasseh west of Jordan (Josh.
xxi. 25). The LXX. reads BaifrVar or Beth-
shean, and in the parallel passage (1 Ch. vi. 70)
we read Bileam. There is thns great uncer-
tainty as to the text. Within the limits of the
tribe of Manasseh we have the name of Rimmon at
the village of Kefr Rumman, north of Shechem,
and of Gath at Jett, an important site on the
edge of the Sharon plain, where the main valley,
running N.W. from Shechem, debouches into
the lowlands. This latter is probably the Gitta
which, according to Justin Martyr, was the
home of Simon Magus, but its identity with
Gath-rimmon is purelv a matter of conjecture
(see PEF. Mem. ii. 163-201; and for Kefir
Rumman, ii. 45). The site of Jett is the
only one known in Southern Palestine, where
the name Gath appears to survive. [C. R. C]
Ml
GAZAfJIW; ri(a; Arabic, Jjp, QhUzzek,
"strong" or "fortified," Gesenius, Lex. In
Dent. ii. 23, 1 K. iv. 24, and Jer. xxv. 20, the
A V. reads Azzah, which the R. V. corrects
Digitized by
Google
GAZA
into accordance with the general spelling. In
cuneiform texts the name is spelt with a gut-
tural, which may be pronounced kh or gh.
There is no certainty as to the early pronuncia-
tion, since the two sounds which in Arabic are
GAZA
1133
represented by
t" d t
are represented by
only a single letter \Xf] in the Hebrew and Phoe-
nician alphabets, down to a very late date ; but
the exact sound does not affect the radical mean-
ing). One of the most important cities in
Palestine, the frontier fortress on the Egyptian
highway, and in all ages a place of great
strength, barring the road to the south. It is
mentioned in Genesis (x. 19) as the limit of the
Canaanite territory, and frequently as one of
the fire great Philistine cities. The latest
Biblical notice is in Acts (viii. 26) ; and both in
monumental and classical history the name is
familiar. It was the limit of Hebrew conquest
(Josh. x. 41), but was apparently not at first
reduced, as the Anakim survived in it (xi. 22),
though assigned as one of the provincial capitals
to Judah (xv. 47). It was taken by the Hebrews
in the next generation after Joshua (Judg. i. 18),
though in Samson's time (Judg. xvi. 1, 21) it was
in the hands of the Philistines. Perhaps it may
have been lost daring the Midianite incursions
(Judg. vi. 4). In David's time it was a Philis-
tine fortress (1 Sam. vi. 17). Hezekiah smote
the Philistines as far as Gaza (2 K. xviii. 8).
An Egyptian conquest of the city is mentioned
by Jeremiah (xlvii. 1, 5), and Amos in earlier
times speaks of its approaching desolation
(L 6, 7), bnt it survived in Zephaniah's time
(ii. 4), and Zechariah yet later speaks of it as on
inhabited city (ix. 5). Its position on one of
the main trade routes along the shore secured
its prosperity, in spite of constantly recurring
sieges and demolitions. In the N. T. Gaza is
mentioned (Acts viii. 26) as reached by a road
through deserts, and the region round it has
always been very deficient in water supply — a
fact which added considerably to its importance.
The earliest account on monuments of this
city is found in one of the recently discovered
Tell Amarna letters, written by a local governor
to the king of Egypt, probably about 1450 B.c.
The city was then held by Egypt — probably
about the time of the earlier Judges; but
the letter speaks of a revolt apparently in
favour of the 'Abiri or " Hebrews " (see PSBA.
Jane 1889, p. 345): "The city of Gaza, be-
longing to the king, which is on the shore of
the sea westwards of the cities of Gath and
Carmel (of Judah X fell away to Orgi and to the
men of the city of Gath " (Qimti). The Egyp-
tian governor appears to have been taken cap-
tive, since the same letter (now in the Boulak
Museum) states that he was then "in his
house in the city of Gaza." About a century
later Gaza is also mentioned in the Travels of a
Mohar, at a time when Rameses II. had re-
established Egyptian supremacy, during the
days of Canaanite oppression under Sisera. The
possession of Gaza was always that of a secure
base for advance into Palestine ; and it appears
to have been almost always in the power of
Egypt, until that power was overthrown by the
Babylonians. We have, however, no account of
any siege by Nebuchadnezzar, or by Darius, on
their way to Egypt. The city may have sur-
rendered, or have been simply guarded by the
invaders. Cambyses is said to have stored his
treasures there (Pomp. Mela, i. 11); and accord-
ing to Anion (Exped. Alex. ii. 26) the city
resisted Alexander the Great for five months,
and was finally taken by storm, the men being
slain and the women and children sold as slaves,
while a new population was taken from the
surrounding country. It subsequently acknow-
ledged the sway of the Greek kings of Egypt
and of Syria in turn : it was fortified by Bac-
chides, its environs burned by Jonathan the
Hasmonean, and the town itself taken by his
successor Simon (1 Mace. xi. 61, 62, xiii. 43;
Josephus, Ant. xiii. 5, § 5). Simon imposed the
Law on its inhabitants. Other passages (1 Mace,
ix. 52, xiv. 7, xv. 28, xvi. 1) which speak of
Gazara have been wrongly supposed to refer to
Gaza, when in fact Gezer is clearly intended.
Strabo is apparently incorrect in supposing
Gaza to have remained in ruins in the times
succeeding Alexander's siege (xvi. 2, 30), other
notices of which occur in Quintus Curtius
(4, 6), Plutarch (Alex. ch. 25), Josephus (Ant.
xi. 8, §§ 3, 4), as noted by Robinson (BAI. Sea.
ii. p. 41). About 96 B.C. Alexander Jannaeus
destroyed the town after a year's siege (Jose-
phus, Ant. xiii. 13, § 3, and xiv. 5, § 3). It was
restored by the Roman general Gabinius, and
given to Herod the Great by Augustus, and
after his death assigned to Syria (Ant. xr. 7,
§ 3, and xvii. 11, § 4). The Jews in rebellion
against Floras laid it in ruins ( Wan, ii. 18, § 1),
bat it recovered after the fall of Jerusalem,
and coins of Titus, Adrian, and later emperors
were struck at Gaza (Rel. Pal. pp. 788, 797).
The notices of Gaza by later classical writers
are extracted by Reland, but do not add mate-
rially to our information. Pliny speaks (vi. 28)
of the trade routes from Petra and Palmyra
which met at this frontier city. Arrian
(lib. ii.) mokes the distance from the sea to be
20 stadia. The surrounding country, he says,
wos sandy, and the sea shallow. The city
itself was large and placed on a hill with a
strong wall. This account clearly refers to the
present site of the town, although the distance
is slightly overstated, the city being 2 Eng-
lish miles from the shore. Gaza had a small
port called the Majuma of Gaza, or in the Greek
of Julianns Kiiiiva t^j ri(t)s. The word
Majuma is apparently a corruption of on Ara-
maic word (['HID) and signifies a " seaside "
place, but the Greek term was very early
adopted among the Jews (in Greek or Roman
times) as a designation for the small ports, or
rather landing-places, near cities on the Pales-
tine coast, and it survives in the modern Arabic
El Mineh ( gjq ^)i applied to the ruins at
the present landing-place. Sozomen (Hist. v.
3 ; cp. Reland, Pal. p. 791) mentions this port
or Limcn of Gaza as called Majuma in Con-
stantine's time, and as containing a population
favourable to Christianity. The distance be-
tween the two he also gives as 20 stadia.
Several other writers quoted by Reland (Eva-
grius; Marco Diacano, Vita S. Porphyrii, &c.)
notice the shore town as distinct from the city
itself. According to Eusebius, a Bishop Silvanus
Digitized by
Google
1134
GAZA
of Gaza was martyred in 285 A.D. under Diocle-
tian ; and of other Bishops enumerated, no less
than six appear, down to 536 A.D., subscribing
their names in councils (Euseb. H. E. 8, 13 ; cp.
Rob. Bib. Res. ii. p. 41). In later times there
appear to have been Bishops both of the town
and of the Majuma (cp. Reland, Pal. ii. p. 209).
In the Onomastkon (OS.* p. 252, 62) we learn
that the city was important in the 4th cent. A.D.
(est usque hodie insignis civitas Palestinae are
the words of Jerome's translation), and in the
Talmud it is mentioned as still given to idolatry
in the same ages (Tal. Jer. Abodah Sarah, i. 4;
tal. Bab., same treatise, 11 4 ; Neubauer, Qeog.
Tal. p. 68), but inhabited nevertheless by Jews.
That pagan idolatry long survived in Gaza we
learn from the Life of St. Porphyry, who is said
in 406 A.D. to have been made Bishop, and
instructed to demolish the temples, fnnds being
granted by Eudoxia, wife of the Emperor Ar-
cadins, for the erection of a church. There
were at this time eight temples to the gods in
Gaza ; and if this account is correct, they must
have been recently restored, since Jerome
(Cotnm. in Esa. xvii. 3; cp. Robinson, Bib. Res.
ii. 42) speaks of the destruction, in his own
time, of the temple of Marnion, and appa-
rently of the building of an earlier church,
the eight deities are said to have been Venus,
Apollo, Proserpine, Hecate, the Sun, Fortune,
and Juno, with Marnas, who was the chief deity
and who is compared to the "Cretan Jove."*
His name is usually translated " our lord," and
it is possible that the great statue of Jupiter,
discovered some twelve years ago near Gaza
and now in the Constantinople Museum, repre-
sents Marnas (see Conder's Syrian Stone Lore,
p. 287, for a drawing of this statue, which is
15 feet high): the temple of Marna3 is said to
have been circular, with two rows of pillars,
(laza does not seem to have been frequently
visited by the early pilgrims, although the
trade relations of its population rendered them
favourable to visitors. Antoninus in the 6th
cent. A.D. speaks of Gaza and its Majuma as a
mile apart. He calls the city magnificent and
delightful, its inhabitants most respectable,
eminent for all kinds of liberality, and friendly
to pilgrims (ch. xxxiii.). In the 9th century
Bernard the Wise speaks of the richness of the
town, which meantime had fallen into the
hands of the Moslems, having been conquered
by Abu Bekr, the first Khalif in 634 a.d. At
the close of the 8th century (796 A.D.) it had,
however, been desolated during civil wars
among the Arabs. It appears always to have
recovered rapidly from its misfortunes. In
985 a.d. El Mukaddasi speaks of the city as
containing a beautiful mosque, a monument of
Omar, and the tomb of Hashem, Muhammad's
father. In the struggles between the Moslem
rulers of Egypt and Syria, the possession of
Gaza was always very important ; and after the
» Mima was also in Egyptian a word for "Lord"
(Plerret, Vocab. p. 1»5). In Gsia he was the rain-giving
god. There was a place in the town called Tetram-
phodoe, "the cross roads; "and here stood the altar and
nude statue of Venus, before which lamps were lighted
and Incense offered by women. The statue answered by
dreams those about to marry, as the worshippers stated
(TOo Porpa.).
GAZA
conquest of Jerusalem by the Franks, Gaza with
Ascalon formed the bulwarks of Egypt against
the Christians. In 1152 A.D. the Franks erected
a fortress on the hill, which was then appa-
rently deserted, and so cut the communication
of Egypt with Ascalon; the fortress was en-
trusted to the Templars (Will, of Tyre, xvii. 12).
Saladin vainly attacked this fortress in 1170
A.D., but it surrendered after the fatal day of
Hattin in 1187 (Will, of Tyre, xv. 21, and Boha
ed Din); it was entered by king Richard, accord-
ing to Robinson (Bib. Res. ii. p. 43), but, if so,
soon retaken; and great Christian defeats oc-
curred in its vicinity in 1239 and 1244 A.D.
In the following century Sir John Maundeville
speaks of the town as " a gay and rich city, and
as very fair and full of people." The Arab
historians and geographers often refer to Gaza,
but their notes, as in most other cases, are
brief. Ibn Haukal (10th cent.) speaks of the
city as a great market for the Hejjiz, and as
the place where the Khalif Omar obtained his
early wealth. In the 13th century, however,
Abu el-Feda speaks of it as a city only of
medium size, with a small castle and gardens.
In another century it had again become pros-
perous, with many mosques, as noted by Ibn
Batata (Le Strange, Palestine under Moslems,
p. 442). This short review of its history suf-
fices to show that, from the earliest times to
our own, the geographical position of the town
has secured a constantly returning prosperity,
in spite of continual assaults from the north
and south, and also in spite of the absence of a
port. Its trade was always a caravan trade,
and the products of Arabia came to it (through
Petra) as well as those of Palestine and of
Egypt. It remains the starting-place for the
journey to Egypt across the desert, which Baby-
lonians, Persians, Greeks, and later warriors ac-
complished along the same narrow track, which
was also followed by Napoleon in 1799, on his
way to and from Syria.
Modern Gaza is one of the chief cities of
Palestine, and the largest frontier town on the
side of Egypt. A full account is given in the
Memoirs of the Survey of Western Palestine
(iii. 234, 235, 248-251). The town itself
occupies the greater part of the isolated hill,
which rises 180 feet above the sea and 60
to 100 feet above the surrounding plain. The
site is almost as large as that of the city of
Jerusalem, but is not fully occupied on the
north. Considerable scattered suburbs occur
on each side on the lower ground. The greater
part of the houses are of mud and wood.
There are no city walls, but great mounds
visible on the sides of the hill mark the site of
ancient fortifications, the date and character of
which are at present unknown in default of
excavation. They may perhaps belong to
Crusading or even later times. On the south,
near the quarantine building, the name Bab ed
Darin is given to a road crossing, preserving
probably the name of the " Gate of Darum,"
named from the Crusading fort of Darum (now
Deir el-BeUh) on the road to Egypt. The
population of Gaza is believed to be about
18,000 souls, the large majority being Moslems,
with some 200 Greek orthodox Christians.
About a century ago the Samaritans, who then
also resided in Egypt, had a synagogue in Gaza,
Digitized by
Google
GAZA
but they have now died out, and the Jewish
population is small. A few missionaries and
government officials, in charge of the telegraph,
Ac, form the only European element. The
town is divided into four quarters, called —
(1) The quarter "of the Steps" on the west,
(2) " of the Prison " on the north, (3) " of the
mod houses " on the east, (4) " of the olives "
on the south. The town is surrounded with
beautiful gardens. A few palms occur, and
figs, olives, lentils, apricots, mulberries, melons,
cucumbers, and dates are grown, with a little
cotton. The bazaar provides the Arab nomads
of the south with clothing, soap is manufac-
tured, and on the west are potteries, where a
black pottery, similar to that used in very early
times, is made. The place is reported very i
healthy, on account of its dry desert air. The
sand dunes steadily encroach on the west and
south over the cultivated ground. The water
GAZA
1135
supply is from Beiydrahs, or deep wells like
those of Jaffa, of which there are many in the
gardens. The names of fifteen of these were
collected by the Survey party. On the north a
long avenue of very ancient olives extends for
about 4 miles to the next villages, and the
site generally is picturesque and truly Oriental,
being little spoilt by the sordid Levantine imi-
tations of Western civilisation, found in parts
more frequented by tourists. The costume of
the natives is Egyptian rather than Syrian — as
is noticeable in other Philistine towns ; and the
early population succeeding the Avites (cp.
Deut. ii. 23) was also Egyptian, for the Philis-
tines — according to the Book of Genesis — were
of Egyptian derivation, though of what stock is
as yet uncertain (x. 14) ; while, as already seen,
the Egyptians still held Gaza in the 14th cent.
B.C. and probably much later.
The principal buildings in Gaza are the Serai
or Government office, and the mosques. There
are five lofty minarets on the hill. The great
mosque is the Crusading Church of St. John
Baptist, and there is a second large mosque with
several smaller. The shrine of 'Aly el Merwan
U the traditional prison, or tomb, of Samson
(Jodg. xvi. 30), and is on the east side of the
town. It appears to be a modern building.
The tomb of H£shem, father of Muhammad
(already noticed), is shown near the brow of the
hill on the north-west. There is also a Greek
church in Gaza, which contains two Byzantine
columns, and appears to be ancient. A register
therein preserved is said by the priests to be a
thousand years old. On the south side of the
town is an isolated hillock called El Mxmtdr,
** the watch tower," and now crowned with a
■brine sacred to a certain 'Ali. It is surrounded
by a Moslem cemetery, and is traditionally the
place to which Samson carried the gates of Gaza
(cp. Judg. xvt 3), though it is doubtful whether
this agrees with the expression "before Hebron."
The hill is about 270 feet above sea-level at
the top.
The ruined site at El Mineh representing the
Majuma of Gaza is north-west of the town on
the shore; it bears the name El Kishani ("the
painted tiles "). It now consists of gardens,
with a few wells, surrounded by a bank ; but is
clearly the site of a small town. Marble slabs
and other fragments have here been dug up by
the peasantry. In the plain, rather more than a
mile to the east of the town, is an ancient race-
course, called Mcidan ez Zeid, said to have been
made by the Saracens some 700 years ago. The
corners are marked by pillars, stolen from the
headstones of Christian graves. On two of these
there are Greek inscriptions, which appear to
be of the Byzantine age, cut on the grey granite.
One is the epitaph of the son of Domesticus, set
up by his father. The other contains the words
of Psalm xxiv. 1, "The earth is the Lord's
Digitized by
Google
V
\
1136
GAZABA
and the fulness thereof," with the name of
Deacon Alexander, who " faced " some " monu-
ment" with stone in "February 640" (no doubt
of the Christian era). Both were found by the
Key. W. D. Pritchett in 1875 and 1877 re-
spectively. The distance between these goals
was 1,000 b'aa, or about 2,000 yards east and
west. With the exception of the great statue
of Jupiter already noticed, these are the oldest
remains as yet found at Gaza. The Church of
St. John was built in the latter half of the
12th century, and is a fine and massive specimen
of Crusading work. The west door is remarkably
fine, with pointed arches. The church had a
nave and two aisles, with clerestory windows to
the nave. A slab with a representation of the
golden candlestick and a short Greek text is
built in to the wall of this clerestory. The apses
have been destroyed, and the building much
injured by the Moslems. An inscription of
Kalawun (13th cent, A.r>.) occurs over the
courtyard door ; and a later text over the Mih-
rab, by Husa Pasha, dates 1074 a.h. Small
pottery figures (Teraphim), like those common
in Phoenicia and Cyprus, have been discovered
at Gaza ; but are not of necessity very ancient,
though certainly specimens of the native pagan
art, common to the whole of Syria. It is possible
that very interesting discoveries might here
result from excavation on the hill-side, but
very ancient remains cannot be expected to
survive on the surface. Gaza is the capital of
the Turkish province bearing the same name, and
subject to the Jerusalem governor. [C, R. C.j
GAZ'ABA(q rd(apa and t4 rrffapa; Gaz-
ara), a place frequently mentioned in the wars of
the Maccabees, and of great importance in the
operations of both parties. Its first introduction
is as a stronghold (oxipa/ta), in which Timotheus
took refuge after his defeat by Judas, and which
for four days resisted the efforts of the infuriated
Jews (2 Mace. x. 32-36). One of the first steps
of Bacchides, after getting possession of Judaea,
was to fortify Bethsura and Gazara and the
citadel (aVpa) at Jerusalem (1 Mace. ix. 52 ; Jos.
Ant. xiii. 1, § 3); and the same names are
mentioned when Simon in his turn recovered
the country (1 Mace. xiv. 7, 33, 34, 36, xv. 28 ;
Jos. B. J. i. 2, § 2). So important was it, that
Simon made it the residence of his son John as
general-in-chief of the Jewish army (1 Mace,
xiii. 53 ; xvi. 1, 19, 21).
There is every reason to believe that Gazara
was the same place as the more ancient Gezkr
or Gazer, now Tell Jezer. The name is the
same as that which the LXX. use for Gezer in
the O. T. ; and, more than this, the indications
of the position of both are very much in accord-
ance. As David smote the Philistines from
Gibeon to Gezer, so Judas defeated Gorgias at
Emmaus and pursued him to Gazera (1 Mace,
iv. 15). Gazara also is constantly mentioned in
connexion with the sea-coast — Joppa and Jamnia
(xv. 28, 35 ; iv. 15), and with the Philistine
plain, Azotus, Adasa, &c. (iv. 15; vii. 45; xiv.
34). [Gezer.] [G.] [W.]
GA'ZATHITES, THE (W1K1, accur. "the
Azzathite;" -ry Tafaly; Oazaeos; R. V. Ga-
zites), Josh. xiii. 3 ; the inhabitants of Gaza.
Elsewhere the same name is rendered GAZITES
in the A V.
GAZELLE
GAZELLE. By this word the Revisers
have rendered *3V. !"I»3V, seW, fUnyah, in
the text of the Pentateuch, and in the margin
elsewhere. The A. V. everywhere renders the
Hebrew by " roe," or " roebuck ; " LXX. Sopxds,
SSpKuy, SopicdStor ; Vulg. caprea, damula ; Arab.
t gJufr, *<■& There can be no question as to
the accuracy of the Revisers' translation; the
Hebrew and Arabic names being identified by
Arabic writers with Jhp', ghazat, the gazelle,
and the names being frequently interchanged
in poetry. The gazelle is by far the most
abundant of all the antelope tribes in Palestine,
as it is along the whole of North Africa and
South-Western Asia. Its flesh was much
esteemed among the Jews : " The unclean and
the clean may eat thereof, as of the roebuck Q2 Tf,
R. V. " gazelle "), and as of the hart " (Deu't.
xii. 15, 22, &c). Its venison was among the
delicacies of Solomon's table: "harts, and
relies, and roebucks, and fatted fowls" (1
iv. 23, R. V.). But the gazelle is more
frequently mentioned in Scripture as an emblem
of loveliness, grace, gentleness, and swiftness:
" swift as the roes upon the mountains " (1 Ch.
xii. 8). Its beauty rendered it a favourite term
of admiration in love : " My beloved is like
a roe or a young hart " (Song ii. 9, v. 17, and
viii. 14). "Thy breasts are like two young
roes that are twins " (Song iv. 5). Asahel, the
brother of Joab, " was as light of foot as a
wild roe." To the present day, the black-eyed
gazelle supplies the Arab poet with his favourite
similes for the fair object of his admiration.
Naturally the ; word, as expressive of beauty,
became a favourite female name, " Tabitha " in
its Aramaic form, or "Dorcas" in its Greek
rendering (Acts ix. 36).
The common gazelle of Palestine is the
Oazella dorcas (Pall.), and is the only species
west of the Jordan. It is the only wild animal
of the chase which an ordinary traveller is
pretty certain to meet with. Small herds of
gazelle are to be found in every part of the
country, and when water is scarce they con-
gregate at their favourite drinking places in
large numbers. I have seen a herd of about
100 at the southern end of the Jebel Usdum,
south of the Dead Sea, where they had congre-
gated to drink at 'Ain Beida (ue. the white
spring), the only fresh spring within several
miles. Though generally considered an in-
habitant of the deserts and the plains, the
gazelle appears to be everywhere at home. It
shares the rocks of Engedi with the wild goats ;
it dashes over the wide expanse of the desert
beyond Beersheba ; it canters in single file
under the monastery of Marsaba. I have found
it in the glades of Carmel, before they were
ruthlessly stripped to make charcoal ; it often
springs from its leafy covert behind Mount
Tabor, and screens itself under the thorn
bushes of Gennesaret. Among the grey hills of
Galilee we still find "the roe upon the moun-
tains of Bether," and I have seen a little troop
of gazelles feeding on the Mount of Olives, close
to Jerusalem itself. In the open ground it is
the wildest of game, and can scarcely ever be
captured ; bnt, once in cover or among trees, it
Digitized by
Google
GAZER
GEBA
1137
is very easily approached. The Arabs capture
it generally by concealing themselves near the
well-known watering places. In the rocky
districts the hunters lie in wait in the sides of
the steep ravines, down which the gazelles are
known to pass. The Druses of the Hauran
contrive decoy enclosures, with pitfalls in which
they sometimes capture a whole herd. But the
horseman of the desert despises these devices,
and the true Arab sheikh will only pursue the
gazelle with the Persian greyhound, or the
falcon, or with both conjointly. If the grey-
hound be alone, the roe often " delivers itself
from the hand of the hunter." If falcons are
used alone, generally two are thrown oft", the
birds employed being the sakker (Falco saker,
Gm.). The birds do not attempt to seize their
victim, but repeatedly swoop at its head, and so
arrest its speed till the horseman can come up.
If falcons and greyhound are used together, the
poor animal can scarcely ever escape, as the
birds repeatedly swoop at it nntil the dog comes
up and seizes it. Dean Stanley was much
interested by seeing the peasants chasing the
gazelle in the valley of Ajalon, i.e. " of stags,"
proving the appropriateness of the name down
to the present day.
A different species of gazelle is found in
Gilead and on the wide plains and deserts
eastward, which has generally been considered to
be the Gazella arabica, Ehrenb. It is larger than
the common species, and of a darker fawn colour
on the back, and is known as the Ariel gazelle,
It extends from Syria across Persia as far as
Scinde. The Persian Gazella subgntturosa and
Gazella Bermetti are distinct. Sir Victor Brooke,
after examining my specimens from Gilead,
whilst agreeing that they are distinct from
Gazella dorcas, is inclined to believe that they
are of another race differing from the Ariel
gazelle of South Arabia, and more nearly ap-
proaching the western species. But the different
races or species of gazelle are very numerous
and difficult to discriminate. [II. B. T.]
GA'ZEB pt| ; Gazer), 2 Sam. v. 25 [r«-
Cripi] ; 1 Ch. xiv. 1 6 [B. TiQapa, K. -or, A. -ty»].
The same place as Gezer, the difference arising
from the emphatic Hebrew accent ; which has
been here retained in the A. V., though disre-
garded in several other places where the same
form occurs. [Gezer.] From the uniform
practice of the LXX., both in the O. T. and the
books of Maccabees, Ewald infers that the ori-
ginal form of the name was Gazer; but the
punctuation of the Masorets is certainly as often
the one as the other. (Ewald, Gesch. ii. 427,
note.) [G.] [W]
GAZETIA. 1. (T. T t4 Ti(r,pa, A. raVijpa;
Joseph, -ra rdSapa; Gezeron, Gazara), 1 Mace.
iv. 15 ; vii. 45. The place elsewhere given as
Gazara.
3. (B. KaCvpi, A. Ta(npi ; Gaze), one of the
"servants of the Temple," whose sons returned
with Zorobabel (1 E*d. v. 31). In Ezra and
Nehem. the name is Gazzam.
GA'ZEZ (TTJ = shearer; BA. 6 r<{W; Ge-
ztz), a name which occurs twice in 1 Ch. ii. 46 :
(I) as son of Caleb by Ephah, his concubine ;
and (2) as son of Haran, the son of the same
woman : the second is possibly only a repetition
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. 1.
of the first. At any rate there is no necessity
for the assumption of Houbigant, that the second
Gazez is an error for Jahdai. In some MSS. and
in the Peshitto the name is given as Gazen. The
Vat. LXX. omits the second occurrence.
GA'ZITES, THE (D'rwri; to« Tafoiow ;
Philathum), inhabitants of Gaza (Judg. xvi. 2).
Elsewhere given as Gazathites.
GAZ'ZAM (£MJ,? = tA« devourer ; r«C4*
[Ezra], rnfoV [Ken".]; Gazam, Getcm). The
Bene-Gazzam were among the families of the
Nethinim who returned from the Captivity
with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii. 48; Neh. vii. 51).
In 1 Esd. the name is altered to Gazera.
GE'BA (B3|, often with the definite article,
=the hill; iafiai [usually]; Gabae", Gabee,
Qabaa, Geba), a city of Benjamin, with "sub-
urbs,*' allotted to the priests (Josh. xxi. 17 ;
1 Ch. vi. 60). It is named amongst the first
group of the Benjamite towns, and was ap-
parently near the north boundary (Josh, xviii.
24). Here the name is given as Gaba, a change
due to the emphasis required in Hebrew before
a pause ; and the same change occurs in Ezra ii.
26, Neh. vii. 30 and xi. 31, 2 Sam. v. 25, 2 K.
xxiii. 8 ; the last three of these being in the A.V.
(and all in the R. V.) Geba. In one place Geba
is used as the northern landmark of the kingdom
of Judah and Benjamin, in the expression "from
Geba to Beersheba " (2 K. xxiii. 8), and also as
an eastern limit in opposition to Gazer (2 Sam.
v. 25; ra&iav). In the parallel passage to
this last, in 1 Ch. xiv. 16 the name is changed
to Gibeon. During the wars of the earlier part
of the reign of Saul, Geba was held as a
garrison by the Philistines (1 Sam. xiii. 8), but
they were ejected by Jonathan — a feat which,
while it added greatly to his renown, exas-
perated them to a more overwhelming invasion.
Later in the same campaign we find it referred
to in order to define the position of the two
rocks which stood in the ravine below the
garrison of Michmash, in terms which fix Geba
on the south and Michmash on the north of
the ravine (1 Sam. xiv. 5, Ta$a4: the A. V.
has here Gibeah ; R. V. correctly Geba). Ex-
actly in accordance with this is the position
of the modern village of M'a, which stands
picturesquely on the top of its steep terraced
hill, on the very edge of the great Wad;/
Suiceintt, looking northwards to the opposite
village, which also retains its old name
of M&khmas (PEF. Mem. iii. 9, 94; Gue"rin,
Judee, iii. 68). The names, and the agreement
of the situation with the requirements of the
story of Jonathan, make the identification cer-
tain; and it is still further confirmed by the
invaluable list of Benjamite towns visited by
the Assyrian army on their road through the
country southward to Jerusalem, which we have
in Is. x. 28-32 ; where the minute details — the
stoppage of the heavy baggage (A. V. "car-
riages"), which could not be got across the
broken ground of the trad;/ at Michmash ; then
the passage of the ravine by the lighter portion
of the army, and the subsequent bivouac
("lodging," fhf = rest for the night) at Geba on
the opposite side — are in exact accordance with
4D
Digitized by
Google
1138
GEBAL
the nature of the spot. Standing as it does on
the south bank of this important tcady — one of
the most striking natural features of this part
of the country — the mention of Geba as the
northern boundary of the lower kingdom is very
significant. Thus commanding the pass, its
fortification by Asa (1 K. if. 22, fiovrtr ; 2 Ch.
xvi. 6) is also quite intelligible. It continues
to be named with Michmash to the very last
(Neh. ii. 31).
Geba is probably intended by the " Gibeah-in-
the-field" of Judg. xx. 31, to which its position
is very applicable. [Gibeah, 6.] The " fields "
are mentioned again as late as Neh. xii. 29.
It remains to notice a few places in which,
from the similarity of the two names, or possibly
from some provincial usage,* " Geba " is perhaps
used for " Gibeah." These are :— (1.) Judg. xx.
10 : here the A. V. and R. V., probably anxious to
prevent confusion, have " Gibeah." (2.) Judg.
xx. 33 : " the meadows," or more probably " the
cave of Geba." In this case A V. has "Gibeah,"
and R. V. " Maareh-Geba," marg. the meadow
of Geba or Gibeah. The meaning seems to be
that the " Hers in wait " were concealed in
the cave or caves of Geba, and brake forth when
the men of Benjamin had been drawn away from
Gibeah (cp. m. 33, 36, 37). For the existence of
caves at Jeb'a, see PEF. Mem. iii. 9. Owing to
the word occurring here at a pause, the vowels
are lengthened, and in the Hebrew it stands as
Odba. (3.) 1 Sam. xiii. 16 : here the A. V. has
altered the name, whilst K. V. retains the
reading " Geba." Josephus {Ant. vi. 6, § 2) has
ra&cuiv, Gibeon, in this place ; for which perhaps
compare 1 Ch. viii. 29, ix. 35.
2. The Geba (B. Taifad, A. Tai/Sd, K. TcuB&r),
named in Judith iii. 10, where Holofernes is
said to have made his encampment — " between
Geba and Scythopolis " — must be the place of
the same name, Jeb'a, on the road between
Samaria and Jenin, about 3 miles from the
former (Rob. i. 440; PEF. Mem. ii. 155). The
Vulgate has a remarkable variation here — venit
ad Jdumaeos in terram Qabaa. [G.] [W.]
GE'BAX (^3|, O'bal, from V»3|, gabal, to
twist; thence 7423, gSml, a line ; thence Ai*.,
Gcbal, a line of mountains as a natural boundary ;
in Ps., A. U0a\ KB. NoiftU; Gcbal: in Ezek.
filfiKtoi, Giblii), a proper name, occurring in
Ps. lxxxiii. 7 (Vulg. lxxxii.) in connexion with
Edom and Moab, Ammon and Amalek, the
Philistines and the inhabitants of Tyre. The
mention of Assur, or the Assyrian, in the next
verse, is with reason supposed to refer the date
of the composition to the latter days of the
Jewish kingdom. It is inscribed moreover with
the name of Asaph. Now, in 2 Ch.vxx. 14, it is
one of the sons or descendants of Asaph, Ja-
haziel, who is inspired to encourage Jehoshaphat
and his people, when threatened with invasion
by the Moaoites, Ammonites, and others from
beyond the sea, and from Syria (as the LXX.
and Vulg. : it is unnecessary here to go into the
obscurities and varieties of the Hebrew, Syriac,
and Arabic Versions). It is impossible there-
fore not to recognise the connexion between this
• As with us, Barkahlre for Berkshire, Darby for
Derby, *c.
GEBAL
Psalm and these events ; and hence the contexts
both of the Psalm and of the historical records will
justify our assuming the Gebal of the Psalms
to be one and the same city with the Gebal of
Ezekiel (xxvii. 9), a maritime town of Phoenicia,
and not another, as some hare supposed, in the
district round about Petra, which is by Josephus,
Eusebius, and St. Jerome called Gebalene. Je-
hoshaphat had, in the beginning of his reign,
humbled the Philistines and Arabians (2 Ch. xvii.
9, 10), and still more recently had assisted Ahab
against the Syrians (ibid. ch. xviii.). Now, ac-
cording to the poetic language of the Psalmist,
there were symptoms of a general rising against
him : on the south, the Edomites, Ishmaelites,
and Hagarenes ; on the south-east, Moab and
north-east Ammon ; along the whole line of
the western coast (and, with Jehoshaphat's mari-
time projects, this would naturally disturb him
most : see 2 Ch. xx. 36) the Amalekites, Philist-
ines, and Phoenicians, or inhabitants of Tyre,
to their frontier town Gebal, with Assur, i.e.
the Syrians or Assyrians, from the more distant
north. It may be observed that the Ashurites
are mentioned (v. 6) in connexion with Gebal no
less in the prophecy than in the Psalm. But,
again, the Gebal of Ezekiel was evidently no
mean city. From the fact that its inhabitants
are written "Giblians" in the Vulg., and " Bib-
lians " in the LXX., we may infer their identity
with the Giblites, spoken of in connexion with
Lebanon by Joshua (xiii. 5), and that of their city
with the " Biblus " (or Byblus) of profane litera-
ture — so extensive that it gave name to the sur-
rounding district (see a passage from Lucian,
quoted by Reland, Palest, lib. i. c. xiii. p. 269).
It was situated on the frontiers of Phoenicia,
somewhat to the north of the mouth of the
small river Adonis, so celebrated in mythology
(cp. Ezek. viii. 13). Meanwhile the Giblites, or
Biblians, seem to have been pre-eminent in the
arts of stone-carving (1 K. v. 18) and ship-
calking (Ezek. xxvii. 9); but, according to
Strabo, their industry suffered greatly from the
robbers infesting the sides of Mount Lebanon.
Gebal or Gnbal is frequently mentioned in the
cuneiform inscriptions; its king, Sibitti-bahali,
paid tribute to Tiglath-pileser II.; under Sen-
nacherib its king was Urumelik ; and under
Esarhaddon, Milki-asapa (Schrader, Die Keilin-
schriften u. d. A. Test. p. 185). Enylus, king of
Byblus, joined the Macedonian fleet, with his
vessels, after the town was taken by Alexander
(Arrian, Anab. ii. 15, § 8 ; 20, § 1). Pompey not
only destroyed the strongholds from whence these
pests issued, but freed the city from a tyrant
(Strabo, xvi. 2, 18). Some have confounded
Gebal, or Biblus, with the Gabala of Strabo, just
below Laodicea, and consequently many leagues
to the north, the ruins and site of which, still
called Jebileh, are so graphically described by
Maundrell (Early Travellers in Pales, by Wright,
p. 394). By Moroni (Dizion. Ecclcs.) they are
accurately distinguished under their respective
names. Finally, Biblus became a Christian see
in the patriarchate of Antioch, subject to the
metropolitan see of Tyre (Reland, Palest, lib. i.
p. 214 sq.). It shared the usual vicissitudes
of Christianity in these parts ; and even now
furnishes episcopacy with a title. It is called
Jebeil by the Arabs, thus reviving the old
Biblical name (Diet. Ok. and Bom. Geog., s. v.
Digitized by
Google
GEBALITES
Byblos). Extensive excavations were carried
ont, in and near JebeS, by H. Renan, who dis-
covered numerous tombs and sarcophagi, the
substructions of a large temple, perhaps that of
Adonis, and many interesting Phoenician remains
(Mission de Phenicie, pp. 153-359).
[E.S. Ff.] [W.]
GEBALITES, 1 K. v. 18 (B. V.> [Gebal.]
GETJER ("QJ = a strong man), a name oc-
curring twice in the list of Solomon's com-
missariat officers, and there only. 1. (BA.
Tafi4p; Sengaber). The son of Geber (Ben-
Geber) resided in the fortress of Ramoth-Gilead,
and had charge of Havoth-Jair and the district
of Argob (1 K. iv. 13). Josephns (Ant. viii.
2, § 3) gives the name as TaPdpvs. 2. (Ta$4p,
B. omits ; Gaber). Geber the son of Uri
had a district south of the former — the " land
of Gilead," the country originally possessed
by Sihon and Og, probably the modern Seiko,
the great pasture-ground of the tribes east of
Jordan (1 K. iv. 19). The conclusion of this
-rerse as rendered in the A V. and R. V. (text)
is to some unsatisfactory — " and he was the only
officer which was in the land " — when two others
are mentioned in m. 13 and 14. A more accu-
rate interpretation is, " and one officer who was
in the land " (R. V. marg.), that is, a superior
(3^n,a word of rare occurrence, bnt used again
for Solomon's "officers" in 2 Ch. viii. 10) over
the three. Josephns has M Si roiruv tts -xAKtr
HpX"" arotfttuero, the xdAw referring to a simi-
lar statement just before that there was also one
general superintendent over the commissaries of
the whole of Upper Palestine. [G.J [W.]
GETMM (D'^jri, with the article, = pro-
bably the ditches; the word is used in that
sense in 2 K. iii. 16, and elsewhere ; Ti$$ttp ;
Gabon), a village north of Jerusalem, in the
neighbourhood of the main road, and apparently
between Anathoth (the modern 'Andta) and the
ridge on which Nob was situated, and from
which the first view of the city is obtained. It
is named nowhere but in the enumeration by
Isaiah of the towns whose inhabitants fled at
Sennacherib's approach (x. 31). Judging by
those places the situation of which is known to
us. the enumeration is so orderly that it is im-
possible to entertain the conjecture of either
Ensebius (Tritely, Gebin, OS* p. 256, 2 ; p. 1 62, 5),
who places it at Geba, 5 miles north of Gophna;
or of Schwarz (p. 131), who would have it identi-
cal with Gob or Gezer : the former being at least
10 miles north, and the latter 20 miles west, of
its probable position. The site is unknown, but
it may perhaps be el-' Aisdwiych, on the eastern
slope of the ridge of Olivet. [G.] [W.]
GECKO. The rendering in R. V. of njMK,
'anakdh ; but in A. V. Ferret, which see.
GEDALI'AH (H'VlJ and vAni, i.e. Ge-
t: -: t: * j
daliahu = J ah is great ; ToSoXlas ; Godolias).
1. Gedaijah, the son of Ahikam (Jeremiah's
protector, Jer. xxvi. 24), and grandson of
Shaphan the secretary of king Josiah. After
the destruction of the Temple, B.C. 588, Nebu-
chadnezzar departed from Judaea, leaving
Gedaliah with a Chaldaean guard (Jer. xl. 5) at
GEBER
1139
Mizpah, a strong (1 K. xv. 22) town, 6 miles
N. of Jerusalem, to govern, as a tributary
(Joseph. Ant. x. 9, § 1) of the king of Babylon,
the vine-dressers and husbandmen (Jer. Iii. 16)
who were exempted from captivity. Jeremiah
joined Gedaliah ; and Mizpah became the resort
of Jews from various quarters (Jer. xl. 6, 11),
many of whom, as might be expected at the end
of a long war, were in a demoralized state, un-
restrained by religion, patriotism, or prudence.
The gentle and popular character of Gedaliah
(Joseph. Ant. x. 9, §§ 1, 3), his hereditary piety
(Rosenmiiller in Jer. xxvi. 24), the prosperity of
his brief rule (Jer. xl. 12), the reverence which
revived and was fostered under him for the
ruined Temple (xli. 5), fear of the Chaldaean
conquerors, whose officer he was, — all proved
insufficient to secure Gedaliah from the foreign
jealousy of Baalis king of Ammon, and the
domestic ambition of Ishmael, a member of the
royal family of Jndah (Joseph. Ant. x. 9, § 3).
This man came to Mizpah with a secret purpose
to destroy Gedaliah. Gedaliah, generously re-
fusing to believe a friendly warning which he
received of the intended treachery, was mur-
dered, with his Jewish and Chaldaean followers,
two months after his appointment. After his
death, which is still commemorated in the Jewish
Calendar (Prideanx, Connexion, anno 588 ; Zech.
vii. 19; Friedlander, Text Book of the Jewish
Religion, p. 33) as a national calamity, the Jews
in their native land, anticipating the resentment
of the king of Babylon, gave way to despair.
Many, forcing Jeremiah to accompany them,
fled to Egypt under Johanan (see Stanley, Hist,
of the Jewish Church, ii. Lect. xl. ; Milman,
Hist, of the Jews,* i. 403). 2. Gedaliahu;
a Levite, one of the six sons of Jeduthun
who played the harp in the service of Jehovah
(1 Ch. xxv. 3 [B. om.], 9 [A. ToSo\las, B.
raAovfcfJ). 3. Gedaliah ; a priest in the time
of Ezra (Ezra x. 18 [BA. raSattid,H. roAooW]).
[Joadahus.] 4. Gedaliahu ; son of Pashur
(Jer. xxxviii. 1 ; K'. Tobias), one of those who
caused Jeremiah to be imprisoned. 6. GE-
DALIAH ; grandfather of Zephaniah the prophet
(Zeph.i.1). [W.T. B.] [F.]
GELVDTJB (B. Ktttoip, A. TtSto&p ; Qeddu),
lEsd. v. 30. [Gahar.]
GELVEON (Ttttdr ; Gedeon). 1. The son
of Raphaim; one of the ancestors of Judith
(Judith viii. 1). The name is omitted in BK.
2. The Greek form of the Hebrew name
Gideon (Heb. xi. 32) ; retained in the N. T. by
A. V. (R. V. " Gideon ") in company with Elias,
Eliseus, Osee, Jesus (—Joshua), and other
Grecised Hebrew names, to the confusion of the
ordinary reader.
GEDER ("V3? = «*»»• A.TaS4p,B.'Aw,
Gader). The king of Geder was one of the
thirty-one kings who were overcome by Joshua
on the west of the Jordan (Josh. xii. 13), and
mentioned in that list only. Being named with
Debir, Hormah, and Arad, Geder was evidently
in the extreme south : this prevents our identi-
fying it with Gedor (Josh. xv. 58), which lay
between Hebron and Bethlehem ; or with hag-
Gederah in the low country (xv. 36). It is
possible, however, that it may be the Gedor
4 D 2
Digitized by
Google
1140
GEDERAH
named in connexion with the Simeonites (1 Ch.
iv. 39). [G.] [W.]
GEDE"BAH (rni?n, with the article=tte
sheepoote ; riSifpa ; Gedera), a town of Judah
in the Shefelah or lowland country (Josh. zv.
36), mentioned next after Adithaim, Haditheh.
It is probably the Gedonr (Tttoup) of Eusebius,
which was in his time called Gedrus (rtSpois),
and was 10 miles from Diospolis (Lydda) on the
road to Eleutheropolis (OS.* p. 254, 39). ThU
place is now Kh. Jedireh, 9 Eng. miles south of
Laid (PEF. Mem. iii. 43). The name (if the
interpretation given be correct), and the occur-
rence next to it of one so similar as Gedero-
thaim, seem to point to a great deal of sheep-
breeding in this part. [G.] [W.j
GEDEHATHTTE, THE 01?""!?' K *
I'aiapaSutln, N. 6 TaSapi, A. i Taii)pu8t ; Gade-
rothites), the native of a place called Gederah,
but not of that in the Shefelah of Judah, for
Josabad the Gederathite (1 Ch. xii. 4) was one of
Saul's own tribe — his " brethren of Benjamin "
(c. 2). It is now apparently the village
Jedireh, near el-Jib, Gibeon (PEF. Mem. iii. 9).
[G.] [W.]
GEDE'BITE, THE ('^JPI; B. t r**-
pefnjj, A. 6 VMp ; Qederites)', i.e. the native of
some place named Geder or Gederah. Baal-hanan
the Gederite had charge of the olive and sycamore
groves in the low country (Shefelah) for king
David (1 Ch. xxvii. 28). He possibly belonged
to Gederah, a place in this district, the very
locality for sycamores. [G.] [W.]
GEDETtOTH (rfTJI = theepcotes, but in
Ch. with the article ; in Ch. B. roAijpa, A.
VatiriptiB, in Josh. rtSS6p ; Qideroth, Gadtroth),
a town in the Shefelah or low country of Judah
(Josh. xv. 41; 2 Ch. xxviii. 18). It is not
named in the same group with Gedebah and
Gederotiiaim in the list in Joshna, but with
Beth-dagon, Daj&n, Naahmah, Nffaneh, and
Hakkedah, el-Mugh&r. Sir C. Warren proposes
to identify it with Katrah, the Ckdrox of
1 Mace. xv. 39, which is close to el-Mtujh&r
(PEF.Mem.ii. 410). [G.] [W.]
GEDEROTHA'IM (D?rfT1| = tico sheep-
folds ; Gedorathaim), a town in the low country
of Judah (Josh. xv. 36), named next in order to
Gederah. The LXX. render it k<U ai trai\tts
afrrijj- [Gederah.] [G.] [W.]
GEDCR OhJ = a wail; Gedor). 1. (B.
Vttidv, A. Tthip), a town in the mountainous
part of Judah, named with Halhul, Bethzur,
and Maarath (Josh. xv. 58), and therefore a few
miles north of Hebron. It seems to be the place
TA&tipa, Gaddera, described by Eusebius and
Jerome (OS* p. 254, 37 ; p. 160, 30) as being in
the boundaries of Jerusalem (Aelia), near the
Terebinth, and there called Vitapi, Gadora. It
is now probably represented by Kh. Jedur, which
lies to the north of Beit Sir, Bethznr, and about
2 miles west of the road from Hebron to Beth-
lehem (Robinson, Sib. Ses. iii. 283 ; PEF. Mem.
iii. 313).
2. The town — apparently of Benjamin, and, if
so, perhaps Jedireh — to which " Jeroham of
Gedor " belonged, whose sons Joelah and Zcba-
GEHENNA
diah were among the mighty men, "Saul's
brethren of Benjamin," who joined David in his
difficulties at Ziklag (1 Ch. xii. 7). The name
has the definite article to it in this passage
OHlrp|P ; ol rov Tttip). If this be a Beu-
jaraite name, it is very probably connected
with
3. (TtSoip ; in 1 Ch. viii. 31, B. Aoip ; in ix.
37, BK. 'USovp.) A man among the ancestors
of Saul; son of Jehiel, the "father of Gibeon"
(1 Ch. viu. 31 ; ix. 37).
4. The name occurs twice in the genealogies
of Judah— 1 Ch. iv. 4 and 18 — (in both short-
ened to Y13 ; rtitip). In the former passage
Penuel is said to be " father of Gedor," while in
the latter Jered, son of a certain Ezra by his
Jewish wife (A V. " Jehudijah," R. V. "the
Jewess "), has the same title. In the Targuin,
Jered, Gedor, and other names in this passage are
treated as being titles of Moses, conferred on him
by Jehudijah, who is identified with the daughter
of Pharaoh.
5. In the records of the tribe of Simeon, in
1 Ch. iv. 39, certain chiefs of the tribe are said
to have gone, in the reign of Hezekiah, " to the
entrance of Gedor, unto the east side of the
valley" (K*JH), in search of pasture-grounds,
and to have expelled thence the Hamites, who
dwelt there in tents, and the Maonites (A. V.
"habitations," R. V. Meunim). Simeon lay in
the extreme south of Judah, and therefore this
Gedor must be a different place from that
noticed above — No. 1. If what is told in ■>. 42
was a subsequent incident in the same expedition,
then we should'look for Gedor between the south
of Judah and Mount Seir, i.e. Petra. Mo place
of the name has yet been met with in that
direction. The LXX. (both MSS.) read Gerar
for Gedor (?»j rov iK0t7y Ttpdpa) ; which agrees
well both with the situation and with the men-
tion of the " pasture," and is adopted by Ewald
(i. 322, note). The " valley " (Got, i.e. rather
the " ravine "), from the presence of the article,
would appear to be some well-known spot ; but
in our present limited knowledge of that district,
no conjecture can be made as to its locality.
Nachal (=wady), and not Qai, is the word else-
where applied to Gerar [G.] [W.]
GEHA'ZI OtnS, of uncertain meaning;
Ttt([ ; Giezi), the servant or boy of Elisha. He
was sent as the Prophet's messenger on two
occasions to the good Shunammite (2 K. iv.) ;
obtained fraudulently in Elisha's name money
and garments from Naaman ; was miraculously
smitten with incurable but non-infectious
leprosy ; and was dismissed from the Prophet's
service (2 K. v.). Later in the history he is
mentioned as being engaged in relating to king
Joram all the great things which Elisha had
done, when the Shunammite whose son Elisha
had restored to life appeared before the king,
petitioning for her house and land of which
she had been dispossessed in her seven years'
absence in Philistia (2 K. viii.). [W. T. B.]
GEHENNA, the Greek representative of
Djrr^a, Josh. xv. 8, Neh. xi. 30 (rendered by B.
Vaiina, A. Tal 'Orvbn in Josh, xviii. 16) ; more
fully, D3iT"}3 '$ or Tr>)2 'J, (2 K. xxiii. 10,
2 Ch. xxviii. 3, xxxiii. 6, Jer. xix. 2), the "valley
Digitized by VjOOQIC
GELILOTH
of Hinnom," or "of the son" (usually), or
" children (one reading of 2 K.) of Hinnom," a
deep narrow glen to the S. of Jerusalem, where,
after the introduction of the worship of the fire-
gods by Ah ax, the idolatrous Jews offered their
children to Molech (2 Ch. xxviii. 3, xxxiii. 6 ;
Jer. vii. 31, xix. 2—0). In consequence of these
abominations the valley was polluted by Josiah
(2 K. xxiii. 10) ; subsequently to which it became
the common lay-stall of the city, where the dead
bodies of criminals, and the carcases of animals,
and every other kind of filth were cast, and,
according to late and somewhat questionable
authorities, the combustible portions consumed
with fire. From the depth and narrowness of
the gorge, and perhaps its ever-burning fires,
as well as from its being the receptacle of all
sorts of putrefying matter, and all that defiled
the holy city, it became in later times the image
of the place of punishment (cp. The Book of
Enoch, chs. xxvi., xxvii., with Dillmann and
Schodde's notes in loco), "where their worm
dieth not, and the fire is not quenched ; " in
which the Talmudists placed the mouth of hell :
" There are two palm-trees in the V. of H.,
between which a smoke ariseth ; . . . and this is
the door of Gehenna " (Talmud, quoted by
Barclay, City of Great King, p. SO ; Lightfoot,
Centur. Chorograph. Matt, proem, ii. 200. Cp.
Riehm, HWB., and Hamburger, RE. s. nn.
" Halle," " Hinnom "; Weber, System d. altsynag.
Pa&st. Theohgie, p. 326 sq. [and Index s. v.]).
In this sense the word is used by our blessed
Lord, Matt. v. 29, 30, x. 28, xxiii. 15, 33;
Mark ix. 43, 45; Luke xii. 5: and with the
addition rov vvp&s, Matt. v. 22, xviii. 9 ; Mark
ix. 47 ; and by St. James, iii. 6. [Hinnom,
Vallevof; Topuet.] [E. V.] [F.]
GELTLOTH (jibbl = circuit ; B. ToWO,
A. 'AyaWi\&0, u if the definite article had
been originally prefixed to the Hebrew word;
ad tumuios), a place named among the marks
of the south boundary line of the tribe of
Benjamin (Josh, xviii. 17). The boundary went
from Enshemeah towards Geliloth, which was
" over against " (H2i) the ascent of Adummim.
In the description of the north boundary of
Judah, which was identical at this part with
the south of Benjamin, we find Gilgal sub-
stituted for Geliloth, with the same specifica-
tion as " over against " (n33) the ascent of
Adummim (Josh. xv. 7). The name Geliloth
never occurs again in this locality, and it
therefore seems probable that Gilgal is the
right reading. Many glimpses of the Jordan
valley are obtained through the hills in the
latter part of the descent from Olivet to Jericho,
along which the boundary in question appears
to have run; and it is very possible that,
from the ascent of Adummim, Gilgal appeared
through one of these gaps in the distance, " over
against " the spectator, and thus furnished a
point by which to indicate the direction of the
line at that part.
But though Geliloth does not again appear in
the A. V., it is found in the original bearing a
peculiar topographical sense. The following
extract from the Appendix to Dean Stanley's
8. ty P. (1st edit.), § 13, contains all that can be
said on the point : — "This word U derived from
GENEALOGY
1141
a root ^1, ' to roll ' (Geaen. Thes. p. 287 6). Of
the five times in which it occurs in Scripture,
two are in the general sense of boundary or
border: Josh. xiii. 2, 'AH the borders of the
Philistines ' (ipia) ; Joel iii. 4, ' All the coasts of
Palestine ' (R. V. Philistia) (TdKiKaia aM.o$i-
Aw) ; and three specially relate to the course of
the Jordan: Josh. xxii. 10, 11, 'The borders of
Jordan' (in xxii. 10, B. TdXyaXa rov 'lopidvov;
inc. 11, B. roAottSr. '1.; in tie. 10, 11, A.roAiA&fl
t. 'I.) ; Ezek. xlvii. 8, 'The east country' («j tJ)»-
TaXikalay). In each case R. V. renders by region
or regions. It has been pointed out in ch. vii.
p. 278, note, that this word is analogous to
the Scotch term ' links,' which has both the
meanings of Geliloth, being used of the snake-
like windings of a stream, as well as with the
derived meaning of a coast or shore. Thus
Geliloth is distinguished from Ciccar, which will
rather mean the circle of vegetation or dwellings
gathered round the bends and reaches of the
river."
It will not be overlooked that the place
Geliloth, noticed above, is in the neighbourhood
of the Jordan. [G.] [W.]
GEMAI/LI '0$>D? ; B. e. 13 ro^af, A.
rapaAi ; Gemalli), the father of Ammiel, who
was the "ruler" (Nasi) of Dan, chosen to
represent that tribe among the spies who
explored the land of Canaan (Num. xiii. 12).
GEMARI'AH (rFiai= Jehovah hath com-
pleted; Tapaplas; Gamarias). 1. SonofShaphan
the scribe, and father of Michoiah. He was one
of the nobles of Judah, and had a chamber in
the house of the Lord, from which (or from a
window in which, Prideaux, Michaelis) Baruch
read Jeremiah's alarming prophecy in the ears
of all the people, B.C. 606 (Jer. xxxvi.). Geroa-
riah with the other princes heard the Divine
message with terror, but without a sign of re-
pentance ; though Gemariah joined two others
in intreating king Jehoiakim to forbear destroy-
ing the roll which they had taken from Baruch.
2. Son of Hilkiah, being sent u.c. 597 by king
Zedekiah on an embassy to Nebuchadnezzar at
Babylon, was made the bearer of Jeremiah's
letter to the captive Jews (Jer. xxix.). [W. T. B.]
GEMS. [Stones, Precious.]
GENEAXOGY (TmaKoyla), literally the
act or art of the yti>ea\Ayos, ie. of him who
treats of birth and family, and reckons descents
and generations. Hence by an easy transition
it is often (like Unopla) used of the document
itself in which such series of generations is set
down. In Hebrew the term for a genealogy or
pedigree is EWri Igp and T\\lf?\F\ "l§P, " the
book of the generations," Greek Venet. ytr-
Wj<r«is; and because the oldest histories were
usually drawn up on a genealogical basis, the
expression often extended to the whole history,
as is the case with the Gospel of St. Matthew,
where " the book of the generation of Jesus
Christ" includes the whole history contained
in that Gospel. So Gen. ii. 4, " These are the
generations of the heavens and of the earth,"
seems to be the title of the history which
follows (see Delitzsch [1887] and Dillmann ' in
Digitized by
Google
1142
GENEALOGY
GENEALOGY
loco> Gen. t. 1, vi. 9, i. 1, xi. 10, 27, xit. 12,
19, xxxvi. 1, 9, xxxvii. 2, ore other examples of
the same usage, and these passages seem to
mark the existence of separate histories from
which the Book of Genesis was compiled. Nor
is this genealogical form of history peculiar to
the Hebrews, or the Semitic races. The earliest
Greek histories were also genealogies. Thus
the histories of Acusilaus of Argos and of
Hecataeus of Miletus were entitled TtytaKoylat ;
and the fragments remaining of Xanthus,
Charon of Lampsacus, and Hellanicos, are
strongly tinged with the same genealogical
element,* which is not lost even in the pages
of Herodotus. The frequent use of the patro-
nymic in Greek ; the stories of particular races,
as Heraclides, Alcmaeonidae, &c. ; the lists of
priests and kings, and conquerors at the Games,
preserved at Elis, Sparta, Olympia, and else-
where ; the hereditary monarchies and priest-
hoods, as of the Branchidae, Eumolpidae, &c.,
in so many cities in Greece and Greek Asia ; the
division, as old as Homer, into tribes, fratriae
and ysVij, and the existence of the tribe, the
gens and the familia among the Romans ; the
Celtic clans, the Saxon families using a common
patronymic, and their royal genealogies running
back to the Teutonic gods, — these are among the
many instances that may be cited to prove the
strong family and genealogical instinct of the
ancient world. Coming near to the Israelites,
it will be enough to allude to the hereditary
principle, and the vast genealogical records of
the Egyptians, as regards their kings and
priests, and to the passion for genealogies
among the Arabs, mentioned by Layard and
others, in order to show that the attention paid
by the Jews to genealogies is in entire accord-
ance with the manners and tendencies of their
contemporaries. In their case, however, it was
heightened by several peculiar circumstances.
The promise of the land of Canaan to the
seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob successively,
and the separation of the Israelites from the
Gentile world ; the expectation that Messiah
would spring from the tribe of Judah; the
exclusively hereditary priesthood of Aaron with
its dignity and emoluments; the long succession
of kings in the line of David ; and the whole
division and occupation of the land upon genea-
logical principles by the tribes, families, and
houses of fathers, gave a deeper importance to
the science of genealogy among the Jews than
perhaps any other nation. We have already
noted the evidence of the existence of family
memoirs even before the Flood, to which we are
probably indebted for the genealogies in Gen.
iv., v. ; and Gen. x., xi., &c. indicate the con-
tinuance of the same system in the times
between the Flood and Abraham. But with
Jacob, the founder of the nation, the system of
reckoning by genealogies (CrVJin, or in the
language of Moses, Num. i 18, "17'firt) was much
further developed. In Gen. xxxv. 22-26, we
have a formal account of the sons of Jacob, the
patriarchs of the nation, repeated in Ex. i. 1-5.
In Gen. xlvi. we have an exact genealogical
census of the house of Israel at the time of
* <xra. 'EAAarucoc 'ArtOWtAaw irtpl tup ytvzakaywv
iiajrt^uyqica, (Joseph, c. Apian. 1. 3).
Jacob's going down to Egypt. The way in
which the former part of this census, relating
to Reuben and Simeon, is quoted in Ex. vL,
where the census of the tribe of Levi is all that
was wanted, seems to show that it was tran-
scribed from an existing document. When the
Israelites were in the wilderness of Sinai, in
the second month of the second year of the
Exodus, their number was taken by Divine
command, "after their families, by the house
of their fathers," tribe by tribe, and the number
of each tribe is given "by their generations,
after their families, by the house of their
fathers, according to the number of the names,
by their polk" (Num. i., iii.). This census
was repeated thirty-eight years afterwards, and
the names of the families added, as we find in
Num. xxvi. According to these genealogical
divisions they pitched their tents, and marched,
and offered their gifts and offerings, and chose
the spies. According to the same they cast the
lots by which the troubler of Israel, Achan, was
discovered, as later those by which Saul was
called to the throne. Above all, according to
these divisions, the whole land of Canaan was
parcelled out amongst them. But then of
necessity that took place which always has
taken place with respect to such genealogical
arrangements, viz. that by marriage, or servi-
tude, or incorporation as friends and allies,
persons not strictly belonging by birth to such
or such a family or tribe were yet reckoned in
the census as belonging to them, when they had
acquired property within their borders, and
were liable to the various services in peace or
war which were performed under the heads of
such tribes and families. Nobody supposes that
all the Cornelii, or all the Campbells, sprang
from one ancestor, and it is in the teeth of
direct evidence from Scripture, as well as of
probability, to suppose that the Jewish tribes
contained absolutely none but such as were
descended from the twelve patriarchs." The
tribe of Levi was probably the only one which
had no admixture of foreign blood. In many
of the Scripture genealogies, as e.g. those of
Caleb, Joab, Segub, and the sons of Rephaiah,
&c, in 1 Ch. iii. 21, it is quite clear that birth
was not the ground of their incorporation into
their respective tribes. [Becker; Caleb, j
However, birth was, and continued to be
throughout their whole national course, the
foundation of all the Jewish organisation, and
the reigns of the more active and able kings
and rulers were marked by attention to ge-
nealogical operations. When David established
the Temple-services on the footing which con-
tinued till the time of Christ, he divided the
priests and Levites into courses and compeme«i
each under the family chief. The singers, the
porters, the trumpeters, the players on IP 5 *"'
ments, were all thus genealogically distributed.
In the active stirring reign of Reboboani, we
have the work of Iddo concerning genealogies
• Jul. Afrtcanue, In his Sp. toArUtides. ex ^ e8S ^
mentions that the ancient geneslogicsl recort '
Jerusalem Included those who were descended n°"j
proselytes, and ytui/xu, as well as those »bo S I"~*
from the patriarchs. The registers ' n En ? ,
Nehemiah Include the Nctlunlm, and the children
Solomon's servants.
Digitized by
Google
GENEALOGY
(2 Ch. xii. 15). When Hezekiah re-opened
the Temple, and restored the Temple-services
which had fallen into disuse, he reckoned the
whole nation by genealogies. This appears
from the fact of many of the genealogies in
Chronicles terminating in Hezekiah's reign
[Azabiah, 13], from the expression "So all
Israel were reckoned by genealogies" (1 Ch.
ix. 1), immediately following genealogies which
do so terminate, and from the narrative in
2 Ch. xxxi. 16-19 proving that, as regards the
priests and Levites, such a complete census was
taken by Hezekiah. It is indicated also in 1 Ch.
ir. 41. We learn too incidentally from Pror. xxv.
that Hezekiah had a staff of scribes, who would
be equally useful in transcribing genealogical
registers, as in copying out Proverbs. So also
in the reign of Jotham king of Judah, who
among other great works built the higher gate
of the house of the Lord (2 K. xv. 35), and was
an energetic as well as a good king, we find a
genealogical reckoning of the Reubenites (1 Ch.
v. 17), probably in connexion with Jotham's
wars against the Ammonites (2 Ch. xxvii. 5).
When Zernbbabel brought back the Captivity
from Babylon, one of his first cares seems to
have been to take a census of those that re-
turned, and to settle them according to their
genealogies. The evidence of this is found in
1 Ch. ix., and the duplicate passage Neh. xi. ;
in 1 Ch. iii. 19 ; and yet more distinctly in
Neh. vii. 5 and xii. In like manner Nehemiah,
as an essentia] part of that national restoration
which he laboured so zealously to promote,
gathered " together the nobles, and the rulers
and the people, that they might be reckoned
by genealogy " (Neh. vii. 5, xii. 26). The abstract
of this census is preserved in Ezra ii. and Neh.
vii., and a portion of it in 1 Ch. iii. 21-24.
That this system was continued after their
times, so far at least as the priests and Levites
were concerned, we learn from Neh. xii. 22;
and we have incidental evidence of the continued
care of the Jews still later to preserve their
genealogies in such passages of the apocryphal
books as 1 Mace. ii. 1-5, viii. 17, xiv. 29, and
perhaps Judith viii. 9, Tob. i. 1, &c Passing
on to the time of the birth of Christ, we have a
striking incidental proof of the continuance of
the Jewish genealogical economy in the fact
that when Augustus ordered the census of the
empire to be taken, the Jews in the province of
Syria immediately went each one to his own
city, ue. (as is clear from Joseph going to Beth-
lehem the city of David) to the city to which
his tribe, family, and father's house belonged.
So that the return, if completed, doubtless ex-
hibited the form of the old censuses taken by
the kings of Israel and Judah.
Another proof is the existence of our Lord's
genealogy in two forms as given by St. Matthew
and St. Luke. [Genealogy of Jesus Christ.]
The mention of Zacharias, as "of the course of
Abia," of Elisabeth, as "of the daughters of
Aaron," and of Anna the daughter of Phanuel, as
"of the tribe of Aser," are further indications
of the same thing. And this conclusion is ex-
pressly confirmed by the testimony of Josephus
in the opening of his Life. There, after de-
ducing his own descent, "not only from that
race which is considered the noblest among the
Jews, that of the priests, bnt from the first of
GENEALOGY
1143
the 24 courses " (the course of Jehoiarib), and
on the mother's side from the Asmonean sove-
reigns, he adds, " I have thus traced my genea-
logy, as I have found it recorded in the public
tables" («V reus Srntoaiats Si\rots iraytypaii-
lUrnv) ; and again (amtr. Apian, i. § 7), he states
that the priests were obliged to verify the
descent of their intended wives by reference to
the archives kept at Jerusalem ; adding that it
was the duty of the priests after every war
(and he specifies the wars of Antiochus Epiph.,
Pompey, and Q. Varus) to make new genealogi-
cal tables from the old ones, and to ascertain
what women among the priestly families had
been made prisoners, as all such were deemed
improper to be wives of priests. As a proof of
the care of the Jews in such matters he further
mentions that in his day the list of successive
high-priests preserved in the public records
extended through a period of 2,000 years. From
all this it is abundantly manifest that the Jewish
genealogical records continued to be kept till
near the destruction of Jerusalem. Hence we
are constrained to disbelieve the story told by
Africanus concerning the destruction of all the
Jewish genealogies by Herod the Great, in order
to conceal the ignobleness of his own origin.
His statement is, that up to that time the
Hebrew genealogies had been preserved entire,
and the different families were traced up either
to the patriarchs, or the first proselytes, or the
•yti&pai or mixed people. But that on Herod's
causing these genealogies to be burnt, only a
few of the more illustrious Jews who had pri-
vate pedigrees of their own, or who could supply
the lost genealogies from memory, or from the
Books of Chronicles, were able to retain any
account of their own lineage — among whom he
says were the Desposyni, or brethren of our
Lord, from whom was said to be derived the
scheme (given by Africanus) for reconciling the
two genealogies of Christ. But there can be
little doubt that the registers of the Jewish
tribes and families perished at the destruction
of Jerusalem, and not before. Some partial
records may, however, have survived that event,
as it is probable, and indeed seems to be implied
in Josephus's statement, that at least the
priestly families of the Dispersion had records
of their own genealogy. We learn too from
Benjamin of Tudela, that in his day the princes
of the Captivity professed to trace their descent
to David, and he also names others, e.g. K.
Calonymos, " a descendant of the house of David,
as proved by his pedigree" (i. 32), and R.
Eleazar Ben Tsemach, " who possesses a pedigree
of his descent from the prophet Samuel, and
knows the melodies which were sung in the
Temple during its existence " (ib. p. 100, &c).
He also mentions descendants of the tribes of
Dan, Zebulun, and Naphtali, among the moun-
tains of Khasvin, whose prince was of the tribe
of Levi. The patriarchs of Jerusalem, so called
from the Hebrew TV\2tt " l tPK~\, claimed descent
T " T
from Hillel, the Babylonian, of whom it is said
that a genealogy, found at Jerusalem, declared
his descent from David and Abital. Others,
however, traced his descent from Benjamin, and
from David only through a daughter of Shepha-
tiah« (Wolf, H. B. iv. 380). But however
• Some further Information on these modern Jewish
Digitized by
Google
1144
GENEALOGY
tradition may hare preserved for a while true
genealogies, or imagination and pride have
coined fictitious ones, it may be safely affirmed
that, after the destruction of Jerusalem, the
Jewish genealogical system came to an end.
Essentially connected as it was with the tenure
of the land on the one hand, and with the
peculiar privileges of the houses of David and
Levi on the other, it naturally failed when the
land was taken away from the Jewish race, and
when the promise to David was fulfilled, and
the priesthood of Aaron superseded, by the
exaltation of Christ to the right hand of God.
The remains of the genealogical spirit among
the later Jews (which might of course be much
more fully illustrated from Rabbinical litera-
ture) has only been glanced at to show how
deeply it had penetrated into the Jewish national
mind. d It remains to be said that just notions
of the nature of the Jewish genealogical records
are of great importance with a view to the
right interpretation of Scripture. Let it only
be remembered that these records have respect
to political and territorial divisions, as much as
to strictly genealogical descent, and it will at
once be seen how erroneous a conclusion it may
be, that all who are called " sons " of such or
such a patriarch, or chief father, must neces-
sarily have been his very children. Just as in
the very first division into tribes Manasseh and
Ephraim were numbered with their uncles, as
if they had been sons instead of grandsons (Gen.
xlviii. 5) of Jacob, so afterwards the names of
persons belonging to different generations wonld
often stand side by side as heads of families or
houses, and be called the sons of their common
ancestor. For example, Gen. xlvi. 21 contains
grandsons as well as sons of Benjamin [Belaii],
and Ex. vi. 24 probably enumerates the son and
grandson of Assir as heads, with their father, of
the families of the Korbites. And so in innu-
merable instances. If any one family or house
became extinct, some other would succeed to its
place, called after its own chief father. Hence
of course a census of any tribe drawn up at a
later period, would exhibit different divisions
from one drawn up at an earlier. Compare, e.g.,
the list of courses of priests in Zerubbabel's time
(Neh. xii.) with that of those in David's time
(1 Ch. uiv.).* The same principle must be
borne in mind in interpreting any particular
genealogy. The sequence of generations may
represent the succession to such or such an
inheritance or headship of tribe or family,
rather than the relationship of father and son/
Again, where a pedigree was abbreviated, it
genealogies is given in a note to p. 32 of Asher's Benj.
qf Tudela, 11. o.
* Thus in tbe Targum of Esther we have Hainan's
pedigree traced through twenty-one generations to the
" impious Esau ; " and Mordecai'B through forty-two
generations to Abraham. The writer makes thirty-three
generations from Abraham to king Saul !
" The Jews say that only four courses came back
with Zerubbabel. and that they were subdivided into
twenty-four, raving the rights of such courses as should
return from Captivity. See Selden, Opp. v. i. t. i. p. x.
r "Tbe term 'son of appears to have been used
throughout the East In those days, as it still is, to denote
connexion generally, either by descent or succession"
(Layard's Sin. it Bab. p. 613). The observation to to
explain tbe Inscription " Jehu the son of Omri."
GENEALOGY
would naturally specify such generations as
would indicate from what chief houses the
person descended. In cases where a name was
common the father's name would be added for
distinction only. These reasons would be well
understood at the time, though it may be diffi-
cult now to ascertain them positively. Thus in
the pedigree of Ezra (Ezra vii. 1-5), it would
seem that both Seraiah and Azariah were heads
of houses (Neh. x. 2) ; they are both therefore
named. Hilkiah is named as having been high-
Driest, and his identity is established by the
addition "the son of Shallura" (1 Ch. vi. 13);
the next named is Zadok, the priest in David's
time, who was chief of the sixteen courses
sprung from Eleazar, and then follows a com-
plete pedigree from this Zadok to Aaron. But
then as regards the chronological use of the
Scripture genealogies, it follows from the above
view that great caution is necessary in using
them as measures of time, though they are
invaluable for this purpose whenever we can be
sure that they are complete. What seems ne-
cessary to make them trustworthy measures of
time is, either that they should have special
internal marks of being complete, such as where
the mother as well as the father is named, or
some historical circumstance defines the several
relationships, or that there should be several
genealogies, all giving the same number of
generations within the same termini. When
these conditions are found, it is difficult to over-
rate the value of genealogies for chronology.
In determining, however, the relation of gene-
rations to time, some allowance must be made
for the station in life of the persons in question.
From the early marriages of the princes, the
average of even 30 years to a generation will
probably be fonnd too long for the kings.*
Another feature in the Scripture genealogies
which it is worth while to notice is the recur-
rence of the same name, or modifications of the
same name, such as Tobias, Tobit, Nathan,
Mattatha, and even of names of the same sig-
nification, in the same family. This is an
indication of the carefulness with which the
Jews kept their pedigrees (as otherwise they
could not have known the names of their remote
ancestors); it also gives a clue by which to
judge of obscure or doubtful genealogies.
The Jewish genealogies have two forms, one
giving the generations in a descending, the other
in an ascending scale. Examples of the de-
scending form may be seen in Ruth iv. 18-22, or
1 Ch. iii. ; of the ascending, 1 Ch. vi. 33-43
(A. V.), Ezra vii. 1-5. The descending form is
expressed by the formula A begat B, and B begat
C, &c ; or, the sons of A, B his son, C his son,
&c. ; or, the sons of A, B, c, D ; and the sons of
B, c, D, E ; and the sons of C, E, P, O, &c The
ascending is always expressed in the same way.
Of the two, it is obvious that the descending
scale is the one in which we are most likely to
find collateral descents, inasmuch as it implies
» Mr. J. W. Bosanquet, in a paper read before 'he
Chronolog. Instlt., endeavours to show that a generation
in Scripture language = 40 years ; and that St. Matthew's
three divisions of fourteen generations, consequently,
equal each 660 years; a calculation which suits bis
chronological scheme exactly, by placing the Captivity
in the year B.C. 563.
Digitized by
Google
GENEALOGY OF CHRIST
that the object is to enumerate the heirs of the
person at the head of the stem ; and if direct
heirs failed at any point,' collateral ones would
have to be inserted. In all cases too where the
original document was preserved, when the
direct line failed, the heir would naturally place
his own name next to his immediate predecessor,
though that predecessor was not his father, but
only his kinsman. Whereas in the ascending
scale there can be no failure in the nature of
things. But neither form is in itself more or
less fit than the other to express either proper
or imputed filiation.
Females are named in genealogies when there
is anything remarkable about them, or when
any right or property is transmitted through
them. See Gen. xi. 29, xxii. 23, xxv. l-4,xxxv.
22-26 ; Ex. vi. 23 ; Num. xxvi. 33 ; 1 Ch. ii. 4,
19, 35, 50, &c.
The genealogical lists of names are peculiarly
liable to corruptions of the text, and there are
many such in the Books of Chronicles, Ezra, &c.
Jerome speaks of these corruptions having risen
to a fearful height in the LXX. : " Sylvatn
nominum quae scriptorum vitio confusa sunt."
'• Ita in Graec et Lat. Codd. hie nominum
liber vitiosus est, ut non tarn Hebraea quam
barbara quaedam et Sarmatica nomina conjecta
arbitrandum sit." "Saepe tria nomina, sub-
tractis e medio syllabi.*, in unum vocabulum
cogunt, vel . . . unum nomen ... in duo Tel
tria vocabula dividunt " (Praefat. in Paraleip,').
In like manner the lists of high-priests in
Josephus are so corrupt, that the names are
scarcely recognisable. This must be borne in
mind in dealing with the genealogies. See
Schiirer, Gesch. d. Jud. Volies*, ii. 166 sq.
The Bible genealogies give an unbroken de-
scent of the house of David from the Creation to
the time of Christ. The registers at Jerusalem
must have supplied the same to the priestly and
many other families. They also inform us of
the origin of most of the nations of the earth,
and carry the genealogy of the Edomitish sove-
reigns down to about the time of Saul. Viewed
as a whole, it is a genealogical collection ot
surpassing interest and accuracy. Cp. Rawlin-
son's Herodot. i. ch. 2 ; Burlington's Geneal. Tab. ;
Seldcn's Woria, passim ; Benj. of Tudela'e Itm.,
byA.Asher. " [A. C. H.]
GENEALOGY of JES08 CHRIST. The
New Testament gives us the genealogy of but
one person, that of our Saviour. The priesthood
of Aaron having ceased, the possession of the
land of Canaan being transferred to the Gentiles,
and there being under the N. T. dispensation no
difference between circumcision and uncircum-
cision, Barbarian and Scythian, bond and free,
there is but One Whose genealogy it concerns us
as Christians to be acquainted with, that of our
Lord Jesus Christ. Him the prophets announced
as the seed of Abraham and the son of David,
and the Angel declared that to Him should be
given the throne of His father David, that He
might reign over the house of Jacob for ever.
His descent from David and Abraham being
therefore an essential part of His Messiahship,
it was right that His genealogy should be given
as a portion of Gospel troth. Considering,
further, that to the Jews first He was manifested
and preached, and that His descent from David
GENEALOGY OF CHRIST 1145
and Abraham was a matter of special interest
to them, it seems likely that the proof of His
descent would be one especially adapted to con-
vince them ; in other words, that it would be
drawn from documents which they deemed
authentic. Such were the genealogical records
preserved at Jerusalem. [Genealogy.] And
when to the above considerations we add the
fact that the lineage of Joseph was actually
made out from authentic records for the purpose
of the civil census ordered by Augustus, it
becomes morally certain that the genealogy of
Jesus Christ was extracted from the public
registers. Another consideration adds yet fur-
ther conviction. It has often excited surprise
that the genealogies of Christ should both give
the descent of Joseph, and not of Mary. But if
these genealogies were those contained in the
public registers, it could not be otherwise. In
them Jesus, the son of Mary, the espoused wife
of Joseph, could only appear as Joseph's son
(cp. John i. 45). In transferring them to the
pages of the Gospels, the Evangelists only added
the qualifying expression "as was supposed"
(Luke iii. 23, and its equivalent, Matt. i. 16).
But now to approach the difficulties with
which the genealogies of Christ are thought to
be beset. These difficulties have seemed so con-
siderable in all ages as to drive commentators
to very strange shifts. Some, as early as the
second century, broached the notion, which
Julius Africanus vigorously repudiates, that the
genealogies are imaginary lists designed only to
set forth the union of royal and priestly descent
in Christ. Others on the contrary, to silence
this and similar solutions, brought in a Deus ex
machina, in the shape of a tradition derived
from the Desposyni, in which by an ingenious
application of the law of Levirute to two uterine
brothers, whose mother had married first into
the house of Solomon, and afterwards into the
house of Nathan, some of the discrepancies were
reconciled, though the meeting of the two
genealogies in Zerubbabel and Salathiel is wholly
unaccounted for. Later, and chiefly among Pro-
testant divines, the theory was invented of one
genealogy being Joseph's, and the other Mary's ;
a theory in direct contradiction to the plain
letter of the Scripture narrative, and leaving
untouched as many difficulties as it solves. The
fertile invention of Annius of Viterbo forged a
book in Philo's name, which accounted for the
discrepancies by asserting that all Christ's an-
cestors, from David downwards, had two names.
The circumstance, however, of one line running
up to Solomon, and the other to Nathan, was
overlooked. Other fanciful suggestions have
been offered; while infidels, from Porphyry
downwards, have seen in what they call the con-
tradiction of St. Matthew and St. Luke a proof of
the spuriousness of the Gospels; and critics like
Professor Norton, a proof of such portions of
Scripture being interpolated. Others, like Al-
ford, content themselves with saying that solu-
tion is impossible, without further knowledge
than we possess. But it is not too much to say
that after all, in regard to the main points, there
is no difficulty at all, if only the documents in
question are dealt with reasonably, and after the
analogy of similar Jewish documents in the 0. T.
— and that the clues to a right understanding
of them are so patent, and so strongly marked,
Digitized by
Google
1146 GENEALOGY OF.CHBIST
that it is surprising that so much diversity of
opinion should have existed. The following pro-
positions will explain the true construction of
these genealogies : —
1. They are both the genealogies of Joseph,
i.e. of Jesus Christ, as the reputed and legal son
of Joseph and Mary. One has only to read them
to be satisfied of this. The notices of Joseph
as being of the house of David, by the same
Evangelists who give the pedigree, are an addi-
tional confirmation (Matt. i. 20 ; Luke i. 27, ii.
4, &c.) ; and if these pedigrees were extracted
from the public archives, they must hare been
Joseph's.
2. The genealogy of St. Matthew is, as Grotius
most truly and unhesitatingly asserted, Joseph's
genealogy as legal successor to the throne of
David, i.e. it exhibits the successive heirs of the
kingdom ending with Christ, as Joseph's reputed
eon. St. Luke's is Joseph's private genealogy,
exhibiting his real birth, as David's son, and
thus showing why he was heir to Solomon's
crown. This is capable of being almost demon-
strated. If St. Matthew's genealogy had stood
alone, and we had no further information on this
subject than it affords, we might indeed have
shought that it was a genealogical stem in the
strictest sense of the word, exhibiting Joseph's
forefathers in succession, from David downwards.
But immediately we find a second genealogy of
Joseph — that in St. Luke's Gospel — such is no
longer a reasonable opinion. Because if St. Mat-
thew's genealogy, tracing as it does the succes-
sive generations through the long line of Jewish
kings, had been Joseph's real paternal stem,
there could not possibly have been room for a
second genealogy. The steps of ancestry coin-
ciding with the steps of succession, one pedigree
only could in the nature of things be proper.
The mere existence therefore of a second pedi-
gree, tracing Joseph's ancestry through private
persons, by the side of one tracing it through
kings, is in itself a proof that the latter is not
the true stem of birth. When, with this clue,
we examine St. Matthew's list, to discover
whether it contains in itself any evidence as
to when the lineal descent was broken, we fix at
once upon Jechonias, who could not, we know,
be literally the father of Salathiel, because the
word of God by the mouth of Jeremiah had pro-
nounced him childless. It had also declared that
none of his seed should sit upon the throne of
David, or rule in Judah (Jer. xxii. 30). The
same thing had been declared concerning his
father Jehoiakim in Jer. xxxvi. 30. Jechonias
therefore could not be the father of Salathiel,
nor could Christ spring either from him or his
father. Here then we have the most striking
confirmation of the justice of the inference
drawn from finding a second genealogy, viz. that
St. Matthew gives the succession, not the strict
birth; and we conclude that the names after
the childless Jechonias are those of his next
heirs, as also in 1 Ch. iii. 17. One more look at
the two genealogies convinces us that this con-
clusion is just ; for we find that the two next
names following Jechonias, Salathiel and Zoro-
babel, are actually taken from the other genea-
logy, which teaches us that Salathiel's real
father was Neri, of the house of Nathan. It
becomes therefore perfectly certain, that Sala- I
thiel of the house of Nathan became heir to I
GENEALOGY OP CHRIST
David's throne on the failure of Solomon's line
in Jechonias, and that as such he and his de-
scendants were transferred as "sons of Jeconiah "
to the royal genealogical table, according to the
principle of the Jewish Law laid down in Num.
xxvii. 8-11. The two genealogies then coincide
for two, or rather for four generations, as will
be shown below. There then occur six names in
St. Matthew which are not found in St. Luke ;
and then once more the two genealogies coincide
in the name of Matthan or Matthat (Matt. i. 15 ;
Luke iii. 24), to whom two different sons, Jacob
and Heli, are assigned, but one and the same
grandson and heir, Joseph the husband of Mary,
and the reputed father of Jesus, Who is called
Christ. The simple and obvious explanation of
this is, on the same principle as before, that
Joseph was descended from Joseph, a younger
son of Abiud (the Juda of Luke iii. 26), but
that, on the failure of the line of Abiud's eldest
son in Eleazar, Joseph's grandfather Matthan
became the heir ; that Matthan had . two sous,
Jacob and Heli ; that Jacob had no son, and con-
sequently that Joseph, the son of his younger
brother Heli, became heir to his nncle, and to
the throne of David. Thus the simple principle
that one Evangelist exhibits that genealogy
which contained the successive heirs to David's
and Solomon's throne, while the other exhibits
the paternal stem of him who was the heir,
explains all the anomalies of the two pedigrees,
their agreements as well as their discrepancies,
and the circumstance of there being two at all.
It must be added that not only does this theory
explain all the phenomena, but that that portion
of it which asserts that Luke gives Joseph's
paternal stem receives a most remarkable con-
firmation from the names which compose that
stem. For if we begin with Nathan, we find
that his son, Mattatho, and four others, of whom
the last was grandfather to Joseph, had names
which .are merely modifications of Nathan
(Matthat twice, and Mattathias twice) ; or if
we begin with Joseph, we shall find no less than
three of his name between him and Nathan : an
evidence, of the most convincing kind, that
Joseph was lineally descended from Nathan in
the way St. Luke represents him to be (cp. Zech.
xii. 12).
3. Mary, the mother of Jesus, was in all pro-
bability the daughter of Jacob, and first cousin
to Joseph her husband.* So that in point of
fact, though not of form, both the genealogies
are as much hers as her husband's.
But besides these main difficulties, as they
have been thought to be, there are several others
which cannot be passed over in any account,
however concise, of the genealogies of Christ.
The most startling is the total discrepancy
between them both and that of Zerubbabel in
the 0. T. (1 Ch. iii. 19-24). In this last, of
seven sons of Zerubbabel not one bears the
name, or anything like the name, of Rhesa or
Abiud. And of the next feneration not one bears
the name, or anything like the name, of Eliakim
or Joanna, which are in the corresponding genera-
tion in St. Matthew and St. Luke. Nor can any
subsequent generations be identified. But this
• Hippolytus of Thebes, In the 10th century, asserted
that Mary was granddaughter of Matthan, but by her
mother (Patrltius, Dissert, ix. &c, De Gen. Jet. ChrisK).
Digitized by
Google
GENEALOGY OF CHRIST
difference will be entirely got rid of, and a re-
markable harmony established in its place, if we
suppose Rhesa, who is named in St. Luke's
Gospel as Zerubbabel's son, to hare slipped into
the text from the margin. Shesa is in fact not
s name at all, bnt it is the Chaldee title of the
princes of the Captivity, who at the end of the
second, and throngh the third century after
Christ, rose to great eminence in the East,
assumed the state of sovereigns, and were con-
sidered to be of the house of David (see pre-
ceding article, p. 1143). These princes then
were exactly what Zerubbabel was in his day.
It is very probable therefore that this title,
KB""!, risha, should have been placed against
the name of Zerubbabel by some early Christian
Jew, and thence crept into the text. If this be
so, St. Luke will then give Joanna, 'laxwvas, as
the son of Zerubbabel. But 'ioxuras is the very
same name as Hananiah, iT03n, the son of
Zerubbabel according to 1 Chl'iii'. 19. [Hana-
niah.] In St. Matthew this generation is
omitted. In the next generation we identify
Matthew's Ab-jud (Abiud), "Hn»3$, with Luke's
Juda, in the Hebrew of that day "Hfl* (Jud),
and both with Hodaiah, irmTto, of 1 Cli. iii. 24
(a name which is actually interchanged with
Juda, iTMfP, Ezra iii. 9 ; Neh. xi. 9, compared
with Ezra li. 40 ; 1 Ch. ix. 7), by the simple
process of supposing the Shemaiah, TVVtXf, of
1 Ch. iii. 22 to be the same person as the
Shimei, , 0I?£', of v. 19 : thus at the same
time cutting off all those redundant generations
which bring this genealogy in 1 Ch. iii. down
some 200 years later than any other in the
Book, and long after the close of the Canon.
The next difficulty is the difference in the
number of generations between the two gene-
alogies. St. Matthew's division into three
iburteens gives only 42, while St. Luke, from
Abraham to Christ inclusive, reckons 56; or,
which is more to the point (since the genera-
tions between Abraham and David are the same
in both genealogies), while St. Matthew reckons
28 from David to Christ, St. Luke reckons 43,
or 42 without Rhesa. But the genealogy itself
supplies the explanation. In the second tessaro-
decade, including the kings, we know that
three generations are omitted — Ahaziah, Joash,
Amaziah — in order to reduce the generations
from 17 to 14: the difference between these
17 and the 19 of St. Luke being very small.
So in like manner it is obvious that the genera-
tions have been abridged in the same way in
the third division to keep to the number 14.
The true . number would be one much nearer
St. Luke's 23 (22 without Rhesa), implying the
omission of about seven generations in this last
division. Dr. Mill has shown that it was a
common practice with the Jews to distribute
genealogies into divisions, each containing some
favourite or mystical number, and that, in order
to do this, generations were either repeated or
left out. Thus in Philo the generations from
Adam to Moses are divided into two decads and
one hebdomad, by the repetition of Abraham.
But in a Samaritan poem the very same series is
divided into two decads only, by the omission of
six of the least important names ( Vindication,
pp. 110-118).
GENEALOGY OF CHBIST 1147
Another difficulty is the apparent deficiency
in the number of the last tessarodecad, which
seems to contain only 13 names. But the
explanation of this is, that either in the process
of translation, or otherwise, the names of
Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin have got confused and
expressed by the one name Jechonias. For that
Jechonias, in v. 11, means Jehoiakim, while in
t>. 12 it means Jehoiachin, is quite certain, as
Jerome saw long ago. Jehoiachin had no
brothers, but Jehoiakim had three brothers, of
whom two at least sat upon the throne, if not
three,* and were therefore named in the gene-
alogy. The two names are very commonly
considered as the same, both by Greek and
Latin writers, e.g. Clemens Alex., Ambrose,
Africanus, Epiphanius, as well as the author of
1 Esd. (i. 37, 43), and others. Irenaeus also
distinctly asserts that Joseph's genealogy, as
given by St. Matthew, expresses both Joiakim
and Jechonias. It seems that his identity of
name has led to some corruption in the text
of very early date, and that the clause 'Itxwlas
8« iyiyyjiaf rbv 'Uxoyiav has fallen out between
o&toS and M t»jj ft.tr. Ba/3., in r. 11. The Cod.
Vat. (B.) contains the clause only after Ba/Jv-
Avror in v. 12, where it seems less proper (sec
Alford's 0. T. ; and Westcott and Hort in loco).
The last difficulty of sufficient importance to
be mentioned here is a chronological one. In
both the genealogies there are but three names
between Salmon and David — Boaz, Obed, Jesse.
But, according to the common chronology, from
the entrance into Canaan (when Salmon was
come to man's estate) to the birth of David was
405 years, or from that to 500 years and up-
wards. Mow for about an equal period, from
Solomon to Jehoiachin, St. Luke's genealogy
contains 20 names. Obviously therefore either
the chronology or the genealogy is wrong. But
it cannot be the genealogy (which is repeated
four times over without any variation), because
it is supported by eight other genealogies,' which
all contain about the same number of genera-
tions from the Patriarchs to David as David's
own line does: except that, as was to be ex-
pected from Judah, Boaz, and Jesse being all
advanced in years at the time of the birth of
their sons, David's line is ode of the shortest.
The number of generations in the genealogies
referred to is 14 in five, 15 in two, and 11 in
one, to correspond with the 11 in David's line.
There are other genealogies where the series is
not complete, but not one which contains more
generations. It is the province therefore of
Chronology to square its calculations to the
genealogies. It must suffice here to assert that
the shortening the interval between the Exodus
and David by about 200 years, which brings it
to the length indicated by the genealogies, does
in the most remarkable manner bring Israelitish
history into harmony with Egyptian, with the
traditional Jewish date of the Exodus, with
the fragment of Edomitish history preserved in
Gen. xxxvi. 31-39, and with the internal
evidence of the Israelitish history itself. The
■> See Jer. xxil. 11.
• Those of Zadok, Heman, Ahlmotb, Asaph, Ethan,
in 1 Ch. vi. ; that of Ablathar, made up from different
notices of his ancestors in 1 Sam. ; that of Saul, from
1 Ch. vlll. ix., and 1 Sam. Ix. ; and mat of Zabad la
lCh.lL
Digitized by
Google
1148 GENEALOGY OF CHRIST
following pedigree will exhibit the successive
generations as given by the two Evangelists : —
GENERATION
According
to
6LLukc.
Adam
I
Beth
£nus
I
MaMooI
Jared
Enoch
Mathusnla
Pbalec (I'dleg)
Raxau (Boa)
Saruch (Sorug)
N*cbor
TharafTenh)
Noah
Shem
Arphajtad.
Bala
ibar
Hoi
Pbarez
Ezrum
Aram (Raid)
AmiiiAilab
Aaoordimg Abraham
to Matt. |
and Lmke. Isaac
Jacob
Jndah
8almon=Bachab
Jeane
DavldsBaihshaba
According
to Matt.
Salomon
Bobaam
According
toLukt.
lapbi
Joram (Ahaxiah,
Joaah, Amaziah)
Oziaa
J oat ham
Achaz
Xzeklu
I
ojum
i
Jecboniaa (i. .. Je-
bolakim) and hla
brothen (*.«. Je-
hoahaz, Zedokiah,
and Shall nm)
Jechonlaa (i.e. Je-
holacbin), chiW-
Nalhan
HattaLha
Kenan
Hole*
Ellnkim
Jonan
Joseph
J ml*
Simoon
Levi
I
Matthat
Jorlm
Eliczcr
Joeo
+
Elmodom
i
Cunaro
Add!
I.
llafobi
I
Serf
(JfcM. gad i.uti-.) j
. . SaLthlel
Zorobatwl (the Frlncs or nheaa)
Joanna (Hananlah, In 1 Ch. Ul. 19,
omitted bj Matthew i. 13)
Jiida, or Ab-iud (Hodaiah, 1 Oh. UL 24)
JflUkim
Ajor
I
Smdoa
I
J_
I
Joseph
Bemel
Bind
s r
i
Joseph
Janna
i
(Matt. a*dL*i,,) |
MatL His hair ni Uatthan or Matthat Ule
|
Jacob Hall
I (MaH .amllmte.) |
atary = Jacob's hair was Jo-wph
Jksus, called Christ
Thus it will be seen that the whole number
of generations from Adam to Christ, both in-
clusive, is 74, without the second Cainan and
Khesa. Including these two, and adding the
name of God, Augustine reckoned 77, and
thought the number typical of the forgiveness
of all sins in Baptism by Him Who was thus
born in the 77th generation, alluding to Matt,
xviii. 22 ; with many other wonderful specu-
lations on the hidden meaning of the numbers
3, 4, 7, 10, 11, and their additions and multi-
plications (Quaest. Evang. lib. 11). Irenaeus,
who probably, like Africanus and Eusebins,
omitted Matthat and Levi, reckoned 72 gene-
rations, which he connected with the 72 nations
into which, according to Gen. x. (LXX.), man-
kind was divided, and so other Fathers likewise.
For an account of the different explanations
that have been given, both by ancient and
modern commentators, the reader may refer to
the elaborate Dissertation of Patritins in his
2nd vol. De Evangcliis ; who, however, does not
contribute much to elucidate the difficulties of
the case. The opinions advanced in the fore-
going article are fully discussed in the writer's
work on the Genealogies of our Lord Jesus
Christ; and much valuable matter will be found
iu Dr. Mill's Vindication of the Geneal., and in
Grotius' note on Luke iii. 23. Other treatises
are, Gomarus, De Qeneal. Christi; Hottingei,
Dissert duae de Qeneal. Christi; G. G. Voss,
De J. Chr. Geneal. ; Vardley, On the Geneal. oj
J. Chr., &C [A. C. H.]
GENERATION. 1. ^ostVacf.-- time, either
definite or indefinite. The primary meaning of
the Heb. fn is revolution ; hence period of
time : cp. ■wtpioios, iviavros, and annus. From
the general idea of a period comes the more
special notion of an age or generation of men,
the ordinary period of human life. In this
point of view the history of the word seems to
be directly contrasted with that of the Latin
saecutum; which, starting with the idea of breed
or race, acquired the secondary signification of
a definite period of time (Censorin. de Die Sat.
c. 17).
In the long-lived Patriarchal age a generation
seems to have been computed at 100 years (Gen.
xv. 16 ; cp. t>. 13 and Ex. xii. 40 : see Delitzsch
[1887] and Enobel's note in Dillmann* on Gen.
J. c); the later reckoning, however, was the
same which has been adopted by other civilised
nations, viz. from thirty to forty years (Job
xlii. 16). For generation in the sense of a
definite period of time, see Gen. xv. 16 ; Deut
xxiii. 3, 4, 8, &c.
As an indefinite period of time: — for time
past, see Deut. xxxii. 7, Is. lviii. 12 ; for time
future, see Ps. xlv. 17, lxxii. 5, &c
2. Concrete: — the men of an age, or time.
So generation = contemporaries (Gen. vi. 9;
Digitized by
Google
GENES ABETH
Is. Kii. 8 ; see Lowth ad loc. ; Ges. Lex. ; better
than " aeterna generatio," or " multitudo credi-
tara." Cp. the commentaries of Delitzsch 4 and
Dillmann*); posterity, especially in legal for-
mulae (Lev. iii. 17, &c.) ; fathers, or ancestors
(Ps. xlix. 19; Rosenm. Schol. ad loc., and
modem comm. ; cp. 2 Ch. xxxiv. 28). Drop-
ping the idea of time, generation comes to mean
a race, or class of men: e.g. of the righteous
(Ps. xiv. 5, &c); of the wicked (Dent, zziii. 5;
Jer. rii. 29, where " generation of his wrath "
= against which God is angry).
In A. V. of N. Test, three words are rendered
by generation : —
finals, yfrrfiiwra, ytvtd.
yirtaa, properly generatio ; bnt in Matt. i. 1
$iffKosytviaevs= Ti\~\7\T\ "l|Jp =a genealogical
scheme.
yrrfiitara, pi. of yitnrrnia, Matt. iii. 7, &c,
A. V. generation ; more properly brood, as the
result of generation in its primary sense.
ytrta in most of its uses corresponds with the
Heb. in.
For the abstract and indefinite, see Luke i. 50,
Eph. iii. 21 (A. V. "ages," B. V. "generations"
[see R. V. marg.]), future: Acta xv. 21 (A. V.
" of old time," R. V. " from generations of
old "), Eph. iii. 5 (A. V. "ages," R. V. "genera-
tions "), past.
For concrete, see Matt. xi. 16.
For generation without reference to time, see
Lake xvi. 8, " in their generation," i.e. in their
disposition, "indoles, ingenium, et ratio homi-
nnm," Schlensner ; Trench, " in worldly things "
(Notes on the Parables, in loco) ; Speaker's Comm.
•* in relation to their kindred " ; Nttsgen, " their
contemporaries " (Strack u. ZOckler's Kgf. Komm.
in loco). Matt. i. 17, "all the generations;"
either concrete use, sc. "familiae sibi invicem
snecedentes ; " or abstract and definite, according
to the view which may be taken of the difficulties
connected with the genealogies of our Lord.
[Genealogy.] [T. E. B.] [F.]
GENE8'ABETH. In this form the name
appears in the edition of the A. V. of 1611, in
Mark vi. 53 and Luke v. 1, following the spell-
ing of the Vulgate. In Matt. xiv. 34, where
the Vulg. has Qenesar, the A. V. originally
followed the Received Greek Text — Genesaret.
The oldest MSS. have, however, Ttvynaaplr in
each of the three places. [Gennesaret.]
GENESIS (r Wit, from the LXX. rendering
of ii. 4a, aSrn i) 0l0\ot ytviatott obpavov (tai
-jtjj : called by the Jews, like the other Books
of the Pentateuch, from its first word, JV^K!?.
BUrishith), the first Book in the great historical
series, Gen. — 2 Kings, or, more immediately, in
the Hexateuch (Gen. — Josh.).
§ 1. The general aim of the Hexateuch is to
describe in their origin the fundamental institu-
tions of the Theocracy (the civil and ceremonial
law), and to trace from the earliest past the
coarse of events which issued ultimately in the
establishment of Israel in Canaan. The Book of
Genesis comprises the introductory period of
this history, embracing the lives of the ancestors
of the Hebrew nation, and ending with the
death of Joseph in Egypt, — the close of the
term of migration and the beginning of the
GENESIS
1149
period during which the clan that accompanied
Jacob into Egypt grows insensibly into a nation.
It recounts the fortunes of the Patriarchs as
they were handed down by tradition ; it repre-
sents them as patterns, in that remote age, of a
higher faith among mankind, and as providen-
tially commissioned to be the founders of a
community inspired by the principles of a true
religion, and destined ultimately to become the
cradle of a faith that should embrace the world.
It shows us Abraham, privileged to be the
"Friend of God," migrating from the distant
east, and entering Canaan as his adopted home,
treated by the native princes with honour and
respect, and receiving from God promises of an
august future for his descendants. It shows us
Isaac, livingaqnieter,less eventful life, butother-
wise re-enacting the experiences of his father. It
describes next the chequered career of Jacob ;
the ruse by which he wrests the supremacy
from Esau ; his strange contest with Laban ;
his return, an altered man, after the wrestling
at Peniel ; the reunion, so little expected, with
his sons in Egypt. We trace the hand of Provi-
dence in the vicissitudes which befel JOSEPH ;
and the circumstances are related which made
Egypt for a while the home of the ancestors of
Israel. In the course of the narrative many
points interesting to a later age are incidentally
noticed and explained: for example, local an-
tiquities (e.g. xvi. 14 ; xix. 22 ; xxi. 31 ; xxiii. ;
xxvi. 33 ; xxviii. 19 ; xxxi. 47 ; xxxvi. 24, &c),
current proverbs or customs (x. 9 ; xvii. ; xxii.
14 ; xxviii. 22 ; xxxii. 32 [Heb. 33]; xlvii. 26), the
contrasted character or condition of neighbouring
nations (ix. 25-7; xvi. 12; xvii. 20 sq. ; xix.
37 sq. ; xxv. 23 sqq. ; xxvii. 27-9, 39, 40 ; xlviii.
19). And in ch. xlix. the political character,
or geographical position, of the tribes of Israel
is prefigured in their father's blessing.
§ 2. To recount, however, the ancestry of
Israel alone would leave an unsatisfactory blank
in the picture ; the place occupied by it among
other nations must also be defined. Accordingly
the line of its ancestors is traced back beyond
Abraham to the first appearance of man upon
earth ; and by means of a genealogical scheme,,
developed sometimes with surprising minuteness,
the degree of affinity uniting the principal nations
known to the Hebrews, to one another, and to Israel
is indicated. Thus to the Historij of the Patriarchs
in particular, chs. xii. — 1., is prefixed, chs. i.-xi., a
general view of the Early History of Mankind,
from the Creation inclusive, explaining the
presence of evil in the world (ch. iii.), sketching
the beginnings of civilization (ch. i v.), accounting
for the existence of separate nations (ch. x., xi.
1-9), and determining the position occupied by
the Hebrews among them (x. 1, 21, 22; xi.
10-26).
§ 3. The framework into which the whole is
cast is marked by the recurring formula These
are the generations (lit. begettings) of ... . The
phrase is strictly one proper to genealogies,
implying that the person to whose name it is pre-
fixed is of sufficient importance to mark a break
in the genealogical series, and that he and his
descendants will form the subject of the record
which follows, nntil another name is reached
prominent enough to form the commencement
of a new section. By this means the Book of
Genesis is articulated as follows : —
Digitized by
Google
1150
.GENESIS
Chs. l.-iv.» (Creation; Fall of man; Progress of
Invention in the line of Cain to Lantech).
„ v. 1 Mrl. 8 (Adam and his descendants, through
Seth, to Noah).
„ vl. 9-lx. 29 (History of Noah, and of his sons,
till their father's death).
„ x. 1-xi. 9 (Sons of Noah, and nations sprang
from them).
„ xl. 10-26 (Line of Shem to Terah).
„ xi. 27-xxv. 11 (Terah and his descendants,
Abram and Lot).
„ xxv. 12-18 (Ishmael and Arab tribes claiming
descent from him).
„ xxv. 19-xxxv. 29 (Life of Isaac, with history
of his sons till Isaac's death).
„ xxxvi. 1-43 (Esau and his descendants, with a
digression, en, 20-30, on the aboriginal In-
habitants of Edoin).
„ xxxvli. (see e. 2)-L (Life of Jacob subsequent
to Isaac's death, and history of his sons to
death of Joseph).*
To this scheme the narrative of Genesis is
accommodated. The attention of the reader is
fixed upon Israel, which is gradually disengaged
from the nations with which it is at first confused :
at each stage in the history, a brief general
account of the collateral branches having been
given, they are dismissed, and the narrative is
limited more and more to the immediate line of
Israel's ancestors. Thus after ch. x. all the
descendants of Noah disappear, except the liue
of Shem (xi lOsqq.): after xxv. 18 Ishmael
disappears, and Isaac only remains : similarly
after ch. xxxvi Jacob alone is left. The same
method is adopted in the intermediate parts : thus
xix. 30-38 the relation to Israel of the collateral
branches of Moab and Ammon is explained:
xxii. 20-24 (family of Abraham's brother
Nahor), xxv. 1-4 (children of Keturah), those
of other kindred tribes.
A similar plan governs the promises and
blessings given to, or by, the Patriarchs : they
become gradually more definite, and their scope
is progressively narrowed. Addressed first in
general terms to Adam, they are repeated to
Noah, then limited to Shem among his de-
scendants, afterwards brought down to Jacob,
till finally among his sons the promise of royalty
is bestowed upon Judah alone. They may be
grouped in two series, which, however, whether
taken separately or together, exhibit in this re-
spect the same principle. Thus (a) i. 28-30;
ix. 1-7; xvii. 6-8; xxviii. 3 sq. ; xxxv. 11 sq.
(quoted, xlviii 3) : (6) iii. 15 ; ix. 26 ; xii. 1-3
(Abraham : also xiii. 14-17 ; xv. 5, 13-16 ; rviii.
18; xxii. 15-18) ; xxvi. 2-5, 24 (Isaac) ; xxvii
27-29; xxviii. 13-15 (Jacob); xlix. 10 (Judah).
The unity of plan thus established (and
traceable in numerous other details) has been
long recognised by critics : the hypothesis that
• The formula Is here applied metaphorically to
"heaven and earth," and stands at 11. 4a. Elsewhere
it always relates to what follovn .- Inasmuch as in this
place it can scarcely refer to 11. 4 b sqq. (for this narrative
Is silent as to the heavent), It must refer exceptionally
to what precedes. Perhaps, as some critics have con*
jectured, It originally stood as the superscription to 1. 1,
and owes Its present position to the compiler of the
Book of Genesis.
» The formula here is slightly different: "This Is
the book (or roll) of the generations," tc.
• The formula occurs next In Num. ill. 1 (of Aaron
and Moses) : soe also Ruth iv. 18 ; 1 Ch. 1. 29 (all).
GENESIS
the Book of Genesis is a collection of " frag-
ments " belongs to the infancy of criticism.
§ 4. Unity of plan, however, is not synony-
mous with unity of structure. The Book of
Genesis shows clear marks of the one, but not of
the other. Like the rest of the Pentateuch, and
indeed like the historical Books generally, it is
composed of , distinct documents or sources,
which a later editor or redactor has welded
together into a continuous whole, subordinating
them to the aim with which he wrote, bat
leaving them in the main with their distinctive
literary and other characteristics unchanged.
Although (for reasons which will appear) there
are points which remain, and probably will
continue to remain, uncertain, the fundamental
distinctions between these documents or sources
have been ascertained by critics, and the general
limits of each determined, with sufficient clear-
ness to enable us to picture, at least approxi-
mately, the process by which the Pentateuch
assumed its present shape. The question of the
relative date of its several component parts is
discussed in the art. Pentateuch : we shall
confine ourselves here to an indication of the
general grounds upon which — in the Book of
Genesis in particular — the distinction of sources
is inferred, and an exposition of the structure of
the Book as analysed by the best and moat
recent critics.
§ 5. When the Pentateuch is read attentively,
two facts amongst others attract the readers
notice : (1) the same event is doubly recorded ;
(2) the style and language in different sections
vary. In Genesis we have thus a double
narrative of the origin of man upon earth, i. 1—
ii. 4 a, and U. 4 b-25. It is true, ii. 4 b sqq. might
apparently be regarded as merely a more de-
tailed account of what is described succinctly
in i. 26-30; but a more attentive examination
reveals differences which preclude the suppo-
sition that both sections are the work of the
same hand. It is clear that in ch. ii. the order
of creation is 1. man (v. 7), 2. vegetation (c. 9 ;
cp. v. 5), 3. animals («. 19), d 4. woman (o. 21 sq.).
The separation made between the creation of
woman and man is, indeed, fairly explicable
upon the hypothesis that ii. 4 b sqq. describes in
detail what is stated summarily in i. 27 b ; but
the order in the other cases forms part of a
progression evidently intentional on the part of
the narrator here, and as evidently opposed to
the order indicated in ch. i (vegetation, ani-
mals, man). Not only, however, are there
material differences between the two narratives :
they differ also in form. The style of i. 1-ii. 4 a
is unornate, measured, precise, and particular
phrases frequently recur ; that of ii. 4 b sqq. is
freer and more varied; the recurring phrases
are less marked, and not the same as those of
i. 1-ii. 4 a. Ch. xix. 29, again, where it stands,
interrupts the narrative and repeats the substance
of w. 1-25: the presumption, hence derived,
that it is a briefer account of the same event,
incorporated from another source, is confirmed
by the style, which resembles that of other
sections similarly distinguished from the narra-
tive in which they are embedded.* In chs.
a The rendering had formed Is against idiom.
• Observe God, Jehovah having been regularly used
Digitized by
Google
GENESIS
xxi. 31 and xxvi. 33 we have two explanations of
the origin of the name Beersheba; xxviii. 19 and
xxxt. 15, two of the name Bethel ; xxxii. 28 and
xxxr. 10, two of Israel ; xxxii. 3 and xxxiii. 16,
Esau it described as already resident in Edom,
while in xxxvi. 6, 7 his settlement there is attri-
buted to causes which could only have come
into operation subsequently. In the narrative
of the Deluge vi. 9-13 is a duplicate of vi. 5-8,
and vii. 1-5 of vi. 18-22, the latter with the
difference that of every clean beast seven are to
be taken into the ark, while in vi. 19 two of
every sort indiscriminately are prescribed : there
are also accompanying differences of phraseology.'
Even the genealogies exhibit two distinct types
(below, § 10, I., note). Other sections con-
spicuously distinguished both by phraseology
and manner of treatment are ix. 1-17, xvii.,
xxiii. : where, as in these cases, the differences
are at once numerous, recurrent, and systematic,
they may be regarded as conclusive evidence
that the narratives in which they occur are not
the work of one and the same author.
§ 6. The sections homogeneous in style and
character with i. 1-ii. 4 a recur at intervals to
the close of Joshua, and, when disengaged from
the rest of the narrative and read consecutively,
are found to constitute a tolerably complete
whole, containing a systematic account of the
origines of Israel, marked by definite literary
characteristics, prominent amongst which is the
use of Qod rather than Jehovah (till Ex. vi. 3),
written in the unornate style of an annalist,
displaying a methodical regard for chronological
data which entitles it to be regarded as the
framework of our present Heiateuch, and
treating with particular minuteness the regula-
tions for sacrifice and other ritual institutions
(Sabbath, circumcision, passover, tabernacle,
priesthood, feasts, &c.) of the ancient Hebrews.
From these several characteristics the source in
question (or its author) has been differently
styled the Book of Origins ' (Ewald), the Elohist
(Hupfeld, Bleek, &c.), the Annalistic narrator
(Schrader), the "Grundschrift" (Tuch, Noldeke),
the Priests' Code (Wellhausen, Kuenen, De-
litzsch). Of these designations the last is in
strictness applicable only to the legal parts ;
these, however, form such a distinctive and
central element, that it may not unsuitably be
extended so as to embrace the entire source;
And it may be represented conveniently, for the
take of brevity, by the letter P.*
before (e-g. vt. 13, 14, 18, 24), and remembered (see
Till. 1 ; Ex. 11. 22) : also notice the general statement that
Lot dwelt In " the cities of the Plain," as in xlU. 12 (P),
which would 1*11 naturally from a writer compiling a
summary account of the occurrences, but hardly so
from one who had just before Darned repeatedly Sodom
as the particular city In which Lot was dwelling.
' See the art. Pest atiucb (by the present Bishop of
Worcester), ti. 77« (let ed. of this Diet.) where what
has been stated above is farther Illustrated.
s Vrsjring* — Ewald's rendering of the Heb.
ni*6lR ("generations"): see his BUt. of Israel, i.
pp. 7*4-96.
> DUhnann uses the letter A. Wellhausen uses Q
(so Delltzsch), on account of the /our (Quatuor) cove-
nants described In It (with Adam, 1. 28-30 ; Noah, lx.
1-17 ; Abraham, xvii. ; Israel, Ex. vl. 2 sqq.). But the
first of these Is not strictly a covenant, but a blessing.
GENESIS
1151
§ 7. In Genesis, as regards the limits of P,
there is virtually no difference of opinion amongst
critics. It embraces i. 1-ii. 4 a (creation of
heaven and earth, with God's rest upon the
Sabbath);— v. 1-28, 30-32 (line of Adam's
descendants through Seth to Noah) ; — vi. 9-22 ;
vii. 6, 7-9 (in parts), 11, 13-16 a, 18-21, 24 ;
viii. 1-2 a, Sb-5, 13 a, 14-19; ix. 1-17, 28, 29
(the Flood and the subsequent covenant with
Noah);— x. 1-7, 20, 22, 23, 31, 32 (sons of
Japheth, Ham, and Shem ') ; — xi. 10-26 (descen-
dants of Shem to Terah); — xi. 27, 31, 32;
xii. 4b-5; xiii. 6, llb-12a; xvi. la, 3, 15, 16
(history of Abram to birth of Ishmael) ; — xvii.
(circumcision) ; xix. 29 (destruction of the cities
of the Plain) ;— xxi. 1 b, 2 b-5 (birth of Isaac);
— xxiii. (purchase of cave of Macbpelah); —
xxv. 7-11 a (death of Abraham) ; — xxv. 12-17
(descendants of Ishmael) ;— xxv. 19, 20, 26 b ;
xxvi. 34, 35 ; xxvii. 46-xxviii. 9 (history of
Isaac : Esau's wives : reason why Jacob goes to
Paddan-aram); — xxix. 24,29; xxxi. 18 b; xxxiii.
18 a ; xxxiv." 1, 2 a, 4, 6, 8-10, 13-18, 20-24,
25 (partly), 27-29; xxxv. 9-13, 15, 22b-29
(return of Jacob from Paddan-aram to Shechem :
his sons' refusal to sanction intermarriage with
the Shechemites : change of name at Bethel :
death of Isaac) ; — xxxvi. [in the main '] (history
of Esau) ; — xxxvii. 1-2 a (to Jacob) ; xii. 46 ;
xlvi. 6-27 ; xlvii. 5-6 a» 7-11, 27 b-28 ; xlviii.
3-6 ; xlix. la, 28 b, 29-33 ; 1. 12, 13 (history
of Joseph). The passages present an outline of
the antecedents, and patriarchal history, of
Israel, in which only important occurrences —
such as the Creation, the Flood, the covenants
with Noah and Abraham — are described with
minuteness, but which it sufficient to form an
introduction to the systematic view of the
theocratic institutions which it was the main
object of the author of this source to exhibit.
A few omissions are apparent (e.g. that of the
events of Jacob's life in Paddan-aram, presupposed
by xxxi. 18, and probably others); but these
may be naturally ascribed to the redactor, who,
in combining P with his other source, gave a
preference not unfrequently to the fuller and
more picturesque narrative of the latter. Only
very seldom does the language of P appear to
have been modified by the redactor : thus in xvii.
1, xxi. 1 b, Jehovah has been substituted for
Elohim; in xlvi. 8-27 also slight modifications
appear to have been made by him. As a rule,
however, the language of the narrator it un-
changed ; and many of the peculiarities of his
style are apparent even in a translation. His
language is that of a jurist rather than a his-
torian : it is circumstantial, formal, and precise ;
a subject is developed methodically, and com-
pleteness of detail, even at the risk of some
repetition, is regularly observed : sentences cast
■ Cp. below, Q 10, L
* See, however, below, } 10, DX, n. 6.
> For parts of this ch. appear to contain an element
foreign to P (see the commentators).
■ As read in LXX., viz. : " And Jacob and his sons
came into Egypt to Joseph, and Pharaoh king of Egypt
heard of It And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph, saying.
Thy father and thy brethren are come unto thee : behold,
the land of Egypt Is before thee ; in the best of the land
make thy father and thy brethren to dwelt" Then fol-
lows v. 7. Cp. below, 1 10, IV., n. 3.
Digitized by
Google
1152
GENESIS
in the same type constantly recur.* Particular
formulae are repeated with great frequency,
especially such as articulate the progress of the
narrative, or note the orderly observance of
prescribed forms. The author pays consistent
attention to numbers, chronology, and other
statistical data. A love of system governs his
whole treatment of the history. These pecu-
liarities become even more marked in those
portions of the subsequent Books of the Hexa-
teuch which belong to the same source.
§ 8. It may be worth while here to anticipate
an objection that may be felt, tt has been said
that the sections which have been designated by
P, when compared with other parts of the
narrative, betray differences of style which
argue a difference of authorship. As many of
these sections consist of brief formal notices,
the differences, it may be thought, could be
accounted for by the not unreasonable hypothesis
thai one and the same author, having to make
such formal notices, adopted spontaneously a
similar style throughout. It is true that, did
the sections in question consist solely of such
notices, the explanation suggested would be a
plausible one; when, however, we find sections,
often of considerable length, dealing with varied
subject-matter, occurring not in Genesis merely,
bnt throughout the Hexateuch, and marked
uniformly by the same distinctive and stereo-
typed phraseology, it cannot be accepted as
adequate. It should be added, to preclude a
not unfrequent misconception, that the use of
God (till Ex. vi. 3) instead of Jehovah, is but
one feature in the style of P, not, in fact, more
conspicuous than many others, which regularly
accompany it."
§ 9. Is, however, what remains, after the
separation of P, homogeneous in structure ? It
would appear not. Especially from ch. xx.
onwards, the narrative exhibits marks of com-
posite structure ; and the component parts,
though not differing from one another in diction
or style so widely as either differs from P, and
being so welded together that the lines of de-
marcation between them cannot frequently be
fixed with certainty, seem nevertheless, in their
broader outlines, to be distinctly recognisable.
Thus xx. 1-17 is distinguished by the use of
God, while in chs. xviii.-xix. (except xix. 29 P),
and in the similar narrative xii. 10-20, Jehovah
is regularly employed. The same phenomenon
is repeated, xxi. 6-31, xxii. 1-13, and elsewhere,
noticeably in xl.-xlii., xlv. For such a variation
in consecutive and similar chapters it is difficult
» As v. 6-8, 9-11, 12-14, ftc. ; xi. 10-11, 13-13, 4c. ;
xil. 4 b, xvi. 16, xvii. 34, 25, xxi. 5, xxv. 20, xlL 46 s, Ex.
vtl. 7 j fcc
• As I. 6 b, 8 b, 13, ftc ; x. 6 [see qPB.^], 20, 31, 32,
xxv. 16, xxxvl. 40, Ac.
» Undoubtedly Jehovah and God express different
aspects of the 1 Hvinc nature ; but the theory of Kelt
(Finl., $ 33) and others, that a sense of this distinction
mled the choice In each case, will be felt, If the passages
are examined in detail, to be artificial and inadequate.
Even were the case otherwise, the other variations
would still remain unexplained. TJie statement In the
Speaker"! Commentary, I. p. 28 a, that the peculiarities
of the Elohlstlc phraseology " have been greatly magni-
fied, even if they exist at all," is not la accordance
with the facts. See the present writer's Introduction to
the Literature of the O. T. (1891), pp. 122-138.
GENESIS
to find a satisfactory explanation except diversity
of authorship: where it occurs, it is moreover
often accompanied by differences of representa-
tion, which point to the same conclusion. At
the same time, the fact that Elohim is not here
attended by the other criteria of P"s style, for-
bids our assigning the sections thus characterised
to that source. An independent source must
therefore be postulated: and in fact all critics
who have examined carefully the text of Genesis
have satisfied themselves that the parts which
remain after the separation of P, consist of
excerpts from two narratives covering in the
main the same ground, but independent of each
other, which have been welded together into a
single whole. One of these sources, from its
use of the name Jahnoeh,' 1 is now generally desig-
nated by the letter J : the other, which has just
been alluded to and which uses chiefly the name
Elohim, is denoted by E. The composite work
thus produced may be referred to by the double
letters JE.* The precise manner in which these
two sources were combined together has been
disputed, and can hardly be said to be entirely
certain ; bnt critics generally agree with Wellh.,
who supposes that it was effected by the inde-
pendent hand of a compiler. The method
usually followed by the compiler was to extract
an entire narrative, without appreciable altera-
tion, from either of these sources, as the plan
of his work required (e.g. xx. 1-17 from E ;
xxiv. from J); sometimes, however, it would
seem as if in a narrative derived as a whole
from one source particular notices borrowed
from the other were incorporated, and some-
times a narrative appears to be composed of
elements derived from each in nearly equal
proportions. Occasionally the compiler appears
to have introduced slight additions of his own.
In order to gain an intelligent insight into the
redactor's method, the reader should be careful
to fix his attention on the main source followed
in each section, treating mentally the passages
incorporated in it as subordinate.'
4 In passages, vis, in which the Divine name is used
absolutely. Where It has to be qualified by a genitive,
or possessive pronoun (as " God of Abraham," " thy
God"), Elohim is naturally used quite freely in J, the
personal name Jahweh, as is well known, not admitting
of being thus qualified.
» This Is the nomenclature Introduced by Weflhausen
and now generally adopted (e.g. by Delltisch). The
author of the original source J Is often called by Well-
bausen the Jahviit, the author of E the EUkUt, and tbe
compiler who united the two the Jehoviit (a name
which combines the letter* of JaHWeH with the vowels
of ElOhlm). But It is preferable to employ symbols
exclusively, using J, E, P, to denote indifferently the
documents or their authors. Dlllmann uses B and C for
E and J respectively.
• The following practical method Is recommended.
In a Bible— Hebrew or English — printed. If possible,
with one column In a page, let a line be drawn on the
rioAt-hand side of the text, along the edge of tbe parts
assigned to J, and a similar Hue on tbe !«/t-hand side
of the text along tbe parte assigned to E : two lines, one
on each side of the text, may then be used to indicate
the parts belonging to P: additions belonging more
specially to a redactor may be underlined. By this
plan, a far clearer view of the structure of the narrative
will be obtained than can be given by any mere tabular
anaiysis. For those who are acquainted with German,
however, all such mechanical aids have been now
Digitized by
Google
GENESIS
GENESIS
1153
§ 10. The analysis of JE, as accepted gener- i opinion and unimportant redactional additions
ally by critics at the present day (including in are disregarded ; but the more important cases
most cases Delitzsch), is exhibited in the fol- ! in which the criteria are indecisive, and in
lowing series of tables; the notes appended [ which consequently opinion is not unanimous,
indicate — so far as the available space will I have usually been noted. E cannot be recog-
permit — the general nature of the grounds ! nised with certainty before ch. xx. (or perhaps
upon which it rests. Minor differences of ch. xv.).
I. Chs. i.-xi. The beginnings of history.
J: ii. 4 b-lii. 24; Iv. 1-26; v. 29 ; vt. l-«, 5-8 ' ; vii. 1-6, 7-10 1 (In the main), 12. 16b, 17, 22-23'; vlil
2 b-3 ft, 6-12, 13 b, 20-22 ; ix. 13-27 ; X. 8-19, 21, 24-30 ; xi. 1-9. 28-30.
i With alight insertions, especially in vl. 7, vii. 3, 8. 23, due to tlie compiler.
The rest belongs to P (§ 7), or, in a few
subordinate passages, is the work of the com-
piler. On the question whether the parts here
assigned to J are perfectly homogeneous, it
must suffice to refer to Dillroann (ed. 1886),
pp. 88-90, 128, 199 sq., with the references
there given. In J the line of Seth has been
pr«-*«rved imperfectly (iv. 25 sq.); the compiler
having preferred the genealogy in the form in
-which it was given by P (v. 1-28, 30-31), only
incorporating v. 29 from J (notice the differ-
ence in style of this verse from the rest of ch.
v., and the similarity in form to iv. 25, 26, as
well aa the reference to iii. 16 sq.). The names
in these two chapters are borrowed, it is plain,
from ancient popular tradition : in J this
tradition is exhibited in its more primitive
form; in P it has been divested of every
feature in any way suggestive of what was
mythical, and reduced to little more than a list
of names and chronological data. In reading
cb. iv. (J), it is difficult not to be reminded of
the Phoenician narrative of Sanchoniathon
<preserved in the Greek translation of Philo of
Byblus'), where, in a very similar style, the
origin of various institutions and inventions is
connected similarly with a series of prehistoric
names. The Hebrew and Phoenician narratives
are both, it would seem, derived from the same
cycle of old Semitic tradition.
In the account of the Flood, the main narra-
tive is that of P, which has been enlarged by
the addition of elements derived from J. Here,
however, the elements contributed by, J form
a tolerably complete narrative, though there
are omissions: e.g. between vi. 8 and vii. 1,
of the instructions for making the ark, in place
of which the compiler has preferred the account
in P; and between vii. 5 and viii. 6 the
«xtracts from J for a similar reason do not
form an entirely complete narrative. The
distinguishing characteristics of the two ac-
counts are well exhibited by Delitzsch
(p. 164 sq.): each is marked by a series of
(Aug. 1188) superseded by Die Gcnetit mit Sunerer
Vnttrtcktidung der QiuHentchriftm Sberiettt, von K
Kantsach nnd A. Sodn (ed. 2, 1891). In this very
convenient volume, by the use of different kinds of
type, the literary structure of the Book Is exhibited
with great distinctness to the eye. Another work of
tunllar character, but more elaborate. Is B. W. Bacon's
The Genetit of Oenetii (Hartford. U.S.A., 1892). It
should, however, be recollected in using either of these
books (cp. belntr, « 12) that the distribution of parts
between J C E can frequently not clahn more than a
rsCottw probability.
' Quoted by EoseMns, Praep. Kcang. 1. 10 (ed.
Hrfnicben). Cp. the translation, with notes, by Leoor-
maat. La Origina, tc (see 4 14], L 636 sqq.
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
recurring features which are absent from the
other, and by which it is connected with other
sections of the Book belonging respectively to
the same source. There are, moreover, differ-
ences of detail in the two narratives: thus the
distinction between clean and unclean animals
is peculiar to J; and while in J the entire
duration of the Flood is 40 + (7 + 7 + 7) =
61 days (vii. 4, 12, 17; viii. 6, 10 ["other seven
days," implying seven between v. 7 and t>. 9],
12), in P it extends over a year -and 11 days
(vii. 11; viii. 14). The form which the
tradition took in Babylonia should be com-
pared," though it cannot be maintained that
the Biblical accounts are simply borroioed
thence. In the Babylonian account (which on
the whole has greater affinities with the narra-
tive of J than with that of P), the duration
is " 6 days and 7 nights " + 7 days.
In ix. 20-27, some critics are of opinion that
the form has been modified, and that in the
original narrative Canaan, not Ham, was the
author of the misdeed. Certainly the existing
text (c. 22, compared with r. 25) presents a
difficulty which has not been satisfactorily ex-
plained.
On ch. x. the masterly analysis of Wellhausen
should be read. The scheme of P may be learnt
from the passages ascribed to him in § 7 : here,
as elsewhere, his plan is, having dealt first with
the collateral branches, to dismiss them, and so
to pnss on to the line which leads directly to
Israel. Thus xi. 10 sq. is the natural sequel in
P to x. 22-23. The parts of ch. x. not ascribed
to P exhibit a different style : contrast e.g. m.
21, 25, 26 with re. 22, 23. Vt>. 21, 22 are
the opening words of two parallel accounts
(P and J respectively) of the descendants of
Shem ; re. 24, 25 are J's account of Eber and
Peleg, parallel to P's in xi. 14-16 (cp. iv.
25, 26 J, beside v. 2-8 P). Notices in J of the
nations descended from Noah have thus been
combined by the final redactor with the more
svstematic scheme of P.
" On xi. 28-30, cp. Bndde [§ 14], pp. 220-223,
who shows that the genealogies of J are coat in
a difcrent mould from those of P, and points
out the similarities of expression in iv. 17-26 ;
x. 8-19, 21, 24-30; xix. 37 sq.; xxii. 20-24; xxv.
1-6 (e.g. "6» [not T^1fl, which is used by P]
of the father, JOD 01 [so besides only Judg.
viii. 21], the father of . . ., &c).
" Schrader, KAT.*, p. 46 sqq. The Bxatrtm of Paul
Haupt, pp. 66-79, containing a transcription and trans-
lation of the entire Babylonian narrative, is unfortu-
nately omitted In the English translation.
4 E
Digitized by
Google
1154 GENESIS
II. Chs. xii.-xxvi. Abraham and Isaac.
i
( J
J xll. l-4a, 6-20. xlli. 1-6, 7-1 la, 120-18. xv. (mainly).' xvt. lb-2,_4-14. xvlll. l-xlx L 28. 30-38.
E
J xxi.Ja.2a. XXl. 3 3. xxil. 15-18.
E xx.» 1 17, (18). xxl. 6-32a, (Mb»). (34). xxli. 1-14. 18,
J xxlL 2* 21. xxlv.4 XXV. 1-6, lib, 18, 21-26*, 27-34. xxvt.« 1-14, (IS), 16-17, (18), 19-33.«
The verses enclosed in parentheses appear to be due to the compiler of JE. The parts not Included In the Table
belong to P, with the exception of cli. xlv., which seems to have been taken from an Independent source.
1 Ch. xv. shows signs of composition ; but the criteria are not entirely decisive, though the main narrative 1b
generally considered to be that of J. See Wellh., Oomp., p. 23 sq. ; Dlllm. p. 242 ; Budde, p. 416 sqq. ; Kautzach
and SocJn, p. 27 sq. ; B. \V. Bacon In *he American journal ffebraica, vtl. (1890), 76 sq. Wellh. supposed vv. 1-6
to be derived (with slight modifications) from E, re. 7-11, 17-18 from J ; but both Kautzsch and Socln and Bacon
follow Budde In recognising J In to. 2a, 3b, 4, 6, if not in r. 1 as well.
* Chs. xx.-xxii. form a long section, with the exception of very few verses, entirely fiom E. The pre-
dominance of God will be noticed ; the neighbouring J -sections have regularly Jehovah.
* In chs. xx. and xxl. 22, Abraham and Abimelech dwell together: this half-verse represents Abraham as not
resident in the land of the Philistines at all. The notice is attributed to the compiler, who "transfers here the
situation Implkd In xxvl. 23, 36 (J)." V. 34 seems intended as preparatory to ch. xxli., where Isaac appears as a
grown-up lad. ,
* Probably with one or two glosses at the end. The strange syntax of HJJf iTC fl7ilt<n> "■ *'• I* I* 8 '
explained by the supposition that ^DN mE> 1" a gloss.
* In xxvl. 1 the words '* beside ... to Abraham " have probably been added by the compiler. Fe. 3b-5 (on
grounds of style : see Delltzsch) appear to have been expanded or re-cust by the compiler. The same may have
been the case with xxil. 15-18 (cp. Dlllm.).
* It Is probable that In chs. xxiv.- xxvL a transposition has taken place, and that the original order was xxv. 1-6,
lib, xxlv. (where v. 36, for Instance, presupposes xxv. 5), xxvl. l 3a, 6-33, xxv. 21 -26a, 27-34, of which
ch. xxvli. Is now the natural sequel.
III. Chs. xxvii.-xxxvi. Jacob ami I'sau.
( J xxvli. 1-46.1 xxvllt.s 10, 13-KJ, 19, 2-14,»
E
11-12,
17-ls,
2u-:
!2. xxiX. 1,
15-23, 25-28, 30.
J xxix. 31-35.
3b-5,
7,
0-16,
20b,
24<-xxxi. 1,
E xxx. l-3a (to kntet), 6,
8,
17-20a,
20c-
-23,
J 3.
46,
48-51),
ul-xxxil.
XX
2 (Heb. 3).
xii. 3-13a
(Heb. 4-14a),
E xxxL 2,
4-18a, l»-45,i 47,
J
22 (H^b. 2-1),
24-35
! (Heb. 25-33).
xxx
ii. 1
-17,
E xxxll. 13D-21 (He
b. llb-ii).
23 (Heb.
2«>,
lSb-20.
J xxxlv.* 2b, 3, 6, 7
, 11, 12, 19, 25 (partly), 26, 3d
,31.
XXXV. 1-8,
14,'
21 -22a.
E
16
-20,
{
{
' According to some critics, with traces of E (as to. 21-23 beside re. 24-27 ; to. 33-34 beside to. 35-38) i bnt it
Is doubtful If this opinion Is correct. Cp. however a W. Bacon, Bebraica, vli. 143 sqq.
» Inch, xxvill. the main narrative Is E; ee. 13-16 being, as It seems (cp. the sin liar promise in xiiL 14-16; xll. 3\
Introduced from the parallel narrative of J. V. 17 connects wttb t>. 12. It Is probable that in the original context
V71» In v. 13 meant ey *t'm (i.e. by Jacob) : cp. R. V. marg., and (for the Hebrew) xvlll. 2.
* So Dlllm., DeL In the narrative of the binhs of Jacob's children, xxix. 31 sq., mtlce God Interchanging with
Jehovah, and the double etymologies, xxx. 16 and 18 ; 20 ; 23 and 24.
< la the narrative of the separation of Jacob and Laban (xxx. 25 sq.), It Is to be observed that the two sources
give a different account of the understanding with Laban, and of the manner In which Jacob evaded It (so Del.).
At the same time, as it seems, each account contains notices incorporated by the compiler from the parallel
uarratlve (see Dlllm. or Del. ; also Bacon, Bebraica, vll. 226 sqq.).
» In xxxl. 45 sq. there seem to be two accounts of the covenant between Jacob and Laban (notice that the tcrmt
of the covenant In v. 50 differ from those In v. 52), which have been combined by the compiler of JE, with slight
additions or glosses.
< On this chapter, see (besides the Commentaries or Dlllm. and Del.) Kuenen In the Th. Tijdtchr. xlv. (1880),
p. 257 sqq. ; Wellh. In the ' Nachtrige' to his Composition, pp. 313 sqq , 353 sq. ; and Cornlll In the ttiUckrift
far die AHU.it. Wiieemchaft, 1891, pp. 1-15. The ch. presents considerable difficulties ; and the analysis is in
some particulars uncertain. The two narratives differ partly In phraseology, and still more In representation.
In J the entire transaction partakes of a domestic character : Shechem Is the spokesman ; his aim Is the personal
one of seeming Dinah as his wife; end only the ftoo sons of Jacob are engaged In the act of vengeance (cp. xlix. 6).
In the other narrative, Hamor, head of the clan. Is the spokesman ; his aim Is to secure an amalgamation between
his own people and Jacob's ; and " the sons of Jacob '• generally, i.e. Israel as a whole (cp. xxxv. 5, xlviit 22),
fall upon the Shrchemltes. As regards the parts assigned ( y 7) to P, observe the similar phraseology in
to. 16b, 22b, 24b. and in xviL 10b (P), and in v. 24 and xxlll. 10b. 18b (also P). It Is, however, true that the
passages referred above to P do not throughout exhibit P's characteristics ; and hence Wellh. and Cornlll may be
right In supposing them to be based In part upon excerpts from E. That E contained some account of a conquest
of Shechem by Jacob may be reasonably Inferred from xxxv. 5, xlvill. 22.
' On this verse, see also Cornlll, I. c. p. 15 sq.
Digitized by
Google
GENESIS
IV. Chs. xxxvii.-l. Joseph.
{-
12-21,
25-27,
t xxxvii. 20-11,
J xxxvilL xxxix.
GENESIS
2Hb (to Sillier),
H55
22-24,
'&HL {tU#U),
2»c-au,
Xlll. 38-xliv. 34. >
xl.' XU. 1 1-16, 47-57. xiii. 1-J7.
( J xlvl 28-xlvii. 4, «b,» 12-26, 27a (to OuAcn), 29-31.
« K
xlv.' 1-xlvi. 5.
xlix. lb-2sa. 1. 1-11, 14,
xlviii. 1-2, 8-22. «
• With (u critics generally suppose) traces of J, as xl. lb, 3b, Kb ; xli. 14 (■• and they bronght him quickly
from the dungeon ") ; xiii. 27-28 ; xlv. 4 (" whom ye sold Into Egypt "), 5 (" that ye sold me hither ") ; xlv. 28.
* With tracts of E (xliii. 14, 23b).
> As read in LXX., vix. (directly answering v. 4), " And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, Let them dwell in the
land of Goshen ; and if thou knoweet that there are able men amongst them, then make them/' kc. Then follow
•». 5, 6a (P), as given above, y 7.
« In the main, probably ; but the two narratives cannot here be disengaged with certainty.
The grounds of the analysis of the history
of Joseph most be sought in the Commentaries,
or (more briefly) in the writer's Introduction,
p. 16 sq. Stated generally, they consist partly in
the fact that the representation in different
parts of the narrative varies, partly in the
occurrence of short, isolated notices, not
harmonising properly with the context in which
they are now found, but presupposing different
circumstances, and hence derived presumably
from a different source (cp. Delitzsch, p. 437).
In ch. xlix. the blessing of Jacob is of course
incorporated by J from some earlier, inde-
pendent source. It may hare been in circu-
lation either as a separate piece, or as part of a
collection of national poetry.
§ 11. The sections attributed to J are justly
admired as exhibiting the perfection of Hebrew
historical style. In ease, fluency, and grace,
they are unsurpassed : everything is told with
precisely the amount of detail that is needed :
picturesque and graphic, the narrative never
lingers ; the reader's interest is at once
awakened, and sustained to the end. The
contrast with the style of P is complete : com-
pare for example cb. xvii. with chs. xviii.-xix.,
or ch. xxiii. with ch. xxiv. J's narrative is more-
over pervade hy a fine vein of ethical and
psychological discrimination; and the traditions
which the author recounts become in his hands
the rehicle of deep theological truths. His
narrative is also instinct with a warm sense
of Israel's noble spiritual possessions, and is
elevated by a lofty and vivid consciousness of
the august future reserved for it (see the series
6 of promises, quoted in § 3 : in a, belonging
to P, the outlook is limited to Israel itself, its
position as a medium of extending salvation to
the world being disregarded). The style of £
is nearly equal to that of J, but does not
perhaps display quite the same power or
delicacy of touch. Such material differences as
it exhibits, when compared as a whole with J,
will be noticed under the article Pentateuch.
§ 12. That P and JE form two clearly
definable, independent sources is a conclu-
sion that may be accepted without hesita-
tion. As regards the analysis of JE, the
criteria are fewer and less definite ; and no
doubt the same confidence that the points of
demarcation have been rightly assigned, cannot
in all cases be felt. But the indications that
the narrative is not homogeneous seem un-
mistakable; and the uncertainty which some-
times exists as to the exact limits of the
sources employed will be seen to be not greater
than is natural, when it is considered that
the differences between them are less numerous
and prominent than in the case of P, and that
the. compiler appeal's to have made it his aim
to unite them as effectually as possible into an
organic whole. But it is right to distinguish
between degrees of probability, and to recollect
that that which attaches to the distinction of
J and E is seldom so great as that attaching to
the distinction of P from JE, and that there are
passages of JE in the analysis of which (as
critics themselves universally admit) * certainty
is not attainable.
§ 13. As regards the process by which the
Book of Genesis reached its present form, the
opinions of critics differ. Dillmann supposes
that the compiler to whom the Book owes its
present form found J, E, and P as three dis-
tinct documents, which he combined together,
making such omissions and modifications as
were necessary. But this would be a com-
plicated work for a single author to accomplish :
J and E, moreover, appear to be welded to-
gether more intimately than either is with
P. Hence the view of Wellhausen and others
is more probable, that the combination was
effected in rtro stages: first, J and E were
united together; afterwards, the whole thus
formed (JE) was combined with P by another
hand. The method followed in the combination
of J and E has been indicated above (§ 9).
The compiler who united JE with P adopted P
as his framework, and fitted JE into it, making
in either such omissions as were necessary in
order to avoid needless repetition, and incor-
porating cb. xir. from a special source, but
otherwise making little or no change except
such redactional adjustments as the unity of
his work required. Thus he naturally assigned
i. 1-ii. 3 the first place, at the same time
(perhaps) removing ii. 4 a from its original
position as superscription to i. 1, and placing it
where it now stands. In appending next from
J the narrative of Paradise, he changed (as it
seems) Jahioeh into Jahtreh Elohim, for the
purpose of identifying eipressly the Author of
life in ii. 4 b— iii. 24, with God, the Creator, in
i. 1-ii. 4a. Still following J, he incorporated
from it the history of Cain and his descendants,
but rejected the list of Seth's descendants
' See e.g. Wellh. Omp. pp. 32, 35, 37 ; Kuenen, flex.
i 8. 6 ; Kautcsch and Socin (ed. 2), pp. xl. (cp. xlll.),
68,88.
4 E 2
Digitized by
Google
1156
GENESIS
(which J must clearly have contained), except
the first two names, and the etymology of
Noah, in favour (v. 1-28, 30-32) of the
genealogy and chronological details of P. In
vi. 1-ix. 17 he combines into one the double
narrative of the Flood, preserving, however,
more from both the parallel accounts than was
usually his practice, and in parts slightly
modifying the phraseology. The close of
Noah's life (ix. 28 sq.) from P naturally follows
the incident ix. 20-27 from JE. Ch. x., the
Table of nations, embodies particulars taken
from both sources; it is succeeded by the
account in JE of the dispersion of mankind
(xi. 1-9). The history of Israel's ancestors is
now resumed. Ch. xi. 10-26 carries on the
line from Shem to Terah, from P: xi. 27-32
states particulars respecting Terah's family,
especially Abram, derived partly from P, partly
from JE, and necessary as an introduction to
the fuller details of Abram's life, which follow
in ch. xii., &c. Mutatis mutandis, a similar
method was followed by him in the rest of the
Book. The narrative of Genesis, though com-
posite, is constructed in accordance with a
definite plan, to which the final compiler (who
is the true " author " of the book in its existing
form) has accommodated all the details which
he has introduced.
§ 14. Literature. Exegetical : — Fr. Tuch
(Halle, 1838 ; ed. 2, with preface [critical] by
Ad. Merx, Halle, 1871); F. Delitzsch, ed. 1,
1852 ; ed. 5, under the title Xcuer Commentar
fiber die Genesis, Leipzig, 1887 [translated : T.
and T. Clark] ; C. F. Keil, ed. 3, Leipzig, 1878 ;
M. Kalisch, London, 1858 ; A. Knobel (in the
Kurzgefasstes Exeg. Ilandbuch), ed. 1, 1852;
ed. 3-5 (re-written) by A. Dillmann, 1875,
1882,. 1886. Also in J. P. Lange's Theol.-
homil. Bibelwerk (ed. 2, by Lange, 1877); in
Ed. Renss, La Bible, Traduction nouvelle avec
introductions et commentaires, torn. i. Paris,
1879; in the Speaker's Commentary (by E. H.
Browne, afterwards Bishop of Winchester) ; in
the Commentary edited by Bishop Ellicott (by
R. Payne Smith, Dean of Canterbury) ; in the
Pulpit Commentary by T. Whitelaw; in the
Expositor's Bible by Marcus Dods.
The most masterly and complete of these are
those of Dillmann and Delitzsch, which include
all necessary references to recent critical and
archaeological literature (prior to 1886-7).
Critical : — H. Hupfeld, Die Quellen der
Genesis, 1853 ; Th. NSldeke, Vhtersuchungen xur
Kritik des A. T., 1869 [fixes the limits of P] ;
J. Wellhausen, "Die Composition des Hexa-
teuchs" in the Jahrbiichcr fur Deutsche
Theologie, xxi., xxii. (1876-7) [xxi. 392-450
on Genesis], reprinted (a) in Skizzen u. Vorar-
beiten, ii. (1885); (b) together with matter
contributed by the same writer to his edition of
ltleek's Einleitung, published in 1878, on the
structure of Judges, Samuel, and Kings, in
Die Composition des Hexatettchs und der his-
torischen BScher des A. T.'s, 1889; J. Well-
hausen, Prolegomena zttr Gesch. Israels [trans-
lated nnder the title History of Israel}, ed. 3,
1886, esp. ch. viii.; K. Budde, Die Biblische
Urgeschichte (Gen. i.-xii. 5), 1883 ; A. Kuenen,
articles in the Thcol. Tijdschrift, Leiden, 1880,
p. 257 sq, (on Gen. xxxiv.). 1884, p. 121 sq.
(criticism of Budde's work), and his Hist.-
GENESIS
critixh Onderzoek naar net Ontstaan en de
Verzameling van de Boeken des Oudcn Verbonds
(ed. 2), i. 1, 1885 [translated under the title
The Hexateuch, London, 1886] ; R. Kittel, Gesch.
der Hebraer, i. (" Qnellenkunde und Geschichte
der Zeit bis zum Tode Josnas "), 1888 ;
Kautzsch and Socin (above, § 9, note) ; W. R.
Harper in the American journal Hebraica, Oct.
1888, p. 18 sqq., July 1889, p. 243 sqq., Oct.
1889, p. 1 sqq., with the criticisms of W. H.
Green, ib. Jan.-April 1889, p. 137 sqq., Jan.—
March 1890, p. 109 sqq., April 1890, p. 161 sqq.
Special shorter articles or dissertations are men-
tioned by Dillmann, p. xxi. sq. (and elsewhere).
Miscellaneous : — On the cosmogony of Genesis :
Ewald, Erkliirung der Bibl. Urgeschichte in the
JahrbScher der Bibl. Wissenschaft, i. (1849),
76-94 (Gen. i.), ii. 132-165 (Gen. ii.-iii.), iii.
108-115; and in Die Lehre der Bibel von Gott
(esp. vol. iii. § 231 sq.); Ed. Riehm, Der Bibl.
SchSpfungsbericht, Halle, 1881 (a lecture, il-
lustrating the permanent religious value of
the narrative) ; Otto Zockler, Gesch. der Bezie-
hungen zwischcn Theologie und Nattmcissen-
schaft, 2 vols. 1877-9 (exhaustive), more briefly
in his art. " Schopfung " in Herzog*s PRE.*,
xiii. (1884), pp. 629-49; T. K. Cheyne, art.
"Cosmogony" in the Encyclopaedia Britan-
nica ' ; F. H. Reusch, Bibel und Natur (trans-
lated); S. R. Driver, "The Cosmogony of
Genesis" in The Expositor, Jan. 1886, p. 23
sqq., with the references; C. Pritchard, in
Occasional Thoughts of an Astronomer, 1890,
p. 257 sqq. The Phoenician cosmogony (§ 10)
may be read most conveniently in Heinichen's
Praeparatio Ev mgelica of Eusebius, i. 10, to be
compared with the translation in Lenormant,
I.es Origines de PHistoire d'apres la Bible et
les Traditions des Peuples Orientaux,' Paris,
1880-84, i. p. 536 sqq.
The Babylonian account of the Creation
and Deluge may be seen in G. Smith's Chaldean
Account of Genesis, 1876 (ed. 2 by A. H.
Sayce, 1880 ; in German by Friedrich Delitzsch
[with notes], 1876); in Lenormant, I. c. pp. 493
sqq., 601 sqq.; in Schrader's h'AT.*, 1883 [io
English, London, 1885 ; but see note ', § 10]) ;
that of the Creation also in Records of the Past,
second series, i. (1888), p. 133 sqq. (translated by
A. H. Sayce) ; p. 149 sqq. (another version).
The archaeology of Genesis, from i. 1 to x. 3
(at which point the author's labours were
interrupted by his death), is treated, almost
with superabundant illustration and research,
by Fr. Lenormant in the work just referred to.
See also G. Ebers, Aegypten und die BScher
Mose's, i. [all that has appeared: deals only
with Genesis], 1868 ; Friedrich Delitzsch, Wo
lag das Parodies 1 1881 ; A. Dillmann, " Ueber
die Herkunft der Urgcschichtlichen Sagen der
Hebraer," in the Sitzungsberichte der KSn.-
J'reuss. Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin,
1882, p. 427 sq. (translated in the Ftibliotheca
Sacra, New York, July 1883); and on the
interpretation of Gen. xlix. 10, S. R. Driver,
Gen. xlix. 10 : An Exegetical Study, in the
Cambridge Journal of Philology, xiv, (1885),
pp. 1-28.
The text of Genesis, except in a very few
passages (as xvi. 13, xx. 16 b, xli. 56), has been
handed down in great purity. The principal
variants in the versions are noted by Dillmann:
Digitized by
Google
GENNESAB, WATEB OF
see also the same author's BeitrSge aus dem
Bnch der Jubilaen zvr Kritii des Pentateuch-
Textes in the Sitzungsberichte der Kdn.-Preuss.
Akad. der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 1883, pp.
323-340. [S. K. D.]
GENNESAB, WATEB OF (i* Mora t«
Ttnrnadpa ; atjiut Genesar), 1 Mace. xi. 67 : cp.
Ant. xiii. 5, § 7. [Gennesaret, Sea of.]
GENNESABET, LAND OF (i yv T**w
aaptr ; terra Genesar, terra Genesareth). After
the miracle of feeding the fire thousand, oar
Lord and His disciples crossed over the lake of
Gennesaret and " came into the land of Genne-
saret," or (R. V.) "came to the land onto
Gennesaret " (Matt. xiv. 34 ; Mark vi. 54). It is
generally believed that this term was applied to
the fertile crescent-shaped plain on the western
shore of the lake, extending from Khan Minyeh
on the north to the steep hill behind Mejdel on
the south, and called by the Arabs el-Ghuweir,
" the little Ghor." The description given by
Josephns (B. J. Ui. 10, § 8) would apply admir-
ably to this plain. He says that along the lake
of Gennesaret there extends a region of the same
name, of marvellous nature and beauty. The
soil was so rich that every plant flourished, and
the air so temperate that trees of the most
opposite natures grew side by side. The hardy
walnut, which delighted in cold, grew there
luxuriantly : there were the palm-trees that
were nourished by heat, and fig-trees and olives
beside them, that required a more temperate
climate. Grapes and figs were found during
ten months of the year. The plain was watered
by a most excellent spring, called by the natives
Capharnaum, which was thought by some to be
a vein of the Nile, because a fish was found there
closely resembling the coracinus of the lake near
Alexandria. The length of the plain along the
shore of the lake was thirty stadia, and its
breadth twenty. Making every allowance for
the colouring given by the historian to his de-
scription, and for the neglected condition of cl-
Ghiuc-eir at the present day, there are still left
sufficient points of resemblance between the
two to justify their being identified. The length
of the plain from 'Am et-Tineh to Mejdel is
3 miles, or, if the small adjoining plain of et-
Tabghahbe included, 3$ miles; and its greatest
breadth is 14, miles. There are two springs :
the 'Ain et-Tineh, near Khan Minyeh, wh«h is
close to the lake, and only a few inches above
its level; and the ' Am el-Mudaiuaarah, "Round
Fountain," which is about half a mile from the
lake, and one mile from Mejdel. Three streams
issuing from W. 'Amid, W. er-Ruhudtyeh, and
W. ei-Ilamam. cross the plain and help to
fertilise it. The 'Ain et-Tineh, from its low
level and slight head of water, could never have
been utilised for irrigation ; and the " Round
Fountain," from its position and size, could only
have irrigated a very small portion of the plain.
Neither of these fountains could therefore have
been the Capharnaum of Josephns, which is
said to have watered the plain throughout
(SuipSfTai). This could, however, have been
effected by the waters of 'Ain et-Tabghalt, which
were carried into the plain, by a remarkable
aqueduct, at an altitude sufficient to irrigate it
throughout its whole extent. This spring, the
GENNESABET, SEA OF 1157
largest in Galilee, rises to the surface with great
force in the plain of et-Tabghah, about half a
mile from Gennesaret, and, wherever Capernaum
may be placed, is almost certainly the fountain
called by Joseph us Capharnaum. At the northern
extremity of the plain, el-Ghuiceir, are the
mounds of Minyeh, and at its southern end is
Mejdel, Magdala ; on the shore of the lake are
several mounds of rubbish, and on the slope of
the hills, which rise somewhat abruptly, are
shapeless ruins, all perhaps marking the sites
of some of those towns and villages in which
Christ taught. The soil of the plain, enriched by
the scourings of the basaltic hills, is surprisingly
fertile ; and the shore, fringed by a thick jungle
of thorn and oleander in which birds of brilliant
plumage find a home, is broken into bays of
exquisite beauty. Burckhardt tells us that the
pastures of Khan Minyeh are proverbial for their
richness (Syria, p. 319); and the fertility and
beauty of the plain have been remarked upon by
nearly every traveller (see Stanley, S. <$• P.
ch. x. ; Robinson, iii. 282 sq. ; Thomson, L. and
B. p. 347 sq. ; Wilson, Recovery of Jerusalem,
p. 350; Guerin, Galilei, i. 207 ; Sepp, ii. 232).
In the Journal of Classical and Sacred Philology
(ii. 290-308) Mr. Thrupp has endeavoured to
show that the land of Gennesaret was not el-
Ghuiceir, but the fertile plain el-Batihah, on the
north-eastern side of the lake. The dimensions
of this plain and the character of its soil and
productions correspond with the description given
by Josephus of the land of Gennesaret ; but it is
very swampy near the lake, and has no spring
corresponding to the Capharnaum of Joseph us
It is also perfectly clear, from an examination of
the narrative in the Gospels, that Capernaum
(which was certainly west of Jordan) and Genne-
saret were close together on the same side of the
lake. [Capernaum ; Bethsaida.]
Additional interest is given to the land of
Gennesaret, or el-Ghmceir, by the probability
that its scenery suggested the parable of the
Sower. It is admirably described by Dean
Stanley : " There was the undulating corn-field
descending to the water's edge. There was the
trodden pathway running through the midst of
it, with no fence or hedge to prevent the seed
from falling here and there on either side of it,
or upon it. ; itself hard with the constant tramp
of horse and mule and human feet. There was
the ' good ' rich soil, which distinguishes the
whole of that plain and its neighbourhood from
the bare hills elsewhere descending into the
lake, and which, where there is no interruption,
produces one vast mass of corn. There was the
rocky ground of the hillside protruding here
and there through the corn-fields, as elsewhere
through the grassy slopes. There were the large
bushes of thorn — the ' Nabk,' that kind of which
tradition says that the Crown of Thorns was
woven — springing up, like the fruit-trees of t lie
more inland parts, in the very midst of the
waving wheat ' (S. <|' P. p- 426).
[W.A. W.] [W.]
GENNESABET, SEA OF (.xtimr Ttvm-
eap*T, Luke v. 1), one of the names of the
well-known Sea op Galilee (Matt. iv. 18;
Mark vii. 31 ; John vi. 1) or Sea op Tiberias
(John vi. 1), a sweet-water lake through which
the river Jordan flows. The name has been
Digitized by
Google
1158 GENNESAUET, SEA OF
thought to be connected with the older title,
Sea of Chijjnereth or of Chinneroth (Num.
xxxi v. 11; Josh. xii. 3), and with the town of
that name (Josh. six. 35), but this is uncertain,
nor is it known certainly that Chinneroth is a
Semitic word. The " plains south of Chin-
neroth" (Josh. xii. 3) are probably those
surrounding the Jordan south of the lake.
According to Gesenius (Lex.), the Hebrew form
of the name Gennesaret would be 1DM. InTal-
mudic notices (cp. Neubauer, Geog. Tal. p. 215),
the name is spelt ")DU'3 or 1D*3J and identified
with Kinnereth (Tal. Jer. Megillah, i. 1). The
Hidrash (Bereshith Rabba, ch. 98) translates
Gennesaret " Prince's Garden," which would be
the natural rendering in both Hebrew and
Assyrian. The fruits of this region were much
prized in the times when the writers in question
were living near the lake (2nd to 5th cent.
a.d.) The Rabbis applied the Bible words
" blessing of God " to this region (Siphre, end).
The region, though not often mentioned in the
Bible, was famous for its fertility, and well
known not only to Josephus (see especially
Wars, iii. 10, § 8), but also to classic writers
(Strabo, xvi. ; Pliny, v. 16 ; Ptol. v. 15), and in
every succeeding age it has been a place of
pilgrimage, and its natural productions have
been described by Moslem as well as by Christian
authors.
Sea of GtmneMret or Caltlee.
Josephus describes the shores of the lake,
within a century of the time when it was the
scene of many incidents in the life of Christ, and
before the time when Tiberias on its shores
became the seat of the Sanhedrin, and the
centre of Jewish life, after the destruction of
Jerusalem. He gives the dimensions of the
lake as 140 furlongs by 40, and speaks of the
sweet water and numerous fish. The land of
Gennesaret near the lake was fertile, and many
trees — such as the walnut, palm, fig, and olive —
grew near the shores. Vines also were cultivated,
the air was of good temperature, and the plain
was watered by the spring of Capernaum.
Titus, at the time of which Josephus is speaking,
had constructed a fleet on the lake, for the
GENNESARET, 8EA OF
attack of Tarichaeae at the south end of the
same ; and although at the present time there
are only one or two boats on the lake, there
were ships on its waters in the 10th and 12th
centuries A.D.
The lake lay between the territory of Ma-
nasseh in Bashan and of Naphtali west of Jordan,
as has been shown by the recent discovery of
certain towns of Naphtali on the plateau west
of Tiberias. The Talmudic commentators say
the same (Tal. Bab. Baba Kama, 81 b, quoted by
Reland, Pal. i. p. 259), and in the same treatise
(80 b) fishing in the waters of the Tiberias
(IV-OB h& riO<) is noticed. Pliny (v. 16)
gives a short but clear account (quoted by
Keland, Pal. i. p. 440) under the name Lake of
Genesera. He makes it 16 miles long and 6
miles wide. On the east he says were Julias and
Hippos ; on the south Tarichaeae, whence the lake
itself was sometimes named ; on the west Tiberhis,
with salubrious hot springs. In Ptolemy's
geography it is also called Ti04pias \lpov.
The lake is a natural basin, pear-shaped and
surrounded with limestone cliffs, except on the
north and north-west, where steep slopes lead
down from the mountains of Naphtali, and from
the plains of Lower Galilee, respectively. A
narrow strip of flat ground occurs on either
side, and on the north-west enlarges into the
small plain of Gennesaret, now only tilled in a
few patches and covered with brushwood,
measuring 3 miles by 1 J mile, and watered by
the springs in the western hills and by the
" Round Fountain " QAin el Madowarah) in the
plain itself. The soil is a rich basaltic loam.
[Gennesaret, Land of.] The north shore of
the lake is rocky, and indented with small coves.
The plain of the Batihah, east of the Jordan, at
. he north-east corner of the lake, is larger than
that of Gennesaret, measuring about 3 miles along
the shore, with an extreme width of 1 J mile. It
is very swampy, with a rich basaltic soil, and
watered by several streams, that of Wady
Hej&j being larger than either of the Gennesaret
streams (Sir C. W. Wilson, Recovery of Jeru-
salem, p. 368). The name of the ruin of
.Ifes'adii/eh in this plain may be thought to
preserve that of Bethsaida Julias, though not at
the ancient site [see Bethsaida]. A consider-
able cultivation is described in this plain by
Robinson (Bib. Res. ii. 411), similar to that of
the • Gennesaret vale, and the nomad Arab
tribes here possess large herds of buffaloes.
The Jordan enters the lake on the north, and has
there formed a small delta. The greatest depth
of water in the concave basin, according to the
measurements of Lieut. Lyuch, is 165 feet
(Report, p. 15; cp. Rob. 'Bib. Res. ii. 417).
The average height of the plateau cast of the
lake is about 1200 feet above the Mediter-
ranean, and that ou the west about 1000 feet.
The level of the lake itself is 680 feet below
that of the Mediterranean, as determined by a
line of levels run by the surveyors of Palestine.
The cliffs are precipitous and rugged, but the
scenery of the lake is somewhat featureless, and
not so wild as that of the Dead Sea. Its more
picturesque effects are due to the colours of the
sunset or of the storm. The general colouring
in summer is white or dusky brown, but in
spring the vegetation covers the slopes with
Digitized by
Google
GENNESABET, SEA OF
green. On the north the ground is strewn
with basaltic debris. The actual length is
12} miles north and sooth by 8 miles at its
widest part east and west. The cultivation on
the shores has much decreased.* In the plain
of Gennesaret corn and indigo are grown; there
are a few palms at Kefr Arjib, east of the lake,
near Magdala and Tiberias, and a grove at the
south end of the lake. Robinson (Bib. lies. ii.
388} mentions maize, wheat, barley, millet,
tobacco, melons, grapes, gourds, cucumbers, and
a few vegetables, the melons being especially
tine; rice was also grown (p. 402). The
prater extent of shore is now however wild,
the ground covered in spring with gigantic
GENNESAEET, SEA OF 1159
thistles and, near the springs, with oleanders.
The papyrus is also fouud in the swampy
ground, where some of the springs run into the
lake. The waters are still full of fish of
various kinds, resembling bream and perch, and
the famous coraciuus or shent fish, to which
Josephus refers. These fish, caught in nets or
by poisoning bread crunibs with bichloride of
mercurv, are fully described by Dr. Tristram
(VEF. 'Mem. and Nut Hist, of the Ilible, p. 285) ;
they resemble the Nile fishes, and are fonnd
also in the Jordan. The shoals are very
numerous, and fourteen species hare been
identified, two of which are very common, viz.
Chromis Xilotica and Clariaa macrocanthtu :
Sea of Qannamrat or OalUue. with Uie village of Magdal*.
three other species of the African genus Hemi-
cAromi seem to be peculiar to the lake. The
o/rncmus or she.at fish is the second of those
named, and is said to occur in the Round
Fountain as well as in the lake. Mediaeval
rr-canes are mentioned by El Mukaddotl (10th
«eot ».d.) at Tiberias, with palm-trees and the nabk
frail, as well as nunufactures of carpets, paper, and
doth. There were then boat* on the lake. Tbe climate
w eonsMered unhealthy ; the hot baths were, however,
audi rrputed for the cure of skin disease*. In the 12th
century there were mills mar Maftdala, and tbe owners
M fiahtng right. In the lake (rod. Dipt. 1, No. 166).
Tiberias was then a walled town and capital of tbe
1 legends as to these fishes occur in several
tractates, but are more curious than valuable.
The chief inhabited site is the town of
i Tiberias, founded (or rebuilt) by Herod Antipas.
South of this are the famous hot springs, which
probably mark the site of Mammon (1 Ch.
vi. 76), or Hammath (Josh. xix. 35) : the
distance from Tiberias is only 1} miles. The
springs have an average temperature of 137°
Fahr., and are said to have greatly increased in
temperature aud in volume at the time of the
great earthquake of Safed in 1837.
At the south Cud of the lake towards the
I west and close to the Jordan outlet was
Tarichaeae, the ruins of which still exist, almost
I surrounded with water, at Kcrak.
Digitized by
Google
1160 GENNESARET, SEA OF
On the slopes further west was Sinnnbris
(Senn-en-nabrah), mentioned by Josephus in
connexion with the Jordan ( Wars, iii. 9, § 7 ;
ir. 8, § 2). On the east shore Gamala (el
Hosn) stood on the cliffs, and Hippos (Susieh)
has recently been fixed at a ruin 2 miles east of
the lake shore, and a mile west of File (Aphek).
Further north a small ruined mound, called
JCerta, on the narrow plain at the foot of the
slopes, is supposed to mark the city of the
Geroesenks (Matt. viii. 28 ; cp. Mark v. 1).
Choraxin, on the slopes north of the Sea of
Galilee, is a well-known site, but opinion differs
as to Capernaum. Some writers, following
Robinson, place it close to the " Kigtree Spring "
at the ruin of Mint/eh, near the little cliff,
pierced by an ancient cutting at the north end
of the plain of Geonesaret, near the shore.
This opinion seems to gather support from
mediaeval Jewish tradition. Other authors
accept the Christian tradition, which since the
4th century has always placed Capernaum nt
Tell Hum. Between these two sites, which are
2) miles apart, are the five Hue springs called Kt
Tahtjhah, with ruined mills, and a reservoir
whence they were fed. This appears to be the
Migdol Tseboia of the Talmud, "the dyer's
tower " (Tal. Jer. Taanith, iv. 8 : cp. Neubaucr,
Uecxj. Tal. p. 217). It is possible that the
curious water towers at this site, and at Mag-
ilala, may have had some connexion with the
art of dyeing, which was a common Jewish
occupation in later times.
The sites so noticed are ruinous, but in the
plain of Gennesaret there is a small hamlet
containing three or four families of Algerines,
who till the plain. It is called Aba Shushch,
from its sacred shrine. It does not appear to
be an ancient site. At the south end of the
plain is itejdcl (Magdala), a mud village of
about 80 inhabitants, with palms and ruined
mills, and cultivation to the north.
The population of Tiberias is reckoned only
at 2,000 to 3,000 souls, including the Jews
(about 200), the Christians, and the Moslems.
Thus the decay of cultivation in this region is
no doubt mainly due to decay in population.
The existence of ruins of no less than nine small
towns, on or near the shore, is evidence of the
former prosperity of the region. The climate
is now extremely hot in summer and mild in
winter, owing to the depression and to the
surrounding rocks; but if we may judge from
the frequent notice of fevers and other diseases
among the population of this region, which
recur in the Gospel narratives, the climate
cannot have been very different in the time of
Christ from that of our times, although irriga- I
tion and cultivation may have decreased the
power of the malaria, now prevalent m the
swampy ground near the springs.
The vicinity of the lake is subject to sudden
storms, such as are mentioned in the Gospels
(Matt. viii. 24, xiv. 24; Mark iv. 37, vi. 48 ; Luke
viii. 23; John vi. 18), blowing down from the
western gorges. These occur in spring and
early summer, as well as in autumn and winter,
and are sometimes induced by the great heat in
the lake basin. Such a storm has been de-
scribed by Sir Charles Wilson (Recor. of Jems.
p. 340), in a series of papers which give the
fullest extant account of the whole lake. The
GENTILES
region surrounding the lake is also subject to-
earthquakes, and the hot springs of Tiberias and
Gadara, together with the basalt fields north
and west of the valley, are evidence of volcanic
forces which are still working beneath the
surface, and which in pre-historic times were
very powerful. Monumental notices of the
Sea of Galilee are confined to the slight refer-
ence in the Travels of a Mohar (or Egyptian
official), who in the 14th century u.c. appears
to have reached its shores from the west, and
to have travelled down to the Jordan valley
past Taricbaeae. The region lay apart from the
main highways of war and commerce, and its
most prosperous period was perhaps in the 2nd
century A.D., when the Jews gathered round the
famous school of the Mishnaic Rabbis, and when
synagogues and other buildings were erected in
the towns on the shore. The earliest inscrip-
tions in Greek and in Hebrew, found in the
vicinity, belong to this peaceful period, and the
opinion of architectural authorities attributes
the well-known synagogues of Tell Hum,
Chorazin, and others to this age. The earliest
remains are, however, the scattered dolmens
on the hills to the north, and the old stone
circle (Ahjar en-Nasara) on the plateau to the
west — relics probably of Canaanite idolatry.
The traditional scenes of various events in the
life of Christ shown near the lake, have not
been continuously fixed at any site, and vury
in different ages. They cannot, therefore, be
considered to possess authority." [C. R. C.J
GENNE'US (T.' Ttmaios, A. Uvrt6s ; Gen-
nanus), father of Apollonius, who was one of
several generals (orpariryol) commanding towns
in Palestine, who molested the Jews while Lysias
was governor for Antiochus Eupator (2 Mace,
xii. 2). Luther understands the word as au
adjective (ycwcuos= well-born), and has "des
edlen Apollonius."
GENTILES. I. Old Testament.— The He-
brew '13 in sing.=a people, nation, body politic ;
in which sense it is applied to the Jewish nation
amongst others. In the pi. it acquires an ethno-
graphic and also an invidious meaning, and is
rendered in A. V. by Gentiles and Heathen.
D?1J, the nations, the surrounding nations,
fureiijners as opposed to Israel (Neh. v. 8). In
Gen. x. 5 it occurs in its most indefinite sense =
the far-distant inhabitants of the Western Isles
(see Dillmann* and Delitzsch [1887]), without
the slightest accessory notion of heathenism or
barbarism. In Lev., Deut., Pss. the term is
applied to the various heathen nations with
which Israel came into contact ; its meaning
grows wider in proportion to the wider circle
of the national experience, and more or less
invidious according to the success or defeat of
the national arms. In the Prophets it attains
at once its most comprehensive and its roost
hostile view : hostile in presence of victorious
rivals, comprehensive with reference to the
triumphs of a spiritual future (cp. Schultz,*
b A legend current among Jews and Moslems predicts
Ibst Messiah will rise from the Set of Gennesaret. It
besrs a curious resemblance to the old Persian legend of
a future prophet wbo Is to be bom In a legendary lake in
the East.
Digitized by
Google
GENUBATH
Alttest. Theologie, p. 745 sq., and [with caution]
Cheyne, The Origin of the Psalter, p. 291 sq.
and notes).
Notwithstanding the disagreeable connotation
of the term, the Jews were able to use it, even
in the plural, in a purely technical, geographical
sense. So Gen. x. 5 (see above) ; Is. ix. 1. In
Gen. xiv. 1, Josh. xii. 23, D?1J is by R. V. and
most moderns taken as the name of a land,
" Goiim " (cp. Delitzsch and Dillmann* on Gen.
I. c, though Dillmann* prefersj " nations," in
Josh. /. a).
For "Galilee of the Gentiles," cp. Matt. iv.
15 with Is. ix. 1, where the A. V. and R. V.
(text) read " Galilee of the nations." In Heb.
D'iin bfai means the "circle of the Gen-
tiles ; " kot' i(ox4v, W>3f}, hag-Galil ; whence
the name Galilee was applied to a district which
was largely peopled by the Gentiles, especially
the Phoenicians.
II. AVw Testament. — 1. The Greek t8ns in
sing, means a people or nation (Matt. xxiv. 7 ;
Acts ii. 5, ke.% and even the Jewish people
(Luke vii. 5, xxiii. 2, &c. ; cp. '13, supr.). It is
only in the pi. that it is used for the Heb. D'13,
heathen, Gentiles (cp. tivos, heathen, ethnic) : in
Matt. xxi. 43 Wmi, " nation," alludes to, but
does not directly stand for, " the Gentiles. ' As
equivalent to Gentiles it is found in the Epistles
of St. Paul, but not always in an invidious sense
(ejg. Rom. xi. 13 ; Eph. iii. 1, 6).
2. 'TXknv, John vii. 35, i) Suurxopa ruv
'EXA^rWt " the Jews dispersed among the Gen-
tiles " (R. V. " the Dispersion among [marg. of]
the Greeks ") ; Rom. iii. 9, 'lovtaioos ml 'ZKKn-
ras, " Jews and Gentiles " (R. V. " Greeks ").
The A. V. is not consistent in its treatment
of this word ; sometimes rendering it by Greek
(Acts xiv. 1, xvii. 4; Rom. i. 16, x. 12), some-
times by Gentile (Rom. ii. 9, 10, iii. 9 ; 1 Cor.
x. 32), inserting Greek in the margin. The
R. V. translates it always " Greek " (see Thorns,
Concordance to the B. V. of the A. T., s. n.).
The places where "EAAijv is equivalent to Greek
simply (as Acts xvi. 1, it) are much fewer
than those where it is equivalent to Gentile.
The former may probably be reduced to Acts
xvi. 1, 3, xviii. 17 ; Rom. i. 14. The latter use
of the word seems to have arisen from the
almost universal adoption of the Greek language.
Even in 2 Mace. iv. 13, 'ZKKt)ytaiibs appears as
synonymous with hK\o<pvKiay.is (cp. vi. 9) ; and
in Is. ix. 12 the LXX. renders DWvB D Y
"EAAqmu; and so the Greek Fathers defended
the Christian faith webs 'EWnras, and icofl'
'EAA^mv- [Greek ; Heathen.] (T. E. B.]
GENU'BATH (fOM ; Tarnfrte ; Genubath),
the son of Hadad, an Edomite of the royal family,
br an Egyptian princess, the sister of Tahpcnes,
the queen of the Pharaoh who governed Egypt
in the latter part of the reign of David (1 K. xi.
20 ; cp. r. IG). Genubath was born in the palace
of Pharaoh, and weaned by the queen herself;
after which he became a member of the royal
establishment, on the same footing as one of the
sons of Pharaoh. The fragment of Edomite
chronicle in which this is contained is very re-
markable, and may be compared with that in
GERAE
11CI
Gen. xxxvi. Genubath is not again mentioned
or alluded to. The meaning of the name has
been variously traced to an Egyptian source,
and is given as " curly " or " the Southern "
or " the Pilnitc " (PJiSA. x. 372). [F.]
GE'ON (ri[cSe; Gehon), i.e. Gihon, one of
the four rivers of Eden ; introduced, with the
Jordan, and probably the Nile, into a figure in
the praise of wisdom (Eccl us. xxiv. 27). This is
merely the Greek form of the Hebrew name, the
same which is used by the LXX. in Gen. ii. 13.
GE'B A (KTJ, ? = little weight ; T-npA), one of the
"sons," i.e. descendants, of Benjamin, enume-
rated in Gen. xlvi. 21, as already living at tin-
time of Jacob's migration into Egypt. He was
son of Bela (1 Ch. viii. 3). [Bela.] The text of
this last passage is very corrupt ; and the ditFerent
Geras there named seem to reduce themselves into
one, — the same as the son of Bela. Gera, who is
named in Judg. iii. 15 as the ancestor of Ehud,
and in 2 Sam. xvi. 5 as the ancestor of Shimei
who cursed David [Becher], is probably also
the same person. Gera is not mentioned in the
list of Benjamite families in Num. xxvi. 38-40 :
of which a very obvious explanation is that at
that time he was not the head of a separate
family, but was included among the Belaites;
it being a matter of necessity that some of
Beta's sons should be so included, otherwise there
could be no family of Belaites at all. Dr.
Kalisch has some long and rather perplexed ob-
servations on the discrepancies in the lists in
Gen. xlvi. and Num. xxvi., and specially as
regards the sons of Hen jam in. But the truth
is that the two lists agree very well so far as
Benjamin is concerned. For the only discrepancy
that remains, when the absence of Becher and
Gera from the list in Num. is thus explained, is
that for the two names 'rifit and V\ih (Ehi and
Rosh) in Gen., we have the one name DITIN
(Ahiram) in Num. If this last were written
DK"1, as it might be, the two texts would be
almost identical, especially if written in the
Samaritan character, in which the shin closely
resembles the mem. That Ahiram is right we
are quite sure, from the family of the Ahi-
ramites, and from the non-mention elsewhere of
Rosh, which in fact is not a proper name.
[Rosh.] The conclusion therefore seems certain
that Vni~\\ '!!$< in Gen. is a mere clerical error
[Delitzsch (1887) and Dillmann 1 leave the matter
untouched], and that thero is perfect agreement
between the two lists. This view is strengthened
by the further fact that in the word which
follows Rosh, viz. Muppim, the initial m is an
error for sh. It should be Shuppim, as in Num.
xxvi. 39 ; 1 Ch. vii. 12. The final m of Ahiram,
and the initial sh of Shuppim, have thus been
transposed. To the remarks made under Becher,
it should be added that the great destruction of
the Benjamites recorded in Judg. xx. may ac-
count lor the introduction of so many new
names in the later Benjamite lists of 1 Ch. vii.
and viii., of which several seem to be women's
names. [A. C. H.]
GERAH. [MEA8CRE8.]
GERA'B (V)i; Ttpapi. The name is
rendered " sojourning " by Simonis, and " water-
Digitized by
Google
1162
GERAR
pots " by Gesenius, Lex. ; the modern Arabic
w w
name of the site is \ ■>. A «J J»-, apparently
" ruin of the pottery maker " [Khurbet Umm
■a '
Jcrrdr], from J.^, pi. ,\^> " a water-pot."
There is much pottery at the site. It is, how-
ever, doubtful if this is the original meaning of
the Hebrew name). Gerar is first mentioned
(Gen. x. 19) with Gaia as being on the S.W.
border of Palestine; then as a place where
Abraham "sojourned" ("U), apparently after
he had " dwelt " (3C) in the Negeb or " dry "
country, between Kadesh and Shur (Gen. xx.
1). At this time it was the abode of
Abimelech, the Philistine king (Gen. xxvi. 1),
and Isaac dwelt in Gerar (e. 6) and sowed
corn, and dug again wells in the valley (?ri3,
" a torrent bed ") of Gerar, which had been
previously dug 0211) by Abraham (r. 18), to
which he gave the names Eskk and Sitxaii,
"contention" and "enmity." His further
retreat from the pastoral lands of the Philis-
tines was to liehoboth and Beersheba. In a
later age we read that Asa, after defeating the
Ethiopians (Cushites) at Mareshah (in Wddy
Sdfieh or Zephathah, close to Beit Jibrin), pur-
sued them to Gerar (2 Ch. xiv. 13, 14). Yet
later we find the Gerrhenians, or people of
Gerar, mentioned as defining the limit of the
power of Judas Maccabaeus on the south
(2 Mace. xiii. 24). In most of the Biblical
passages the Samaritan Version reads " As-
calon" for Gerar, and the Arabic &*oAsd
(Kkalisi or Klusa: cp. Reland, Pal. ii. p. 805),
showing that the ancient site of Gerar was
unknown to these copyists. The Targum of
Jonathan also substitutes Arad. Nevertheless
the name was known to Josephus (Ant. i. 12,
§ 1 ; viii. 12, § 1), and the Onomasticon in the
4th cent. a.d. refers to Gerara as being 25
miles south of Eleutheropolis, iu the region
called Geraritica, beyond Daroma. Geraritica
.seems to be noticed in the Talmud (Ip'TIJ, Tal.
Jer. S/tebiith, vi. 1 ; Midrash Bercshith Rabba,
ch. 46 ; Targ. Jon. on Gen. xx. 1 ; Neubauer,
Oeoj. Tal. p. 65) as an unhealthy region near
the "river of E^ypt." It was inhabited by
Gentiles, excepting the Jews at Gaza. Sozomen
{Hist. lib. vi. 32, quoted by Reland, Pal. ii.
p. 805) says that there was a large monastery
and a very great torrent at Gerar. With
exception of the distance given by Eusebius,
these indications are not very exact, but they
all agree in pointing to the region S.E. of Gaza,
on the way to the Negeb or " dry " land south
of Beersheba, and on the border of the Egyptian
desert, in the S.E. corner of the Philistine
country. This is exactly where the ruined site
(Khurbet Umm Jerrdr) has been found, on the
right bank of the great torrent-bed of Wldy
Ghuzzeh, which flows N.W. to fall into the sea
about 4 miles south of Gaza. The distance from
this site of Gerar to Eleutheropolis (Beit Jibrin)
is actually 30 English miles ; but this may be
considered as approximately representing the
estimated distance in the Onomasticon. There
are no stone wells inch as occur at Beersheba,
GERASA
but water is easily obtained by digging
Hufeiyir, " pits," in the torrent-bed. These
are easily tilled in and require to be redug,
thus not only illustrating the redigging of
Abraham's wells by Isaac, but preserving the
same word, used in the Hebrew narrative, for
"digging" the shallow water-pits for the
flocks, necessitated by the fact that the water
flows beneath the surface of the shingly bed of
the torrent. The ruins consist of a large
mound, the site of a good-sized town : about a
dozen cisterns or granaries of rubble, with
domed roofs, exist among the debris ; a few
fragments of glass and tesserae were observed,
and on the sides of the torrent-bed a thickness
of six or ten feet of broken pottery, half buried.
The pottery is hard and red, and probably not
very ancient. The country round is a pastoral
plain, with water only in the great courses
which run down from Beersheba, by Gerar, to
the sea. The region generally is much like
that round Beersheba, and well fitted for the
pastoral nomadic life of the Hebrew patriarchs ;
yet not incapable of producing a crop of corn
such as Isaac reaped. The life of the neigh-
bouring Arabs — mainly pastoral, yet not
without some attempt at agriculture — repre-
sents that of the Patriarchs (see Mem. Surrey
West Pal. iii. 389). [C. R. C]
GER'ASA(Npo<ro; Arab. Jerdsh, (ji\y>-).
This famous town is not mentioned in the
Bible, but in Mark v. 1 the R. V. reads " Ge-
rasenes" for the "Gadarenes" of the A. V.,
referring to the inhabitants of the district of
which Gerasa was the capital. This change is
made on the authority of the Sinaitic and
Vatican JISS. and Codex Bezae. In Matt. viii.
28 the Sinaitic MS. reads "Gazarenes" for
" Gadarenes." There was evidently a confusion
made by copyists between Gadara and Gerasa,
and Origen points out (see Reland, Pal. ii.
p. 806) that the latter is too far from the Sea
of Galilee to be the site intended in the Gospel,
although the reading in the majority of the
MSS. known to him appears to have been
Gerasenes in Matt. viii. 28. The meaning of the
name is probably " plain " or " pasture " (see
Gesen. Lex.), and there are several sites in
Palestine east and west of Jordan where it
recurs as Jerdsh in the modern nomenclature of
ruined sites.
The earliest historic notice of Gerasa is found
in Josephus in the time of Alexander Jannaeus,
about 85 n.c. ( Wars, i. 4, § 8). Marching from
Pella near the Jordan valley, the Hasmonean
king penetrated S.E. to this remote town, already
a strong place, and built a triple siege-work
round it, taking it Anally by assault. In the
time of Josephus the town marked the limits of
Peraea, or the country beyond Jordan on the
side of the desert ( Wars, iii. 3, § 3). In the
Talmudic writings Gerash (EHJ) is made equiva-
lent to Gilead (Midrash on Samuel, ch. xiii. ;
Neubauer, (Hog. Tal. p. 250). The city was well
known in the 4th cent., and Jerome (OS* p. 158,
29, s. v. Gergasi) calls it urbs insignis Arabiat.
It had risen from its ashes in the 2nd century
A.D. — the time of its greatest prosperity — after
having been set on fire by Lucius Annius during
the war of Vespasian against the Jews ( Wars,
Digitized by
Google
GEEASA
iv. 9, § 1). The Jews themselves (Wars, ii. 18,
§ l)jiad wasted this region just before the war in
revenge for the massacres at Caesarea, and the
population is called " Syrian " by Josephus,
being no donbt Aramean.' Pliny appears to
refer to Gerasa in the form Galasa, as now read
(v. 18), in enumerating towns of the region of
Gilead and Bashan ; and Epiphanius {Adv. Haeres.
book ii.) speaks of the spring in the city of
Gerasa of Arabia. Stephanus (Ethnic.) says that
it belonged to the region of the fourteen cities
(perhaps meaning Decapolis) in Syria, and was
the home of Ariston Rhetor, lamblichus, who
mentions it with Bostra, says it was colonised by
the veterans of Alexander the Great. Jerome
(<:d Obad. 1) says that the region of Gerasa was
the ancient Gilead (cp. Reland, J'al. ii. 806).
Coins of Gerasa are said by Keland to exist,
bearing the legend APTEMIZ TYXH TE-
PAEIzN, showing the worship of Artemis in
the temple here erected in the 2ud century A.D.
The town however became Christian, and its
bishops attended the Great Councils oft he Church.
In the 10th century £1 Mukaddasi speaks of the
region Jebel Jarash as being full of villages in
trade relation with Tilierias. Baldwin II. early
in the 12th century (1121 A.D.) besieged Jarras,
and the chronicler speaks of its strong site and
the mighty masonry of its walls. William of
Tyre, describing this siege, makes the distance a
few miles (leagues) from the Jordan (Hist. xii.
ch. 16): the town was then fortified by a garrison
sent by the Sultan of Damascus; but as the
latest buildings in Gerasa belong to the By-
zantine period, it would appear never to have
been inhabited by any settled Moslem population.
In the 13th century Yakut, who had not seen it,
describes the site as once a mighty city, but
" now a total ruin." A river however turned
several mills, and the mountains round contained
many villages. Jerash, he says, had been
conquered in the time of Omar (Le Strange, ]'al.
under Moslems, p. 462). The importance of
Gerasa is, however, attested by its ruins rather
than by any historic notices of the site. In
respect of these Roman remaius it is perhaps
the most interesting example in Syria of the
great works of the Antonines (140-180 A.D.),
presenting even more variety than Palmyra,
and being also more purely Roman. Surpassing
Philadelphia and Gadara, and laying before our
eyes the complete plan of a Roman colonial city,
with no later additions save a church close to
the great Temple, it stands as it was left by the
shock of earthquake or after the tierce assault
of the followers of Omar.
The site is on the uplands of Gilead, 18 miles
east of the Jordan and 5 miles north of the
Jabbok, at an elevation of about 1700 feet
above the Mediterranean, near the border of
the Syrian desert. The town lies across a flat
valley with low hills of grey limestone, the
summits of which are occupied by the walls on
the east and west. A perennial brook in a
sunken bed divides the town into two unequal
portions, the largest to the west, and flows south
GERASA
HH3
» Since, in tbe passage referring to the attack by
Annios, Jericho Is said to have been held by the Romans,
it does not seem neo.swiry to adopt Keland's reading,
• tatara (Oezer) for Gerasa; but tbe criticism Is worthy
•A notice.
in a bright stream, with a cascade close to tin.'
south wall. The course is surrounded with
oleanders, but the hills are bare, with a little
scrub of oak and mastic in places. Corn is also
grown on the slopes by the villagers of Suf, the
nearest inhabited place. Approaching from the
south, scattered sarcophagi, a triumphal arch,
aud a great basin 230 yards by 100 yards, sur-
rounded with tiers of stone seats, are first seen.
This latter structure is the naumachia or circus
for naval contests, once filled from the stream.
The city gate is a quarter of a mile to the north.
The area of the walls, which are traceable on
all sides with six gates, has been over-esti-
mated : according to Kiepert's plan, it is not
quite 3,000 yards, enclosing a polygon. Within
the walls the main street of columns runs
parallel to the stream on the west ; the circular
forum or jieribolos being on the south, close to
a theatre and a temple. The great temple
occupies the western slope near the centre of
the western quarter. A second theatre exists
further north ; and a third temple, east of the
stream, in the N.E. corner of the town. A
basilica or judgment hall faces the great temple,
east of the main street ; and north of this, close
to the stream, are the baths. Two main streets
run across the stream, that from the basilica
having a bridge with ruts carefully cut for
chariot wheels. Auother large public building
stands in the cast quarter, near the stream,
between the two streets. The size of the
buildings may be judged from that of the
pillars of the southern temple, which are
38 feet in height and 4$ in diameter. In
the basilica is a fine red granite pillar shall,
which must have been brought from Egypt or
from Sinai. The site was carefully explored by
Burckhardt, who copied most of the inscriptions.
Of these ten are known, one having the name of
Antonius. As usual in Syria, the Romans have
used the Greek language and character. Two
texts near the ruined foundations of the church
(immediately south of the great temple) are of
special interest, as they refer to the establish-
ment of Christianity and the discontinuance of
the pagan worship. The shorter is a memorial
of a certain ' Af 8\o<pupos or " victor " — a term
which is sometimes applied to Christian
champions or martyrs — named Theodorus.
" His body," says the poet, " is in the earth, but
his soul in the wide heaven." This text is in
hexameters and marked with the Cross: the
date is probably about the 5th century A.D.
The second and longer text, in 13 hexameter
lines, was carved by a priest named Aeneas (sec
translation in Conder's Palestine, 1889, p. 181),
and relates that the clouds of darkness having
been dispelled by the grace of God, the sign of
the Cross has been substituted for the evil odour
of the sacrifices formerly offered here. The
region round Jerash was one of the earliest to
accept Christianity, but the text above mentioned
is the most important yet discovered in con-
nexion with the abolition of pagan rites in
Syria. Gerasa was no doubt an important
trading centre, communicating with the Haunin,
aud with the southern cities of Gilead as well
as with the west. It shared the fate of all the
cities east of Jordan, and ceased to be inhabited
when the Arabs overthrew the Byzantine power.
The best accounts are in Burckhardt's and
Digitized by
Google
1164
GEBGESENES
Buckingham's Travels. It was visited by the
present writer in 1882, but would repay a
mora complete exploration than has yet been
attempted. [C. R. C]
GEBGESE'NES, Matt. viii. 28. [Gadara.]
GEBGESI'TES, THE (ol r,ryt<ralot ;
Vulg. omits), Judith v. 16. [GlBOASUITES.]
GEEIZ*IM(D»ni in ; ropier). The name
is doubtfully translated by Gesenius " Mount of
GEH1Z1M
the Gerizites," but cannot well be connected
with the tribe of Girzites (otherwise Gezrites
or people of Gezer) in Philistia (1 Sam. xivii. 8).
The root ?"13 in Hebrew and Arabic means " to
-T
cut otf" or "separate;" and since no definite
article is used, the term may refer rather to the
features of the mountain than to any ethnical
the Arabic
" barren
name : compare me Araoic - ^,
land " or " un watered." The ruggedness of
Gerizim suggests that the true meaning is
" mountain of the barren places." The position
of Ebal and Gerizim is defined, with unusual
detail, in the first passage in which the name
occurs (Deut. xi. 30 ; R. V.) : " Are they not be-
yond Jordan, behind (or in the western parts of>
the way of the going down of the sun, in the Unix
Digitized by
Google
GEBIZIM
GEBIZ1M
1165
-of the Canaanites, which dwell in the Arabah
<* plain' or 'desert') over against the Gilgal,
near the plains (or terebinths) of Moreh ?" Yet
this account has been understood by Eusebius
and Jerome to refer to a site near Jericho. It
is notable, however, that the extreme horizon
(" behind the sunset ") is clearly intended as
viewed from the region east of Jordan, whence
the two mountains are almost hidden by the
chain to their immediate east. This would not
agree with any site in or near the Jordan valley.
The blessing was to be set (or " given forth )
on Gerizim, though the altar, according to the
Hebrew Version, was to be built on (or at) Ebal
(Dent, xxvii. 4, 12). The tribes were to stand
half on one mountain and half on the other.
According to the Samaritans, who charge the
Jews with altering the text, the altar was to be
erected on (or " at ") Gerizim, the " mount of
the blessing." It is not however to be supposed
that the summits of the mountains are intended,
for in the passage which records the ceremony
(Josh. via. 33) the tribes are said to have stood
" in front " (71D) of either mountain, probably
on the lower slopes, which are separated by a
distance of only half a mile. Much that has
been written as to the difficulty of hearing the !
words spoken by the priests standing between I
the two divisions of the people, is quite un- '
necessary, in view of the precise meaning of the '
Hebrew words. The natural amphitheatre of
hill-slopes is well fitted for the retention of the
voice, but no unusual clearness of the air marks
the spot, nor is any such required by the Bible ac-
count. The space is sufficient for n large national
assembly, and the phonetic difficulty is only that
which is found in every open-air assembly.
The clearest notice of the position of Gerizim
is found in a later passage (Judg. ix. 7), when
Jotham addressed the men of Shechem from the
top of the mountain. In the New Testament
also (John iv. 20, 21), the Samaritan woman,
speaking at Jacob's well, clearly refers to Geri-
zim as the mountain close by, where the Samari-
tans worshipped. It is therefore to be regarded
as certain that the mountain south of the vale
of Shechem is that called Gerizim in the Bible.
The question whether Gerizim is the moun-
tain intended in Genesis (xxii. 2) as the scene of
Abraham's sacrifice of his son is quite distinct.
It is described as in the " land of Morinh "
(rVlb), which has been connected with the
Moreh near Shechem (Gen. xii. 6 ; I)eut. xi. 30),
which was either a "plain" (A. V.) or a group
of "oaks " or terebinths (R. V.); but it should
be noticed that Moriah was the name of the
Temple hill (fl'TID), according to the author of
the Second Book of Chronicles (iii. 1), and Josephus
believed that the Temple mountain was the
scene of this sacrifice (Ant. i. 13, § 2). The
Samaritan tradition identifies it with Gerizim,
and Dean Stanley (S. $ P. p. 235) has argued
in favour of this view. The distance from Beer-
aheba does not absolutely forbid such an identifi-
cation, since Gerizim can be seen at some con-
siderable distance (Gen. xxii. 4); but there
appears to be no very conclusive reason for pre-
ferring the Samaritan to the Jewish tradition on
this point.
The summit of Gerizim was probably a sacred I
place at a very early period, like the summits of ,
many other mountains in Palestine — such as Car-
mel, Olivet, &c. ; but we have no account of any
temple or altar on the mountain in the Bible.
Josephus states that Sanballat, the Horonite,
allied by marriage to the high-priest Jaddua,
built for his son-in-law, Manasseh, a temple on
Gerizim (Ant. xi. 8, § 4) ; but the difficulty
arises that Josephus dates this event in the time
of Alexander the Great, whereas the Sanballat
of the O. T. lived in the time of Nehemiah (Neh.
xiii. 28), nearly a century earlier ; and however
old Sanballat may have been, the two accounts
can hardly be reconciled. The whole of
Josephus' account of the Samaritan history is
marked by strong prejudice; but he clearly
identifies Gerizim as the mountain near Shechem
(Ant. xi. 8, § 6). In a later passage (Ant. xiii.
3, § 4) the dispute before Ptolemy Philometor,
between Jews and Samaritans, as to the com-
parative antiquity of their temples, is narrated.
The peculiar views of Eusebius and Jerome as to
the position of Gerizim and Ebal were also pro-
bably due to Jewish influence. In the Onutnas-
ticon ( OS* p. 253, 79; 158, 4) they identify these
mountains with two hills near Jericho, and reject
the Samaritan statement that they were near
Shechem, with the words sed tehementer er-
rant ; which, however, applies to themselves.
That their view was not generally received is
clear, since the Bordeaux Pilgrim in the same
century places Gerizim at Shechem; and this
is also always the view of every pilgrim or
chronicler who mentions the mountain later.
Eusebius himself (Praep. Ewmg. ix. 22) quotes
lines from Thcodotus which accurately describe
the true position. Procopius of Caesarea, de-
scribing the works of Justinian on the mountain,
also places it near Shechem (De Aedif. v. 7).
In conclusion of the question as to the Sama-
ritan temple, it is remarkable that, in the
Gospel, no allusion is made to its existence. The
fathers are merely said to have worshipped " in
this mountain " (John iv. 20). As, however, John
Ilyrcanus, in 129 n.c, made an expedition into
Samaria, where he is said to have caused the
temple on Gerizim to be deserted (Ant. xiii. 9,
S 1, 10, § 2 ; Wars, i. 2, § 6), it is possible that
it may have been in ruins in the time of Christ.
The coins of Neapolis are believed to represent
a temple on Gerizim, but Robinson has ex-
pressed his doubt (Bib. Ses. ii. p. 293) whether
more than an altar existed on the mountain.
During the war against Vespasian (Josephus,
Wars, iii. 7, § 32) the Samaritans endeavoured
to resist the Romans on Gerizim, but the latter
held apparently the springs at the foot of the
mountain, and the defenders submitted, worn
out by heat and want of water and of food. In
474 a.d. the Emperor Zeno built the church still
to be seen on the summit, to which Justinian
added a fortress in the next century. This church
was seized by the Samaritans under the leader-
ship of a woman in 529 A.D., the third year of
Justinian's reign, but a cruel retribution fell on
the rioters, and it appears that for a time all
access to the mountain was denied them.
The Samaritan accounts of their history are
all unfortunately very late, being written in
the Middle Ages. Gerizim was the centre of
their faith, round which were clustered many
traditional sites. Joseph's tomb, Jacob's well,
the sepulchres of Joshua and of the sons of Aaron
Digitized by
Google
1166
GERIZIM
GERIZIM
were all near to the mountain, on which in all
ages, from the time when they became a dis-
tinct sect, they appear to have shown the site of
Abraham's sacrifice, and to have held their Pass-
over feast. Here, too, they believed that Joshua
set up the Tabernacle, and afterwards built a
temple. The site of Bethel was also shown as
early as the 4th century a.d. on the mountain,
and is still so placed by the Samaritans. The
Samaritan " Book of Joshua " is a legendary
work of the 13th cent. a.D. (Juynboll, Leyden,
1848), founded on earlier materials. It can-
not be relied on except in so far as it shows
Samaritan beliefs. According to this work,
written in Arabic, all Israel gathered thrice
a year on Gerizim, where a temple was erected
(ch. xxiv.), on the altar of which only could
sacrifices be made (ch. xxxviii.). On Gerizim,
in the time of the Judges, the sacred vessels
were hidden in a cave (ch. xlii.), where the
Samaritans believe them still to lie hid. In the
days of the Persians the re-erection of this
temple was permitted, the Jews were defeated
in their contention in favour of Jerusalem, and re-
pented, all Israel worshipping on Gerizim (ch. xlv.).
Alexander the Great acknowledged Gerizim to
be the true centre of worship (ch. xlvi.) ; Hadrian
brought the brazen doors of the Jerusalem
Temple to the shrine which he built on Gerizim
(ch. xlvii.). At this time many of the sacred
books were lost. The Romans placed a guard on
the mountain, and a magic bird of brass warned
them of the approach of any Samaritan (ch. xlviii.):
this appears to have been destroyed in a riot
under Baba Rabba (ch. 1.). Among the articles
of Samaritan belief (see Nutt, Samaritan Hist.
p. 67), the sanctity of Gerizim is one of the most
distinctive. It is regarded as the abode of God
on earth, the home of eternal life, "the Mount
of Blessings," " the Everlasting hill," " the Stone
of Israel " : above it is Paradise ; here Adam and
Seth raised altars, and seven steps led to Noah's
altar ; here were the " twelve stones " on which
the Law was inscribed, the high-priest's house,
and the cave of Makkedah. Gerizim, they say,
is the highest mountain in the world (though
Kbal is 200 feet higher), and Gerizim alone was
not covered by the Flood.
Among mediaeval writers Benjamin of Tudela
is one of the very few who describe the Samaritans.
He mentions an altar on Gerizim (in 1163 a.d.),
where they offered sacrifice, made from the
stones taken by Israel from Jordan. The moun-
tain, he says, was rich in wells and orchards
(which applies only to its N.W. slopes), whereas
Kbal was barren, which applies to the southern
side of the mountain. Sir John Maundeville
(1322) speaks of the sacrifices, and of the tradi-
tion of Abraham's sacrifice. Maundrell (1697
a.d.) speaks of " a small temple or place of
worship," and of the Samaritan assertion that
Joshua's altar was built on Gerizim. He also
regards the latter as more fruitful than Ebal.
The other Jewish pilgrims whose Itineraries are
known refer only in a cursory manner to the
mountain. According to Crusading tradition,
both Dan and Bethel were on or near Gerizim,
and the calves set up by Jeroboam stood on the
mountain, or on Ebal and Gerizim (Marino
Sanuto, 14th cent.) ; but these opinions have no
historic value. If any temple was really built
on Gerizim, it would appear to. have been an
unimportant edifice, soon destroyed, and of which
no remains are recognisable at the present time.
The fullest account of Gerizim is to be found
in the Memoirs of the Survey of Western Pales-
tine (vol. ii. sheet xi. pp. 168-9, 187-93), as ex-
plored in 1866, 1872, 1875, and 1882. The
mountain is one of the highest in Palestine south
of Galilee, rising to a small plateau, half a mile
in length north and south, and presenting steep
slopes on the north and east, while long spurs run
out on the other sides — the whole forming a
remarkable block of rugged limestone, which, as
seen from the western plains or from the plateau
east of Jordan, is conspicuous among the sur-
rounding mountains. The extreme height is
2,800 feet above the Mediterranean, and about
1200 above the vale of Shechem, which lies to
the north, dividing Gerizim from Ebal, while on
the east is the plain of El Mukhnah (" the
camp ") stretching to the hills on the east, which
hide the Jordan valley. This plain is often
identified with Moreh (already mentioned), and
the border of Ephraim appea/s to have run along
its west side at the foot of Gerizim. The mount-
ain consists of hard and very rough limestone,
the lower part dokmiitic, the upper of numnm-
litic beds, found also on Ebal, but not common
in Palestine, except at considerable elevations.
There are two excellent springs on the east, near
the foot of the slope, and on the north is the
'Am Balata (to be noticed later), and further
west, beneath the lower spur, the fine fountain
called Ras el 'Ain. Near the northern springs
occur gardens with olives, figs, pomegranates,
and cactus, which are picturesque in contrast
with the utter barrenness of the rocks which
rise above them. A peculiar knoll, north of the
main summit, is clearly artificial, in part at
least. The white marl, which overlies the
dolomite, appears at the foot of Gerizim on the
south-east. The plain to the east, and the vale
of Shechem, present a contrast to the mountain,
being very fertile and well cultivated, and the
springs and gardens of Shechem itself are
celebrated among Syrians.
The view from the summit is one of the
most extensive and remarkable in Palestine (see
Tent Work in Palestine, chap. ii.). On the north
it is blocked by the superior height of Ebal ;
beneath are seen the buildings and gardens of
Shechem. On the east the hills of Gilead appear ;
above the nearer tops east of the plain of the
Mukhnah. On the south are the mountains
round Shiloh. On the west a large part of the
plain of Sharon appears, beyond the foot hills,
which are dotted with olive-groves and villages,
and the Mediterranean forms the horizon beyond
the yellow sand dunes. Cacsarea can be seen on
this side, and further north the hills beyond
Samaria and the distant range of Carmel.
One of the most remarkable sites connected
with Gerizim is " the Mosque of the pillar "
(JamCa el 'Amid) at the foot of the mountain,
half a mile from the village of Balata. There
appears to have been a sacred Samaritan shrine
in this vicinity, known in later times as " the
Holy Oak " or " the Tree of Grace " — possibly
the oak of Moreh already mentioned. The name
Balata is perhaps a corruption of this title
(Ballut, "oak "), since Jerome (05.* p. 140, 15)
speaks of Balanus as the " oak of Shechem "
(Judg. ix. 6), and as near Joseph's tomb. This
Digitized by
Google
GERIZIM
waa the place where Abimelech was proclaimed,
at the foot of the holy mountain, and the Sama-
ritan tradition appears to connect the site with
the oak by the " sanctuary of Jehovah " (Josh.
xxiv. 26), and with the oak mentioned yet
earlier in the story of Jacob (Gen. xxxv. 6).
The name " Mosque of the pillar " no doubt
commemorates the pillar, or " erect stone," be-
side which the Sheiliemites made their king
under the oak ; but this shrine cannot be the
site of Joshua's altar "at" Ebal, unle>s we take
the Samaritan view as to the alteration of the
text, and suppose that the sanctuary was really
at the foot of Gerizim.
Immediately north of the summit of the moun-
tain are the ruins of L6zeh or Luz — the place
where the Samaritans celebrate the Passover.
This name is also of some antiquity. Samaritan
tradition makes it the site of Bethel, where Jacob
dreamed. In the Onomastiam it is mentioned as
Luza near Shechem (OS.'' p. 167, 14). The ruins
consist merely of dry stone walls, with the
trench for roasting the Paschal lambs, a large
stone on which the high-priest stands, and places
for boiling water and skinning the sacrifice.
The Holy Kock of the Samaritans is a limestone
stratum on the very summit, overlooking the
eastern slope. It trends naturally to the north-
west, and has a pit or care on this side, over
which the Tabernacle is believed to have stood.
The rock measures 50 feet either way, with a
low dry-stone fence to mark its limits. There
is a well-marked artificial " cup hollow " in this
rock, such as so frequently occur at pre-historic
sanctuaries or " earth-fast rocks." It is said to
mark the site of the laver in the court of the
Tabernacle.* East of the rock are the "seven
steps " (of Noah's altar or of Adam's descent
from Eden), and on the south-east corner of the
plateau forming the summit of the mountain is
a small trench in the rock — the supposed site of
Abraham's altar. The " twelve stones " are
rudely-shaped blocks in a foundation wall of
three or four courses. They are not of great size,
and the date of the platform so formed is un-
certain. There are many small praying places,
fenced with stones, round the sacred rock, but
no clear indications of any important building.
The Christian ruins near the north end of the
plateau include Zeno'a octagonal church, with
an apse to the east, and six side chapels with
smaller apses; round which church rises Jus-
tinian's square fortress — 180 feet N. and S. by
230 feet E. and W. — formed of drafted masonry,
such as was used in Byzantine times. A
modern shrine on the north-east tower of tho
fortress is called Sheikh Ghanim, or, by the
Samaritans, the tomb of Shechem ben Hamor.
North of the fortress is a reservoir, 1 20 feet by
60 feet, to supply water, there being none on
the summit : this also is Byzantine work. Pro-
copius says that the church was dedicated
to the Virgin, and was fortified in consequence
of the Samaritan attack upon it: the original
wall round it was a mere dry stone fence, but
the fort of Justinian rendered it impregnable.
The artificial knoll — perhaps a Roman guard
station — has already been noticed : a vallum
* The Samaritan Chronicle, however (Journal Atia~
tique, Dec 1869, p. 435), places the site of the Tabernacle
and temple at Luz.
GERSHOM
1167
protected it on the side of the summit, and a
strong building, 53 feet square, stood on the
knoll.
To the Arab population Gerizim is known only
as Jab I et T6r, a common name for isolated
summits. To the Samaritans it is best known
as " the Mount of the Blessing." [C. B. C.j
GEBI'ZITES, 1 Sam. xxvii. 8. [Gebzites.]
GERRHE'NIANS, THE (tut tuv r.#ij-
ruv, A. I'tnTj/w ; ad Ocrrenos), named in
2 Mace. xiii. 24 only, as one limit of the district
committed by Antiochus Eupator to the govern-
ment of Judas Maccabaeus, the other limit being
Ptolemais (Accho). To judge by the similar
expression in defining the extent of Simon's
government in 1 Mace. xi. 59, the specification
has reference to the sea-coast of Palestine, and,
from the nature of the case, the Gerrhenians,
wherever they were, must have been south of
Ptolemais. Grotius seems to have been the first
to suggest that the town Gerrhon or Gerrha
was intended, which lay between Pelusium and
Rhinocolura ( Wddy el-'Arish). But it has been
pointed out by Ewald (Geschichte, iv. 365, note)
that the coast as far north as the latter place
was at that time in possession of Egypt, and he
thereon conjectures that the inhabitants of the
ancient city of Gkrar, S.E. of Gaza, the resi-
dence of Abraham and Isaac, are meant. In
support of this Grimm (Kurz,j, llandb. ad loc>
mentions that at least one MS. reads repapriv&v,
which would without difficulty be corrupted to
It seems to have been overlooked that the
Syriac Version (early, and entitled to much re-
spect) has Gazar (>*_.). By this may be in-
tended either (a) the ancient Gezer, now Tell
Jeter, S.E. of er-Ramlch ; or (6) Gaza, which
sometimes takes that form in these books. In
the latter case the government of Judaea would
contain the whole coast of Palestine ; and this is
most probably correct. [G.] [W.]
GERSHOM (in the earlier books OCn j, in Ch.
generally Dtenj). 1. (in Ex. Tripoin ; in Judg.
xxx. B. Vtipain, and A. Tupauy. ; Joseph. Trmaot ;
Gersom, Gersan.) The first-born son of Moses
and Zipporah (Ex. ii. 22; xviii. 3). The name is
explained in these passages as if EC "Ij (Ger
shdm)= " a stranger there," in allusion to Moses'
being a foreigner in Midian — " For he said, I
have been a stranger (Ger) in a foreign land."
This signification is adopted by Josephus (Ant.
ii. 13, § 1), and also by the LXX. in the form of
the name which they give — rnpaifi; but accord-
ing to Gesenius (Thcs. p. 3066), its true meaning,
taking it as a Hebrew word, is "expulsion,"
from a root EHJ, being only another form of
Gf.rshon (see also Kiirst, Handnb.). The cir-
cumcision of Gershom is probably related in Ex.
iv. 25. He does not appear again in the history
in his own person, but he was the founder of a
family of which more than one of the members
are mentioned later, (a.) One of these was a
remarkable person — " Jonathan the son of
Gershom," the " young man the Levite," whom
we first encounter on the way from Bethlehem-
Judah to Micah's house at Mount Ephraim
Digitized by
Google
1168
GEBSHON
(Judg. xvii. 7), and who subsequently became
the first priest to the irregular worship of the
tribe of Dan (xviii. 30, 15. rijjwd/t; A. Vtpadip.).
The change of the name " Moses " in this passage,
as it originally stood in the Hebrew text, to
" Manasseh," as it now stands both in the Text
and the A. V. (R. V. has " Moses " ; martj.
Manasseh), is explained under Manasseh.
('>.) But at least one of the other brauches of
the family preserved its allegiance to Jehovah,
for when the courses of the Levites were settled
by king David, " the sous of Moses the man of
< Jod " received honourable prominence, and
■SlIEBUEL, chief of the sons of Uershom, was ap-
pointed ruler (T?') °' tne treasures (1 Ch.
xxiii. 15-17; xxvi/24-28).
2. The form under which the name Gershon
— the eldest son of Levi — is given in several
passages of Chronicle', viz. 1 Ch. vi. 16, 17, 20,
43, 62, 71 ; xv. 7. Ti.e Hebrew is almost alter-
nately DBnj and D1Ch| ; the LXX. have
different renderings of the name ; B. rttaiiy,
A. ri))xr<6e; Vulg. Gersorn and Gersorn.
3. (QCnj; BA. Ityinfp; Gersorn.) The re-
presentative of the priestly family of Phinehas,
among those who accompanied Ezra from Baby-
lon (Ezra viii. 2). In Esdras the name is
■Gubson. [G.] [W.]
GEBSHON ({tehjj; in Gen. Tnpadv, in
other books uniformly Tt&a&r ; and so also A.
with three exceptions ; Joseph. Ant. ii. 7, § 4,
rripcr6fi.il!), the eldest of the three sons of Levi,
born before the descent of Jacob's family into
Egypt (Gen. xlvi. 11 ; Ex. vi. 16). But though
the eldest born, the families of Gershon were
■outstripped in fame by their younger brethren
of Eohath, from whom sprang Moses and the
priestly line of Aaron.* Gershon's sons were
Lidni and Shim (Ex. vi. 17 ; Num. iii. 18, 21 ;
1 Ch. vi. 17), and their families were duly re-
cognised in the reign of David, when the perma-
nent arrangements for the service of Jehovah
were made (1 Ch. xxiii. 7-11). At this time
Gershon was represented by the famous Asaph
" the seer," whose genealogy is given in 1 Cb.
vi. 39-43, andalso in part, ec. 20, 21. The family
is mentioned once again as taking part in the
reforms of king Hezekiah (2 Ch. xxix. 12, where
it should be observed that the sons of Asaph
are reckoned as distinct from the Gershonites).
At the census in the wilderness of Sinai the
whole number of the males of the Bene-Gershon
was 7,500 (Num. iii. 22), midway between the
Kohathites and the Merarites. At the same
date the efficient men were 2,630 (iv. 40). On
the occasion of the second census the numbers
of the Levites are given only in gross (Num.
xxvi. 62). The sons of Gershon had charge of
the fabrics of the Tabernacle — the coverings,
curtains, hangings, and cords (Num. iii. 25, 26 ;
iv. 25, 26) ; for the transport of these they had
two covered wagons and four oxen (vii. 3, 7).
In the encampment their station was behind
(HnS) the Tabernacle, on the west side (Num.
iii. 23). When on the march, they went with
the Merarites in the rear of the first body of
• See an instance of this in 1 Cb. vi. 2-15, where the
line of Kobstb Is given, to the exclusion of the other two
families.
GEBZITES
three tribes — Judah, Issachar, Zebulun — with
Reuben behind them. In the apportionment of
the Levitical cities, thirteen fell to the lot of
the Gershonites. These were in the northern
tribes — two in Manasseh beyond Jordan: four
in Issachar ; four in Asher ; and three in Naph-
tali. All of these are said to have possessed
" suburbs," and two were cities of refuge (Josh,
xxi. 27-33 ; 1 Ch. vi. 62, 71-76). It is not easy
to see what special duties fell to the lot of the
Gershonites in the service of the Tabernacle after
its erection at Jerusalem, or in the Temple.
The sons of Jeduthun " prophesied with a harp,"
and the sons of Heman " lifted up the horn,"
but for the sons of Asaph no instrument is men-
tioned (1 Ch. xxv. 1-5). They were appointed
to " prophesy " (that is, probably, to utter or sing
inspired words, K??), perhaps after the special
prompting of David himself (xxv. 2). Others
of the Gershonites, sons of Laadan, had charge
of the " treasures of the house of God, and over
the treasures of the holy things " (xxvi. 20-22),
among which precious stones are specially named
(xxix. 8).
In Chronicles the name is, with two ex-
ceptions (1 Ch. vi. 1, xxxiii. 6), given in the
slightly different form of Gershom [Gershom,
2]. See also Gershonites. [G.] [W.]
GEKSHOXITES, THE C?Bn.l.f?» •'•«• the
Gershunnite ; B. 6 Vtlaur, t Tt&aurl ; uToi TtS-
aurl; A. [sometimes] Vripaiiv), the family de-
scended from Gershon or Gkrshom, the son of
Levi (Num. iii. 21, 23, 24 ; iv. 24, 27 ; xxvi. 57 ;
Josh. xxi. 33 ; 1 Ch. xxiii. 7 ; 2 Ch. xxix. 12).
"The Gershonite," as applied to indivi-
duals, occurs in 1 Ch. xxvi. 21 (Laadan), xxix. 8
(Jehiel). [G.]
GER'SON (rripo-cix; Gersomus), 1 Esd. viii.
29. [Gershom, 3.]
GER'ZITES, THE (nTJn or *rW1 [Ges.
Thes. p. 301], the Girzite, or the Gerizzite ; B.
omits, A. rbv Ttfrvuov; Gerzi and (Jerri, bnt
in his Quaest. Hebr. Jerome has Getri ; Syr. and
Arab. Godola), a tribe who with the Geshurites
and the Amalekites occupied the land between
the south of Palestine * and Egypt in the time of
Saul (1 Sam. xxvii. 8). They were rich in
Bedawi treasures — " sheep, oxen, asses, camels,
and apparel" (v. 9; cp. xv. 3; 1 Ch. vi. 21).
The name is not found in the text of the A. V.,
but only in the margin (R. V., on the other
hand, has "Girzites" in the text and Qizrites
in the margin). This arises from its having
been corrected by the Masorets {Kerf) into
Gizrites, which form our translators have
» The LXX. (B) has rendered the passage referred to
as follows:— uu i&ov if yij KartfKtLTO awb iyijK6mt»
(?=Q7tfQ)4«»*r«Aan^ovp(A. r«Xa#Kroilp). Ttrri-
XtapcVor itat «»« yijj Atyu»«iv. The word ffetomjovr
may be a corruption of tbe Hebrew meotam . . SkuraA
(? = D^DO + "!«?. AV - "ofold-.toShur"). Some
curslve'MSS. read TcAd> (D^ED fo r ckvQX a place
T ** ■ T
In the south-east of Judah (Josh. xv. 24), which bore a
prominent part In a former attack on tbe AmalekHes
(1 Sam. xv. 4); and this reading Is more satisfactory (cp.
I Driver, Xotu m Me Heb. Tat. ttftttiBB. of Sam. I.e.).
Digitized by
Google
GESEM
adopted in the text. The change is supported
by the Targum, and by A. as above. There is
not, however, any apparent reason for relinquish-
ing the older form of the name, the interest of
which lies in its possible connexion with that of
Mount Gerizim. In the name of that ancient
mountain we have perhaps the only remaining
trace of the presence of this old tribe of Bedawin
in Central Palestine. They appear to have
occupied it at a very early period, and to have
relinquished it in company with the Amalekites,
who left their name attached to a mountain in
the same locality (Judg. xii. 15), when they
abandoned that rich district for the less fertile
but freer South. Other tribes, as the Avvim
and the Zemarites, also left traces of their pre-
sence in the names of towns of the central
district (see Avvim, and p. 395, n. *).
The connexion between the Gerizites and
Mount Gerizim appears to have been first sug-
gested by Gesenius. It has been since adopted
by Stanley (& # P. p. 237, note). Gesenius in-
terprets the name as "dwellers in the dry,
barren country." [Gerizim.] [G.] [W.j
GET3EM, THE LAND OF (yv IW>. ; terra
Jesse), the Greek form of the Hebrew name
Goshxk (Jndith i. 9 ; Syr. Goshen).
GE'SHAM (je>»3, U. Geshan, of uncertain
meaning ; B. Zwyip, A. Tripaufi ; Gesan), one of
the sons of Jahdai, in the genealogy of Judah
and family of Caleb (1 Ch. ii. 47). Nothing
further concerning him has been yet traced.
The name, as it stands in our present Bibles, is
a corruption of the A. V. of 1611, which has,
accurately, Geshan (so R. V.).
GE'SHEM and GASH'MU (D^|; once,
1DC3, Neh. vi. 6 ; rijo-a^ ; Gossem), an Arabian,
mentioned in Neh. ii. 19 and vi. 1, 2, 6, who,
with "Sanballat the Horonite, and Tobiah the
servant, the Ammonite," opposed the rebuilding
of the walls of Jerusalem. Geshem, we may
conclude, was an inhabitant of Arabia Petraea,
or of the Arabian Desert, and probably the chief
of a tribe which, like most of the tribes on the
eastern frontier of Palestine, was, in the time of
the Captivity and the subsequent period, hostile
to the revival of the Jewish nation. Geshem,
like Sanballat and Tobiah, seems to have been
one of the "governors beyond the river," to
whom Nehemiah came, and whose mission
"grieved them exceedingly, that there was
come a man to seek the welfare of the children
of Israel " (Neh. ii. 10) ; for the wandering in-
habitants of the frontier doubtless availed them-
selves largely, in their predatory excursions, of
the distracted state of Palestine, and dreaded
the re-establishment of the kingdom ; and the
Arabians, Ammonites, and Ashdodites are re-
corded to have " conspired to fight against Jeru-
salem," and to stop the work of fortification!
The endeavours of these confederates and their
failure are recorded in chs. ii., iv., and vi. The
Arabic name corresponding to Geshem cannot
easily be identified. G'asim (_m\>.) is one
r * i *■
of very remote antiquity ; and G'ashum ( . *«- )
is the name of an historical tribe of Arabia
BIBLE DIOT. — VOL. I.
GETHER
11(39
Proper ; the latter may more probably be com-
pared with it, although neither is identical in
form. As regards the two Hebrew forms,
Geshem is uninflected; Gashmu corresponds to
the Arabic nominative case (supposing that the
Hebrew text of Neh. vi. 6 is sound).
[E. S.P.] [C. J. B.]
GESHU'B (ne^; rWoiSp [al. lYStrrfp];
Jessur. Gesenius translates the word as bridge,
Arabic t - r rP- but the root also means " daring "),
an independent kingdom of the Geshurites (see
next article) in David's time (2 Sam. iii. 3 ; xiii.
37, 38 ; xiv. 23, 32 ; xv. 8 ; 1 Ch. iii. 2). It was
close to Aram or Syria (2 Sam. xv. 8), and
Talmai, its king, was Absalom's grandfather.
To Geshur he fled after the murder of Amnon,
and the LXX. adds that it was the country of
(his mother) Maachah, as appears also from the
earlier passage. It appears to have been the
region now called Jeid&r ( ^Sx>-\ tl >e plain
south of Hennon and east of the Jordan,
usually supposed to be the later Ituraea
(Luke iii. 1) : on the borders of David's king-
dom and of Syria. [C. R. C.f
GESHUTU and GESHU'BITES Qy^i;
Jos. Ant. vi. 13, § 10, Itpptrat). Two nations
of this name appear to be mentioned. (1.) The
inhabitants of Geshur above noticed, who would
appear to be the later lturaeans (Deut. iii. 14 ;
Josh. xii. 5, xiii. 2, 11, 13; 1 Ch. ii. 23).
They appear in the earliest passage cited to
have remained independent beyond the posses-
sions of the tribe of Manasseh, and to have dwelt
near Aroob and Maachah. They had probably
(Josh. xii. 5) been also independent of Og, king
of Bashan. If this tribe is to be understood in
Josh. xiii. 2, they were not conquered by Joshua
(see vv. 11 and 13), and remained as a min-
gled people who, according to the First Book
of Chronicles (ii. 23), were subdued by Jair.
The relations of the Hebrews to these border
tribes appear, from a number of passages, to
have constantly fluctuated, and the original
population was never rooted out.
(2.) A tribe mentioned in the south with the
Amalekites (1 Sam. xxvii. 8 [B. r«r»ip(, A.
Ttatptl; Gessvri]) and the Gezrites. These
three peoples are said to have been abori-
gines on the south border of Palestine, near
the desert of Shur. It is quite possible that
they were a division of the northern tribe
(No. 1), and that this division is intended in
Josh. xiii. 2, though not in re. 11, 13 of the
same chapter. [C. K. C]
GETHER ("ing; Tiitp; Gether), the third
of the four sons of Aram (Gen. x. 23). In
1 Ch. i. 17 he and his brothers are briefly
included with their father among the "sons
of Shem. No satisfactory trace of the people
sprung from this stock has been found. The
theories of Bochart and others, which rest on
improbable etymologies, are without support;
while the suggestions of Cariana (Jerome),
Bactrians (Joseph. Ant.), and the sSuc\ _«», the
G'aramikah (Saad.), are not better founded (see
4F
Digitized by
Google
1170
GETHSEMANE
Bochart, Phaleg, ii. 10, and Winer.s. r.). Kautzsch
suggests that the four Aramean peoples are
named according to their local situation, pro-
ceeding from north to south. Thus Uz in
S. Syria is mentioned first ; then comes Hal,
perhaps to the north of the Sea of Galilee
(cp. Lake Hileh); between which and Mash,
which he connects with Mount Musi us, south of
the Upper Tigris, we must place Gether, i.e.
somewhere between Damascus and the Euphrates
or even beyond it — a sufficiently vague deter-
mination. But in 1 Ch. i. 17 the fourth name
is not Mash, but Meshech (so also LXX. Gen.
x. 23), •'.«. the Mushk! or Muskt of Assyrian
annals, who lay to the north-east of Cappadocia
in Lesser Armenia (Schrader, KAT.* p. 84).
The Arabs writ* the name j\j> (Ghathir) ;
and, in the mythical history of their country,
it is said that the (probably aboriginal) tribes of
Thamud, Tasm, JadI, and Ad (the last, in the
second generation, through 'ltd) were descended
from Ghathir (Caussin, Essai, i. 24, 28; Abul-
Fida, Hist. Anteist. p. 16. Sale's Prelim. Disc, and
the authorities there cited). See Arabia, Aram,
and Nabathaeans. [E. S. P.] [C. J. B.]
GETHSEMANE (nj, gath, a "wine-
press," and JOJ?, shemen, " oil ; " Tttaiiiuwtl,
or more generally TtBaiiiiiavri), a small " farm,"
as the French would say, " un trim aux champs "
(xupior, = ager, praedium ; or as the Vulgate,
villa; A. V. "place;" E. V. marg. an en-
closed piece of ground; Matt. xxvi. 36 ; Mark
xir. 32), situated across the brook Kedron
(John xviii. 1), and perhaps near the foot of
Mount Olivet (Luke xxii. 39). There was a
" garden," or rather orchard (k^toi), attached
to it, to which the olive, fig, and pomegranate
doubtless invited resort by their "hospitable
shade." And we know from the Evangelists St.
Luke (xxii. 39) and St. John (xviii. 2) that our
Lord ofttimes resorted thither with His disciples.
According to Josephus, the suburbs of Jerusalem
abounded with gardens and pleasure-grounds
(TrapaSttaots, B. J. vi. 1, § 1 ; cp. v. 3, § 2).
Now, with the exception of those belonging to
the Greek and Latin convents, hardly the
vestige of a garden is to be seen. There is
indeed a favourite spot, half a mile or more to
the north, on the same side of the continuation
of the valley of the Kedron, the property of a
wealthy Turk, where the Muhammadan ladies
sometimes pass the day with their families,
their bright - flowing costume forming a
picturesque contrast to the stiff sombre foliage
of the olive-grove beneath which they cluster.
But Gethsemane has not come down to us as a
scene of mirth ; its inexhaustible associations
are the offspring of a single event — the Agony
of the Son of God on the evening preceding His
Passion. Here emphatically, as Isaiah had fore-
told, and as the name imports, were fulfilled
those dark words, "I have trodden the wine-
press alone" (lxiii. 3; cp. Rev. xiv. 20, "the
wine-press . . . without the city"). "The
period of the year," writes Mr. Gresswell
(Harm. Diss, xlii.), " was the Vernal Equinox :
the day of the month about two days before the
full of the moon — in which case the moon
GETHSEMANE
would not be now very far past her meridian ;
and the night would be enlightened until a late
hour towards the morning " — the day of the
week Thursday, or rather, according to the
Jews, Friday — for the sun had set. The time,
according to Mr. Gresswell, would be the last
watch of the night, between our 11 and 12
o'clock. Any recapitulation of the circum-
stances of that ineffable event would be un-
necessary ; any comments upon it unseasonable.
A modern garden, enclosed by a wall, in which
are some old olive-trees, said to date from the
time of Christ, is now pointed out as the
Garden of Gethsemane. It is on the left bank
of the Kedron, about 730 feet from the east
wall of the city, and immediately south of the
road, from St. Stephen's Gate to the summit of
Olivet, which separates it from the "Grotto
of the Agony " and the " Tomb of the Virgin."
This garden is, there is little reason to doubt,
the spot alluded to by Eusebius when he says
(OS.' p. 248, 18), that Gethsemane was at the
Mount of Olives, and was then a place of prayer
for the faithful; and which Jerome .more
distinctly defines as being at the foot of the
Mount of Olives, and as having a church built
over it (OS.* p. 130, 22). The Bordeaux Pilgrim
( >.D. 333) mentions a stone at the place where
Judas betrayed Christ, which was to the left of
the road up the Mount of Olives, and about a
stone's-throw from the tombs of Isaiah and
Hezekiah (Itm. Hierosol.). Theodosius (c. A.D.
530) also mentions the place of betrayal (De
Situ T. S. xi.). A broken column from 20 to
30 paces south of the entrance to the garden is
now shown as the place of betrayal ; the tombs
of Isaiah and Hezekiah are those of Zechariah
and Absalom. Cyril of Jerusalem, Antoninus,
Arculfus, and nearly all later pilgrims
mention Gethsemane, so that the chain of
tradition is almost unbroken. S. Silvia (A.D.
379-88) gives an interesting account of the
service at Gethsemane, during the night of
Thursday and early morning of Good Friday ;
and of the procession from the garden to the
cross (Per. ad Looa Sancta). Whether the
traditional site be the true one or not is a more
difficult qnestion. There is no tradition earlier
thnn the first half of the fourth century ; and
Robinson suggests (i. 346) that the spot may
have been fixed upon during the visit of Helena
to Jerusalem a.d. 326, when the places of the
Crucifixion and Resurrection were supposed to be
identified. He also seems inclined to the view
that Gethsemane was higher up the Mount of
Olives than the present site (i. 347, note), which
must have been close to the Roman road to
Jericho, and not a place that is likely to have
been selected for frequent retirement from the
crowded streets of Jerusalem. This view is also
taken by Thomson (L. $ B. p. 634). The close
proximity of the present garden to the brook
Kedron is, however, considered by some wk'J 1
argument in its favour (Stanlev, S. $ P- !*•*"£
Falkener (Proc. Soc. Bib. Arc'haeol. June 1887)
places Gethsemane on the right bank of the
Kedron, beneath the city wall, but this seems
inconsistent with the Bible narrative._
Against the contemporary antiquity of the
olive-tree*, it has been urged that Titus cut
down all the trees round about Jerusalem ; «"''
certainly this is no more than Josephus states a
Digitized by VjOOQlC
GETHSEMANE
express terms (see particularly B. J. vi. 1, § 1,
a passage which must have escaped Mr.
Williams, Holy City, ii. 437, 2nd edit.,
who only cites v. 3, § 2, and vi. 8, § 1). Be-
sides, the 10th legion, arriving from Jericho,
GETHSEMANE
1171
were posted about the Mount of Olives (v. 2,
§ 3 ; and cp. vi. 2, § 8), and, in the course of
the siege, a wall was carried along the valley
of the Kedron to the fountain of Siloam (v. 10,
§ 2). The probability therefore would seem to
be, that they were planted by Christian hands
to mark the spot : unless, like the sacred olive
of the Acropolis (Bahr, ad Herod, viii. 55), they
may have reproduced themselves. They are
not mentioned by any of the earlier pilgrims.
Maundrell {Early Travellers in P., by Wright,
p. 471) and Quaresmios (Elueid. T. S. lib. iv.
per. v. ch. 7) appear to have been the first to
notice them, not more than three centuries ago;
the former arguing against, and the latter in
favour of, their reputed antiquity : but nobody
reading their accounts would imagine that there
4 F 2
Digitized by
Google
1172
GETTEL
were then no more than seven or eight, the
locality of Gethsemane being supposed the same.
Parallel claims, to be sure, are not wanting in
the cedars of Lebanon, which are still visited
with so ranch enthusiasm : in the terebinth, or
oak of Mamre, which was standing in the days
of Constantine the Great, and even worshipped
(Vales, ad Euseb. Vit. Const, iii. 53), and the
fig-tree (Ficus elastica) near Nerbudda in India,
which native historians assert to be 2,500 years
old (Patterson's Journal of a Tour in Egypt, #c,
p. 202, note). Still more appositely there were
olive-trees near Linternum 250 years old, ac-
cording to Pliny, in his time, which are recorded
to have survived to the middle of the tenth
century (Nouveau Diet. d'Hist. Nat. Paris, 1846,
vol. xxix. p. 61). Descriptions of the traditional
Garden of Gethsemane, with its chapels and
" holy places," will be found in Porter, Hand-
book, and Baedeker-Socin, Pal. and Syria.
[E. S. Ff.] [W.]
GE-U-EL (fo«U,?=tA« greatness of God,
Sam. 7K13 ; TouStM ; Quel), son of Machi ; ruler
of the tribe of Gad, and its representative among
the spies sent from the wilderness of Paran to
explore the Promised Land (Num. xiii. 15).
GE'ZER (1TJ, ?=a precipitous place, in pause
TJJ; raft>, TtCip, U(ns, TaCdpa, raftpa;
Gazer), an ancient city of Canaan, whose king,
Horam, or Elara, coming to the assistance of
Lachish, was killed with all his people by Joshua
(Josh. x. 33; xii. 12). The town, however, is not
said to have been destroyed ; it formed one of the
landmarks on the south boundary of Ephraim,
between the lower Beth-horon and the Mediter-
ranean (xvi. 3), the western limit of the tribe (1
Ch. vii. 28 ; Jos. Ant. v. 1, § 22). It was allotted
with its suburbs to the Kohathite Lerites (Josh,
xxi. 21 ; 1 Ch. vi. 67); but the original inhabitants
were not dispossessed (Judg. i. 29); and even
down to the reign of Solomon the Canaanites, or
(according to the LXX. addition to Josh. xvi. 10)
the Canaanites and Perizzites, were still
dwelling there, and paying tribute to Israel
(IK. ix. 16). At this time it mnst in fact
have been independent of Israelite rule, for
Pharaoh had burnt it to the ground and killed
its inhabitants, and then presented the site to
his daughter, Solomon's queen. But it was
immediately rebuilt by the king (v. 17); and
though not heard of again till after the Cap-
tivity, yet it played a somewhat prominent
part in the later struggles of the nation.
[Gazara.]
Ewald (Gesch. iii. 280 ; cp. ii. 427) takes Gezer
and Geshur to be the same, and sees in the de-
struction of the former by Pharaoh, and the
simultaneous expedition of Solomon to Hamath-
zobah in the neighbourhood of the latter,
indications of a revolt of the Canaanites, of
whom the Geshnrites formed the most powerful
remnant, and whose attempt against the new
monarch was thus frustrated. But this can
hardly be supported.
In one place Gob is given as identical with
Gezer (1 Ch. xx. 4; cp. 2 Sam. xxi. 18). Jose-
phns (Ant. vii. 12, 2) agrees with 1 Ch. xx. 4.
Gezer is named as the last point to which
David's pursuit of the Philistines extended
GEZEB
(2 Sam. v. 25; 1 Ch. xiv. 16'), and as the
scene of at least one sharp encounter (1 Ch. xx.
4). It was naturally strong, and occupied an
important position on the outskirt of the
Philistine territory (Ta(apd rrjy rrjs TtaXaicrTl-
rar x<*P a * >"dpxov<r(a>, Jos. Ant. viii. 6, § 1 ;
cp. vii. 4, § 1). By Eusebius it is mentioned
(OS.' p. 254, 14) as being 4 miles northward
(in Boptlois) from Nicopolis ('Arnicas). Strabo
(xvi. 2, § 29) mentions it under the name Gadaris
(TaSapis), and says that the Jews had appro-
priated it to themselves. It is possible that
Gazara should be read for Gadara in Jos. Ant.
xiv. 5, § 4 ; B. J. i. 8, § 5, and that Gezer and
not Gadara was the seat of the Sanhedrin.
This view derives some support from the
evidence that Gezer was an important Jewish
city during the Maccabaean period.
The site of Gezer was discovered at Tell
Jeter, close to the village of Abu Shusheh, by
M. Clermont-Ganneau, in 1870. It is situated
on a swell of the low hills, about 4 miles
W.N.W. of 'Amirds; and the tomb of Sheikh
Muhammad el-Jezari which surmounts the
mound is a conspicuous landmark, and a
prominent object to the right of the road from
Jaffa to Jerusalem. The view from the ruins
over the rich plain of Philistia is extremely
fine, and the site is an admirable one for n
fortified city. The terrace walls of the Tell are
of large blocks of unhewn stone, and there is
much broken pottery scattered over the surface.
There are the remains of an aqueduct and pool,
numerous rock-hewn tombs, a large number
of wine-presses, an ancient quarry, and a
large cave hollowed in the soft rock. The
identity of Gezer with Tell Jezer was confirmed
by the discovery of two bilingual inscriptions
on the face of the rock, containing the Greek
word AAKIOY (perhaps Hilkiah) in characters
of the classical epoch, followed by "ItJOrW in
Hebrew letters of ancient square form. The
latter M. Ganneau translates "the limit of
Gezer," the name of the town being written
as it is in the Bible ; and he connects the
Alkios of the text with a certain Alkios, son of
Simon, whose name occurs on a sarcophagus
found at Lydda. The inscriptions are perhaps
of the late Maccabaean period, and may
possibly define the Sabbatic boundary; they
are about 5,600 ft. from the centre of the Tell
(PEF. Mem. ii. 428-439). M. Ganneau has
also shown that Tell Jezer is the celebrated
Mons Gisardus, or Mont Gisart, which is s»
frequently mentioned in the histories of the
Crusades, and which gave its name to one of
the noble families of the Latin Kingdom of
Jerusalem (Recueild'Archeologie Orientate, p. 351
sq.).
From the occasional occurrence of the form
Gazer, and from the LXX. Version being almost
* In these two places the word, being at toe end of a
period, has, according to Hebrew custom, Its first vowel
lengthened, and stands in the text as Gaser, and In
these two places only the name is so transferred to the
A. V. Bat, to be consistent, the same change should
have been made lu several other passages, when tt
occurs in the Hebrew : e.g. Jndg. 1. » ; Josh. xrl. 3,
10 ; 1 K. ix. 15, fee It would seem better to render the
Hebrew name always by the same English one, when
the difference arises from nothing but an emphatic
accent.
Digitized by
Google
GEZBITES
uniformly Gazers or Gazer, Ewald infers that
this was really the original name. [G.] [W.]
GEZTtlTES, THE (nt?n, accur. the Giz-
rite ; rbr Tt(p<uov ; Gexri). The word which
the Jewish critics hare substituted in the
margin of the Bible for the ancient reading,
"the Gerizite" (1 Sam. xxvii. 8), and which
has thus become incorporated in the text of the
A. V. If it mean anything — at least that we
know — it must signify the dwellers in Gezer.
But Gezer was not less than 50 miles distant
from the "south of Judah, the south of the
Jerahmeelites, and the south of the Kenites,"
the scene of David's inroad ; a fact which stands
greatlr in the way of our receiving the change.
[Gerzites, the.] [G.] [W.]
GI'AH (JVi; Tat; vallis), a place named
only in 2 Sam. ii. 24, to designate the position
of the hill Amman — " which faces Giah by the
way of the wilderness of Gibeon." No trace of
the situation of either has yet been found, but
they must hare been to the east of Gibeon.
By the LXX. the name is read as if tCl, i.e. a
ravine or glen; a view also taken in the
Vulgate. [Amuah.]
GIANTS. The frequent allusion to giants
in Scripture, and the numerous theories and
disputes which hare arisen in consequence,
render it necessary to give a brief view of
some of the main opinions and curious in-
ferences to which the mention of them leads.
1. They are first spoken of in Gen. vi. 4,
under the name SlphVtm (D^»B3 ; LXX. yt-
yarrtt ; Aquil. hmrtrroms ; Symm. /3iaioi ;
Vulg. giganta ; Onk. K'"]?? i Luther, Tyrannen).
The etvmology of the word is obscure. Some
derive it from K7B (= "marvellous"), or,
from 7Q3, either in the sense to throw down, or
to fall (= fallen angels, Jarchi, cp. Is. xiv. 12 ;
Luke x. 18). Others give it the meaning '* f/pats
irruentes" (Gesen.), or collapsi (by euphemism,
Boettcher, de Inferis, p. 92, or unnaturally
born [MY. 11 ]); but certainly not "because
men fell from terror of them (as R. Kimchi).
That the word means "giant" is clear from
Num. xiii. 32, 33, and is confirmed by &OB3,
the Chaldee name for " the aery giant " Orion
(Job ix- 9, xxxviii. 31 ; Is. xi'ii. 10 ; Targ.),
unless this name arise from the obliquity of the
constellation (Gen. of Earth, p. 35).
But we now come to the remarkable state-
ment about the origin of these Nephilim in
Gen. vi. 1-4 (cp. Delitzsch [1887] and Dill-
mann* in loco. See also Kurtz, Die Ehen
4er SShne Gottes, &c., Berlin, 1857; Ewald,
Jahrb. 1854, p. 126; Govett's Isaiah Unfulfilled;
Faber's Many Mansions, J. of Sac. Lit. Oct.
1858, *c) We are told that "there were
Nephilim in the earth," and that " afterwards "
(sal ij.tr" tut!**, LXX.) the " sons of God " ming-
ling with the beautiful "daughters of men"
produced a race of violent and insolent Gibborim
(0*135). This latter word is also rendered by
the LXX. yiyavTts, but we shall see hereafter
that the meaning is more general. It is clear,
however, that no statement is made that the
GIANTS
1173
Nephilim themselves sprang from this un-
hallowed union. Who, then, were they ? Tak-
ing the usual derivation (?B3), and explaining
it to mean " fallen spirits," the Nephilim seem
to be identical with the " sons of God ; " but
the verse before us militates against this notion
as much as against that which makes the
Nephilim the same as the Gibborim, viz. : the
offspring of wicked marriages. This latter sup-
position can only be accepted if we admit either
(1) that there were two kinds of Nephilim, —
those who existed before the unequal intercourse,
and those produced by it (Heidegger, Mist.
Patr. xi.), or (2) by following the Vulgate
rendering, postquam enim ingressi sunt, &c. But
the common rendering seems to be correct, nor
is there much probability in Aben Ezra's ex-
planation, that t?"nnK ("after that") means
^>UOn iriK (U "after the deluge "X and is
an allusion to the Anakim.
The genealogy of the Nephilim then, or at
any rate of the earliest Nephilim, is not recorded
in Scripture, and the name itself is so mysterious
that we are lost in conjecture respecting them.
2. The sons of the marriages mentioned in
Gen. vi. 1-4 are called Gibborim (D'T3), from
■Q3, to be strong'), a general name meaning
powerful (i&picrral <tal wdyros inrtpowral KaAoO,
Joseph. Ant. i. 3, § 1 ; yris waiocs rbv voir
iKPtfidoarres toC Aoyt(to8ai K.T.A., Philo, dt
Qigant. p. 270 : cp. Is. iii. 2, xlix. 24 ; Ezek. xxxii.
21). They were not necessarily giants in our
sense of the word (Theodoret, Quae.it. 48). Yet,
as was natural, these powerful chiefs were al-
most universally represented as men of extra-
ordinary stature. The LXX. render the word
yiyarrts, and call Nimrod a ytyas Kwnyis
(l Ch. i. 10); Augustine calls them Stalurosi
(de Ch. Dei, xv. 4) ; Chrysostom, tpaes tv/inKtit ;
Theodoret, nanfityt$tis (cp. Bar. iii. 26, tbpuyt-
Sets, hnoriiuroi ToAe/toy).
But who were the parents of these giants;
who are " the sons of God " (OTT^Kfl '33) ?
The opinions are various. (1) Men of power (viol
owaortv6rrm, Symm. Hieron. Quaest. Heb. ad
loc. ; NJ3")2"1 '33, Onk. ; TOoSc *33, Samar. ;
so too Selden, Vorst, &c.) : cp. Ps. ii. 7, lxxxii.
6, lxxxix. 27 ; Mic. v. 5, &c. The expression
will then exactly resemble Homer's Atoytytts
$aot\rits, and the Chinese Tidn-tscit, "son of
heaven," as a title of the Emperor (Gesen. s. v.
J3). But why should the union of the high-
born and the low-born produce offspring unusual
for their size and strength? (2) Men with
great gifts, "in the image of God" (Ritter,
Schumann). (3) Cainites arrogantly assuming
the title (Paulus) ; or (4) the pious Sethites
(cp. Gen. iv. 26 ; Mairaon. Mor. Neboch. i. 14 ;
Suid. s. ec. Sj)9 and /uaiyafilas ; Cedren. Hist.
Camp. p. 10 ; Aug. de Civ. Dei, iv. 23 ; Chry-
sost. Horn. 22, m Gen. ; Theod. tn Gen. Quaest.
47 ; Cyril, c. Jul. ix. &c). A host of modern
commentators catch at this explanation, but
Gen. iv. 26 has probably no connexion with the
subject. Other texts quoted in favour of the
view are Deut. xiv. 1, 2 ; Ps. lxxiii. 15 ; Prov.
xiv. 26; Hos. i. 10; Rom. viii. 14, &c. Still
the mere antithesis in the verse, as well as
Digitized by
Google
1174
GIANTS
other considerations, tend strongly against this
gloss, which indeed is built on a foregone con-
clusion. Compare however the Indian notion
of the two races of men, Saras and Asuras
(children of the sun and of the moon, Kork,
Brarran. und Rabb. p. 204 sq.), and the Persian
belief in the marriage of Djemshid with the
sister of a dec, whence sprang black and impious
men (Kalisch, Gen. p. 175). (5) Worshippers of
false gods (mutts rur Btar, Aq.), making '33
= " servants " (cp. Deut. xiv. 1 ; Prov. xiv. 26 ;
Ex. xxxii. 1 ; Deut. iv. 28, &c). This view is
ably supported in Genesis of Earth and Man,
p. 39 sq. (6) Devils, such as the Incubi and
Succubi. Such was the belief of the Cabbalists
(Valesius, de 8. Philosoph. cap. 8). That these
beings can have intercourse with women St.
Augustine declares it would be folly to doubt,
and it was the universal belief in the East.
Mohammed makes one of the ancestors of Balkis
queen of Sheba a demon, and Damir says he had
heard a Mohammedan doctor openly boast of
having married in succession four demon wives
(Bochart, Hieroz. i. p. 747). Indeed the belief
still exists (Lane's Mod. Eg. i. chs. x., xi.).
(7) Closely allied to this is the oldest opinion,
that they were angels (Ayytkot rod 8coG, LXX.,
for such was the old reading, not viol, Aug. de
Civ. Dei, xv. 23 ; so* too Joseph. Ant. i. 3, § 1 ;
Phil, de dig. ii. 358 ; Clem. Alex. Strom, iii. 7,
§ 69 ; Snip. Sever. Hist. Script, in Orthod. 1. i.
be. : cp. Job i. 6, ii. 1 ; Ps. xxix. 1, Job iv. 18).
The rare expression "sons of God" certainly
means angels in Job xxxviii. 7, i. 6, ii. 1 ; and
that such is the meaning in Gen. vi. 4 also, was
the most prevalent opinion both in the Jewish
and early Christian Church.
It was probably this very ancient view which
gave rise to the spurious book of Enoch, and the
notion quoted from it by St. Jude (v. 6), and
alluded to by St. Peter (2 Pet. ii. 4; cp. 1 Cor.
xi. 10, Tert. de Virg. Vet. 7). According to
this book, certain angels, sent by God to guard
the earth ('Eypiryopoi, ipiXtucts), were perverted
by the beauty of women, " went after strange
flesh," taught sorcery, finery (lumina lapillorum,
circulos ex awe, Tert., &c), and being banished
from heaven had sons 3,000 cubits high, thus
originating a celestial and terrestrial race of
demons — " Unde modo vagi subvertunt corpora
multa " (Commodiani Instruct. III. Cultus Dae-
monum), i.e. they are still the source of epilepsy,
&c. Various names were given at a later time
to these monsters. Their chief was Leuixas,
and of their number were Machsael, Aza, Schem-
chozai, and (the wickedest of them) a goat-like
demon Azael (cp. Azazel, Lev. xvi. 8 ; and for
the very curious questions connected with this
name, see Bochart, Hieroz. i. p. 652 sq. ; Rab.
Eliezer, cap. 23, Bereshith Sab. ad Gen. vi. 2;
Seunert, de Oigantibiie, iii.).
Against this notion (which Havernick calls
" the silliest whim of the Alexandrian Gnostics
and Cabbalistic Rabbis ") Heidegger (Hist. Patr.
1. c.) quotes Matt. xxii. 30, Luke xxiv. 39, and
similar testimonies. Philastrius (adv. ffaeres.
cap. 108) characterises it as a heresy, and Chry-
sostom (Him. 22) even calls it rb QKio-tpTi/ui
imtro. Vet St. Jude is explicit, and the question
is not so much what can be, as what was be-
lieved. The Fathers almost unanimously accepted
these fables, and Tertullian argues warmly
GIANTS
(partly on expedient grounds !) for the genuine-
ness of the book of Enoch. The angels were
called 'Ey frfryopoi, a word used by Aq. and Symm.
to render the Chaldee "TO (Dan. iv. 13 sq. ;
Vulg. VigU; LXX. dp; Lex. Cyrilli, nyytXoi t,
typvwfoi ; Fabric. Cod. Pseudepigr. V. T. p. 180),
and therefore used, as in the Zend-Avesta, of
good guardian Angels, and applied especially to-
Archangels in the Syriac liturgies (cp. "MX?, Is.
xxi. 11), but more often of evil angels (Caste! Ii,
Lex. Syr. p. 649 ; Scalig. ad Euseb. Chron. p. 403 ;
Gesen. s. v. Tff). The story of the Egregori is
given at length in Tert. de Cult. Fern. i. 2, ii. 10 ;
Commodianus, Instruct, iii. ; Lactant. Div. Inst.
ii. 14 ; Testam. Patriarc. c v., &c. Every one
will remember the allusions to the same inter-
pretation in Milton, Par. Beg. ii. 179 —
" Before the Flood, thou with thy lusty crew,
False-titled sons of God, roaming the earth.
Cast wanton eyes on the daughters of men.
And ooupled with them, and begat a race."
The use made of the legend in some modern
poems cannot sufficiently be reprobated.
We need hardly say how closely allied this
is to the Greek legends which connected the
Hypia <pv\a yiyimwv with the gods (Horn. Od.
vii. 205 ; Pausan. viii. 29), and made Satuorts
sons of the gods (Plat. Apolog. jjntdeot ; Cratyl.
§ 32). Indeed the whole heathen tradition
resembles the one before us (Cumberland's
Sunchoniatho, p. 24; Horn. Od. xi. 306 sq. ;
Hes. Theog. 185, Opp. et D. 144; Plat. Rep. ii.
§ 17, 604 E; de Legg. iii. § 16, 805 A; Ovid,
Metam. i. 151 ; Luc. iv. 593; Lucian, de Dei
Syr., &c. ; cp. Grot, de Ver. i. 6) ; and the Greek
translators of the Bible make the resemblance
still more close by introducing such words as 8*6-
f a X 0, t Vyy***'*) aou eTen Tito"/**, to which last
Josephus (/. c.) expressly compares the giants of
Genesis (LXX. Prov. ii. 18; Ps.xlviii. 2; 2 Sam.
v. 18 ; Judith xvi. 5). The fate too of these
demon-chiefs is identical with that of heathen
story (Job xxvi. 5 ; Sir. xvi. 7 ; Bar. iii. 26-28 ;
Wisd. xiv. 6; 3 Mace. ii. 4; 1 Pet. iii. 19).
These legends may therefore be regarded as
distortions of the Biblical narrative, handed
down by tradition, and embellished by the fancy
and imagination of Eastern nations. The belief
of the Jews in later times is remarkably illus-
trated by the story of Asmodeus in the book of
Tobit. It is deeply instructive to observe how
wide and marked a contrast there is between
the incidental allusion of the sacred narrative
(Gen. vi. 4) and the minute frivolities or
prurient follies which degrade the heathen
mythology, and repeatedly appear in the
groundless imaginings of the Rabbinic inter-
preters. If there were fallen angels whose
lawless desires gave birth to a monstrous
progeny, both they and their intolerable off-
spring (it is implied) were destroyed by the
Deluge, which was the retribution on their
wickedness, and they have no existence in the
baptized and renovated earth.
Before passing to the other giant-races we
may observe that all nations have had a dim
fancy that the aborigines who preceded them
and the earliest men generally were of immense
stature. Berosus says that the ten antediluvian
kings of Chaldea were giants, and we find in alt
Digitized by VjOOQlC
GIANTS
GIANTS
1175
monkish historians a similar statement about
the earliest possessors of Britain (cp. Horn. Od. x.
119; Aug. de Civ. Dei, xv. 9; Plin. vii. 16;
Varr. ap. Anl. Gel!, iii. 10 ; Jer. on Matt, nvii.).
The great size decreased gradually after the
Deluge (2 Esd. v. 52-55). That we are dwarfs
compared to our ancestors was a common belief
among the Latin and Greek poets (II. v. 302 sq. ;
Lucret. ii. 1151 ; Virg. Am. xii. 900; Jut. xr.
69), althongh it is now a matter of absolute
certainty from the remains of antiquity, reach-
ing back to the very earliest times, that in old
days men were no taller than ourselves. On
the origin of the mistaken supposition there are
carious passages in Natalis Comes (Mythotog. vi.
21) and Macrobius (Saturn, i. 20).
The next race of giants which we find men-
tioned in Scripture is
3. The Rkphaim, a name which frequently
occurs, and in some remarkable passages. The
earliest mention of them is the record of their
defeat by Chedorlaomer and some allied kings at
Ashteroth Karnaim (Gen. xiv. 5). They are
again mentioned (Gen. xv. 20), their dispersion
recorded (Dent. ii. 10, 20), and Og the giant
king of Bashan said to be " the only remnant of
them " (Deut. iii. 11 ; Josh. xii. 4, xiii. 12, xvii.
15). Extirpated however from the east of
Palestine, they long found a home in the west,
and in connexion with the Philistines, under
whose protection the small remnant of them
may have lived, they still employed their arms
against the Hebrews (2 Sam. xxi. 18 sq. ; 1
Ch. xx. 4). In the latter passage there seems
however to be some confusion between the
Kephaim and the sons of a particular giant of
Gath, named Kapha. Such a name may have
been conjectured as that of a founder of the race,
like the names Ion, Dorus, Teut, &c. (Boettcher,
de Inferti, p. 96, n. ; Kapha occurs also as a
proper name, 1 Ch. vii. 25, viii. 2, 37). It is
probable that they had possessed districts west
of the Jordan in early times, since the " valley
of Kephaim " (koiAot t»k TitoVuv, 2 Sam. v. 18,
1 Ch. xi. 15, Is. xvii. 5; k. r&v yryavrvr,
Joseph. Ant. vii. 4, § 1% a rich valley S.W. of
Jerusalem, derived its name from them.
That they were not Canaanites is clear from
there being no allusion to them in Gen. x. 15-19.
They were probably one of those aboriginal
peoples to whose existence the traditions of
many nations testify, and of whose genealogy
tbe Bible gives us no information. The few
names recorded have, as Ewald remarks, a
Semitic aspect (Qeachich. <fes Voltes Isr. i. 311) ;
bat from the hatred existing between them and
both the Canaanites and Hebrews, some suppose
them to be Japhethites, " who comprised especi-
ally the inhabitants of the coasts and islands "
(Kalisch on Gen. p. 351. Cp. Dillmann* in loco).
D'NB"! is rendered by the Greek Versions very
variously ('Patpatl/x, yiyavrtt, yifftVM, 9*6-
paxoi, TrrSrsj, and larpol ; Vulg. Medici ; LXX.
Ps. lxxxvii. 10; Is. xxvi. 14, where it is con-
fused with D'METI; cp. Gen. 1. 2, and sometimes
rtxpol, t«6Vi)Kot«j, especially in the later
Versions). In A. V. the words used for it are
"Kephaim," "giants," and "the dead." That
it has the latter meaning in many passages is
certain (Ps. lxxxviii. 10; Prov. ii. 18, ix. 18,
xxi. 16 ; Is. xxvi. 19, 14). The question arises,
how are these meanings to be reconciled ?
Gesenius gives no derivation for the national
name, and derives ""\ =. mortui, from KB*1,
sanavit, and the proper name Rapha from an
Arabic root signifying " tall," thus seeming to
sever all connexion between the meanings of the
word, which is surely most unlikely. Masius,
Simonis, &c, suppose the second meaning to
come from the fact that both spectres and giants
strike terror (accepting the derivation from
ilBI, remisit, " unstrung with fear," R. Bechai
on Dent, ii.) ; Vitringa and Hiller from the notion
of length involved in stretching out a corpse, or
from the fancy that spirits appear in more than
human size (Hiller, Syntag. Hernu p. 205; Virg.
Aen. ii. 772, &c). J. D. Michaelis (ad Lowth, JJe
tacr. poesi Hcbr. p. 466) endeavoured to prove
that the Rephaim, &c, were Troglodytes, and
that hence they came to be identified with the
dead. Passing over other conjectures, Boettcher
sees in RBI and DB1 a double root, and thinks
T T T T
that the giants were called D'ND") (languefactt)
by an euphemism; and that the dead were so
called by a title which will thus exactly parallel
the Greek KafUrrts, k«k/u)koV«s (cp. Buttmann,
Lexil. ii. 237 sq.). His arguments are too elabo-
rate to quote (but see Boettcher, pp. 94-100).
An attentive consideration seems to leave little
room for doubt that the dead were called
Rephaim (as Gesenius also hints) from some
notion of Sheol being the residence of the fallen
spirits or buried giants. The passages which
seem most strongly to prove this are Prov. xxi.
16 (where obviously something more than mere
physical death is meant, since that is the
common lot of all); Is. xxvi. 14, 19, verses
difficult to explain without some such supposi-
tion; Is. xiv. 9, where the word H1FIB (oJ
iptarrts rrit yvs, LXX.), if taken in its literal
meaning of goats, may mean evil spirits repre-
sented in that form (cp. Lev. xvii. 7); and
especially Job xxvi. 5, 6, " Behold the gyantes
(A. V. ' dead things ') grown under the waters "
(Douay Version), where there seems to be clear
allusion to some subaqueous prUon of rebellious
spirits, like that in which (according to the
Hindoo legend) Vishnu, the water god, confines
a race of giants (cp. wv\dpx°*i os a title of
Neptune, Hes. Theog. 732 ; Nork, Brammin. und
Sabb. p. 319 sq.). [Og; Goliath.]
Branches of this great unknown people were
called Emim, Anakim, and Zuzim.
4. Emim (D'D'N; LXX. 'Op/ifr, 'l/ipau>c),
smitten by Chedorlaomer at Shaveh Kiriathaim
(Gen. xiv. 5), and occupying the country after-
wards held by the Moabites (Deut. ii. 10), who
gave them the name D'P'K, "terrors." The
word rendered " tall " may perhaps be merely
" haughty " (laxiorrts). [Emim.]
5. Anakim (D'pjl?). The imbecile terror of
the spies exaggerated their proportions into some-
thing superhuman (Num. xiii. 28, 33), and their
name became proverbial (Deut. ii. 10 ; ix. 2).
[Anakim.]
6. Zuzim (DWt), whose principal town was
Ham (Gen. xiv. 5), and who lived between the
Arnon and the Jabbok, being a northern tribe of
Rephaim. The Ammonites, who defeated them,
called them D'BTDT (Dent. ii. 20 sq., which is
however probably an early gloss).
Digitized by
Google
1176
GIANTS
We have now examined the main names
applied to giant-races in the Bible, but except
in the case of the first two (Nephilim and
Gibborim) there is no necessity to suppose that
there was anything very remarkable in the
stature of these nations, beyond the general fact
of their being finely proportioned. Nothing can
be built on the exaggeration of the spies (Num.
xiii. 33) ; and Og, Goliath, Ishbi-benob, &c. (see
under the names themselves), are obviously
mentioned as exceptional cases. The Jews, how-
ever (misled by supposed relics), thought other-
wise (Joseph. Ant. v. 2, § 3).
No one has yet proved by experience the
possibility of giant races, materially exceeding
in size the average height of man. There is no
great variation in the ordinary standard. The
most stunted tribes of Esquimaux are at least
four feet high, and the tallest races of America
(e.g. the Guayaquilists and people of Paraguay)
do not exceed six feet and a half. It was long
thought that the Patagonians were men of
enormous stature, and the assertions of the old
voyagers on the point were positive. For
instance, Pigafetta ( Voyage Sound the World,
Pinkerton, xi. 314) mentions an individual Pata-
gonian so tall, that they " hardly reached to his
waist." Similar exaggerations are found in the
Voyages of Byron, Wallis, Carteret, Cook, and
Forster ; but it is now a matter of certainty
from the recent visits to Patagonia (by Winter,
Capt. Snow, &c.\ that there is nothing at all
extraordinary in their height.
The general belief (until very recent times)
in the existence of fabulously enormous men,
arose from fancied giant-graves (see De la Valle's
Travels in Persia, ii. 89), and above all from the
discovery of huge bones, which were taken for
those of men, in days when comparative anatomy
was unknown. Even the ancient Jews were
thus misled (Joseph. Ant. v. 2, § 3). Augustine
appeals triumphantly to this argument, and
mentions a molar tooth which he had seen at
Utica a hundred times larger than ordinary
teeth (de Civ. Bet, xv. 9). No doubt it once
belonged to an elephant. Vives, in his com-
mentary on the place, mentions a tooth as big
as a fist which was shown at St. Christopher's.
In fact this source of delusion has only been
dispelled in modern times (Sennert, de Gigant.
passim ; Martin's West. Islands, in Pinkerton, ii.
691). Most bones which have been exhibited
have turned out to belong to whales or ele-
phants, as was the case with the vertebra of a
supposed giant, examined by Sir Hans Sloane in
Oxfordshire.
On the other hand, isolated instances of mon-
strosity are sufficiently attested to prove that
beings like Goliath and his kinsmen may have
existed. Columella (S. B. iii. 8, § 2) mentions
Navius Pollio as one, and Pliny says that in the
time of Claudius Caesar there was an Arab
named Gabbaras, nearly ten feet high, and that
even he was not so tall as Pusio and Secundilla
in the reign of Augustus, whose bodies were
preserved (vii. 16). Josephus tells us that,
among other hostages, Artabanus sent to Tiberius
a certain Eleazar, a Jew, surnamed " the Giant,"
seven cubits in height (Ant. xviii. 4, § 5). Nor
are well-authenticated instances wanting in
modern times. O'Brien, whose skeleton is pre-
served in the Museum of the Coll. of Surgeons,
GIBEA
must have been eight feet high, bnt his un-
natural height made him weakly. On the other
hand, the blacksmith Parsons, in Charles II. 's
reign, was seven feet two inches high, and also
remarkable for his strength (Fuller's Worthies,
Staffordshire).
For information on the various subjects
touched upon in this article, besides minor
authorities quoted in it, see Grot, de Veritat. i.
16 ; Nork, Brammin. und Rabb. 210 ad fin. ;
Ewald, Gesch. i. pp. 305-312 ; Winer, s. v.
Riesen, &c. ; Gesen. s. c. D'KB") ; Rosenmiiller,
Kalisch, Comment, ad loca cit. ; Rosenmiiller,
Alterthumsk. ii. ; Boettcher, de Inferis, p. 95 sq. ;
Heidegger, Hist. Patr. xi. ; Havernick's Introd.
to Pentat. p. 345 sq. ; Home's Introd. i. 148 ;
Faber's Bampt. Led. iii. 7 ; Maitland's Eruvin ;
Orig. of Pagan Idol. i. 217, in Maitland's false
Worship,pp. 1-67; Pritchard's Hat. Hist. of Man,
v. 489 sq. ; Hamilton on the Pentat. pp. 189-201 ;
Papers on the Rephaim, Journ. of Sac. Lit. 1851.
There are also monographs by Cassanion, Sangu-
telli, and Sennert : we have only met with the
latter (Dissert. Hist. Phil, de Gigantibus, Vittemb.
1663) ; it is interesting and learned, but extra-
ordinarily credulous. [F. W. F.]
GIANTS, VALLEY OF THE (Josh. xt.
8 ; xviii. 16). [Rephaim, Vallev of.]
GIB'BAB ("133; B. Ta$ip, A. Tafiio; Geb-
bar\ Bene-Gibbar, to the number of ninety-five,
returned with Zerubbabel from Babylon (Ezra
ii. 20). In the parallel list of Nehemiah (vii.
25) the name is given as Gibeon.
GIB'BETHON (fm33 = a height; B. Beye-
0dy, rc0<8dV, A. VaBaBdv, Ta&tBiv ; Qabathon), a
town allotted to the tribe of Dan (Josh. xix. 44),
and afterwards given with its " suburbs " to the
Kohathite Levites (xxi. 23). Being, like most
of the towns of Dan, either in or close to the
Philistines' country, it was no doubt soon taken
possession of by them ; at any rate they held it
in the early days of the monarchy of Israel,
when king Nadab " and all Israel," and after
him Omri, besieged it (1 K. xv. 27 ; xvi. 15, 17).
What were the special advantages of situation
or otherwise which rendered it so desirable as a
possession for Israel are not apparent. In the
Onomasticon (0&* p. 255, 52) it is quoted as a
small village (xoKixvri) called Gabe, in the 17th
mile from Caesarea. This must, however, be
wrong, as the territory of Dan did not extend
northwards beyond the Wady Kanah. Conder
has suggested Kibbieh, to the S.W. of TSmeh, as
a possible identification (PER Mem. ii. 297).
GIB'EA (N1Q3 = a hill ; B. rot&iA, A. rai$ai;
Gabaa). Sheva, " the father of Macbenah " and
" father of Gibea," is mentioned with other names,
unmistakably those of places and not persons,
among the descendants of Judah (1 Ch. ii. 49;
cp. e. 42). This would seem to point out Gibea
(which in some Hebrew MSS. is Gibeah ; see
Burrington, i. 216) as the city Gibeah in Judah.
The mention of Madmannah (v. 49 ; cp. Josh. xv.
31), as well as of Ziph (t>. 42) and Maon (v. 45),
seems to carry us to a locality considerably south
of Hebron. [Gibeah, 1.] On the other hand,
Madmannah recalls Mndmenah, a town named
in connexion with Gibeah of Benjamin (Is. x.
Digitized by
Google
GIBEAH
31), and therefore lying somewhere north of
Jerusalem.
GIB'EAH (HID?, derived according to
Gesenius \Thea. pp*. 259, 260] from a root, 1?33,
signifying to be round or humped : cp. the Latin
git/bus, Eng. gibbous ; the Arabic .Vas»> jebel, a
mountain, and the German Gipfel). A word
employed in the Bible to denote a " hill " — that
is, an eminence of less considerable height and
extent than a " mountain," the term for which
is ID, har. For the distinction between the two
terms, see Ps. cxlviii. 9 ; Prov. viii. 25 ; Is. ii. 2,
xl. 4, &c. In the Historical Books gibeah is
commonly applied to the bald rounded hills of
Central Palestine, especially in the neighbour-
hood of Jerusalem (Stanley, App. § 25). Like
most words of this kind, it gave its name to
several towns and places in Palestine — which
would doubtless be generally on or near a hill.
They are —
1. Gibeah (rafiad; Gabaa), a city in the
mountain-district of Judah, named between Cain
and Timnah, and in the same group as Haon and
the Southern Carmel (Josh. xv. 57 ; and cp. 1 Ch.
ii. 49, &c). Robinson (ii. 6, 16), Tobler (Dritte
Wandenmg, p. 157), and Conder (PEF. Mem. iii.
25) suggest its identification with Jeb'a, about
7 miles W.S.W. of Bethlehem. This place is
apparently the village named Gabatha, which is
mentioned in the Onomasticon (OS.' p. 255, 67)
as containing the monument of Habakkuk the
prophet, and lying 12 miles from Eleuthero-
polis. It cannot therefore be the place intended
in Joshua, since that would appear to have been
to the S.E. of Hebron, near where Carmel and
Maon are still existing. The site is therefore
yet to seek (cp. Dillmann* on Josh. /. c).
2. Gibeath (J1P33 ; LXX., see below ; Ga-
baathy This is enumerated among the last
group of the towns of Benjamin, next to Jeru-
salem (Josh, xviii. 28). It is sometimes taken
to be the place which afterwards became so
notorious as " Gibeah-of-Benjamin " or " of-
Saul." But this, as we shall presently see,
was about 4 miles north of Jerusalem, near
Gibeon and Raman, with which, in that case, it
would have been mentioned in v. 25. The name
being in the "construct state" — Gibeath and
not Gibeah — may it not belong to the following
name Kirjath, and denote the hill adjoining that
town, or, according to Schwarz (pp. 102, 103),
the title of one place, " Gibeath-Kirjath " ? The
obvious objection to this proposal is the state-
ment of the number of this group of towns as
fourteen, but this is not a serious objection, as in
these catalogues discrepancies not unfrequently
occur between the numbers of the towns, and
that stated as the sum of the enumeration (cp.
Joah. xv. 32, 36 ; xix. 6, &c). In this very list
there is reason to believe that Zelah and ha-Eleph
«re not separate names, but one. The lists of
Joshua, though in the main coeval with the
division of the country, must have been often
added to and altered before they became finally
fixed as we now possess them.* It is possible
• For Instance, Beth-marcaboth, •' bouse of chariots,'*
and Hazar-susab, " village of horses " (Josh. xix. 6),
would seem to date from the time of Solomon, when the
(raffle in these articles began with Egypt.
GIBEAH
1177
that Kirjath may be identical with Kirjath-
jearim, and that the latter part of the name
has been omitted by copyists at some very early
period. Such an omission is apparently indicated
by the readings of the LXX. (B. ra$at»6iaptt/i ;
A. Tafia&8 xal toAis 'Iapiju) and some Hebrew
MSS. [Kirjath]. In this case Gibeath might
denote the hill on which the Ark rested in the
time of Saul (see below, No. 3). The objection
to this view is that Kirjath-jearim is enumerated
as a city of Judah (Josh. xv. 60). Major Conder
{PEF. Mem. iii. 43) proposes to place Gibeath at
Jibi'a, 3 miles north of Kwyet el-'Enab, which
he identifies with Kirjath. A more likely site
would be Kh. el-Jubeiah, to the right of the road
from Kuryet el-'Enab to Jerusalem, and near
Kustul. Sepp (ii. 11) identifies Gibeath with
Gibeah of Benjamin ; and Riehm (a. v. Gibea, 3)
and Dillmann* incline to the same view.
3. (iTI?33n ; B. ir ry fSavv$, A. iv flawy ; in
Gabaa.) The place in which the Ark remained
from the time of its return by the Philistines
till its removal by David (2 Sam. vi. 3, 4 ; cp.
1 Sam. vii. 1, 2). The name has the definite
article, and in 1 Sam. vii. 1 it is translated " the
hill." (See No. 2 above.)
4. Gibeah-of-Benjamin. This town does
not appear in the lists of the cities of Benjamin
in Josh, xviii. (1.) We first encounter it in the
tragical story of the Levite and his concubine,
when it brought all but extermination on the
tribe (Judg. xix. xx.). It was then a " city "
(Yl?), with the usual open street (3ilT1) or
square (Judg. xix. 15, 17, 20), and containing
700 " chosen men " (xx. 15), probably the same
whose skill as slingers is preserved in the next
verse. Thanks to the precision of the narrative,
we can gather some general knowledge of the
position of Gibeah. The Levite and his party
left Bethlehem in the " afternoon " — when the
day was coming near the time at which the
tents would be pitched for evening. It was
probably between 2 and 3 o'clock. At the
ordinary speed of Eastern travellers they would
come "over against Jebus" in two hours,
say by 5 o'clock, and the same length of time
would take them an equal distance, or about
4 miles, to the north of the city on the Ndblus
road, in the direction of Mount Ephraim (xx. 13,
cp. 1). The Levite proposed to lodge at Ramah
or Gibeah; the latter being apparently the
nearest to Jerusalem ; and when the sudden
sunset of that climate, unaccompanied by more
than a very brief twilight, made further progress
impossible, they " turned aside " from the beaten
track to the town where one of the party was
to meet a dreadful death (Judg. xix. 9-15).
Later indications of the story seem to show that
a little north of the town the main track divided
into two— one, the present K&blus road, leading
up to Bethel, the " house of God," and the other
taking to Gibeah-in-the-field (xx. 31), possibly
the present Jeb'a. Below the city probably —
about the base of the hill which gave its name
to the town — was the "cave* of Gibeah," in
* iTU7D. A. V. "meadows of Gibeah," taking the
word as Ma'areh, an open field (Stanley, App. $ 19) ;
the LXX. transfers the Hebrew word literally,
Mapnayafii j the Syrtac has ' **- <r> = cave. The
Hebrew word for cave, Jfe'araA, differs from that
Digitized by
Google
1178
GIBEAH
which the lien in wait concealed themselves
until the signal was given* (xx. 33).
During this narrative the name is given simply
as " Oibeah," with a few exceptions ; at its intro-
duction it is called " Gibeah which belongeth to
Benjamin " (xix. 1 4, and so in xx. 4). In xx. 10 we
have the expression " Gibeah of Benjamin," but
here the Hebrew is not Gibeah, but Geba — V21-
The same form of the word is found in xx. 33,
where the meadows, or cave, " of Gibeah " should
be " of Geba." Josephus, in describing the route
of the Levite, apparently makes Gibeah (TaPi)
20 stadia from Jerusalem (Ant. v. 2, § 8); but
too much reliance should not be made on this
statement, for he gives, at the same time, the
distance from Bethlehem to Jerusalem as 30
instead of 40 stadia.
The natural inference from the above story is,
that Gibeah and Ramah were not far from the
road leading northwards from Jerusalem, and
some 4 or 5 miles from that place. The site of
Ramah, er-Jidm, about 5J miles from Jerusalem
and J mile east of the road, is well known ; and
Gibeah must be looked for somewhat nearer to
Jerusalem — perhaps at Kh. Ms et- Tamil (PEF.
Mem. Ui. 124) or Tell el-FM (iii. 158), which are
respectively 4 miles and 3 miles from Jerusalem,
and j mile and \ mile east of the road. The
suggestion that Jeb'a, Geba, 6$ miles from Jeru-
salem and 1\ miles east of the road, is the Gibeah
referred to is untenable, though it may be in-
tended in Judg. xx. 33. Jerome (Ep. S. Paulae,
vi.) apparently places Gibeah on the direct road
from Gibeon to Jerusalem.
(2.) We next meet with Gibeah of Benjamin
during the_ Philistine wars of Saul and Jonathan
(1 Sam. xiii. xiv.). It now bears its full title.
The position of matters seems to have been
this : — The Philistines were in possession of the
village of Geba, the present Jeb'a on the south
side of the Wddy Suweintt. In their front, across
the widy, which is here about a mile wide, and
divided by several swells lower than the side
eminences, was Saul in the town of Michmash,
the modern Muihtnds, and holding also " Mount
Bethel ; " that is, the heights on the north of the
great wady— Deir DiaSn, Burkah, et-Tell, as
tar as BeiHn itself. South of the Philistine
camp, and between 2 and 3 miles to its rear,
was Jonathan, in Gibeah-of-Benjainln, with a
thousand chosen warriors (xiii. 2). The first
step was taken by Jonathan, who drove out the
Philistines from Geba, by a feat of arms which
at once procured him an immense reputation.
But in the meantime it increased the difficulties
of Israel, for the Philistines (hearing of their
reverse) gathered in prodigious strength, and,
advancing with an enormous armament, pushed
Saul's little force before them out of Bethel and
Michmash, and down the Eastern passes to
Gilgal, near Jericho in the Jordan valley (xiii.
adopted In the A. V. only to the vowel-points j and
there seems a certain consistency to an ambush con-
cealing themselves to a cave, which to an open field
would be Impossible. On the other hand, tbe expression
"round about" to v. M seems Inconsistent with the
theory of a cave ; and more suitable to an ambush con-
cealed In standing corn, or by Inequalities In tbe ground.
The E. V. reads " Maareh-geba " In the text, and " tbe
meadow of Geba " In the margin.
• Josephus, Ant. v. 2, J 11.
GIBEAH
4, 7). They then established themselr™ ine - «'
Michmash, formerly the head-quarters of . w " e »
and from thence sent out their bands of pmm. il
derers, north, west, and east (tro. 17, 18). B-» ■
nothing could dislodge Jonathan from his mi.t/ \
stronghold in the south. As far as we can dis-.
entangle the complexities of the story, he soon'
relinquished Geba, and retired with his little
force to Gibeah, where he was joined by his
father, 4 with Samuel the prophet and Aliah the
priest, who, perha|» remembering the former
fate of the Ark, had brought down the sacred
Ephod ' from Shiloh. These three had made
their way up from Gilgal, with a force sorely
diminished by desertion to the Philistine camp
(xiv. 21) and flight (xiii. 7) — a mere remnant
(KardAci/ipa) of the people following in the rear
of the little band (LXX.). Then occurred tbe
feat of the hero and his armour-bearer. In the
stillness and darkness of the night they de-
scended the hill of Gibeah, crossed the inter-
vening country to the steep terraced slope of
Jeb'a, and threading the mazes of the ravine
below climbed the opposite hill, and discovered
themselves to the garrison of the Philistines just
as the day was breaking/
No one had been aware of their departure, bet
it was not long unknown. Saul's watchmen in
Gibeah were straining their eyes to catch a
glimpse in the early morning of the position of
the foe ; and as the first rays of the rising sun
on their right broke over the mountains of
Gilead, and glittered on the rocky heights of
Michmash, their practised eyes quickly dis-
covered the unusual stir in the camp ; they conld
see " the multitude melting away, and beating
down one another." The muster-roll was hastily
called to discover the absentees. The oracle of
God was consulted, but so rapidly did the tumult
increase that Saul's impatience would not permit
the rites to be completed, and soon he and Ahiah
(xiv. 36) were rushing down from Gibeah at the
head of their hungry warriors, joined at every
step by some of the wretched Hebrews from their
hiding-places in the clefts and holes of the Ben-
jamite hills, eager for revenge, and for the re-
covery of the " sheep, and oxen, and calves "
(xiv. 32), equally with the arms, of which they
had been lately plundered. So quickly did the
news run through the district that — if we may
accept the statements of the LXX. — by the time
Saul reached the Philistine camp his following
amounted to 10,000 men : on every one of the
heights (Pa/iud) of the country the people rose
against the hated invaders, and before the day
was out there was not a city even of Mount
Ephraim to which the struggle had not spread.
[Jonathan.]
« According to E. V. (1 Sam. xiU. 15, 16), Samuel
went from Gilgal to Gibeah, whilst Saul and Jonathan
assembled their men in Geba, whence they most hsve
gone to Gibeah (xiv. 2, l»>
• 1 Sam. xiv. 3. In v. 18 the Ark is said to have been
at Gibeah j but this Is in direct contradiction to the
statement of vil. 1, compared with 2 Sam. vL S, 4, and
1 Ch. xiii. 3 ; and also to those of tbe LXX. and
Josephus at this place. Tbe Hebrew words fcr Ark sad
epbod— p-|K and "T1BK— are not very dissimilar, and
may have been mistaken for one another (Ewald, Ottck.
ill. 46. note ; Stanley, p. 206).
' We owe tola touch to Josephus: m^ninv #»
t*v rnUfnt (Ant. vL 6, y a).
Digitized by
Google
GIBEAH
2 / The only indications of position in the above
; / narrative are that Gibeah and Geba were distinct
places (xiii. 2, 3 ; xiv. 2, 5, in R. V.), and that
' Sanl's watchmen in Gibeah could see the com-
i motion in the Philistine army at Michmash.
If Gibeah of Benjamin were in the position
suggested in (IX it must hare been between 4
and 5 miles from Michmash, — a distance at
which it would be difficult, though not perhaps
impossible, with the assistance of the rays of
the rising sun, for a trained eye to distinguish
an unusual movement in a large army. May
we not, however, suppose that the watchmen
were the usual outposts or scouts, 2 or 3 miles
in front of Gibeah; and that they kept up
communication with Saul by means of swift
" runners " ? In this case there would be no
difficulty in placing Gibeah at or near Tell
el-Ful. The actual distances from Mukhmas
are, Jeb'a, 2 miles; XX Has et-TaaU, 4 miles ;
and Tell el-Ful, 5 miles. Josephos {Ant. vi. 6,
§§ 1-3) does not distinguish between Gibeah
ind Geba.
(3.) As " Gibeah of Benjamin," this place is
referred to in 2 Sam. xxiii. 29 (cp. 1 Ch. xi. 31),
and as *' Gibeah " it is mentioned by Hosea (v. 8 ;
ix. 9 ; x. 9X but it does not again appear in the
history. It is, however, almost without doubt
identical with .
5. Gibeah-of-Saul (TINE' niQ? ; the LXX.
do not recognise this name except in 2 Sam.
xxi. 6, where they have Tafiativ taoi\, Gabaath
Senilis, and Is. x. 29, w6\is 'XaoiK, elsewhere
simply ra$a& or A. TafiaBi). This is not men-
tioned as Saul's city till after his anointing
(1 Sam. x. 26), when he is said to have gone
" home " (Hebr. " to his house," as in xv. 34) to
Gibeah, " to which," adds Josephus {Ant. vi. 4,
§ 6), " he belonged." In the subsequent narra-
tive the town bears its full name (xi. 4), and
the king is living there, still following the
avocations of a simple farmer, when his rela-
tions* of Jabesh-Gilead beseech his help in their
danger. His Ammonite expedition is followed
by the first Philistine war, and by various other
conflicts, amongst others an expedition against
Amalek in the extreme south of Palestine. But
he returns, as before, " to his house " at Gibeah-
of-Saul (1 Sam. xv. 34). Again we meet with
it, when the seven sons of the king were hung
there as a sacrifice to turn away the anger of
Jehovah (2 Sam. xxi. 6 k ). The name of Saul
has not been found in connexion with any place
of modern Palestine, but it existed as late as
the days of Josephus, and an allusion of his has
fortunately given a cine to the position of the
town. Josephus (B. J. v. 2, § IX describing
Titus's march from Caesarea to Jerusalem,
gives his route as through Samaria to Gophna,
thence a day's march (usually 10 miles) to a
valley " called by the Jews the Valley of Thorns,
near a certain village called Gabathsaoule
(Ta&aOauoiKrj), distant from Jerusalem about
30 stadia." Here he was joined during the
night (§ 3) by the legion from Emmaus (Nico-
GIBEAH
1179
< This is a fair inference from the nut that the wives
of 400 oat of the SOO Benjsmltes who escaped the
m u s ii re at Gibeah came from Jabeah-Qilead (Judg.
xxi. 11).
* The word In this verse rendered "hill" la not
gibeah but tuxr, i.e. " mountain " (aee Driver, Notts on
tkeOO). Text of the Ml. of Somiui, \n loco).
polis), which would naturally come up the road
by Beth-boron and Gibeon, the same that still
falls into the road from Gophna to Jerusalem
about half a mile north of Tell el-Ful. The
junction of the two roads is exactly 10 Roman
miles from Jufna, Gophna, and 30 stadia from
Jerusalem ; and it is just the position that
an army advancing on Jerusalem and expecting
reinforcements by the Beth-horon road might
be expected to take up. Hereabouts then must
have been the " Valley of Thorns," perhaps
H r . ed-Dumm, west of the road, or W. el-Hap, to
the east of it ; and " Gabathsaoule," which may
have been either Tell el-Ful or Kh. S&s et-
Taail, respectively 25 and 32 stadia from
Jerusalem. The agreement between the posi-
tions of Gibeah of Benjamin and Gibeah of Saul
is complete, and there seems every reason to-
suppose that the two places are identical.
The position assigned to Gibeah, as also the
identification of Geba with Jeb'a, is fully sup-
ported by Is. x. 28-32, where we have a specifi-
cation of the route of Sennacherib from the
north through the villages of the Benjamite
district to Jerusalem. Commencing with Ai,
to the east of the present Bcitin, the route pro-
ceeds by Mukhmas across the " passages " of the
Wady Suweinit to Jeb'a on the opposite side ; and
then by er-Ram and Tell el-Ful, villages ac-
tually on the present road, to the heights north
of Jerusalem, from which the city is visible.
Gallitn, Madmenah, and Gebim, none of which
hare been yet identified, must have been, like
Anathoth ('Anatd), villages on one side or the
other of the direct line of march. The only
break in the chain is Migron, which is here
placed between Ai and Michmash, while in
1 Sam. xiv. 2 it appears to have been 5 or 6
miles south, at Gibeah. One explanation that
presents itself is, that in that uneven and rocky
district the name "Migron" (" precipice ") would
very probably, like "Gibeah," be borne by
more than one town or spot. [Migroh.1
In 1 Sam. xxii. 6,' xxiii. 19, xxvi. 1, "Gibeah "
doubtless stands for G. of Saul.
Dr. Robinson (i. 577-79) was the first to
identify Gibeah of Benjamin, or of Saul, with
Tell el-Ful, though it was partly suggested by
a writer in Stud. u. Kritiken. He has been fol-
lowed by Stanley, Tristram, Porter, Geikie,
Sepp, Riehm, and Baedeker-Socin. On the other
hand, Knobel, Vhenius, Manchot in Schenkel's
Bib. Lex., Schwarz, and Conder identify Gibeah
with Geba, Jeb'a. Conder argues, from Judg.
xx. 31, 1 Sam. xiv. 2, xxii. 6, that Gibeah wae-
a district having Geba as a capital {PEFQy. Stat.
1877, pp. 104, 105 ; 1881, p. 89). It seems clear,
however, especially from Is. x. 29, that they
were distinct places. Birch (PEFQy. Stat. 1882>
suggests Kh. 'Adaseh, 2 miles E. of El-Jib, Gibeon,
as a site for Gibeah, but this place is apparently
ADA8A.
6. Gibeah-in-the Field (iTlB>3 TTIQJ ; r<x-
Paa <V &yp<f ; Gabaa), named only in Judg. xx.
31, as the place to which one of the "high-
ways " (!")i?P9) led from Gibeah-of-Benjamin,
> The words In 1 8am. xxll. 6 may either be trans-
lated " In Gibeah, under the tamailslt tree on the
height," as In R. V. marg., or It may Imply that lUmali
was Included within the precincts of the king's city.
[Kamau.J
Digitized by
Google
1180
GIBKATH
— "of which one goeth up to Bethel, and one
to Gibeah-in-the-lield." Sadeh, the word here
Tendered "field," is applied specially to culti-
vated ground, "as distinguished from town,
desert, or garden " (Stanley, App. § 15). Culti-
vation was so general throughout this district,
that the term affords no clue to the situation of
the place. It is, however, remarkable that the
north road from Jerusalem, shortly after passing
Tell el-Ful, separates into two branches, one
running on to Beitin (Bethel), and the other
diverging to the right to Jeb'a (Geba). The
attack on Gibeah came from the north (cp. zx.
18, 19, and 26, in which " the house of God " is
really Bethel), and therefore the divergence of
the roads was north of the town. In the case
of Gibeah-of-Benjamin we have seen that the
two forms " Geba " and " Gibeah " appear to be
convertible, the former for the latter. If the
identification now proposed for Gibeah-in-the-
field be correct, the case is here reversed — and
" Gibeah " is put for « Geba."
The " meadows of Gaba " (ID i ; A. V. Gibeah,
R. V. Geba ; Judg. xx. 33) have no connexion
with the " field," the Hebrew words being en-
tirely different. As stated above, the word
rendered " meadows " is probably accurately
"cave." [Geba, p. 1177, n. V)
7. There are several other names compounded
of Gibeah, which arc given in a translated form
in the A. V., probably from their appearing not
to belong to towns. These are : —
(1.) The " hill of the foreskins," R. V. marg.
Gibeath ha-araloth (Josh. v. 3), between the
Jordan and Jericho; it derives its name from
the circumcision which took place there, and
seems afterwards to have received the name of
Giloal.
(2.) The "hill of Phinehas," R. V. marg.
Gibeah of Phinehas, in Mount Ephraim (Josh,
xxiv. 33). Schwarz (H. L. p. 118), who is fol-
lowed by Sepp (ii. 53) and Conder (PEF. Mem.
ii. 288), identifies it with 'Atrertah, near Ndblus,
where the tombs of Phinehas and Eleazar are
shown. Guerin (Judge, iii. 37) and Riehm (s. v.)
place it at Jibia, 3 miles north of Kuryct
el-'Enab.
(3.) The hill of Moreh (Judg. vii. 1).
(4.) The hill of God — Gibeath ha-Elohim
(1 Sam. x. 5) ; one of the places in the route of
Saul, which is so difficult to trace. In re. 10
and 13, it is apparently called " the hill " and
"the high place."
(5.) The hill of Hachilah (1 Sam. xxiii. 19,
xxvi. 1).
(6.) The hill of Ammah (2 Sam. ii. 24).
(7.) The hill Gareb (Jer. xxxi. 39).
In addition to those enumerated above,
Josephus (B. J. iii. 3, § 1) mentions a Gibeah
as adjoining Carmel, and as having the sobri-
quet "city of horsemen" (Ta$a ircfAis iinrimi),
because it was the residence of certain horsemen
dismissed by Herod. This place is now called
JeVa (PEF. Mem. ii. 42). [G.] [W.]
GIBEATH, Josh, xviii. 28. [Gibeah, 2.]
GIBEATHITE, THE Oninari; 6 TajSc-
Biros; Gabaathites), ie. the native of Gibeah
(1 Ch. xii. 3) ; in this case Shemaah, or " the
Shemaah," father of two Benjamites, "Saul's
brethren," who joined David.
GIBEON
GIBEON tfto3J, i.e. " belonging to a hill ; "
Ta&aiiiv, Joseph, tafiai; Gaboon), one of the
four* cities of the Hivites, the inhabitants of
which made a league with Joshua (ix. 3-15),
and thus escaped the fate of Jericho and Ai
(cp. xi. 19). It appears, as might be inferred
from its taking the initiative in this matter, to
have been the largest of the four — "a great
city, like one of the royal cities " — larger than
Ai (x. 2). Its men too were all practised war-
riors (Gibborim, D'13|). Gibeon lay within the
territory of Benjamin (xviii. 25), and with its
"suburbs " was allotted to the priests (xxi. 17),
of whom it became afterwards a principal sta-
tion. Occasional notices of its existence occur
in the Historical Books, which are examined
more at length below ; and after the Captivity
we find the " men of Gibeon " returning with
Zerubbabel (Neh. vii. 25 : in the list of Ezra
the name is altered to Gibbar), and assisting
Nehemiah in the repair of the wall of Jerusalem
(iii. 7). In the post-biblical times it was the
scene of a victory by the Jews over the Roman
troops under Cestius Gallus, which offers in
many respects a close parallel to that of Joshua
over the Canaanites (Joseph. B. J. ii. 19, § 7 ;
Stanley, S. $ P. p. 212).
The situation of Gibeon has fortunately been
recovered with as great certainty as any ancient
site in Palestine. The traveller who pursues
the northern camel-road from Jerusalem, turn-
ing off to the left beyond Tell el-Ful, on that
branch of it which leads westward to Jaffa,
finds himself, after crossing one or two stony
and barren ridges, in a district of a more open
character. The hills are rounder and more
isolated than those through which he has been
passing, and rise in well-defined mamelons from
broad undulating valleys of tolerable extent and
fertile soil. This is the central plateau of the
country, the " land of Benjamin ; " and these
round hills are the Gibeahs, Gebas, Gibeons, and
Ramahs, whose names occur so frequently in
the records of this district. Retaining its an-
cient name almost intact, el-Jib stands on the
northernmost of a couple of these mamelons,
just at the place where the road to the sea
parts into two branches, the one by the lower
level of the Wddy Suleiman, the other by the
heights of the Beth-horons, to Gimzo, Lydda,
and Joppa. The road passes at a short distance
to the north of the base of the hill of el-Jib.
The strata of the hills in this district lie much
more horizontally than those further south.
With the hills of Gibeon this is peculiarly the
case, and it imparts a remarkable precision to
their appearance, especially when viewed from a
height such as the neighbouring eminence of
Neby Samwil. The natural terraces are carried
round the hill like contour lines ; they are all
dotted thick with olives and vines, and the
ancient-looking houses are scattered over the
flattish summit of the mound. On the east side
of the hill is a copious spring, which issues in a
cave excavated in the limestone rock, so as to
form a large reservoir, whence a rock-hewn
passage led to the surface of the hill above
(PEFQy. Stat. 1890, p. 23). In the trees farther
• So Josh. ix. IT. Josephus (Ant. v. 1, $ 16) omits
Beeroth.
Digitized by
Google
GIBEON
down are the remains of a pool or tank of consider-
able size ; probably, says Dr. Robinson, 120 feet
by 100, i.e. of rather smaller dimensions than the
lower pool at Hebron. This is doubtless the
" pool of Gibeon " at which Abner and Joab met
together with the troops of Ishbosheth and
David, and where that sharp conflict took place
which ended in the death of Asahel, and led at
a later period to the treacherous murder of
Abner himself. Here or at the spring were the
" great waters (or the many waters, D , 3'] D'D)
of Gibeon," * at which Johanan the son of
Kareah found the traitor Ishmael (Jer. zli. 12).
Round this water also, according to the notice
of Josephus (4*1 net *yyj) ttjs riktcn oinc
&ww8*v, Ant. v. 1, § 17), the five kings of the
Amorites were encamped when Joshua burst
upon them from Gilgal. The "wilderness of
Gibeon *' (2 Sam. ii. 24)— the Afidbar, i.e. rather
the waste pasture-grounds — must have been to
the east, beyond the circle or suburb of culti-
vated fields, and towards the neighbouring
swells, which bear the names of Jedtreh and
BSr Xebala. Such is the situation of Gibeon,
fulfilling in position every requirement of the
notices of the Bible, Josephus, Eusebius, and
Jerome. Its distance from Jerusalem by the
main road is as nearly as possible 6} miles ; but
there is a more direct road reducing it to
5 miles.
(1.) The name of Gibeon is most familiar to
us in connexion with the artifice by which its
inhabitants obtained their safety at the hands of
Joshua, and with the memorable battle which
ultimately resulted therefrom. This transac-
tion is elsewhere examined, and therefore re-
quires no further reference here. [Joshua ;
Betr-horon.]
(2.) We next hear of it at the encounter
between the men of David and of Ishbosheth
under their respective leaders, Joab and Abner
(2 Sam. ii. 12-17). The meeting has all the
air of having been premeditated by both parties,
unless we suppose that Joab had heard of the
intention of the Benjamites to revisit from the
distant Hahanaim their native villages, and had
seized the opportunity to try his strength with
Abner. The details of this disastrous encounter
are elsewhere given. [Joab.] The place where
the straggle began received a name from the
circumstance, and seems to have been long after-
wards known as the " field of the strong men."
[Helkath-hazzcbjm.]
(3.) We again meet with Gibeon in connexion
with Joab ; this time as the scene of the cruel
and revolting death of Amasa by his hand
(2 Sam. xx. 5-10). Joab was in pursuit of the
rebellious Sheba the son of Bichri, and his being
so far ont of the direct north road as Gibeon
may be accounted for by supposing that he was
making a search for this Benjamite among the
towns of his tribe. The two rivals met at
" the great stone which is in Gibeon "■ — some
old landmark now no longer recognisable, at
least not recognised — and then Joab repeated
the treachery by which he had murdered Abner,
bat with circumstances of a still more revolting
character. [Joab.]
It is remarkable that the retribution for this
• Both here and In 1 E. 111. 4, Josephus substitutes
Hebron for Gibeon (Ant. x. 9, » 5; vat 2, $ 1).
GIBEON
1181
crowning act of perfidy should have overtaken
Joab close to the very spot on which it had been
committed. For it was to the Tabernacle at
Gibeon (1 K. ii. 28, 29 ; cp. 1 Ch. xvi. 39) that
Joab fled for sanctuary when his death was
pronounced by Solomon, and it was while cling-
ing to the horns of the brazen Altar there that he
received his deathblow from Benaiah the son of
Jehoiada (1 K.ii. 28, 30, 34; and LXX. t>. 29).
(4.) Familiar as these events in connexion
with the history of Gibeon are to us, its reputa-
tion in Israel was due to a very different circum-
stance — the fact that the Tabernacle of the
congregation and the brazen Altar of burnt-
offering were for some time located on the
" high place " attached to or near the town.
We are not informed whether this " high place "
had any fame for sanctity before the Tabernacle
came there ; but if not, it would have probably
been erected elsewhere. We only hear of it in
connexion with the Tabernacle, nor is there any
indication of its situation in regard to the town.
Dean Stanley has suggested that it was the
remarkable hill of Neby Samutl, the most promi-
nent and individual eminence in that part of the
country, and to which the special appellation of
"the great high-place" (1 K. iii. 4; !TD3n
H?il3n) would perfectly apply. And certainly,
if " great " is to be understood as referring to
height or size, there is no other hill which can
so justly claim the distinction (Sinai and Pal.
p. 216). But the word has not always that mean-
ing, and may equally imply eminence in other
respects, e.g. superior sanctity to the numerous
other high places — Bethel, Kamah, Mizpeh, and
Gibeah — which surrounded it on every side. The
main objection to this identification is the
distance of Neby Samwti from Gibeon — more
than a mile — and the absence of any closer
connexion therewith than with any other of
the neighbouring places. The most natural
position for the high place of Gibeon is the
twin mount immediately south of el-Jib — so
close as to be all but a part of the town,
and yet quite separate and distinct. The tes-
timony of Epiphiinius, by which Dean Stanley
supports his conjecture, viz. that the "Mount
of Gabaon " was the highest round Jerusalem
(Adv. Hcureses, i. 394), should be received with
caution, standing as it does quite alone, and
belonging to an age which, though early, was
marked by ignorance, and by the most improba-
ble conclusions.
To this high place, wherever situated, the
" Tabernacle of the congregation " — the sacred
tent which had accompanied the children of
Israel through the whole of their wanderings —
had been transferred from its last station at
Nob.* The exact date of the transfer is left in
uncertainty. It was either before or at the
time when David brought up the Ark from Kir-
" The various stations of the Tabernacle and the
Ark, from their entry on the Promised Land to their
final deposition in the Temple at Jerusalem, will be
examined under Tabkrsacle. Meantime, with re-
ference to the above, It may be said that though not
expressly stated to have been at Nob, it may be con-
clusively Inferred from the mention of the "sbew-
bread " (1 Sam. xxL 6). The "ephod" (v. 9) and the
expression "before Jehovah" (v. •) prove nothing
either way. Josephus throws no light on It.
Digitized by
Google
1182
GIBEONITES, THE
jath-jearim, to the new tent which he hod
pitched for it on Mount Zion, that the original
tent wn spread for the last time at Gibeon.
The expression in 2 Ch. i. 5, " the brazen Altar
he put before the Tabernacle of Jehovah," at
first sight appears to refer to David. But the
text of the passage is disputed, and the authori-
ties are divided between DC = " he put," and
DB> = " was there " (R. V.). 'Whether king David
transferred the Tabernacle to Gibeon or not, he
certainly appointed the staff of priests to offer
the daily sacrifices there on the brazen Altar of
Moses, and to fulfil the other requirements of
the Law (1 Ch. xvi. 40), with no less a person at
their head than Zadok the priest (o. 39), assisted
by the famous musicians Heman and Jeduthun
<t>. 41).
One of the earliest acts of Solomon's reign —
it must have been while the remembrance of the
execution of Joab was still fresh — was to visit
Gibeon. The ceremonial was truly magnificent :
he went up with all the congregation, the
great officers of state— the captains of hundreds
and thousands, the judges, the governors, and
the chief of the fathers — and the sacrifice con-
sisted of a thousand burnt-offerings (1 K. iii. 4).
And this glimpse of Gibeon in nil the splendour
of its greatest prosperity — the smoke of the
thousand animals rising from the venerable altar
do the commanding height of " the great high
place " — the clang of " trumpets and cymbals
and musical instruments of God " (1 Ch. xvi.
42) resounding through the valleys far and near
— is virtually the last we have of it. In a few
years the Temple at Jerusalem was completed,
and then the Tabernacle was once more taken
down and removed. Again "all the men of
Israel assembled themselves " to king Solomon,
with the " elders of Israel," and the priests and
the Levites brought up both the Tabernacle and
the Ark, and " all the holy vessels that were in
the Tabernacle " (1 K. viii. 3 ; Joseph. Ant. viii.
■*> § l)i an d placed the venerable relics in their
new home, there to remain until the plunder of
the city by Nebuchadnezzar. The introduction
of the name of Gibeon in 1 Ch. ix. 35, which
seems so abrupt, is probably due to the fact
that the preceding verses of the chapter contain,
as they appear to do, a list of the staff attached
to the " Tabernacle of the congregation " which
was erected there; or if these persons should
prove to be the attendants on the " new tent "
which David had pitched for the Ark on its
arrival in the city of David, the transition to
the place where the old tent was still standing
is both natural and easy. For the present state
■of Gibeon, see PEF. Mem. iii. 10, 94, and Guerin,
Judei, i. 385-391 [G.] [W.]
GIBEONITES, THE (D'HOM; oi ra$aa-
rlrtu; Qabaonitae), the people of Gibeon, and
perhaps also of the three cities associated with
Gibeon (Josh. ix. 17)— Hivites; and who, on the
discovery of the stratagem by which they had
obtained the protection of the Israelites, were
condemned to be perpetual bondmen, hewers of
wood and drawers of water for the congregation,
and for the house of God and Altar of Jehovah
(Josh. ix. 23, 27). Saul appears to have
broken this covenant, and in a fit of enthusiasm
or patriotism to hare killed some and devised a
GIDDEL
I general massacre of the rest (2 Sam. xxi. 1, 2,
I 5). This was expiated many yean after by
I giving up seven men of Saul's descendants to
\ the Gibeonites, who hung them or crucified
them " before Jehovah " — as a kind of sacrifice
— in Gibeah, Saul's own town (m. 4, 6, 9). At
this time, or at any rate at the time of the
composition of the narrative, the Gibeonites
were so identified with Israel, that the historian
is obliged to insert a note explaining their
origin and their non-Israelite extraction (xxi. 2).
The actual name " Gibeonites " appears only in
this passage of 2 Sam. [Nethinim.]
Individual Gibeonites named are (1) Ismaiah,
one of the Benjaraites who joined David in his
difficulties (1 Ch. xii. 4); (2) Melatlah, one of
those who assisted Nehemiah in repairing the
wall of Jerusalem (Neh. iii. 7) ; (3) Hanahia.ii,
the son of Azur, a false prophet from Gibeon,
who opposed Jeremiah, and shortly afterwards
died (Jer. xxviii. 1, 10, 13, 17). [G.] [W.]
GIBLITES, THE (^Oifl, U. singular,
" theGiblite ;" B. roAia* Iwktarntu, A. TafiKt;
confinia). The "land of the Giblite" is men-
tioned in connexion with Lebanon in the enu-
meration of the portions of the Promised Land
remaining to be conquered by Joshua (Josh,
xiii. 5). The ancient Versions, as will be seen
above, give no help, but there is no reason to
doubt that the allusion is to the inhabitants of
the city Gebal, which was on the sea-coast at
the foot of the northern slopes of Lebanon. The
one name is a regular derivative from the other
(see Gesenius, T/ies. p. 258 6). We have here a
confirmation of the identity of the Aphek men-
tioned in this passage with Afia [Aphek, 2] ;
and the whole passage is instructive, as show-
ing how very far the limits of the country
designed for the Israelites exceeded those which
they actually occupied.
The Giblites are again named (though not in
the A. V.) in 1 K. v. 18 (D'^jri; B. om., A. oi
BlfiKuu; Sib/it), as assisting Solomon's builders
and Hiram's builders to prepare the trees and
the stones for building the Temple. That they
were clever artificers is evident from this
passage (cp. Ezek. xxvii. 9); but why the A. V.
should have rendered the word " stone-squarers "
is not obvious. Possibly they followed the
Targum, which has a word of similar import in
this place. K. V. correctly translates Gebalites.
[G.] [W.]
GIDDAL'TI ('rfaj = 7 have magnified
(God); B. ro»oAAa««i, i A~. rc8oAAa«; OtddeUhi),
one of the sons of Heman, the king's seer, and
therefore a Kohathite Levite (1 Ch. xxv. 4; cp.
vi. 33): his office was with thirteen of his
brothers to sound the horn in the service of the
Tabernacle (t>». 5, 7). He had also charge of
the 22nd division or course (o. 29).
GIDDEL fJH| = he hath magnified; B.
K»W«, A. rtSH\ [Ezra], BK. roNjA, A. Sa8«A
[Neh.] ; Oaddel). 1. Children of Giddel (Bene-
Oiddel) were among the Nethinim who returned
from the Captivity with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii. 47 ;
Neh. vii. 49). In the parallel lists of 1 Esdrat
(v. 30) the name is corrupted to Cathua.
2. Bene-Giddel were also among the "servants
Digitized by VjOOQlC
GIDEON
of Solomon " who returned to Judaea in the same
caravan (Ezra ii. 56, B. rttni, A. TtSH*. ; Nth.
vii. 58, BK. ra*K A. TaSSfa). In 1 E»d. v.
32 this is given as Isdael.
GIDEON (fllHl, Ges.=o hewer, i.e. a brave
warrior; cp. Is. x. 33: IV5«<£r; Gedeon), a
Manassite, youngest son of Joash of the Abiez-
rites, an undistinguished family who lived at
Ophrah (LXX. r. 11, 'E^poSo), which was pro-
bably a town of Manasseh not far from Shechem
(Judg. vi. 15), although its exact position is
unknown. He was the fifth recorded Judge of
Israel, and for many reasons the greatest of
them all. When we first hear of him he was
grown up and had sons (Jndg. vi. 11, viii. 20),
and from the apostrophe of the Angel (vi. 12)
we may conclude that he had already distin-
guished himself in war against the roving bands
of nomadic robbers who had oppressed Israel for
■even years, and whose countless multitndes
(compared to locusts from their terrible de-
vastations, vi. 5) annually destroyed all the
produce of Canaan, except such as could be
concealed in mountain fastnesses (vi. 2). It
was probably daring this disastrous period that
the emigration of Elimelech took place (Ruth i.
1, 2). Some have identified the Angel who
appeared to Gideon ($Avraaiia vtcwioxov /wpQjj,
Jos. Ant. v. 6) with the prophet mentioned in
vi. 8, which will remind the reader of the
legends about Malachi in Origen and other
commentators. Paulns (Exeg. Conserv. ii. 190
sq.) endeavours to give the narrative a sub-
jective colouring, but rationalism is of little
value in accounts like this. When the Angel
appeared, Gideon was thrashing wheat with a
flail (faowre, LXX.) in the wine-press, to con-
ceal it from the predatory tyrants. After a
natural hesitation he accepted the commission
to be a deliverer, and learnt the true character
of his visitant from a miraculous sign (vi. 12-
23) ; and, being reassured from the fear which
tint seized him (Ex. xx. 19; Judg. xiii. 22),
he built the altar Jehovah-shalom, which existed
when the Book of Judges was written (vi. 24).
In a dream the same night he was ordered to
throw down the altar of Baal and cut down the
Asherah (A V. "grove") np«n »* [Asherah],
with the wood of which he was to offer in sacrifice
hu father's " second bullock of wven years old,"
an expression in which some see an allusion to the
seven years of servitude (vi. 25; cp. o. 1). « er -
haps that particular bullock is specified because
it had been reserved by his father to sacrifice to
Baal (Rosenmuller, Schol. ad loc), for Joash
seems to have been a priest of that worship.
Bertheau can hardly be right in supposing that
Gideon was to offer two bullocks (Rickt. p. 115).
At any rate the minute touch is valuable as an
indication of truth in the story (see Ewald,
Geteh. ii. 498, and note). Gideon, assisted by
ten faithful servants, obeyed the vision, and
next morning ran the risk of being stoned; but
Joash appeased the popular indignation by using
the common argument that Baal was capable of
defending his own majesty (cp. 1 K. xviii. 27).
This circumstance gave to Gideon the surname
of t«3T (" Let Baal plead," vi. 32 ; LXX. 'Hpo-
fiitLK), a' standing instance of national irony, ex-
GIDEON
1183
pressive of Baal's impotence. Winer thinks that
this irony was increased by the fact that ?MT
(see MV.") was a surname of the Phoenician
Hercules (cp. Movers, Phonic, i. 434). We have
similar cases of contempt in the names Sychar,
Baal-zebul, &c. (Lightfoot, Hor. Heir, ad Matt.
xii. 24). In consequence of this name some
have identified Gideon with a certain priest
'Uo6ufia\os, mentioned in Eusebius (Praep.
Ecang. i. 10) as having given much accurate
information to Sanchoniatho the Berytian (Bo-
chart, I'haleg, p. 776 ; Huetius, Dem. Evann.
p. 84, &c.), but this opinion cannot be main-
tained (Ewald, Gesch. ii. p. 494 ; Gesen. s. v.).
We also find the name in the form Jerubbesheth
(2 Sam. xi. 21. Cp. Eshbaal, 1 Ch. viii. 33, with
Ishbosheth, 2 Sam. ii. sq.). Ewald (p. 495, n.)
brings forward several arguments against the
supposed origin of the name.
2. After this begins the second act of Gideon's
life. "Clothed" by the Spirit of God (Judg.
vi. 34; cp. 1 Ch. xii. 18; Luke xxiv. 49), he
blew a trumpet ; and, joined by " Zebulun,
Naphtali, and eveu the reluctant Asher" (which
tribes were chiefly endangered by the Midian-
ites), and possibly also by some of the original
inhabitants, who would suffer from these pre-
datory " sons of the East " no less than the
Israelites themselves, he encamped on the slopes
of Gilboa, from which he overlooked the plains
of Esdraelon covered by the tents of Midian
(Stanley, Sin. # Pal. p. 243). Strengthened by
a double sign from God (to which Ewald gives
a strange figurative meaning, Gesch. ii. p. 500),
he reduced his army of thirty-two thousand by
the usual proclamation (Dent. xx. 8 ; cp. 1 Mace,
iii. 56). The expression " let him depart from
Mount Gilead" is perplexing (R. T. marg. renders
171) round about) ; Dathe would render it " to
Mount Gilead," — on the other side of Jordan ;
and Clericus reads V27&, Gilboa ; but Ewald is
probably right in regarding the name as a sort
of war-cry and general designation of the Man-
assites (see too Gesen. Thet. p. 804, n.). By a
second test at " the spring of trembling " (now
probably Mm Jahlood, on which see Stanley,
p. 342), he again reduced the number of his
followers to three hundred (Judg. vii. 5 sq.),
whom Josephus explains to have been the malt
cowardly in the army {Ant. v. 6, § 3). Finally,
being encouraged by words fortuitously over-
heard (what the later Jews termed the Bath
Kol; cp. 1 Sam. xiv. 9, 10; Lightfoot, Hor.
Hebr. ad Matt. iii. 14), in the relation of a
significant dream, he framed his plans, which
were admirably adapted to strike a panic terror
into the huge and undisciplined nomad host
(Judg. viii. 15-18). We know from history
that large and irregular Oriental armies are
especially liable to sudden outbursts of uncon-
trollable terror; and when the stillness and
darkness of the night were suddenly disturbed
in three different directions by the flash of
torches and by the reverberating echoes which
the trumpets and the shouting woke among the
hilb, we cannot be astonished at the complete
rout into which the enemy were thrown. It
must be remembered too that the sound of three
hundred trumpets would make them suppose
that a corresponding number of companies were
Digitized by
Google
1184
GIDEON
attacking them.* For specimena of similar
stratagems, see Liv. xxii. 16 ; Polyaen. Strateg.
ii. 37; Frontin. ii. 4; Sail. Jug. 99; Niebuhr,
Desc. de I' Arabic, p. 304; Journ. As. 1841, ii.
516 (quoted by Ewald, Rosenmuller, and
Winer). The custom of dividing an army into
three seems to hare been common (1 Sam. xi.
11; Gen. xiv. 15), and Gideon's war-cry is not
unlike that adopted by Cyrus (Xen. Cyr. iii.
28). He adds his own name to the war-cry, as
suited both to inspire confidence in his followers
and strike terror in the enemy. His stratagem
was eminently successful, and the Midianites,
breaking out into their wild peculiar cries, fled
headlong " down the descent to the Jordan," to
the " house of the Acacia " (Beth-shittu) and
the "meadow of the dance" (Abel-mcholah),
but were intercepted by the Ephraimites (to
whom notice had been sent, vii. 24) at the fords
of Beth-barah, where, after a second fight, the
princes Oreb and Zeeb (" the Raven " and " the
Wolf ") were detected and slain, — the former at
a rock, and the latter concealed in a wine-press,
to which their names were afterwards given.
Meanwhile the " higher sheykhs, Zeba and Zal-
munna, had already escaped," and Gideon (after
pacifying — by a soft answer, which became
proverbial — the haughty tribe of Ephraim, viii.
1-3) pursued them into eastern Manasseh, and,
bursting upon them in their fancied security
among the tents of their Bedouin countrymen
[see Kabkor], won his third victory, and avenged
on the Midianitish emirs the massacre of his
kingly brethren whom they had slain at Tabor
(viii. 18 sq.). In these three battles only fifteen
thousand out of one hundred and twenty thousand
Midianites escaped alive. It is indeed stated in
Judg. viii. 10, that one hundred and twenty thou-
sand Midianites had already fatten: but here, as
elsewhere, it may merely be intended that such
was the original number of the routed host.
During his triumphal return Gideon took sig-
nal and appropriate vengeance on the coward
and apostate towns of Succoth and Peniel. The
memory of this splendid deliverance took deep
root in the national traditions (1 Sam. xii. 11;
Ps. lxxxiii. 11 ; Is. ix. 4, x. 26 ; Heb. xi. 32).
3. After this there was a peace of forty years,
and we see Gideon in peaceful possession of his
well-earned honours, and surrounded by the
dignity of a numerous household (viii. 29-31).
It is not improbable that, like Saul, he had owed
a part of his popularity to his princely appear-
ance (Judg. viii. 18). In this third stage of his
life occur alike his most noble and his most
questionable acts, viz. the refusal of the mon-
archy on theocratic grounds, and the irregular
consecration of a jewelled ephod, formed out of
the rich spoils of Midian, which proved to the
Israelites a temptation to idolatry, although it
was doubtless intended for use in the worship of
Jehovah. Gesenius and others (Thes. p. 135;
• It is curious to find " lamps sod pitchers " In use
for & similar purpose at this very day In the streets of
Cairo. The Zabit or Agka of the police carries with
him at night, "a torch which bums soon after It is
lighted, without a flame, excepting when it Is waved
through the air, when it suddenly blazes forth: it
therefore answers the same purpose as our dark lantern.
The burning end U sometimes concealed in a small pot
or jar, or covered with something else, when not re-
quired to give light" (Lane's Mod. Kg. 1. ch. lv.)-
OIEB EAGLE
Bertheau, p. 133 sq.) follow the Peshitto in
making the word Ephod here mean an idol,
chiefly on account of the vast amount of gold
(1700 shekels) and other rich material ap-
propriated to it. But it is simpler to under-
stand it as a significant symbol of an unautho-
rised worship.
Respecting the chronology of this period, little
certainty can be obtained. Making full allow-
ance for the use of round numbers, and even
admitting the improbable assertion of some of
the Rabbis that the period of oppression is
counted in the years of rest (e. Rosenmuller on
Judg. iii. 11), insuperable difficulties remain.
If, however, as has been suggested by Lord A.
Hervey, several of the judgeships really syn-
chronise instead of being successive, much of
the confusion vanishes. For instance, he sup-
poses (from a comparison of Judg. iii., viii., and
xii.) that there was a combined movement under
three great chiefs, Ehud, Gideon, and Jephthah,
by which the Israelites emancipated themselves
from the dominion of the Moabites, Ammonites,
and Midianites (who for some years had occu-
pied their land), and enjoyed a long term of
peace through all their coasts. " If," he says,
" we string together the different accounts of
the different parts of Israel which are given us
in that miscellaneous collection of ancient re-
cords called the Book of Judges, and treat them
as connected and successive history, we shall
fall into as great a chronographical error as if
we treated in the same manner the histories of
Mercia, Kent, Essex, Wessex, and Northumber-
land, before England became one kingdom "
(fienealog. of our Lord, p. 238). It is now
well known that a similar source of error has
long existed in the chronology of Egypt.
[F. W. F.]
ODDECNI (*?inj, or once 'JijTI?; B.
[usually] raStuvti, AF. [usually] Tattvrl ; Ge-
deonis). Abidan, son of Gideoni, was the chief
man of the tribe of Benjamin at the time of the
census in the wilderness of Sinai (Num. i. 1 1 ;
ii. 22 ; vii. 60, 65 ; x. 24).
GID'OM (Dinj ; Trior, A. TaXaiX), a place
named only in Judg. xx. 45, as the limit to
which the pursuit of Benjamin extended after
the final battle of Gibeah. It would appear to
have been situated between Gibeah {Tell el-Fil}
and the cliff Rimmon (probably Summon, about
3 miles E. of Bethel); but no trace of the name,
nor yet of that of Menuchah, if indeed that
was a place (Judg. xx. 43 ; A. V. " with ease,"
R. V. "at their resting place" — but see
margin), has yet been met with. The reading
of A., "Gilead," can hardly be taken as well
founded. In the Vulgate the word does not
seem to be represented. [G.] [W.]
GIEB EAGLE. The rendering in A. V. of
Dm, racham, ilDm, rachamah, in Lev. xi. 18
T T T T T
and Deut. xiv. 17, the only passages where the
name occurs: Arab. ,»i-.> SL»s»-ji racham, ra-
chamah ; R. V. " vulture." All authorities are
unanimous in identifying racham with the
well-known Egyptian vulture, or " Pharaoh's
hen," as it is often called in the East, Neo.
Digitized by
Google
GIEB EAGLE
phron percnopiena (L.). The Revisers' trans-
lation is undoubtedly preferable to that of the
A. V. But it is unfortunate that the name
" vulture " is applied in our language to
birds so widely different in appearance and
character as the Griffon and the Neophron.
The LXX. in Leviticus give Kiicvos, "swan;"
and in Deut. ■mpQvpluv, "purple water-
hen," Porphyrio caeruleus, Vand., in which
they are followed by the Vulgate. But both
of these seem to be mere random guesses of
writers who had no knowledge of the subject,
and have no justification, etymological or other.
The name gier-eagle is a compound of the German
word for vulture, Geier, and eagle ; than which
a more inappropriate name could hardly be
found for the un-eaglelike Neophron. This bird
holds an important place in the Arab pharma-
copoeia, and is also the subject of many wonderful
tales. In spite of its repulsive habits — for it
feeds exclusively on putrid carrion and ordure —
or perhaps because of its consequent value as
a scavenger, it is greatly respected by all
Orientals : its Turkish name is Ach bobba, " white
father," in respectful allusion to its white plu-
mage. Everywhere in the East it is protected.
Though more abundant in tropical countries
than elsewhere, its range is very extended. In
Africa it is found from the Cape to Morocco and
Egypt, and through Southern Europe and the
warmer parts of Asia to Ceylon. (The Indian
bird has however been distinguished as Neophron
gmgmianus, Lath., but the differences are very
GIFT
1185
E«TpU»n Vulture.
minute.) It is a handsome bird on the wing,
with white body and tail and black pinions.
It respectfully follows but never consorts with
the noble griffons, and is often seen high up in
the air, sailing below them. Its long, feeble,
and slightly curved bill, and its weak feet and
claws, separate it widely from the true vultures,
eagles, and all other birds of prey, with which
it is never classed by the Orientals. In Palestine
it is only a summer visitant, arriving from the
south in April, and remaining till October. It
is scattered everywhere in pairs over the country,
nesting low down in the cliffs, and heaping up
in some conspicuous spot an enormous structure
of sticks, turf, bones, rags, pieces of sheepskin,
and whatever else the neighbourhood of a village
may supply. It is fearless, and from long ex-
perience seems to have confidence in man, visit-
H1BLE DICT. — VOL. I.
ing the Tillage dunghills with perfect unconcern.
Excepting over a carcase, rarely more than two
are ever seen together. The Egyptian vulture
does not acquire its adult plumage until it is
two years old. The young bird has a dappled
brown plumage, and in this plumage it has been
captured in England.
The Revisers, while substituting " vulture"
for " gier eagle," as the translation of rachdm,
have unfortunately transferred this latter word to
DIB, peres, the " lamraergeyer " of naturalists,
the '" ossifrage " of the A. V. [H. B. T.]
GIFT. The giving and receiving of presents
has in all ages been not only a more frequent,
but also a more formal and significant proceeding
in the East than among ourselves. It enters
largely into the ordinary transactions of life : no
negotiation, alliance, or contract of any kind
can be entered into between states or sovereigns
without a previous interchange of presents:
none of the important events of private life —
betrothal, marriage, coming of age, birth — take
place without presents: even a visit, if of a
formal nature, must be prefaced by a present.
We cannot adduce a more remarkable proof of
the important part which presents play in the
social life of the East, than the fact, that the
Hebrew language possesses no less than fifteen
different expressions for the one idea. Many of
these expressions have specific meanings: for
instance, minchah (111130) applies to a present
from an inferior to a superior, as from subjects
to a king (Judg. iii. 15; 1 K. x. 25; 2 Oh.
xvii. 5) : maseth (n^S^D) expresses the converse
idea of a present from a superior to an inferior,
as from a king to bis subjects (Esth. ii. 18);
hence it is used of a portion of food sent by the
master of the house to guests whom he wishes
to honour (Gen. xliii. 34; 2 Sam. xi. 8): nitseth
(JlttgO) has very much the same sense (2 Sam.
xix.42): feracaA (i13"13), literally a "blessing,"
is used where the present is one of a compli-
mentary nature, either accompanied with good
wishes, or given as a token of affection (Gen.
xxxiii. 11 ; Judg. i. 15; 1 Sam. xxv. 27, xxx. 26 ;
2 K. v. 15); and again, shochad (inE>) is a
gift for the purpose of escaping punishment,
presented either to a judge (Ex. xxiii. 8 ; Deut.
x. 17) or to a conqueror (2 K. xvi. 8). Other
terms, as mattan (JDD), were used more gene-
rally. The extent to which the custom pre-
vailed admits of some explanation from the
peculiar usages of the East : it is clear that the
term " gift " is frequently used where we should
substitute " tribute," or " fee." The tribute of
subject states was paid not in a fixed sum of
money, but in kind, each nation presenting its
particular product — a custom which is frequently
illustrated in the sculptures of Assyria and
Egypt; hence the numerous instances in which
the present was no voluntary act, but an ex-
action (Judg. iii. 15-18 ; 2 Sam. viii. 2, 6 ; IK.
iv. 21 ; 2 K. xvii. 3; 2 Ch. xvii. 11, xxvi. 8);
and hence the expression " to bring presents " =
to own submission (Ps. lxviii. 29, lxxvi. 11 ; Is.
xviii. 7). Again, the present taken to a prophet
was viewed very much in the light of a con-
sulting " fee," and conveyed no idea of bribery
(1 Sam. ix. 7, cp. xii. 3 ; 2 K. v. 5, viii. 9): it
4G
Digitized by
Google
1186
GIHON
was only when false prophets and corrupt judges
arose that the present was prostituted, and
became, instead of a minchah (as in the instances
quoted), a shochad, or bribe (Is. i. 23, v. 23;
Ezek. xxii. 12; Micah iii. XI). But even allow-
ing for these cases, which are hardly " gifts " in
our sense of the term, there is still a large excess
remaining in the practice of the East: friends
brought presents to friends on any joyful
occasion (Esth. ix. 19, 22), those who asked for
information or advice to those who gave it (2 K.
viii. 8), the needy to the wealthy from whom
any assistance was expected (Gen. xliii. 11; 2 K.
xv. 19, xvi. 8), rulers to their favourites (Gen.
xlv. 22 ; 2 Sam. xi. 8), especially to their officers
(Esth. ii. 18 ; Joseph. Ant. xii. 2, § 15), or to
the people generally on festive occasions (2 Sam.
vi. 19). On the occasion of a marriage, the bride-
groom not only paid the parents for his bride
(A. V. and R. v. "dowry"), but also gave the
bride certain presents.(Gen. xxxiv. 12 ; cp. Gen.
xxiv. 22), while the father of the bride gave her
a present on sending her away, as is expressed in
the term shilluchim (QVpW, 1 K. ix. 16): and
again, the portions of the sons of concubines
were paid in the form of presents (Gen. xxv. 6).
The nature of the presents was as various as
were the occasions: food (1 Sam. ix. 7, xvi. 20,
xxv. 18), sheep and cattle (Gen. xxxii. 13-15 ;
Judg. xv. 1), gold (2 Sam. xviii. 11 ; Job xlii.
11; Matt. ii. 11), jewels (Gen. xxiv. 53), furni-
ture and vessels for eating and drinking (2 Sam.
xvii. 28) ; delicacies, such as spices, honey, &c.
(Gen. xxiv. 53 ; IK. x. 25, xiv. 3) ; and robes
(1 K. x. 25 ; 2 K. v. 22), particularly in the case
of persons inducted into high office (Esth. vi. 8 ;
Dan. v. 16; cp. Herod, iii. 20). The mode of
presentation was with as much parade as possible ;
the presents were conveyed by the hands of
servants (Judg. iii. 18), or still better on the
backs of beasts of burden (2 K. viii. 9), even
when such a mode of conveyance was unneces-
sary. The refusal of a present was regarded as
a high indignity, and this constituted the aggra-
vated insult noticed in Matt. xxii. 1 1, the mar-
riage robe having been offered and refused
(Trench, Notes on the Parables, in loco).
No less an insult was it, not to bring a present
when the position of the parties demanded it
(1 Sam. x. 27). " [W. L. B.]
GI'HON (tflVS; ADE. rnSp; Ochan). 1.
The second river of Paradise (Gen. ii. 13).
The name does not again occur in the Hebrew
text of the 0. T. ; but in the LXX. it is used in
Jer. ii. 18, as an equivalent for the word
Siiichor or Sihor, i.e. the Nile, and in Ecclus.
xxiv. 27 (E. V. "Geon"). All that can be
said upon it will be found under Eden, p. 849.
2. (fma, and in Ch. jilT3 ; B. Ttuby, A. Tiuv;
Oihon.) A place near Jerusalem, memorable as
the scene of the anointing and proclamation of
Solomon as king (1 K. i. 33, 38, 45). From the
terms of this passage, it is evident that it was at
a lower level than the city — " bring him down
(DFTPifll) upon (?£) Gihon" — "they are come
up 0«£!) fr° m thence." With this agrees a
later mention (2 Ch. xxxiii. 14 ; Hop), where it is
called " Gihon-in-the-valley," the word rendered
GIHON
valley being nachal (7113). In this latter place
Gihon is named to designate the direction of the
wall built by Manasseh — " without the city of
David, on the west side of Gihon, in the valley,
even to the entering in at the fish-gate." It is
not stated in any of the above passages that
Gihon was a spring ; * but the only remaining
place in which it is mentioned suggests this
belief, or at least that it had given its name to
some water — " Hezekiah also stopped the upper
source or issue [KV'lD, from HIP, to rush forth ;
incorrectly "watercourse" in A. V.] of the
waters of Gihon " (2 Ch. xxxii. 30 ; A. Tula,
B. 2tuir). Josephus also writes (Ant. vii. 14,
§ 5) of " the fountain called Gihon."
The following facts may be noticed in regard
to the occurrences of the word.
1. Its low level ; as above stated.
2. The expression "Gihon-in-the-valley;"
where it will be observed that nachal( u torrent"
or " wady ") is the word always employed for
the valley of the Kedron, east of Jerusalem—
the so-called Valley of Jehoshaphat; ge
(" ravine " or " glen ") being as constantly
employed for the Valley of Hinnom. In this
connexion the mention of Ophel (2 Ch. xxxiii.
14) with Gihon should not be disregarded.
3. The Targum of Jonathan, and the Syriac
and Arabic Versions, have Shiloha, i.e. Siloam
(Arab. Mm-Shiloha), for Gihon in 1 K. i.; so
also Procop. Gaz. Scholia in 2 Par. xxxii. friar -
top SiAtoi/i olSrct KaAti. In Chronicles they
agree with the Hebrew text in having Gihon.
In the Mishnah (Pesachim iv. 9) Siloam is called
Gihon, and a Christian tradition to the same
effect is given by Theodoret as cited by Beland
(Pal. p. 859). If Siloam be Gihon, then
4. The omission of Gihon from the very de-
tailed catalogue of Neh. iv. is explained.
It is possible that two different places are
intended by " Gihon " and " Gihon in the val-
ley ;" — the former being Siloam, or the end of
the conduit which, before the construction of
the rock-hewn tunnel, carried the waters of the
Fountain of the Virgin to the lower Pool of
Siloam, and " Gihon in the valley " the Foun-
tain of the Virgin itself. This view agrees
with the statements of Josephus that Adonijah's
feast took place "near the fountain that was
in the king's paradise " (Ant. vii. 14, § 4), that
is, Enrogel or the Fountain of the Virgin; and
(14, § 5) that Solomon was anointed at "the
fountain called Gihon" (tV wrjV r h* *T°"
phniv Tidy), — probably Siloam, which Josephus
elsewhere (B. J. v. 4, §§ 1, 2 ; 9, § 4) calls a
spring.
The position of the " upper spring of the
waters of Gihon," which Hezekiah stopped and
brought "straight down to (R. V. "on ") the west
side of the city of David," is one of the most
difficult questions connected with the topo-
graphy of Jerusalem. The most natural identi-
fication would be the Fountain of the Virgin,
« It has been suggested (Dr. Chaplin In PBPQy. Stat.
1890, p. 124) that the true derivation of Gihon is not |T3.
giah, " to burst forth," but JJ1J, gahan, " to bow down,"
to prostrate oneself, and that the term w«s originally
applied, not to the fountain, but to the caul whicli
brought the water from the fountain.
Digitized by
Google
GILALAI
in the Kedron valley ; bat the Siloam tunnel
through which the waters of that spring flow
down to the upper Pool of Siloam, near the
southern extremity of the eastern hill, can
scarcely be said to have conveyed them to or on
the west side of the city of David. On the
other band, the description in 2 Ch. xxxii. 30
would apply perfectly to the waters of a spring,
north of the Damascus Gate, carried southward
by the very ancient conduit that entered the
city near "the Quarries," and apparently fol-
lowed the west face of the eastern hill upon
which the city of David stood. There is, how-
ever, no known spring near the head of the
valley that runs down through the centre of
Jerusalem, and it is doubtful whether the aque-
duct in question derived its supply from n
spring or a reservoir. The conduit which ap-
pears to hare connected the Birket Mamilla
with the " Low Level Aqueduct " and the reser-
voirs in the Temple enclosure, might also be
described as carrying water down "to" the
west side of the city of David ; but there is no
trace or tradition of the existence of a spring
near that pool. [Jerusalem. Water Supply?]
The two pools Birket Mamilla and Birket «»-
Sultan, in the "valley of Hinnom," appear as
the " Upper " and " Lower *' Pools of Gihon in
the map of Marino Sanuto (*.D. 1310), and these
titles have been adopted by many succeeding
writers, including Robinson, Tobler, and others
in the present century. The valley of Hinnom
appears to have been first called the " valley of
Gihon" in the lat.t century (a.d. 1738, Jonas
Korte, Plan). In the 12th century, the " Hill
of Evil Counsel," south of Jerusalem, was called
" Mount Gihon," and regarded as the place at
which Solomon was anointed king (John of
Wurzburg, xv. ; William of Tyre, viii. 4 ; Thiet-
nur, p. 19, &c). In 1283, the hill N.W. of
Jerusalem was called " Mount Gihon," according
to Brocardus (viii. 9) ; and this tradition appears
to have gradually replaced the older one, which
had not quite died out in the 15th century
(F. Fabri, i. 427).
The spring of Gihon is identified with the
Fountain of the Virgin by Furrer, Riehm, Sepp,
Baedeker-Socin, Conder, &c. ; it is placed north
of the Damascus Gate by Fergusson, Williams,
Barclay, De Saulcy, &c. ; and near the Birket
Mamilla by Robinson, Thomson, Tobler, &c.
[G.] [W.]
GI-LALAI (•#>«, probably = H$>J [Ges.] ;
A. r«AoAoi. BK. omit ; Galalai [v. 35]), one of
the party of priests' sons who played on David's
instruments at the consecration of the wall of
Jerusalem, in the company at whose head was
Ezra (Neh. xii. 36).
GILBO'A (Tsta, ? = the bubbling fountain,
Ges.). The name of the mountain ridge
which bounds the great plain of Lower Galilee
[EgDRAElONj on the east. The name may be
derived from the important spring, 'Ain Jdlud,
at the foot of the mountain to the north, or
from one of the other springs which also rise from
it* lower slopes on the east, or from the spring
well on the mount itself. The name survives
at the village of Jelbdn (^.»a1>), on the
southern part of the range. Here Saul en-
GILBOA
1187
camped (1 Sam. xxviii. 4) near Jezreel, at the
N.W. end of the range, opposite the Philistines
at Shunem, and his defeat occurred on the
mountain itself (ch. xxxi. 1, 8; 2 Sam. i. 6).
In the " Song of the Bow " (2 Sam. i. 21) a
curse is pronounced on the "mountains of Gilboa,"
that there should be " no dew nor rain upon
you, nor fields for heave offerings," on account
of Saul's death (cp. 2 Sam. xxi. 12, and 1 Ch.
x. 1, 8). Josephus represents Saul as being
hemmed in on the mountain (Ant. vi. 14, § 7),
probably from the west ; and escape down the
rugged eastern slopes wonld have been very
difficult. The site of the mountain and of the
village (r«A0oCj, Gelbue) was known to Eusebius
and Jerome (OS.* p. 256, 82; p.l61,15)as6miles
from Scythopolis (Bcisdn). Gilboa is not often
mentioned by later writers, though its site was
not forgotten. William of Tyre (xxii. 26) men-
tions it as having Jezreel to the west; and
Marino Sanuto (14th cent.) gives it the same
position. Among Jewish travellers Benjamin
of Tudela (12th cent.) speaks of its barrenness,
and says it was called JelbOn by the Christians.
Rabbi (Jri of Biel, in the 16th century, says
that dew and rain never fell there — clearly re-
ferring to the curse in the " Song of the Bow."
The Gilboa ridge runs north for 4} miles
from the saddle at Wddy Shubash, which may
be said to be its limit, passing JelbSn, a small
village west of the watershed. The highest
point is at Sheikh Burkin, 1696 feet above the
Mediterranean. Here the range curves round
N.W., and runs to Jezreel (4 miles), where it
abuts on the Plain of Esdraelon, and on the
valley north of Jezreel. The elevation at El
Mazar, 2} miles S.E. of Jezreel, is 1318 ft. above
the sea, whence the shed falls rapidly, being
only 400 feet above the sea at Jezreel itself
The great plain to the west has an average
elevation of 300 feet above the Mediterranean,
so that the apparent height of Gilboa from the
west is about 1000 to 1400 feet. On the east
it towers more than 2,000 feet above the Jordan
valley. On the north it is precipitous, with
curiously contorted strata. On the east the
slopes are extremely steep, with cliffs in places.
On the west the spurs run out with gentler
slopes into the plain. The southern part is very
rugged, of hard grey dolomitic limestone. This
is, however, covered on the west and north by
the soft white chalk, whence the name Bas
Sheiban, " the hoary head," applied to one of the
knolls on the ridge. The range generally is now
known as Jebel fuku'a, from the large village of
Fuku'n, which stands among its olives on the
west slope, 1500 feet above the sea, where the
range begins to curve. The mountain is barren
and waterless on its upper slopes, but at Jelbdn
there is a spring well of perennial water, whence
perhaps the old name of Gilboa was derived.
At the eastern foot there are fine springs at the
ruin Mujedd'a, 125 feet below the Mediterranean ;
and further north, at about the same level, is
'Ain el 'Asy — a very large spring of thermal
water (80° Fahr.) in a pool 100 yards long, 20
yards wide, and 20 feet deep, issuing from a
low cliff. On the north there are two other
famous springs, also 120 feet below sea-level,
east of Jezreel, feeding the stream which flows
east between them to the Jordan, and watering
Bethshean. The southern, from a cave in the
4 G 2
Digitized by
Google
1188
GILEAD
precipices of Gilboa, is called 'Ain Jalud ("Go-
liath's Spring "), and in 300 A.D. the Bordeaux
Pilgrim incorrectly makes it the scene of David's
conquest of the giant. It is the 'Ain Jalut of
Boha ed Din (Life of Saladin). The pool is 50
yards long, muddy and sulphurous, but the
spring itself is clear and sweet ; the depth is 8
to 10 feet. The northern spring, 'Ain Tub'aun,
is the Tubania of the Middle Ages (Will, of
Tyre, xxii. 27), which Robinson confuses with
the preceding. It was believed to have been
miraculously supplied with fish for the benetit
of the Christian army fighting Saladin. Both
springs still contain fish. 'Ain Ivb'aun is
smaller than 'Ain Jalud, and its waters have a
reddish tinge.
The lower slopes of Gilboa to the west have
several olive groves, and corn is grown in the
soft ground. In the rougher part to the south
a scrub of mastic, arbutus, dwarf oak, and haw-
thorn covers the rocks. The summit is very
bare, but thyme, mint, and cistus grow on the
ledges. The soil is in parts (especially to the
north of Jelbdn) a basaltic debris, which is
fertile. The vine was once grown near Jezreel,
as noticed in the Bible (1 K. xxi.) and as attested
by the remains of rock-cut wine-presses. The
contrast between the barren ridge and the rich
valleys on each side is sufficiently notable.
Near the village of Dcir GhuzdUh, near the
west foot of Gilboa, a curious rude stone monu-
ment was found iu 1872, resembling the dolmens
of Galilee and of Eastern Palestine. This is
probably a relic of prehistoric times. There are
nine villages on the slopes of Gilboa, namely:
(1) Jelbdn, on the south, as already noticed;
(2) Fuku'a, possibly the Aphek to which the
Philistines advanced (1 Sam. ixix. 1), turning
Saul's strong position near the "fountain in
Jezreel," which was no doubt the 'AinelMeiyeteh
— a clear spring below the town ; (3) El Mazar
(or El War), a stone hamlet on the watershed
inhabited by Dervishes ; (4) Ztr'in or Jezreel ;
(5) Beit Kad, a small mud village 687 feet above
the sea, on the west slopes ; (6) Deir Qhuzakh, a
similar village 738 feet above the sea, further
north ; (7) 'Arrdneh, close to the plain, further
north, probably the Reggan or Rangan which
Josephus mentions (Ant. ri. 14, § 1), as the
Philistine camp " near Shunem " ; (8) Sundela,
a still smaller hamlet higher up (502 feet above
the sea) ; and (9) Nuris, a little hamlet bidden
among the northern precipices, 600 feet above
the valley. This last, in the Middle Ages, be-
longed to the Abbey of Mount Tabor. Several
other villages are found in the rough country at
the south end of the chain. With the exception
of Jelbdn and Jezreel they all depend on cisterns
or deep wells for water. One of Jacob's sons is
traditionally believed to be buried at el Mazar
("the place of pilgrimage ").
The above sketch is abstracted from the
writer's account of his explorations on the
mountain in 1872-4 (PEF. item. vol. ii. sheet
ix. pp. 75, 79-88, 90, 91). Mujedd'a, as there
explained, appears to be the probable site of
Megiddo, at the foot of Gilboa towards the
east. [C. R. C]
GIL'EAD Ctpin ; ToAotSJ; modern Arabic
£*k>- iVju*-, Jd>el Jil'ad). The geographic
GILEAD
name is written with the article in Hebrew ;
the personal name, and the patronymic *"W?3>
occur in Num. xxvi. 29, 30; Judg. xi. 1, 2,
xii. 7 ; I Ch. v. 14. The meaning is " rugged,"
but in Gen. xxxi. 21 it is connected with Galeed
(1I??3> " mound of witness ; " cp. Gesen. Lex.) :
the region east of the Jordan Valley, between
the plains of Bashan and the deserts of Moab,
coinciding with the territory of the tribe of Gad.
The great gorge of the Hieromax ( Yermuk) is its
natural boundary on the north; the plateau south
of Rabbath Ammon appears to be its southern
limit ; on the east it extends to the Syrian desert,
and on the west to the Jordan Valley. It is
divided into two districts by the valley of the
Jabbok (Zerkd): the northern, comprising about
600 square miles, is the modern Jebel 'Ajtin;
the southern, about 400 square miles in area, is
now called the Belka or " waste " land. The
name occurs very frequently in the Bible (more
than eighty references are given) as Mount
("in) Gilead and land or country (JHS) of GileaJ,
and sometimes as " The Gilead " only. It was
famous as a pastoral region, and also as producing
balm and other aromatic plants ; and is one of
the most picturesque and well-watered regions
of the Hebrew land. The northern part still
contains many villages, and is cultivated, but
the southern is almost entirely in the possession
of nomadic tribes, with very little cultivation
and only one inhabited town (es-Salt), though
corn is grown in the level tracts.
Mount Gilead is first noticed (Gen. xxxi.
21-25) as crossed by Jacob from Mizpeh (Sif)
to Mahanaim (Mukhmali). Thence came the
lshmaelites, bearing gums, balm, and cistus
(Gen. xxxvii. 25). Jazer, on its border, and the
"land of Gilead," were good pasture-lands
(Num. xxxi. 1). It already was filled with
cities which had belonged to the Amorites
(ct>. 26, 29, 31), whose cattle also fell a prey to
the Hebrews (Deut. ii. 35, 36 ; cp. iii. 10). The
Ammonites dwelt on the east side of Gilead,
apparently as far north as the Jabbok (Deut.
iii. 16). Ramoth in Gilead was a city of refuge
(Deut. iv. 43). In Deut. xxxiv. 1 we find the
words "all Gilead unto Dan," which are difficult
to explain. According to the geographies!
chapters of the Book of Joshua (xii. 2) half
Gilead, as far north as the Jabbok, belonged to
Sihon the Amorite, whose capital was beyond
its limits at Heshbon. The northern half was
ruled by Og, whose capital was at Ashtaroth
Carnaim (Tell Ashteralt) in Bashan. It became
the heritage of the tribe of Gad, though some of
the families of Manasseh appear also to have
held lands in its northern parts (Josh. xiii. !!)•
The border was at Jazer (v. 25), and Manasseh
extended even as far south as Mahanaim
(Mukhmah) in Gilead (vv. 30, 31 ; cp. xvii. 5, 6).
Ramoth, however, belonged to the tribal terri-
tory of Gad (xx. 8), and Mahanaim was a city
of Gilead, also in the territory of Gad (xxi. 38).
The tribes took possession after the conquest of
Western Palestine (xxii. 9, 13, 15, 32), and in
Judges (v. 17) Gilead appears to be synonyn>°<«
with the Hebrews of the east. In Gilead were
the Havoth Jair or "villages of Jair," the
Gileadite judge (Judg. x. 4); but the Amorites
still dwelt there (v. 8), and the Ammonites
Digitized by
Google
GILEAD
attacked the " princes of Gilead " (m. 17, 18).
"Gilead begat Jephthah" "the Gileadite"
(Jadg. xi. 1), who fled to Tob (probably Taiyibeh)
near Gadara, whence he was summoned to assist
the " elders of Gilead " attacked on the sooth
bv the Ammonites (v. 5), meeting them at
Mizpeh (Suf), north of the scene of conflict
(re. 10, 11), whence he advanced towards the
Ammonite capital (b. 29), driving them south
into Moab, and returning to his house at
Mizpeh (rr. 33, 34). The Aroer mentioned in
this passage was apparently the place so named
close to Rabbath-ammon. The concord between
the Hebrews of the east and west was, according
to this narrative, no longer maintained, and the
men of Ephraim, raiding to the north-east, were
caught at the upper fords of the Jordan in
Northern Gilead (Judg. xii. 4, 5,7); but subse-
quently the Gileadite* are said to have joined
the rest of Israel in worship at Mizpeh near
Jerusalem (xx. 1). Gilead remained faithful to
the house of Saul (2 Sam. ii. 9), but after the
death of Ishbosheth accepted David's rule, when
Rabbath-ammon had been conquered by Joab.
Here David found a refuge at Mahanaim, and
Absalom camped in Gilead (2 Sam. xvii. 26, 27)
in the wood of Ephraim (xviii. 6), which was
probably one of tbe oak woods south-west of
e*-8alt. Joab's census of David's dominions in-
cluded Gilead (xxiv. 6), but did not apparently
include Bashan [see Gesiiub]. In the time of
Solomon Gilead was divided into two provinces,
of which the northern had its capital at Ramoth,
and the southern at Mahanaim (1 K. iv. 13, 14,
19). From Tishbe in Gilead came Elijah
( I K. xvii. 1 ). In Ahab's reign the Syrian king
of Damascus seized Ramoth-gilead, where Ahab
met his death in attempting to regain the city
(1 K. xxii.). All Gilead and Moab then passed
into the power of the Syrians (2 K. x. 33), and
in the 8th century B.C. Tiglath-pileser, the
Assyrian monarch, conquered this region (2 K.
xr. 29). The men of Gad had already been
oppressed, in Omri's time, by Mesha king of
Moab, as stated on the Moabite Stone. The
number of cities possessed by Jair in Gilead is
stated in 1 Ch. ii. 22 to hare been twenty-three ;
♦he expression " father of Gilead " (e. 21) may
perhaps be taken as a territorial title, like others
in the Bible.
The Assyrian tablets supply a gap in the his-
tory of Gilead after this period, for the region is
not further noticed in the history of the later
Hebrew kings. In the reign of Manasseh (see
Cylinder A of Assur-bani-pal), about 650 B.C.,
there was a great inroad of Arab tribes from the
south, joined by the Nabatheans near Petra.
They conquered Edom, Moab, Beth-Ammon, the
Hauran, and Zobah (near Damascus), and clearly
therefore overran Gilead. Assur-bani-pal with
his army set out from Nineveh, crossed the
Tigris and the Euphrates, and advanced some
700 miles. They came to " the lofty country,
they passed through the forests of which the
shadow was great and strong, and with vines,
a road of mighty woods." Thence they entered
a desert, and, after punishing the Arabs who had
fled back to tbe Nabatheans, they returned on
the road to Damascus. This account would seem
to apply to no other region than Gilead, which
has always been celebrated for its forests. The
petty kings of Moab, Ammon, and Gilead were at
GILEAD
1189
this time subject to Assyria, and with interval*
of revolt remained so subject till the Babylonian*
and Persians succeeded to the power of the kings
of Nineveh. The Hebrew population probably
became much mingled with the other stocks,
and some were carried captives even as early as
the time of Tiglath-pileser (1 Ch. v. 6), as in the
case of the Gileadite prince of the tribe of Reuben.
The cattle of the Israelites multiplied, and were
pastured in Gilead as far east as the "desert of
Euphrates " (re. 9, 16), but the attacks of the
Hagarites had commenced even in the time of
Saul (r. 10), and the settled population suffered,
as they still do, from the raids of the desert
Arabs, to which the tribes west of Jordan were
less exposed, after the establishment of the
kingdom. Gilead was famous for its warriors in
David's time (1 Ch. xxvi. 31), and is claimed as
Hebrew territory in the Psalms (lx. 7, cviii. 8).
The flocks of goats " couching on the slopes of
Mount Gilead " are mentioned in the Song of
Songs (iv. 1, vi. 5), as asimileofthe colour of the
hair of the Egyptian bride. Jeremiah (viii. 22)
speaks of the medicinal balm of Gilead, already
noticed in Genesis (cp. xxii. 6 and xlvi. 11) : the
Gileadites were apparently pagans in this later
period (Jer. 1. 19 ; Ezek. xlvii. 18 ; Hos. vi. 8,
xii. 1 1 ). The Ammonite attacks are mentioned by
Amos (i. 3, 13) as early as the 9tb century B.C.
In Obadiah (v. 19) Gilead is given to Benjamin.
In Micah (vii. 14) its flocks are again mentioned.
In Zechariah the return of Israel to Gilead is
promised (x. 10). These various notices give a
fairly continuous history of the region down to
the Persian period, and show the pastoral
character of the country, and also its settled
condition at a very early period.
After the revolt of Judas Maccabaeus a suc-
cessful raid was made into Gilead and Bashan,
with the object however of gathering in the
Jewish population to more secure regions west
of Jordan (1 Mace. r. 9 sq. ; Josephus, Ant. xiii.
14, § 2 ; Wars, i. 4, § 3). The Jews had fled
before the heathen of Gilead, to Dathema, and
were shut up in Gileadite cities (1 Mace. r. 27).
Judas Maccabaeus, assisted by the Nabatheans
(r. 25), attacked Bashan, but " turned aside " to
Maspha — perhaps Mizpeh of Gilead — which he
took by assault (p. 35). After various successes he
then returned with the Jews from the east (r. 45)
to Bethshean and to Jerusalem. Gilead, though
conquered by Alexander Jannaeus (1st cent. B.C.),
was retaken by the king of Arabia {Ant. xiii.
14, § 2), after the expedition in which tribute had
been for a time imposed ( Wars, i. 4, § 3). In
the time of Christ little is known of Gilead, but
some of its northern towns belonged to the
region of Decapolis. Vespasian sent Lucius
Annius into this region, who took Gerasa [see
Gerasa] during the great war preceding the
destruction of Jerusalem. The most prosperous
age in the history of this region appears to hare
been the Antonine period (140-180 A.D.). when
several Roman cities were built, such as Gadara,
Capitolias, Gerasa, and Philadelphia ; and though
fresh Arab tribes colonised Gilead and Bashan
soon after, the ruins of the country and the list
of bishoprics show that this prosperity con-
tinued after the establishment of Christianity,
and until the invasion of Gilead by the Moslems
under Omar. The Crusaders also appear to have
established themselves in this region, which paid
Digitized by
Google
1190
GILEAD
tribute to Baldwin I. as early as A.D. 1118.
Baldwin II. in a.d. 1121 conquer ■ it, and ad-
vanced beyond Gerasa towards Bostra. Two
strongholds were built, one near Ajlun in the
northern district (called Kal'at er-Sabad), one in
GILEAD
the south at cs-Salt ; and the pilgrim road to
Mecca was commanded by these, and by the
great castle of Kerak in Moab. The region was
known as " Ouitre Jourdan," and was attacked
by Saladin on his way to Kerak. Since the fall
sbporauauL
of the Christian kingdom little is known of its
history. Its population decayed, and the great
Arab tribes became supreme, until within the
last half-century, when they were reduced to pay
taxes by the Turks. The inaccessibility of the
position of Gilead, and its exposure to raids from
the desert, remain its chief drawbacks, though
the climate is healthy, the country fertile snd
picturesque, and better watered and wooded
than the rest of Palestine.
The Gilead mountains are little more than the
edge of the great eastern plateau which exteDds
Digitized by
Google
GILEAD
to the Euphrates. Viewed from the west, they
form a chain rising more than 4,000 feet above
the Jordan valley, with extremely steep slopes ;
Tie wed from the east, the highest tops are not more
than about 500 feet above the level of the plateau,
which may be said to have an average level of
3,000 feet above the Mediterranean towards the
south, sinking northwards to the plains of Bashan
about 1,000 feet lower. The highest point in
Gilead is Jebel Osh'a, just north of es Salt, deter-
mined trigonometrically by the Palestine sur-
veyors as 3,597 feet above the Mediterranean.
Some of the ridges to the S.E. are nearly as high.
Jebel Osh'a (the probable site of Penuel) com-
mands one of the most extensive views in
Palestine (see Conder's Heth and Moab, ch. vi.),
and far wider than that, so celebrated, which
may be commanded from Nebo in clear weather.
East of this mountain is the circular basin of the
Bukefa (on the west side of which stood Maha-
naim), which is only 2,000 feet above the
Mediterranean. North of the Jabbok the general
elevation is less than on the south. Jebel Ilakart,
west of Reimun (Ramoth-gilend), is estimated
barometrically at 3,480 feet; and Jebel Kafka} 'ah,
further north, close to the great pilgrim road
on the watershed — the true eastern limit of
Gilead — is about 3,430 feet. A very fine view
is obtained from A'al'at er Jtabad on a conical
point near Ajlfln, about 2,700 feet above the
Mediterranean. Yet further north El Mazar
stands up 2,830 feet, but the general elevation
is not above 2,000 feet ; and the Jordan valley is
here only about 500 feet below the Mediter-
ranean (except in the river-bed itself), so that
the ascent is here reduced to 2,500 feet.
The geological formation is the same as that
of Western Palestine, but the underlying sand-
stone, which does not appear west of Jordan,
forms the base slopes of the chain of Moab and
Gilead', and is traceable as far as the Jabbok.
It is covered in part by the more recent white
marls which form the curious peaks of the foot
hills immediately above the Jordan valley ; but
reaches above them to an elevation of 1,000 feet
above the Mediterranean on the sonth, and forms
the bed of the Bukei'a basin, further east and
1,000 feet higher. Above this lies the hard
impervious Dolomitic limestone, which appears
in the rugged grey hills round the Jabbok, and
in Jebel Ajlfln, rising on an average 1500 feet
above the sandstone, and forming the bed of the
copious springs. It also dips towards the Jordan
valley ; and the water from the surface of the
plateau, sinking down to the surface of this
formation, bursts out of the hill-slopes on the
west in perennial brooks. It was from the rugged-
nesa of this hard limestone that Gilead obtained
its name. Above this again is the white chalk
of the desert plateau, the same found in Samaria
and Lower Galilee, with bands of flint or chert
in contorted layers, or strewn in pebbles on the
surface. Where this formation is deep the country
is b ire and arid, supplied by cisterns and deep
wells. Thus the plateau becomes desert, while
the hill-slopes abound in streams and springs, and
for this reason Western Gilead is a fertile country,
and Eastern Gilead a wilderness.
The perennial streams are numerous. The
main drains are the river Jabbok in the centre
of the region, and the Hieromax in its deep gorge,
with rugged precipices on the extreme north.
GILEAD
1191
Here in 634 A.D. the Moslems won their great
victory over the forces of the Romans, which
left them the masters of Syria. The Jabbok,
rising in the clear springs at Rabbath-ammon,
but sinking at intervals in its bed of boulders,
flows north at first ; and turning suddenly west,
reinforced from the great Zerka springs near
the pilgrim road, it breaks down in an open and
picturesque glen, flowing into the Jordan. The
western valleys are clothed with thick woods of
oak, and on the higher slopes the Aleppo pine is
conspicuous. The glades of some of these valleys
— such as Wadv Hamflr, east of Ramoth-gilead,
and WSdy Sir', which runs S.W. of Rabbath-
ammon, by the ruined palace of Hyrcanus—
present some of the most beautiful sylvan
scenery in Syria, superior to that of the Leba-
non. The rocky ground is covered with flowers,
of which the phlox, cistus, and narcissus are the
commonest, with bushes of styrax, hawthorn,
mastic, and arbutus, the slopes hidden with
hanging woods of oak. One such wood — per-
| baps the Wood of Ephraim— occurs south of
es-Salt, and those of the Jebel Ajlfln are equally
dense and beautiful. The rugged upper slopes
are dotted with scrub, chiefly of mastic bushes.
The desert plateau is diversified with clumps of
the white broom (the juniper of the Bible):
along the courses of the streams the dark olean-
der, with its flame-coloured blossoms, attains to
the size of a small oak, and canes form a brake
in the lower ground, where also the tamarisk
and the lotus flourish, though the palm is rarely
found. The region is still mainly pastoral, great
flocks of goats being fed on the slopes, while the
desert camels are driven in wild droves on the
plateau, are used only for their milk (and on
least days for their flesh), and are never saddled
or bridled. Here alone in Syria can the true
nomad life of the Arab be studied, and even the
settled population, in dress and manner, ap-
proach closely to the Bedu.
Gilead was famous in Pliny's time, as in that
of the early Patriarchs, for its balm (tsori), but
the tree which bore it has been variously identi-
fied with the Zakkum, or thorny lotus {Balanites
Aciiyptiacd), the home of which is in the Jordan
valley, with the pistachio or sticky mastic, which
grows on the mountains (not the true pistachio),
and with the opobalsamum or true balm-tree,
not now known in Gilead, but found near Mecca.
The Ishmaelites (as already noted) also brought
from Gilead the nechoth (" spicery "), which has
been thought to be the styrax or mock orange,
still frequently found in the glades of Gilead, or
more probably the gum tragacanth or astragalus,
which is equally common. They also traded in
" myrrh " (/<!<)> — an incorrect translation, gene-
rally agreed to be the gum of the Cistus ladani-
ferus, a beautiful flower, like the dog rose in
appearance, still common on these hills. It is a
sure note of the accuracy of that picture of early
Hebrew society which is drawn in the Book of
Genesis, that the products so noted are those
native to Gilead, while monumental records
carry back the trading relations of SjTia and
Mesopotamia with Egypt many centuries earlier
than the age of Joseph.
The ruins of Gilead mostly belong to the
Roman and Byzantine, to the early Arab and
Crusading periods; but in certain centres near
ancient sites, especially at Rabbath-ammon, Suf
Digitized by
Google
1192
GILEAD
{Mizpeh), and the month of the Jabbok glen,
great groups of dolmens, similar to those of
Bashtin, Moab, and Galilee, have survived — pre-
historic monuments of the Amorites and Re-
phaim. At Rabbath-ammon there are tombs
of the Hebrew age, Roman temples, theatres
and baths, and early Moslem mosques. Gerasa,
Gadara, and Capitol ias {Beit er-Ras) present us
with the relics of cities built in the 2nd century
A.D., and every ruined town presents well-carved
masonry, sarcophagi, and inscriptions of the 4th
and 5th centuries of our era, to which later
builders have added little, beyond the two
Crusading castles already noticed, and a few
later minarets and mosques. In the steep
ravines the cells of anchorites, and solitary
monasteries, are found, and in unexpected nooks
great Roman tomb towers and rock-cut sepul-
chres, with well-carved bas-reliefs and classic
tracery. The unfinished palace of Hyrcanus
('Arak A Emir), with its gigantic masonry,
carved lions, and Aramaic text on the rock wall
of its cave stables and granaries, is one of the
most interesting sites. It is dated 176 B.C., and
is almost unique in architectural history, as is
atso the beautiful kiosque at Amman of the
Persian or early Arab period (for these ruins in
Southern Gilead, see Memoirs of the Survey of
Eastern Palestine). The modern villages, wheu
not piled up from such ancient materials, are
mainly mud hovels, or caves faced with stone
walls.
The most interesting sites in the topography
of Gilead are described under the names of
Gadara, Gerasa, and Ramiath-ammon, but
a few words may be added as to important places
of various ages. Ramoth-gilead was probably
situated not far west of Gerasa, near the edge of
the plateau where the ancient ruins and tombs
near the little mountain village of Reimun are
still to be explored. This site, open to the
incursions of the Syrians from the northern
plains, could be reached by chariots up the open
glen of the Jabbok. Mahanaim, the southern
capital, probably stood on the west border of the
Bukei'a basin, where the name still survives as
Mukhmah, near the Roman ruins and fine spring
of El Basha — a site fully meeting the numerous
requirements of the Old Testament notices.
Jabesh-gilead was in the north, and the name
survives in that of Wddy Ydbis, though the
exact site is doubtful. Mizpeh, as already stated,
was probably at Suf, N.E. of Gerasa, where a
dolmen centre surrounds the home of Jephthah.
Close to the Jordan valley is the secluded town
of Pella (Fdhil), with its hot springs, famous in
Talmudic accounts, and its fragmentary Christian
inscriptions. North-west of Rabbath-ammon
are the extensive Byzantine ruins of Jubeihah,
on the plateau, marking the site of Jogbehah
(Judg. viii. 11), to which Gideon pursued the
Midianites. Jazer, the border town, is probably
to be fixed at Beit Zcr'ah, in the fiat ground
4 miles N.E. of Heshbon. The towns of Gad
(Josh. xiii. 25-27) included Aroer near Rabbath-
ammon, Beth-aram and Beth-nimrah in the
plain opposite Jericho, Succoth (Tell Der'ala,
north of the Jabbok), and Zaphon (Amdta, near
Gadara), with others already noticed. Among
other notable places are to be reckoned Mezarib,
at the sources of the Hieromax, one of the sta-
tions of the Haj, with its curious lake, warm
GILEADITE8, THE
spring, and Turkish castle ; Irbid (Arbela), with
its gigantic Roman masonry, the present seat of
government of the Jebel Ajlun, though only now
containing 300 inhabitants ; Beit er-Ras (jCapi-
tolias), with remains of a pillared street, and
Roman eagles, aqueducts, and baths; the village
of Ajlun, with ancient olive-trees and gardens,
and a population of 500 souls, three-fourths of
whom are Christians ; and Suf (Mizpeh), with
three springs, and a stream turning several
mills, and also rich in olive-trees. South of the
Jabbok the only town is es-Salt (the Saltns
Hieraticus of the Middle Ages, then the seat of a
Bishop), which has a population of 6,000 souls,
and is a government centre. It lies on the south
slope of Jebel Osh'a, commanded by its Crusader-
castle, and possesses a small bazaar.
The revenue of the Jebel Ajlun is said to be
now only about £7,000 per annum, but culti-
I vation is gradually increasing, even the 'Adwan
I Arabs sowing corn in the valleys; and with
greater security the region might become
as prosperous as in Roman times, when the
population must have been very dense, and the
| great families very rich. The present popula-
tion includes some 5,000 Arabs, of the 'Adwan
and Beni Sakhr tribes, living in tents, and pay-
ing an uncertain poll-tax. The former possess
I Hocks and cattle, but the latter have only camels.
> Both are tribes which came a few centuries ago
| from the Hejjaz, and subjugated the earlier
Arabs. Since the 7th century B.C. this immigra-
I tion from Arabia has continually brought fresh
! elements of pure Arab origin into Gilead, and
I little remains of the old Aramaic stock.
The principal works which treat of Gilead are
the Travels of Burckhardt, Buckingham's Arab
Tribes, Irby and Mangles' Travels, Selah Merrill's
Hast of Jordan. For the southern region, ace
Conder's Heth and Moab, 1883, and Palestine,
1889, and Memoirs of the Survey of Eastern
Palestine; also Le Strange, Bide through
Ajlun, 1886, in Schumacher's Across the Jordan.
L. Oliphant's Land of Gilead, 1880, contains a
picturesque account of the whole region, bat
the antiquarian information is misleading. Tris-
tram's work on Moab and his earlier Travels may
also be consulted. Sir Charles Warren (PEFQy.
Stat, and Underground Jerusalem) also visited
Gilead, and Sir C. W. Wilson explored Gadara.
The Jebel Ajlun has, however, not been surveyed
as thoroughly as Moab, and is less perfectly
known than Bashan. [C. R. C]
GIL'EAD, MOUNT (Judg. vii. 3). Accord-
ing to Gratz and Bcrtheau, the reading should
be " Gilboa," which would accord well with the
narrative. If the reading is to be maintained, it
is not impossible that this name, " the rugged,"
may have been applied to Gilboa [see Gilboa}.
and that it survives at 'Ain Jalud, at the foot of
the mountain, which is by some identified with
the spring Harod, where (v. 1) Gideon was en-
camped. Gratz's reading " Endor " for " Harod "
does net agree with his proposed emendation.
£C. R. C.}
GILTEADITES, THE (irfa ; Judg. xii. 4, 5,
Hl?75i1: Judg. xii. 4, 5, Va\aii ; Num. zxri.
29* raKaaSl, B. raAoooVf ; Jndg. x. 3, t TaXadS ;
Judg. xi. 1, 40, xii. 7 ; 2 Sam. xvii. 27, xix. SI ;
1 K. ii. 7 ; Ezra ii. 61 ; Neh. vii. 63, i TaAooS-
Digitized by
Google
GILGAL
liyit; B. raAaaStlnit, exc. Judg. zi. 40, B.
raXadX; A. i raAaaSira, i r*\aaMn)s, and
Jndg. xii. 5, ArJpis VaXaiS : Qalaaditae, Qalaad-
ites, viri Qalaad). A branch of the tribe of
Manasseh, descended from Gilead. There appears
to hare been an old standing feud between them
and the Ephraimites, who taunted them with
being deserters. See Jndg. xii. 4, which may
be rendered, '* And the men of Gilead smote
Ephraim, because they said, Runagates of Ephraim
are ye (Gilead is between Ephraim and Man-
asseh);" the last clause being added parenthetic-
ally. In 2 K. xv. 25 for " of the Gileadites "
the l.XX. hare airo rav rtrpaKoalmr ; Vulg. de
JUiU Oalaaditarum. [W. A W.] [W.]
GIL'GAL (always with the article, bihi!},
but once; VdAyaXa [plural]; Oalgala). By
this name were called at least two, and probably
three places in ancient Palestine.
1. (1 .) The site of the first camp of the Israel-
ites on the west of the Jordan, the place at
which they passed the first night after crossing the
river, and where the twelve stones were set up
which had been taken from the bed of the stream
(Josh. iv. 19, 20, cp. v. 3); where also they
kept their first Passover in the land of Canaan
(v. 10). It was in the "end of the east of
Jericho" C rVltO nVj?3; A. V. "in the east
border of Jericho "), apparently on a hillock or
rising ground (v. 3, cp. v. 9) in the Arboth-
Jericho (A. V. " the plains ") ; that is, the hot
depressed district of the Ghor which lay between
the town and the Jordan (v. 10) Here the
Israelites who had been born on the march
through the wilderness were circumcised; an
occurrence from which the sacred historian
derives the name: '"This day I have rolled
away (galtioihf) the reproach of Egypt from off
yon.' Therefore the name of the place is called
Gilgal * to this day." By Josephus {Ant. v. 1,
§ 11) it is said to signify "freedom" (i\tv~
dipioy). The camp thus established at Gilgal
remained there during the early port of the
conquest (ix. 6 ; x. 6, 7, 9, 15, 43) ; and we may
perhaps infer from one narrative that Joshua
retired thither at the conclusion of his labours
(xiv. 6, cp. v. 15). The manner in which
Gilgal is mentioned, in Deut. xi. 30, in connexion
with the "land of the Canaanites," in which
were Ebal and Gerizim, apparently led Eusebius
and Jerome {OS? p. 253, 1, 79 ; p. 158, 4, 14)
to place those mountains in the Jordan valley
near Jericho. [Ebal; Gerizim.]
(2.) We again encounter Gilgal in the time of
Saul, when it seems to have exchanged its
military associations for those of sanctity. True,
Saul, when driven from the highlands by the
Philistines, collected his feeble force at the site
of the old camp (1 Sam. xiii. 4, 7) ; but this is
the only occurrence at all connecting it with
war. It was now one of the "holy cities" (of
iiyiaanivoi) — if we accept the addition of the
LXX. — to which Samuel regularly resorted,
where he administered justice (1 Sam. vii. 16),
and where burnt-offerings and peace-offerings
were accustomed to be offered " before Jehovah "
• This derivation of the name cannot apply In the
cue of toe other Qllgals mentioned below. Hay it not
be the adaptation to Hebrew of a name previously exist-
ing In the former language of the country ?
GILGAL
1193
(x. 8, xi. 15, xiii. 8, 9-12, xv. 21) ; and on one
occasion a sacrifice of a more terrible description
than either ( xv. 33). The air of the narrative
all through leads to the conclusion that at the
time of these occurrences it was the chief
sanctuary of the central portion of the nation
(see x. 8, xi. 14, xv. 12, 21). But there is no
sign of its being a town ; no mention of building,
or of its being allotted to the priests or Levites,
as was the case with other sacred towns, Bethel,
Shechem, &c.
(3.) We again have a glimpse of it, some sixty
years later, in the history of David's return to
Jerusalem (2 Sam. xix.) The men of Judah
came down to Gilgal to meet the king to conduct
him over Jordan, as if it was close to the river
(xix. 15), and David arrived there immediately
on crossing the stream " after his parting with
Barzillai the Gileadite.
How the remarkable sanctity of Gilgal became
appropriated to a false worship we are not told,
but certainly, so far as the obscure allusions of
Hosea and Amos can be understood (provided
that they refer to this Gilgal), it was so appro-
priated by the kingdom of Israel in the middle
period of its existence (Hoe. iv. 15, ix. 15, xii.
11 ; Amos ix. 4, v. 5).
Beyond the general statements above quoted,
the sacred test contains no indications of the
position of Gilgal. Neither in the Apocrypha
nor the N. T. is it mentioned. Later authorities
are more precise, but unfortunately discordant
among themselves. By Josephus (Ant, v. 1, § 4)
the encampment is given as 50 stadia, rather
under 6 miles, from the river, and 10 from
Jericho. In the time of Jerome the site of the
camp, and the twelve memorial stones, were still
distinguishable, if we are to take literally the
expression of the Spit. Paulac (§ 14). The
distance from Jericho was then 2 miles. The spot
was left uncultivated, but regarded with great
veneration by the residents : " locus desert us . . .
ab illins regionis mortalibus miro cultu habitus "
{OS. 1 p. 159, 28) Theodosius {arc. A.D. 530)
gives the distance from Jericho as 1 mile, and
mentions the twelve stones, and the agar Domini,
which was irrigated bv water from the fountain
of Elisha, *Ai'n es Sultan {Dt Situ T. S. § xvi.).
Antoninus {circ. a.d. 570) states that not far
from Jericho there was a church in which were
placed the twelve stones, and that the ager
Domini was in front of the church {De Zoc.
Sand, xiii.) When Arculf was there at the end
of the 7th century, the place was shown at
5 miles from Jericho. A large church covered
the site, in which the twelve stones were ranged.
The church and stones were seen by Willibald,
thirty years later, but he gives the distance as
5 miles from the Jordan, which again he
states correctly as 7 from Jericho. Abbot
Daniel (a.d. 1106) says that the chnrcb was
dedicated to St. Michael, and was 1 verst, or
two-thirds of a mile, from Jericho {PH. xxxv.) ;•
Phocas (xxi.) places the church 6 miles from
the Mt. of Temptation. The stones are mentioned
also by Thietmar," a.d. 1217, and lastly by
Ludolf de Suchem a century later. Schwurt
■> Such Is the real force of the Hebrew text (xix. 40).
« According to this pilgrim. It was to these that John
the Baptist pointed when he said that God was "able of
tkae $tona to raise up children unto Abraham""
(Thtetmar, Ptngr. 31)
Digitized by
Google
1194
GILGAL
(/if. L. p. 99) mentions a hill near the Jordan
which the Arabs called Gilgal ; bnt the site was
really discovered in 1865 by Herr Zschokke at
Tell Jiljil, 4£ miles from the Jordan, and 1)
miles from Eriha, Jericho (Beitrage zur Topog.
d. tcetitichen. Jordtnsau). There are here ah old
pool and a number of artificial mounds, to both
of which the name Jiljulieh is attached ; and
the remains of an old building, possibly the
church and monastery of St. Michael, erected on
the spot where Joshua, according to tradition,
saw the Archangel Michael (Josh. r. 13). A
•curious legend U attached to the ruins, con-
necting them with the capture of Jericho by
Joshua (PEF. Mem. iii. 173, 191, 230 ; Gan-
neau in PEFQy. Stat. 1874, pp. 174-177; Sepp,
ii. 147 sq.). In Juilg. ii. 1, iii. 19, Micah vi. 5,
Gilgal is apparently the well-known place in
the Jordan valley.
2. This was certainly a distinct place from
the Gilgal which is connected with the last scene
in the life of Elijah, and with one of Elisha's
miracles. The chief reason for believing this
is the impossibility of making it fit into the
notice of Elijah's translation. He and Klisha
-are said to "go down" (ITT) from Gilgal to
Bethel (2 K. ii. 2), in opposition to the repeated
expressions of the narratives in Joshua and
1 Samuel, in which the way from Gilgal to the
neighbourhood of Bethel is always spoken of as
an ascent, the fact being that the former is
about 3,700 feet below the latter. Thus there
must have been a second Gilgal at a higher
level than Bethel, and it was probably that at
which Elisha worked the miracle of healing on
the poisonous pottage (2 K. iv. 38). Perhaps
the expression of 2 K. ii. 1, coupled with the
"came again" of iv. 38, may indicate that
Elisha resided there. It is now, apparently,
Jiljilia, a large village, on the top of a high hill,
to the west of the main north road, 7$ miles
from Bethel, Ileitin, and 4J m. from Shiloh,
Seilun. The altitude of Jiljilia (2,441 ft.) is
less than that of Bethel (2,890 ft.) ; but its
appearance on the hills above the great Wiidy
el-Jib is such as to give the impression of great
height, and the descent into the valley may
have led to the expression " going down " to
Bethel. Van de Velde {Memoirs, p. 179), who
appears not to have visited the place, estimated
it to be 500 or 600 feet above Bethel ; see also
Gue'rin (Samarie, ii. 168). Jiljilia may also be
the Beth-gilgal of Neh. xii. 29 (PEF. Menu
iii. 290).
3. The "KINO OP THE NATIONS OP GlLQAL,"
or rather perhaps, as in R. V., the "king of
Goim in Gilgal " (^A D^i)TjS»), is mentioned
in the catalogue of the chiefs overthrown by
Joshua (Josh. xii. 23). The name occurs next
to Dob (v. 22) in au enumeration apparently pro-
ceeding southwards; and this agrees with the
position in which Eusebius and Jerome place
<3ilgal. It was, in their day, a village called
Galgulis (roA-yoi/XJj), 6 miles N. of Antipatris
<OS* p. 254, 31 ; p. 159, 24) ; and this place
is now Kalkilieh, 6} MP. north of Has el-'Am,
Antipatris. The Gilgal of Josh. xii. 23 may
however be Jiljulieh, a large mud village in the
plain about 4 miles N. of Has el-'Ain (PEF. Mem.
ii. 289). What these Goim were has been dis-
cussed under Heathen. By that word (Judg.
GIN
iv. 2) or "nations" (Gen. xiv. 1) the name is
usually rendered in the A. V., as in the well-
known phrase " Galilee of the nations " (Is. ix.
1 ; cp. Matt. iv. 15). Possibly they were a
tribe of the early inhabitants of the country,
who, like the Gerizites, the A vim, the Zemarites,
and others, have left only this faint casual trace
of their existence there.
4. A Gilgal is spoken of in Josh. xv. 7, in
describing the north border of Judah. In the
parallel list (Josh, xviii. 17) it is given aa
Geliloth, and under that word an attempt is
made to show that Gilgal, ijc. the Gilgal near
Jericho, is probably correct. [G.] [W.]
GI'LOH <fb\ ; B. omits, A. Ityktfr; in Sam.
Va\&), a town in the mountainous part of Judah,
named in the first group, with Debir and Esh-
temoh (Josh. xv. 51). Its only interest to us
lies in the fact of its having been the native
place of the famous Ahithophel (2 Sam. xv. 12),
where he was residing when Absalom sent for
him to Hebron, and whither he returned to
destroy himself after his counsel had been set
aside for that of Hushai (xvii. 23). The site is
uncertain. Tobler (Drit. Wand. Map) identifies
it with Beit Jala, near Bethlehem ; but this is
too far to the north, and Conder suggests, with
greater probability, Kh. Jala, about 3 miles
N.W. of Bulhul, Halbul (PEF. Mem. iii. 313,
354). [G.] [W.]
GI'LONITE, THE Q&in and 'AjH; B.
Btnuvti [xv.], TtXmtlros [xxiii.], A. Ti\to-
vaios [xv.], TstAoWros, ue. the native of Giloh
[as Shilonite, from Shiloh]): applied only to
Ahithophel the famous counsellor (2 Sam. xv.
12 ; xxiii. 34). [G.] [W.]
GIM'ZO ("iTOJ, ? = place where sycamores
groxc; B. Ta\t(£, A. rauai(ai), a town which
with its dependent villages (Hebr. "daugh-
ters") was taken possession of by the Philis-
tines in the reign of Ahaz (2 Ch. xxviii. 18).
The name — which occurs nowhere but here —
is mentioned with Timnath, Socho, and other
towns in the north-west part of Judah, or
in Dan. It still remains attached to a large
village between 2 and 3 miles S.W. of Lydda,
south of the road between Jerusalem aud
Jaffa, just where the hills of the highland finally
break down into the maritime plain. Jimzu u
a tolerably large village, on an eminence, well
surrounded with trees, and standing just beyond
the point where the two main roads from Jeru-
salem (that by the Bethhorons, and that by
Wady Suleiman), which parted at Gibcon, again
join and run on as one to Jaffa. It is remarkable
for nothing but some extensive corn magazines
underground, unless it be also for the silence
maintained regarding it by all travellers up to
Dr. Robinson (ii. 249). [G.] [W.]
GIN, a trap for birds or beasts : it consisted
of a net (IIB), and a stick to act as a springe
(E'iJlD) ; the latter word is translated " gin " in
the A. V. and R. V. of Amos iii. 5, and the former
in Is. viii. 14, the term " snare " being in each
case used for the other part of the trap. In
Job xl. 24 (A. V. marg.) the second of these
terms is applied to the ring run through the
nostrils of an animal. [W. L. B.]
Digitized by
Google
GINATH
GrNATH (T0% ? = a garden; T»r<U; Oi-
*4i), father of Tibni, who after the death of
Zimri disputed the throne of Israel with Omri
(1 K. xri. 21, 22).
GINTIKTHO (^n)J, <•«. Ginnethoi, ? = a
gardener; B. omits, SfcA. TtmnflmA ; Genihon),
one of the "chief" (D'E'tn = heads) of the
priests and Levitei who returned to Judaea with
Zerabbabel (Neh. xii. 4). He is doubtless the
same person as
GDfNETHON flinM ; A. ToowotfeV, K.
'harrie, B. Tmrie ; Gentium), a priest who
scaled the covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x. 6).
He was head of a family, and one of his de-
scendants is mentioned in the list of priests and
Levites at a later period (xii. 16).
GIBDLE, an essential article of dress in the
East, and worn both by men and women. The
corresponding Hebrew words are: 1. Iljn or
niun, which is the general term for a girdle of
any kind, whether worn by soldiers (1 Sam.
xriii. 4; 2 Sam. xx. 8; IK. ii. 5; 2 K. iii. 21),
or by women (Is. iii. 24). 2. "ntc$, especially
used of the girdles worn by men; whether
by prophets (2 K. i. 8 ; Jer. xiii. 1), soldiers (Is.
t. 27 ; Ezek. xxiii. 15), or kings in their mili-
tary capacity (Job xii. 18). 3. T\XQ or rVTD,
used of the girdle worn by men alone (Job xii.
21; Ps.cix. 19; Is. xxiii. 10). 4. D32K, the
girdle worn by the priests and state officers. In
addition to these, ^JTIS (Is. iii. 24. The etymo-
logy of the word is much disputed ; see Dillmann*
in loco) is a costly girdle worn by women. The
Vulgate renders it fascia perforate. It would thus
seem to correspond with the Latin strophium,
a belt worn by women about the breast. In the
LX.V, however, it is translated xw&y jwewop-
ptpes, " a tunic shot with purple," and Gesenius
ass "6«nte» Feyerkleid " (cp. Schroeder, de Vest.
MrU. pp. 137 -S, 404. Dietrich [see MV.»] con-
nects it with the Targ. WriB, Oberkleid). The
0*"Wp mentioned in Is! iii. 20, Jer. ii. 32,
were probably girdles (R. V. "sashes"), al-
though both Kirochi and Jarchi consider them
as fillets for the hair (A. V. " headbands "). In
the latter passage the Vulgate has again fascia
pectoralis, and the LXX. trriflottaiiit, an appro-
priate bridal ornament.
The common girdle was made of leather (2 K.
i. 8 ; Matt. iii. 4), like that worn by the Bedouins
of the present day, whom Curzon describes as
"armed with a long crooked knife, and a pistol
or tw» stuck in a red leathern girdle " (Jftmast.
«/ the Levant, p. 7). In the time of Chardin
the nobles of Mingrelia wore girdles of leather,
four fingers broad and embossed with silver. A
finer girdle was made of linen (Jer. xiii. 1 ;
Ezek. xri. 10), embroidered with silk, and some-
times with gold and silver thread (Dan. x. 5 ;
Bev. L 13, xv. 6), and frequently studded with
gald and precious stones or pearls (Le Bruyn,
toy. iv. 170 ; cp. Virg. Aen. ix. 359). Morier
(Second Journey, p. 150), describing the dress of
tie Armenian women, says, " They wear a silver
girdle which rests on the hips, and is generally
carioosly wrought." The manufacture of these
GIBDLE
1195
girdles formed part of the employment of women
(Prov. xxxi. 24).
The girdle was fastened by a clasp of gold or
silver, or tied in a knot so that the ends hung
down in front, as in the figures on the ruins of
Persepolis. It was worn by men about the loins,
hence the expressions D'3HD 111$ (Is. xi. 5) ;
D^rj "lit*? (Is. v. 27). The girdle of women
was generally looser than that of the men, and
was worn about the hips, except when they
were actively engaged (Prov. xxxi. 17). Curzon
(p. 58), describing the dress of the Egyptian
women, says, " Not round the waist, but round
the hips a large and heavy Cashmere shawl is
worn over the yelek, and the whole gracefulness
of an Egyptian dress consists in the way in which
this is put on." The military girdle was worn
about the waist ; the sword or dagger was sus-
pended from it (Judg. iii. 16 ; 2 Sam. xx. 8 ; Ps.
xlv. 3). In the Nineveh sculptures the soldiers
are represented with broad girdles, to which the
sword is attached, and through which two or
even three daggers in a sheath are passed.
Q. Curtius (iii. 3) says of Darius, " Zona aurea
muliebriter cinctus acinacem suspenderat, cui ex
gemma erat vagina." Hence girding up the
loins denotes preparation for battle or for active
exertion. In times of mourning, girdles of sack-
cloth were worn as marks of humiliation and
sorrow (Is. iii. 24, xxii. 12).
In consequence of the costly materials of
which girdles were made, they were frequently
given as presents (1 Sam. xviii. 4 ; 2 Sam. xviii.
1 1), as is still the custom in Persia (cp. Morier,
p. 93). Villages were given to the queens of
Persia to supply them with girdles (Xen. Anab.
i.4, §9; Plat. Ale. i. p. 123).
They were used as pockets, as among the Arabs
still (Kiebuhr, Dcscr. p. 56), and as purses, one
end of the girdle being folded back for the
purpose (Matt. x. 9 ; Mark vi. 8) : hence, zo-
nam perdere, " to lose one's purse " (Hor. Epist.
ii. 2, 40 j cp. Juv. xiv. 297). Inkhorns were
also carried in the girdle (Ezek. ix. 2).
The DJ3N, or girdle worn by the priests about
the close-fitting tunic (Ex. xxviii. 39, xxxix. 29),
is described by Josephus {Ant. iii. 7, § 2) as made
of linen so fine of texture as to look like the
slough of a snake, and embroidered with flowers
of scarlet, purple, blue, and fine linen. It was
about four fingers broad, and was wrapped
several times round the priest's body, the ends
hanging down to the feet. When engaged in
sacrifice, the priest threw the ends over his left
shoulder. According to Maimonides (de Yas.
Sanct. c. 8), the girdle worn both by the high-
priest and the common priests was of white
linen embroidered with wool ; but that worn by
the high-priest on the day of Atonement was
entirely of white linen. The length of it was
thirty-two cubits, and the breadth about three
ringers. It was worn just below the armpits to
avoid perspiration (cp. Ezek. xliv. 18). St. Jerome
(Ep. ad Fabiolam, de Vest. Sjc.) follows Josephus.
With regard to the manner in which the girdle
was embroidered, the " needlework " (A. V. ;
DJ3T nbBD, Ex. xxviii. 39 ; R. V. " the work of
! the embroiderer." See Knobel-Dillmann in loco)
I is distinguished in the Mishna from the " cunning-
I work " (A. V. ; 3B71 Ttym, Ex. xxvi. 31 ; R. V.
Digitized by
Google
1196 GIRGASHITES, THE
" the work of tbe cunning workman ") as being
worked by the needle with figures on one side
only, whereas the latter was woven work with
figures on both sides (Cod. Jama, c 8). So also
Maimonides (de Vas. Sand. viii. 15). But Jarchi
on Ex. xxvi. 31, 36 explains the difference as
consisting in this, that in the former case the
figures on the two sides are the same, whereas
in the latter they are different. [Embroiderer.]
In all passages, except Is. xxii. 21, D03K is
used of the girdle of the priests only, but in
that instance it appears to have been worn by
Shcbna, the treasurer, as part of the insignia of
his office ; nnless it be supposed that he was of
priestly rank, and wore it in his priestly capacity.
He is called "high-priest" in the Chronicon
Paschttle, p. 115 a, and in the Jewish tradition
quoted by Jarchi in loco.
The " curious [A. V. marg. Or, embroidered]
girdle" (3£>0, Ex. xxviii. 8; R.V. "the cun-
ningly woven band") was made of the same
materials and colours as the ephod ; that is, of
" gold, blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine
twined linen." Josephus describes it as sewn to
the breastplate. After passing once round, it
was tied in front upon the seam, the ends hang-
ing down (Ant. iii. 7, § 5). According to Mai-
monides, it was of woven work.
"Girdle" is used figuratively in Ps. cix. 5;
Is. xi. 5 : cp. 1 Sam. ii. 4 ; Ps. xxx. 11, lxv. 12 ;
Eph. vi. 14. [W.A.W.]
GIR'GASHITES, THE C*B J |'ian, •>., ac-
cording to the. Hebrew usage, singular — " the
Girgashite ; " in which form, however, it occurs
in the A. V. but twice, 1 Ch. i. 14 and Gen. x.
16, in the latter the Girgasite [R. V. Girga-
shite]; elsewhere uniformly plural, as above;
R. V. uniformly singular : i IVpyeoxuor, and so
also Josephus : Oergesaeus), one of the nations
who were in possession of Canaan before the
entrance thither of the children of Israel. The
name occurs in the following passages: — Gen. x.
16, xv. 21 ; Deut. vii. 1 (and xx. 17 in Samarit.
and LXX.) ; Josh. iii. 10, xxiv. 11 ; 1 Ch. i. 14;
Neh. ix. 8.* In the first of these "the Girgasite"
is given as the fifth son of Canaan ; in the other
places the tribe is merely mentioned, and that
but occasionally, in the formula expressing the
doomed country ; and it may truly be said in
the words of Josephus {Ant. I 6, § 2) that we
possess the name and nothing more; not even
the more definite notices of position, or the
slight glimpses of character, general or indi-
vidual, with which we are favoured in the case
of the Amorites, Jebusites, and some others of
these ancient nations. The expression in Josh,
xxiv. 11 would seem to indicate that the district
of the Girgashites was on the west of Jordan ;
nor is this invalidated by the mention of " Ger-
gesenes " in Matt. viii. 28 (Ttpynrnv&tr in Rec.
Text, and in a few MSS. — mentioned by Epi-
phanius and Origen — repytvaiar), as on the east
side of the sea of Galilee, since that name may
indicate that some families of the tribe settled
in this place after they were driven from Southern
Palestine. A curious tradition is related in the
Talmud of an appeal made by the Girgashites
» In Deut lit 1» (Gk. r. 14) the LXX. have B. Top-
nati, B*' b? AP. rapywmfor the "Gcshuri"of the
Hebrew text.
GITTITH
to Alexander the Great during his stay in Pales-
tine, for redress for the losses they had suffered
from the Jews in consequence of their expulsion
from Canaan. The appeal, however, was fruit-
less (Otho, Lex. Rabb. 31). [Q.] [W.]
GER'GASITE, THE (Gen. x. 16). See the
— ;oing.
GIBZITE8, THE, 1 Sam. xxvii. 8, R. V.
[Gerzites.]
GISCHALA. [Ahlab.]
GIS'PA (Nftf??; BA. om., Kcs«>tin£ r«r*xC;
Gaspha\ one of' the overseers of the Nethinim,
in " the Ophel," after the return from captivity
(Xeh. xi. 21). By K*. the name appears to have
been taken as a place. [F.]
GIT'TAH-HE'PHEB, Josh. xix. 13.
[Gath-Hepher,]
GITTAIM (DJF1J, i.e. tiro wine-presses ; B.
TtBBal, A. TtWtlm Gethaim), a place incidentally
mentioned in 2 Sam. iv. 3, where the meaning
appears to be that the inhabitants of Beeroth,
which was allotted to Benjamin, had been com-
pelled to fly from that place, and had taken
refuge at Gittaim. Beeroth was one of the
towns of the Gibeonites (Josh. ix. 17); and the
cause of the flight of its people may have been
(though this is but conjecture) Saul's persecution
of the Gibeonites, alluded to in 2 Sam. xxi. 2.
Gittaim is again mentioned in the list of places
inhabited by the Benjamites after their return
from the Captivity, with Anathoth, Hazor,
Ramah, and other known towns of Benjamin to
the N.W. of Jerusalem (Neh. xi. 33). The two
may be the same ; though, if the persecution of
the Beerothites proceeded from Benjamin, as we
must infer it did, they would hardly choose as a
refuge a place within the limits of that tribe.
Gittaim is the dual form of the word Gath,
which suggests the Philistine plain as its
locality. But there is no evidence for or against
this. ^
Gittaim occurs in the LXX. Version of 1 Sam.
xiv. 33 — "out of Getthaim roll me a great
stone." But this is not supported by any other
of the ancient Versions, which unanimously
adhere to the Hebr. text, and probably proceeds
from a mistake or corruption of the Hebrew
word DJjnJ3; A. V. "ye have transgressed."
It further occurs in the LXX. in Gen. xxxvi. 35
and 1 Ch. i. 46, as the representative of Avith,
a change not very intelligible (see Dillmann 5 on
Gen. I.e.), and equally unsupported by the other
old Versions. [G.] [W.l
GITTITES. The inhabitants ofGath (2 Sam.
vi. 10, 11; xv. 18, 19). Obed-edom and Ittai
are named, and six hundred Gittites followed
David from Gath. In the latter passage the
LXX. renders the word " mighty men," and is
followed by Ewald and Thenius. There is
nothing to show that these Gittites were Philis-
tines, since there was probably no town in
Palestine, in David's time, of which the popula-
tion was unmixed [see Gath]. [C. R. C.1
GITTITH, or, more correctly, Haggittith,
which appears as part of the first, or intro-
Digitized by
Google
GIZONITE, THE
ductory, verses of Psalms viii., lxxxi., and
lxxxir., has produced an amusing, if somewhat
unsatisfactory, search after hypotheses. The
authors of the Septuagint evidently had in mind
the Agadic tradition of the Rabbis, when they
rendered 'Al-Haggittith by intip r&y \i)vav (see
later on), and are by no means alluded to by lbn
'Ezra, as has been asserted, when he rejects the
explanation of the " fablers, babblers, or idiots "
(D^'anD). The Targumist gives Gittith as a
harp brought (viii. 1) or come (lxxxi. 1 and
lxxxiv. 1) from Gath (of Philistia ?). This expla-
nation is not merely quoted by Kashi, but ap-
proved of by him, with the additional remark,
that in Gath they were masters in constructing
this instrument. He rejects the view of the
Rabbis (Midrash Tehillim) that this title was an
allusion to the heathen nations, which would be
one day trodden down as grapes are trodden in
a vat. Not that Rashi rejected the Rabbinic say-
ing itself, which rests on the Bible (Is. lxiii. 2, 3);
but he rejects the local application of it. He
does so justly, since, as he says, contents and
context give no evidence whatever for such
an application. Rashi here, as in most other
places, exhibits supreme good sense. Rab
Se'adyah, the Gaon (Ewald, Ueber die Arabisch
rjeschriebenen Werke Jvdischer Sprachgelehrten, i.,
Stuttgard, 1844, 8vo, on Ps. viii. 1), says
that this Psalm got its name Gittith from
having been given by David to the household
of Obed-Edom the Gittite. This explanation
is also given by lbn 'Ezra (13113 "IIDtDn nt
VUn DHK 12V) ninae^), without, however,
acknowledging his indebtedness to the Gaon;
and between it and his own well-known theory
(This is the beginning of a poem, &c.) he
vacillates, with rather an inclination to the
former exposition. Qimchi reproduces both
these explanations, only consistently reversing
their order, as he approves more 4 of the second
explanation (see Schiiler-Szinessy, Qimchi on tie
Ptalms, i., Cambridge and Leipzig, 1883, 8vo,
p. 15). He inserts between the first and second
explanations the interpretation of some anony-
mous authors, according to whom this Psalm
was called Gittith because David both composed
and recited it while at Gath in Philistia. This
interpretation, if it were possible, would leave
the headings of Psalms lxxxi. and lxxxiv. en-
tirely unexplained. Now, on grounds both
negative and positive, advanced in AlJKLETH
Shahar, Alamoth and Al-Taschitii, one is
constrained to explain Haggittith as the name
of a music-band, dwelling in the Levitical Gath-
Kimmon, and the director of which was Obed-
Edom the Gittite (1 Ch. xv. 21). This theory
would give a double reason for the name Hag-
gittith. Obed-Edom did not merely excel as a
music-director, but had harboured the Ark of
God for three months, when David, after the
catastrophe of Uzzah, was afraid to take it to
Zion, his own city. For this act of piety and
devotion the Lord had blessed Obed-Edom the
Gittite, and the king had granted to this Levite
the mastership over a music-corps, consisting
for the most part of his own household, which
should bear his name. [S. M. S.-S.]
GI'ZONITE, THE (^tjn: BX. omit;
A. o Tawl ; Lucian, i rWi : Gezonites). "The
GLASS
1197
sons of Hashem the Gizonite" are named
amongst the warriors of David's guard (1 Ch.
xi. 34). In the parallel list of 2 Sam. xxiii. 32
the name appears as Jashen. Gizon is not
otherwise known, and the reading of Lucian,
i Towi, seems to point to 'SISH, the name of
a Naphtalite family (see Driver, Notes on Heb.
Text of the BB. of Sam. 1. c). [F.]
GIZEITES, THE, 1 Sam. xxvii. 8, R. V.
margin. [Geezitbs.]
GLASS (JV3i3t; Soaoi; vitrum). The word
occurs only in Job xxviii. 17, where in A. V. it
is rendered " crystal," but in R. V. " glass." It
comes from "ipt (to be pure), and according to
the best authorities means a kind of glass which
in ancient days was held in high esteem (J. D.
Michaelis, Mist. Yitri apud Hebr.; and Bam-
berger, Hist. Vitri ex antiquitate eruta, quoted
by Gesen. ». v.). Symmachus renders it Kpi-
o-toaAoi, but that is rather intended by B"35
(Job xxviii. 18, A. V. " pearls," LXX. yd$a, a
word which also means "ice ; " cp. Plin. H. N.
xxxvii. 2), and mg (Ezek. i. 22). Besides Sym-
machus, others also render it Stavyri KpiarraK-
aoj (Schleusner, Thesaur. s. v. Sa\os), and it is
argued that the word SclKos frequently means
crystal. Thus the Schol. on Aristoph. flub. 764
defines SoAoi (when it occurs in old writers) as
tuupav})* *M>»* iouc&s bd\.tp, and Hesychius gives
as its equivalent \l$os rlfuos. In Herodotus
(iii. 24) it is clear that SaAoi must mean crystal,
for he says, r> hi atpt toaaj) xal tUtpyos ipia-
o-iTOi, and Achilles Tatius speaks of crystal as
SaAoi ipapvyptni (ii. 3; Baehr, On Herod.
ii. 44 ; Heeren, Idean, ii. 1, 335). Others con-
sider lT3i3T to be amber, or electrum, or ala-
baster (Bociiart, Hieroz. ii. ch. vi. 872) ; but
modern criticism almost universally adopts the
meaning glass (see MV.", Dillmann * in loco).
The Hebrews must have been aware of the
invention of glass. There has been a violent
modern prejudice against the belief that glass
was early known to, or extensively used by, the
ancients, but both facts are now certain. From
paintings representing the process of glass-blow-
ing which have been discovered at Beni-Hassan,
and in tombs at other places, we know that the
invention is at least as remote as the age of
Osirtasen the First (perhaps a contemporary of
Joseph), 3500 years ago. A bead as old as
1500 B.C. was found by Captain Hervey at
Thebes, " the specific gravity of which, 25° 30',
is precisely the same as that of the crown glass
now made in England." Fragments too of
wine-vases as old as the Exodus have been dis-
covered in Egypt. Glass beads known to be
ancient have been found in Africa, and also (it
is said) in Cornwall and Ireland, which are in
all probability the relics of an old Phoenician
trade (Wilkinson, in Rawlinson's Herod, ii. 50,
i. 475 ; Anc. Egypt, ii. 64, 65 [1878]). The art
was also known to the ancient Assyrians (Layard,
Nineveh, ii. 42), and a glass bottle was found in
the N.W. palace of Nimroud, which has on it the
name of Sargon, and is therefore probably older
than B.C. 702 (Id. Nin. and Bab. pp. 197, 503).
This is the earliest known specimen of trans-
parent glass.
The disbelief in the antiquity of glass (in
Digitized by
Google
1198
GLASS
spite of the distinct statements of early writers)
is difficult to account for, because the invention
must almost naturally arise in making bricks or
pottery, during which processes there must be
at least a superficial vitrification. There is little
doubt that the honour of the discovery belongs
to the Egyptians. Pliny gives no date for his
celebrated story of the discovery of glass from
the solitary accident of some Phoenician sailors
using blocks of natron to support their sauce-
pans when they were unable to find stones for
the purpose (//. N. xxxvi. 65). But this account
is less likely than the supposition that vitreous
matter first attracted observation from the cus-
tom of lighting fires on the sand, " in a country
producing natron or subcarbonate of soda "
(Rawlinson's Herod, ii. 82). It has been pointed
out that Pliny's story may have originated in
the fact that the sand of the Syrian river Belus,
at the mouth of which the incident is supposed
to have occurred, " was esteemed peculiarly
suitable for glass-making, and exported in great
•lUM
Egyptian Olaas Blowen.
quantities to the workshops of Sidon and Alex-
andria, long the most famous in the ancient
world " {Diet, of Gk. and Bom. Antiq. s. n. Vitrum,
where everything requisite to the illustration
of the classical allusions to glass may be found).
Some find a remarkable reference to this little
river (respecting which see Plin. H. S. v. 17,
xxxvi. 65; Joseph. B. J. ii. 10, § 2; Tac. Hist.
v. 7) in the blessing to the tribe of Zebulun,
" they shall suck of the abundance of the seas,
and of treasures hid in the sand " (Deut.
xxxiii. 19). Both the name Belus (Reland,
quoted in Diet, of Geogr. s. v.) and the Hebrew
word 71PI, " sand " (Calmet, s. v.), have been
suggested as derivations for the Greek SoAos,
which hi however, in all probability, from an
Egyptian root.
Glass was not only known to the ancients,
but used by them (as Winckelmann thinks) far
more extensively than in modern times. Pliny
even tells us that it was employed in wains-
coting (vitreae camerae, H. N. xxxvi. 64; Stat.
Silv. i. ch. v. 42). The Egyptians knew the art of
cutting, grinding, and engraving it, and they
could even inlay it with gold or enamel, and
GLEANING
" permeate opaque glass with designs of various
colours." Besides this, they could colonr it with
such brilliancy as to be able to imitate precious
stones in a manner which often defied detection
(Plin. H. N. xxxvii. 25, 33, 75). This is pro-
bably the explanation of the incredibly large
gems which we find mentioned in ancient
authors ; eg. Larcher considers that the emerald
column alluded to by Herodotus (ii. 44) was
" du verre colore, dont l'interieur etait &laire
par des lampes." Strabo was told by an Alex-
andrian glass-maker that this success was partly
due to a rare and valuable earth found in Egypt
(Beckmann, History of Inventions, "Coloured
Glass." i. 195 sq., Eng. Trans). ; also iii. 208 sq.,
iv. 54). Yet the perfectly clear and transparent
glass was considered the most valuable (Plin.
xxxvi. 26).
Some suppose that the proper name nfe'lBtp
DV3 (" burnings by the waters ") contains an
allusion to Sidonian glass -factories (Meier on
Josh. xi. 8, xiii. 6),
but it is much more
probable that it was
so called from the
burning of Jabin's
chariots at that
place (Lord A.
Hervey, On the
Genealogies, p. 228),
or from hot springs.
In the N. T. glass
is alluded to as an
emblem of bright-
ness (Rev. iv. 6,
xv. 2, xxi. 18). The
three other places
where the word
occurs in the A. V.
(1 Cor. xiii. 12;
2 Cor. iii. 18; Jan.
i. 23), as also the
word "glasses" (Is.
iii. 23), are consi-
derel under Mir-
rors. For, strangeto say, although the ancients
were aware of the reflective power of glass, and
although the Sidonians used it for mirrors (Plin.
H. S. xxxvi. 66), yet for some unexplained
reason mirrors of glass must have proved unsuc-
cessful, since even under the empire mirrors were
universally made of metal, which is at once
less perfect, more expensive, and more difficult
to preserve (Diet, of Gk. and Bom. Antiq. s. n.
Speculum). [F. W. F.]
GLEANING (Tvbbs as applied to produce
generally, Op? rather to corn ; see Lev. xix. 9,
10. The verbs are also used figuratively, Judg.
xx. 45, and i. 7). The remarks under Corner
on the definite character of the rights of the
poor, or rather of poor relations and dependants,
to a share of the crop, are especially exemplified
in the instance of Ruth gleaning in the field of
Boaz. Poor young women, recognised as being
" his maidens," were gleaning his field ; and on
her claim upon him by near affinity being made
known, she was bidden to join them and not go
to any other field ; but for this, the reapers, it
seems, would have driven her away (Ruth ii. 6,
Digitized by
Google
GLEDE
8, 9). The gleaning of fruit trees, as well as of
cornfields, was reserved for the poor. Hence the
proverb of Gideon, Judg. viii. 2. Maimonides
indeed lays down the principle (Constitutiones dc
donis pauperum, cap. ii. 1), that whatever crop
or growth is fit for food, is kept, gathered all
at once, and carried into store, is liable to that
law. See for further remarks, Maimon. Con-
stitutiones de donis pauperum, cap. ir. [H. H.]
GLEDE (n$"J, ra'ah; yty; aim). The
word occurs only in Deut. xiv. 13, and is trans-
lated " glede " in A. V. and R. V. In the parallel
passage in Lev. zi. 14, flNI, da'ah, " vulture,"
is read. Gesenius therefore suggests that da'ah
should be substituted also in Deut. If however
HJO be correct, the name is derived from the
T T
bird's clearness of vision, and means " the far-
seer." Our translators have distinguished
between '• kite " and " glede," though the names
are often used synonymously in the South of
England for the royal or red kite, Milvus ictinus,
Sav., now all but extinct. But in the North of
England, in Scotland and Ireland, "glede" is
applied to the buzzard, which is probably there-
fore the bird intended by our translators. There
are three species of buzzard in Palestine: the
common buzzard, Buteo vulgaris, Leach, on the
coast ; B. desertorum, Daud., in the southern
wilderness ; and B. ferox (Gm.), the finest and
largest of the genus, spread all over the country.
[H. B. T.]
GNAT («5iw>J>) only occurs in Matt, xxiii.
24, " Te blind guides, which strain at a gnat and
swallow a camel," A. V. But R. V. correctly —
" which strain out the gnat and swallow the
camel ; " as in all the earlier Versions, Tyndall's,
Cranmer's, and the Genevan : a proverbial ex-
pression, the gnat being looked on as one of the
smallest of insects. The gnat of the East is
better known to us as the " mosquito," one of
the most irritating pests of all countries, and
which in Palestine can only be escaped by sleep-
ing on high ground, away from trees or water.
Gnats belong to the order Diptera, genus Culex.
All the species are characterised by having a
long proboscis in a grooved sheath, from which
the insect shoots its long slender Lance into the
skin. The larvae and pupae live in water, only
emerging into the air when they leave the
chrysalis. [H. B. T.]
GOAD. The equivalent terms in the Hebrew
are (1) "1D^3 (Judg. iii. 31) and (2) \2~n
(1 Sam. xiii.°21; Eccles. xii. 11). The explana-
tion given by Jahn (Archaeol. i. 4, § 59 ; cp.
MV.") is that the former represents the pole,
and the latter the iron spike with which it was
shod for the purpose of goading, and may refer
to anything pointed ; and the tenor of Eccles. xii.
requires rather the sense of a peg ot nail, any-
thing in short which can be fastened ; while in
1 Sam. xiii. the point of the ploughshare is more
probably intended. The former does probably
refer to the goad (A. V. and R. V. " ox-goad "),
the long handle of which might be used as a
formidable weapon (cp. Horn. II. vi. 135),
though even this was otherwise understood by
the LXX. as a ploughshare («V ry oporpoVoSi) :
it should also be noted that the etymological
force of the word is that of guiding (from
GOAT 1199
"VjP, to teach) rather than goading (Saalschiitz,
Archaeol. i. 105). There are undoubted refer-
ences to the use of the goad in driving oxen in
Ecclus. xxxviii. 25, and Acts xxvi. 14. The
instrument, as still used in the countries of
Southern Europe and Western Asia, consists of
a rod about 8 feet long, brought to a sharp
point and sometimes cased with iron at the
head (Harmer's Observ. iii. 348). The expres-
sion "to kick against the goad" (Acts xxvi. 14,
R. V.; A. V. "the pricks") was proverbially
used by the Greeks tor unavailing resistance to-
superior power (cp. Aesch. Agam. 1633, Prom.
323 ; Eurip. Bacch. 791). [W. L. B.]
GOAH, Jer. xxxi. 39, R. V. [Goatic]
GOAT. 1. Of the Hebrew words which are
translated goat and she-goat in A. V., the most
common is T#, 'aiz = Syr. \W Arab. lip.
Phoen. &(a. The Indo-Germanic languages have
a similar word in Sansk. aq'a = goat, off a = she-
goat, Germ, gets or gems, Greek a% aiyis. The
derivation from VB, to be strong, points to he-
goat as the original meaning, but it is also
specially used for she-goat, as in Gen. xv. 9,
xxxi. 38, xxxii. 14 ; Num. xv. 27. In Judg. vi.
19 D'W HJ is rendered kid, and in Deut. xiv. 4
DMJJ Ttff is rendered the goat, but properly
signifies flock of goats. D*{I? is used elliptically
for goats' hair in Ex. xxvi 7, xxxvi. 14, &c ;
Num. xxxi. 20 ; and in 1 Sam. xix. 13.
2. "IIFID, 'attud, Tpiyoi, hirci, is the common
word for the he-goat, which is the leader of the
herd. All herds of goats, however small, have
a leader, whose movements are followed by all
the others. It occurs only in the plural and is
rendered indifferently " goats " and " he-goats "
in A. V. and R. V. It is used' metaphorically
for leaders of men : ". Be as the he-goats
before the flocks "(Jer. 1. 8). "Even all the
chief ones of the earth," marg. he-goats (Is.
xiv. 9). "Mine anger is kindled against the
shepherds, and I will punish the he-goats," ie.
" the leaders of the people " (Zech. x. 3, R. T.>
3. TW, sffir, lit. " a hairy one " or " bristly
one," is the word commonly used in the Penta-
teuch for the goat offered as sin offering, whether
a full-grown animal or a kid.
4. E*PI, tagish, i.e. the butter or the striker,
from e*PI, Hsh, "to strike" or " butt," a non-
existent root ; Arabic ipX>. &"*> p' ur - i^juyO'
tuyis, "a he-goat." The word occurs in four
passages only. In Prov. xxx. 31-2, R. V. : "Four
things which are stately in going ... the he-
goat." The stately march of the he-goat be-
fore the herd, and his haughty bearing, as well
as the dauntless stare with which he scrutinizes
a stranger, are well known to all familiar with
the East ; and his name is still commonly used
by the Arabs to express dignity of manner and
bearing.*
• So the Alexandrian Version of the LXX. gives In
Is. xiv. 9, rp&yot rryoviitvos aiiroAwv. Cp. Theocritus,
Id. viii. 49, *0 rpayt, t&v \€vnav aiyar ai*p : and Virg.
At. vll. 1, " Vlr gregia ipse caper."
Digitized by
Google
1200
GOAT
5. TDV, faphir, ocean only in 2 Ch. xxix.
21, Ezra vi. 17, and Dan. viii. 5, 8. It is derived
from ISy, " to leap." In Daniel it is followed by
D'lffH, i.e. a he-goat of the goats, and U used as
a figure of the Macedonian Empire : " Behold,
an he-goat came from the west on the face of
the whole earth " (v. 5).
"Epi^or and tplQiov, i.e. " a yonng goat or kid,"
are translated " goats " in our Version (R. V.
niarg. kids). " Goat-skins " in Heb. xi. 37 are
in the Greek «V cuytlois Sip/iaaw.
There are several breeds of goats (Capra
hircta, L.) in Palestine. The supposed wild
original of the goat {Capra acgagria, Gm.) is
common in Armenia, the Caucasus, and North
Loug-cwrod Syrian Oo»L
Persia ; yet the goats of Syria exhibit a wider
divergence than those of any other country,
from the pristine type. In the Lebanon there
is a very marked race, like the Welsh breed of
goat, generally black and with short ears often
erect. Very different from this is the common
Syrian goat of the South (Capra mambrica, L.),
with enormous pendent ears often hanging down
below its nose, and stout recurved horns. These
long ears are alluded to by Amos (iii. 12) : "As
the shepherd taketh out of the mouth of the
lion two legs, or a piece of an ear." These goats
are very large, with long hair, generally black.
In fact, black is as much the rule with the
Syrian goat as white with the English sheep.
Another race is the mohair goat (Capra angor-
ensis, L.), which is only a carefully selected breed
of the other, generally white, and with very
long silky hair. It is only reared in a few places
in the north of the country. It is to this fine-
haired goat probably that allusion is made iu
the Song of Songs iv. 1 : " Thy hair is as a flock
of goats that appear from [" lie along the side
of," R. V.] Mount Gilead."
Goats formed an important item in the wealth
of the Patriarchs, and were used for food and
for sacrifice. In pastoral regions the goat may
be said to be the complement of the sheep.
The one browses where the other cannot feed,
for the goat prefers brushwood and coarse herb-
GOAT
age to the fine pasturage indispensable for the
sheep. Thus on the downs of Arabia where no
shrubs are to be found, there are no goats, and
they are not mentioned among the possessions of
Job. In the rich maritime plains their place i>
taken by horned cattle, for the luxuriant grasses
are too succulent for their taste. Bat the
southern wilderness, where there are many
dwarf bashes, and the " hill-country " from
Hebron up the centre of Western Palestine to
the top of Lebanon, are of all others the best
adapted for goats; and here from the earliest
times they have been a chief source of wealth.
Nabal, in the Negeb or South-land of Judah,
had 3,000 sheep and 1,000 goats. Further north,
the proportion of the latter would have been
greater.
The sheep and goats are always seen together
under the same shepherd, but they do not tres-
pass on the domain of each other ; nor seems
there to be on either side any desire for more
intimate acquaintance. The sheep, quietly wend-
ing their way along the lower slopes of the
hillside, graze closely the tender herbage and
fine grass ; the goats, generally riling in Ion;
lines a little above them, skip from rock to rock,
and browse the thymes and twigs of the dwarf
shrubs. When folded together at night, they
still gather in distinct groups; and round the
well, while waiting for the troughs to be filled,
they instinctively classify themselves separately.
With all their economic value, the goats hare
been the cause of mnch of the bareness and
the scarcity of spring rains in Palestine. Their
constant browsing has precluded any chance of
the restoration of the forests in any part of
the country. They have extirpated many species
of trees which once covered the hills, and which
now are only to be found east of Jordan. The
scarcity of fuel has tempted the villagers to
cut down almost every tree of any size in the
country, while the goats effectually keep down
the seedlings. Until an enlightened Pasha
intervened, there was great danger of the cedars
of Lebanon becoming absolutely extinct with the
decay of the few surviving patriarchs of the
forest. Within the present century, after the
ebony forests had been cut down in the island of
St. Helena, the goats barked and destroyed all
the younger trees until not a solitary plant of
the species survives.
In all the districts where goats are kept their
milk takes the place of cow's milk with us, and
is used both fresh (called by the Arabs haled)
and curdled (leben), and is also manufactured
into cheese: "Thou shalt have goat's milk
enough for thy food, for the food of thy
household, and for the maintenance of thy
maidens" (Prov. xxvii. 27). The herds are
their wealth : " The goats are the price of the
field " (Prov. xxvii. 26). A kid of the goats
has always been the special dish for a visitor, or
for a feast. To this day it is as it was in the
time of Abraham: the sheikh presses the tra-
veller to stay till a kid of the goats has been
caught, slain, and cooked for his entertainment :
" I pray thee, let us detain thee, until we shall
have made ready a kid for thee " (Judg. xiii.
15). The lambs are more generally kept for the
sake of their wool, and not slain until they have
vielded at least one fleece ; while a calf is too
large and valuable to be slain except on some
Digitized by
Google
GOAT, SCAPE
very great occasion. " Thou never gavest me a
&/,'" complains the elder brother of the pro-
digal, "that I might make merry with my
friends : bnt as soon as this thy son was come,
. . . thou hast killed for him the fatted calf"
(Luke xv. 29, 30).
The habits of the goat have afforded frequent
illustrations in the teaching of our Lord. In
the solemn description of the day of judgment,
" He shall separate them one from another, as
a shepherd dividcth his sheep from the goats "
(Matt. xiv. 22). The traveller can watch the
shepherd, when evening is coming on, carefully
picking his way on the hill-side, as he cheerily
calls and encourages the sheep who follow him
quietly and in close order, on the beaten track
towards the well-known cave where they will
1* folded till morning, secure from wolf or
jackal. Higher up on the mountain-side, in
looser order, gambolling and skipping from rock
to rock, yet still keeping fairly in line with the
sheep, come the goats ; and then, when the cave
has been reached, they leap down from the rocks
above, as if simply to' exhibit their agility. The
shepherd then tells, first the sheep into one side
of the cave, and next the goats into the other.
Goat's hair being, with the exception of the
Ion? silky fleeces of the Angora breed, much
coarser than wool, is only employed, like camel's
hair, in the weaving of coarse fabrics. The
outer curtains of the Tabernacle in the wilder-
ness were of goat's hair (Exod. ixxvi. 14). It
was also used for stuffing cushions (1 Sam. xix.
1.'!). Goat-skins were and are still a very
important item in the economy of the East ;
for of these are made all the bottles that are
used for the conveyance of water, wine, oil, and
milk ; earthenware jars being only for the
storage of wine in cellars, or for the daily supply
of water for domestic use. For a description of
the manufacture of goat-skin bottles, see
Bottle. [H. B. T.]
GOAT, SCAPE. [Atosehent, Day of.]
GOAT, WILD. Two Hebrew words are
thus rendered in A. V. and R. V. (1) D'W 1 ,
i/e'e'lm; rpayiXapot, (\aipor, ibices: and fem.
rb]£, ya'USk, A. V. " roe," R. V. " doe ; " Arab.
,lp«, tea'/. The word is derived from the root
^1T, "to climb;" and in the three passages
where it occurs in the plural — 1 Sam. xxiv. 2,
Job xxxix. 1, and Ps. civ. 18 — it is no doubt
rightly translated "wild goat." The Trans-
lators seem to have rendered the feminine
form by " roe " or " doe," as being more euphu-
istic where it is used as a term of endearment.
The wild goat of North Arabia, Moab, and
Palestine is Copra beden, Wagn. =Capra tinai-
fi'ci, Ehrenb., ^±), beden, of the Arabs, and
was well known to the Israelites in the wilder-
ness and afterwards in their own land. It is
still abundant in Sinai and Petra, not uncom-
mon in Hoab and the wilderness of Judaea,
and lingers in Central Palestine from Jericho to
Samaria. It was interesting to the present
writer to find this graceful creature near the
very fountain to which it gave name, Engedi,
"the fountain of the kid," on the hills where it
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. L
GOAT, WILD
1201
roamed of old, where David wandered to escape
from Saul : " Saul took three thousand chosen
men out of all Israel, and went to seek David
and his men upon the rocks of the wild goats "
(1 Sam. xxiv. 2). We also obtained a young
one alive near Jericho, and found a horn
further north. In Moab we frequently saw
them, and obtained four specimens. We have
also found its teeth in the breccia of bone
caverns in Lebanon, where possibly it still exists.
The flesh is excellent eating, far superior to
that of the gazelle, and is probably the venison
which Esau went to hunt for his father in
the wilderness of Judaea. The late Rev.
F. W. Holland, who was well acquainted with
the ibex in Mount Sinai, writes : " They are
frequently shot by the Bedawee, who charge
about six shillings for a full-grown one, and
from eighteenpencc to two shillings for a lire
young one. But they are very difficult to rear.
1 had three, but they all died; and one of the
monks told me that the year before he had
twenty, but had lost them all. The Beden
being very shy and wary, keeping to the moun-
tains, and also, from their colour, very difficult
to be seen, are not often detected by travellers,
and have therefore been supposed to be much
more scarce than they really are. The kids,
before they are able to accompany the old ones,
are concealed by the mother under some rock,
and apparently are only visited at night. I once
caught a little one which ran out from under a
rock, as I was climbing a mountain. The poor
little creature had evidently heard me coming,
and ran out, thinking I was its mother. The
Arab who was with me was very anxious to
wait near it till evening to shoot the old one,
and he said there must be another kid close by,
as two were always dropped at a birth ; but we
failed to find a second. Their warning cry is a
shrill kind of whistle."
Like other members of this family, the Beden
t'S" •- _A
Oayro bedrn. Wags.
will drop from a great height and light upon
its powerful horns without injury. The Sinaitic
ibex is very distinct in appearance from the
4 H
Digitized by
Google
1202
GOATH
ibex of the Alps, of the Pyrenees, or of Candia,
and still more from the large Himalayan ibex.
It is smaller than the Alpine species, with longer
but much finer and narrower horns ; and is of a
sandy colour, lighter than any of its congeners.
2. ijj>X, 'akio ; rparyiKapos ; tragelaphus ; A.V.
and R. V. " wild goat," in Deut. xiv. 5, where
alone the word occurs. It appears to be con-
nected with the Arabic »Uj&, 'andk. There
hare been various conjectures as to the animal
intended; some suggesting the Capreolut py-
ijargus (Pall.), called Ann by the Persians, from a
fancied similarity in the names. But it is doubt-
ful if this antelope was ever found so far West.
Others hare proposed the Paseng, Capra aegra-
flrtu, Cur., the wild goat of the Caucasus and
Taurid. It is far more probable that the A. V.
is correct, and that the Capra beden is intended,
more especially since it does not otherwise occur
in the list in Deut., and yet must hare been of all
the animals of the chase by far the most familiar
to Israel in the wilderness. [H. B. T.]
GO'ATH (nyi ; the LXX. seem to hare had
a different text, and read If «VcAmct«v KiHwy;
Ootitha), a place in the neighbourhood of Jeru-
salem, and named, in connexion with the hill
Gareb, only in Jer. xxxi. 39. The name (which
is accurately Goah, as in R. V.) is derived by
Gesenins from !Wi, " to low," as a cow (see, how-
ever, MV."). In accordance with this is the
rendering of the Targum, which has for Goah,
*&y rO^TS = the heifer's pool. The Syriac,
on the other hand, has |fW>;S,fereg>'ttg,"to
the eminence." Owing to the presence of the
letter Ain in Goath, the resemblance between it
and Golgotha does not exist in the original to
the same degree as in English. [Golgotha.]
The Prophet mentions Goah as one of the
limits of the restored Jerusalem in the latter
times ; and he appears to describe a -circuit of
the city commencing at the tower of Hananeel,
and going round by north to west, south, and
east. In this case Goah would be either, follow-
ing the Syriac Version, the hill on which the
Russian convent stands, or, adopting the render-
ing of the Targum, a pool in or near the posi-
tion of the Birket Manilla. [Gareb.] Renan
iV.de J., p. 269, note 4) places Gareb and Goath
totheN.W. of Jerusalem. [G] [W.]
GOB (3J, and 3fa, perhaps = a pit or
ditch; [v. 18] BA. T40, [t>. 19] B. 'Po>, A.
rvf/9; Gob), a place mentioned only in 2 Sam.
xxi. 18, 19, as the scene of two encounters
between David's warriors and the Philistines.
In the parallel account — of the first of these
only — in 1 Ch. xx. 4, the name is given as
Gezkr ; and this, as well as the omission of any
locality for the second event, is supported by
Josephus (Ant. vii. 12, § 2) and most modern
critics. On the other hand, the LXX. and
Syriac have Gath in the first case ; and this
appears to be borne out by the account of a
third and subsequent fight, which all agree
happened at Gath (2 Sam. xxi. 20 ; 1 Ch. xx. 6),
and which, from the terms of the narrative,
seems to have occurred at the same place as
the others. The suggestion of Nob— which
inhabitant
GOLAN
Davidson (Bebr. Text) reports a< in many MSS.,
« — is not admissible on account of the situation
of that place. [G] [W.]
GOBLET (|JK ; Kpcrtip ; crater; joined with
"ITO to express roundness, Cant. vii. 2 ; Gesen.
lies. 22, 39; in plur. Ex. xxiv. 6; A V.
"basons," Is. xxii. 24; LXX. literally ayarit;
craterae ; A. V. " cups "), a circular vessel for
wine or other liquid. [Basin.] [H. W. P.]
GOG. 1. Qia ; Toiy ; Gog.) A Reubenite
(1 Ch. v. 4) ; according to the Hebrew text, son
of Shemaiah. The LXX., however, have a dif-
ferent text throughout the passage. 2. [Hiooo.]
3. In the Samarit. Codex and LXX. of Num.
xxiv. 7, Gog is substituted for Agag.
GO'LAN (Jjto ; Tav\mr), a city and a region.
The name of the region survives in the Arabic
.^)y*-, Jaulan, the district east of Galilee.
The city— capital of the district — is placed by
Herr Schumacher at Saliem el Jaulan (**£"
), 18 miles east of the lake, where the
itants hold a tradition that the site was
once the chief city of the region (Across the
Jordan, p. 92) ; it is not, however, withia the
present limits of the Jaulan, though this is not
an important objection, especially as Golan was
in Bashan (Deut. iv. 43 ; cp. Josh. xx. 28). With
its suburbs it is assigned, in Josh. xxi. 27, to the
Levites. The site in question is a large village,
standing on the plateau 1400 feet above the
level of the Mediterranean. Ruins of a church
with sculptured crosses exist, and the place was
evidently inhabited about the 3rd to the 6th cen-
tury a.d. Eusebius speaks of Golnn (VwXiv) as
a large village in Bashan in his own time (OS.*
p. 253, 75) ; cp. Josephus ( Wars, i. 4, §§ 4 and 8>
The district of Golan, called Gaulanitis by Jose-
phus (TavXarirts), was one of the four divisions
into which ancient Bashan was divided in Roman
times; the others being Auranitis (ffaiiran),
Trachonitis (El Lejjah), and Batanaea (El But-
tetn). Of these Gaulanitis was the western
region, bounded on the south by the river Ifiero-
max, and extending to the Sea of Galilee and the
Jordan. On the east it adjoined the corn plains
of the Hauran ; on the north it reached to the
region of Geshur (probably Ituraea) near Panes*
( Wars, iii. 3, § 5). Josephus includes it in the
kingdom of Og (Ant. ir. 5, § 3 ; cp. 7, § 4, and
Wars, iii. 3, § 1). Sogana and Seleucia are men-
tioned in connexion with this region, the former
in Upper Gaulanitis ; while Gamala, near the
Sea of Galilee, was in Lower Gaulanitis ( Wars, iv.
1, § 1). Seleucia was at the Merom Lake, as here
stated, and this passage shows the western and
northern extent of the district. Other cities
included in the limits were Hippos (Sisiek),
Bethsaida Julias (probably ed DiUeh, near tt
Tell), and Aphek (1 Kings xx. 23-25), which
was the battle-ground of Benhadad, supposed to
be Fik, east of the Sea of Galilee. It is described
as in a mis/tor or " plain," such as that of Gau-
lanitis. Hippos was one of the cities of the
Decapolis. The region thus embraced an area
of about 600 square miles.
Digitized by
Google
GOLAN
GOLD
1203
The modern Janlin is now divided into three
regions, — Esh Sharah on the north, and farther
south the "eastern "and the "western "divisions.
They are separated by the glen of the Nahr er
Bukkad, a perennial stream flowing sooth to
join the Hieromax. The east limit of the Jaulan
is a parallel stream, 20 feet broad, called Nahr
'Allan; both streams are spanned by rained
bridges with pointed arches. The Jaulan is a
plateau, rising northwards, and about 1500 feet
above the Mediterranean on an average. The
formation is basaltic — a field of lava covering
the limestone, which appears in the ravines
which intersect it. It is well watered, with
fine springs and brooks, and cultivated round
the villages ; but the soil is covered with
mounds of basalt rock, resembling ruined sites,
and it does not possess the fine red soil of the
Hauriu, which is free from rocks. It is, how-
ever, an excellent pastoral region, especially to
the north, where the Anazeh Arabs feed nume-
rous flocks, and the grass is knee-deep in spring-
time. Remains of forests are found to the
south, and scattered terebinths on the plateau.
On the north a curious volcanic chain runs
parallel to the Jordan. It consists of the craters
of extinct volcanoes, presenting a very ragged
and picturesque sky-line, as seen from the valley.
These are called Shafdt Kutta, and the southern-
most crater, called Tell FSris, rises 800 feet above
the plateau, which is here about 2,700 feet above
the Mediterranean. It commands a fine view
on all (ides, to the rich corn plains of the Haurin
on the east, and over the Jordan valley to the
hills of Galilee on the west.
The northern district is mainly pastoral, very
few inhabited places now remaining. The seat
of a Kaimakam is placed on the north, at the
decayed village of Kuneitrah, now possessing
only a few stone huts, but in Burckhardt's time
a khan, a mosque, and walls. Three thousand
Circassians were here located about twelve years
ago by the Sultan, to cultivate the country.
This region was held by the Crusaders, and called
the Land of Soethe — a corruption of the Arabic
Smcad, meaning the " black land," on account of
the basaltic soil. Moslem historians apply the
term more widely to the whole Jaulan (see Rey,
Colonies Franqaes, p. 434). The region south of
Esh Sharah, bordering on the Sea of Galilee, now
contains very few hamlets. Among them the
largest perhaps is KMsfin, which is mentioned
in 900 a.d. by Yakflbi, and contains remains of
a fort. Fit (Aphek) also presents ruins, includ-
ing columns and Curie texts. West of this are
the remains of the great fortress of Gamala, on
the cliffs above the lake (see Sir C. W. Wilson's
account. Recovery of Jerusalem, p. 370). North-
east of Fik is the large village of el 'Al, where
a life-sized statue of a goddess with a quiver is
prese rved. This place was seized by the Franks
in 1105 A.D., and a fortress built (cp. Rey,
Col. Franques, p. 434), which still bears the
name "Baldwin's Tower," in the great valley
2 miles to the north. Immediately above the
valley ( Wddy es Semakh) is a spur on the north
covered with dolmens.
The eastern region of the Jaulan contains
many ruined sites, and about a dozen inhabited
villages. The ruins and inscriptions, and re-
mains of a Roman road running east, prove that
it was fully populated in the 2nd century, and
down to the 6th century a.d. It has, indeed,
never been entirely deserted. The highest point
in the plateau, towards the north, is at the
village Ghadir el Huston, 1912 feet above sea-
level. Three miles to the south, on the Roman
road, the hamlet '-4m Dakkar consists of about
thirty huts, but there are remains of a Roman
town which appears to have had a temple. A
fine stream supplies the site. On the north is
a remarkable field of dolmens, such as occur in
Moab and Gilead. They are' called by the
peasantry " graves of the children of Israel,"
but appear more probably to, be prehistoric
remains of the original Amorite population.
The bridge over which the Roman road crosses,
at this point, was repaired in later times by the
Franks or the Arabs. A little further south are
the ruins of Kauhab, probably the Kokaba which
was inhabited in very early Christian times by
the Ebionites from Fella (Epiphanius, Haeret.
xxx. 2, 18; xl. 1). Beit Akidr, yet further
south, on the Nahr 'Allan, was also a Roman
town in a strong position. Sahem el Jaulan,
further east (the supposed site of Golan), is a
large village with gardens and orchards and
good water, but falling into decay. The ruins
present sculptures like those of the Roman cities
of the Haurin, and carved crosses show that
these belong to Christian times. Esh Shejerah,
further south again, has a population of about
450 souls, with Roman ruins. El Ekseir, on
the Hieromax, is the lowest inhabited place,
1145 feet above sea-level, with a fine perennial
spring. Three miles to the north-west, on the
same valley bank, is Beit Erry, which Seetzen
identified with the Batbura (fialipa) of Josephus,
where Herod settled a Jewish population under a
Jewish leader from Babylon (Ant. xvii. 2, § 2).
•Alxiin, a hamlet of 150 souls, N.W. of the last,
contains a mosque with a tower, and a Greek
text has been found : there is a good spring, and
the land is well cultivated. Kefr el Ma, on the
right bank of the Nahr er Rukkad, is a flourish-
ing village; among other remains is a curious
bas-relief of Aesculapius, and what appears to be
a Roman altar. Herr Schumacher identifies this
site with the Alema (1 Mace. v. 26), where the
Jews were shut up till rescued by Judas Macca-
baeus : there is no improbability in this view.
North-east of this, near Seisin (now ruined),
there is another field of dolmens. These sites
are the principal ones of interest as yet described,
and it is thus clear that the Jaulan is not a
desert, but a very fertile pastoral region, which
has possessed a settled population from the
earliest times. A full account will be found in
Schumacher's Across the Jordan, 1886, and further
information in the Rev. Selah Merrill's Reports
(No. 4, American Palestine Exploration Society,
January 1877). The region is also noticed in
Burckhardt's Travels in Syria. [C. B. C]
GOLD, the most valuable of metals, from
its colour, lustre, weight, ductility, and other
useful properties (Plin. H. N. xxxiii. 19). Hence
it is used as an emblem of purity (Job xxiii. 10)
and nobility (Lam. iv. 1). There are six Hebrew
words used to denote it, and four of them occur
in Job xxviii. 15, 16, 17. These are —
l.'SfIT, the common name, connected with
aflV (to be yelha), as oW<f,'from gel, yellow.
Various epithets are applied to it: as, "fine'
4 H 2
Digitized by
Google
1204
GOLD
(2 Ch. iii. 5), "refined" (1 Ch. xxviii. 18),
"pure "(Ex. xxv. 11). Id opposition to these,
" beaten gold " (WITC 't) is probably mixed
gold ; LXX. iKaris ; used of Solomon's shields
(1 K. x. 16).
2. T13D (<c€I/»^Xiof), treasured, i>. fine gold
(1 K. vi. 20, vii. 49, &c.). Many names of pre-
cious substances in Hebrew come from roots
signifying concealment, as }1DBD (Gen. xliii. 23,
A. V. " treasnrt ").
3. tB, pure or native gold (Job xxviii. 17 ;
Cant. v. 15 ; probably from ttB, to separate).
liosenmiiller (Alterthumsk. iv. p. 49) makes it
come from a Syriac root meaning solid or massy;
but lifTD (2 Ch. ix. 17) corresponds to TWO
(1 K. x* 18). The LXX. render it by x/fet
rtfuot, xp""^ " &rv?or (Is. xiii. 12; Theodot.
&Tttp9uv: cp. Thuc. ii. 13; Plin. xxxiii. 19,
obrussa). In Ps. cxix. 127, the LXX. render it
rtnrd(ioy (A. V. "fine gold"); but Schleusner
happily conjectures to xdfrov, the Hebrew word
being adopted to aroid the repetition of xpuo-o'j
(Thes. s. v. ToVaf; Hesych. s. v. irifrov).
4. "IV3, gold earth, or a mass of raw ore (Job
xxii. 24, iwvpoy, A.V. " gold," R.V. " treasure ").
The poetical names for gold are : —
1. DH3 (also implying something concealed) ;
LXX. xpvaiov ; and in Is. xiii. 12, \t8os m\u-
rt\J)s. In Job xxxvii. 22, it is rendered in A.V.
"fair weather," K. V. "golden splendour;"
LXX. »4<pT) xfoauyovvra. (Cp. Zech. iv. 12.)
2. fnn = " dug out " (Prov. viii. 10), a
general name, which has become special, Ps.
Ixviii. 13 (A. V. and R. V. " yellow gold "), where
it cannot mean gems, as some suppose (Bochart,
Jfieroz. ii. 9). Michaelis connects the word
chants with the Greek xpvfa-
Gold was known from the very earliest times
(Gen. ii. 11). Pliny attributes the discovery of
it (at Mount Pangaeus), and the art of working
it, to Cadmus (//. -V. vii. 57) ; and his statement
is adopted by Clemens Alexandrinus {Strom.
i. 363, ed. Pott.). It was at first chiefly used
for ornaments, &c. (Gen. xxiv. 22) ; and although
Abraham is said to have been " very rich in
cattle, in silver, and in gold " (Gen. xiii 2), yet
no mention of it, as used in purchases, is made
till after his return from Egypt. Coined money
was not known to the ancients (e.j. Horn. ft.
vii. 473) till a comparatively late period ; and
on the Egyptian tombs gold is represented as
being weighed in rings for commercial purposes
(cp. Gen. xliii. 21). No coins are found in the
ruins of Egypt or Assyria (Layard's Nin. ii. 418).
"Even so late as the time of David gold was
not used as a standard of value, but was con-
sidered merely as a very precious article of
commerce, and was weighed like other articles "
(Jahn, Arch. BiM. § 115, 1 Ch. xxi. 25).
Gold was extremely abundant in ancient times
(1 Ch. xxii 14 ; 2 Ch. i. 15, ix. 9 ; Nah. ii. 9 ;
Dan. iii. 1); but this did not depreciate its
value, because of the enormous quantities con-
sumed by the wealthy in furniture, &c. (1 K.
vi. 22, x. passim ; Cant. iii. 9, 10 ; Esth. i. 6 ;
Jer. x. 9 : cp. Horn. Od. xix. 55 ; Herod, ix. 82).
Probably, too, the art of gilding was known
extensively, being applied even to the battle-
GOLGOTHA.
ments of a city (Herod, i. 98 ; and other autho-
rities quoted by Layard, ii. 264).
The chief countries mentioned as producing
gold are Arabia, Sheba, and Ophir (1 K. ix. 28.
x. 1 ; Job xxviii. 16 : in Job xxii. 24, the word
Ophir is used for gold). Gold is not found in
Arabia now (Niebuhr's Travels, p. 141), but it
used to be (Artemidor. ap. Strab. xri. 3, 18,
where he speaks of an Arabian river if/Trf/M
Xfveov Karatpfpuv). Diodorus also says that it
was found there native ((urvpov) in good-sized
nuggets (fiuXipia). Some suppose that Ophir
was an Arabian jwrt to which gold was brought
(cp. 2 Ch. ii. 7, ix. 10). Other gold-bearing
countries were Uphaz (Jer. x. 9; Dan. .\. ;'>)
and Parraim (2 Ch. iii. 6).
Metallurgic processes are mentioned in Ps.
lxvi. 10, Prov. xvii. 3, xxvii. 21; and in I*,
xlvi. 6, the trade of goldsmith (cp. .ludg. xvii. 4.
*1"1S) is alluded to in connexion with the over-
laying of idols with gold-leaf (Rosenmuller's
Minerals of Script, pp. 46-51). [Handicraft.]
[K. W. F.]
GOLDSMITH. [Handicraft.]
GOL'GOTHA (ro\yo$a; Golgotha), the
Hebrew name of the spot at which our Lord
was crucified (Matt, xxvii. 33 ; Mark xv. 22 ;
John xix. 17). By these three Evangelists it is
interpreted to mean the " place of a skull." St.
Luke, in accordance with his practice in other
cases (cp. Gabbatha, Gethsemane, &c), oiuit*
the Hebrew term and gives only its Greek
equivalent, xoaviov. The word Calvary, which
in Luke xxiii. 33 is retained in the A. V. from
the Vulgate, as the rendering of Kpavlov, ob-
scures the statement of St. Luke, whose words
are really as in R. V. — " the place which is
called 'the skull"' — not, as in the other
Gospels, Kfxwiov, " of a skull ; " thus employing
the Greek term exactly as they do the Hebrew
one. This Hebrew, or rather Chaldee, term,
was doubtless HFQ&bi, Gulaolta, in pure He-
brew n?j^i (see MY*."), applied to the skull
on account of its round globular form, that
being the idea at the root of the word.
Two explanations of the name are given : (1)
that it was a spot where executions ordinarily
took place, and therefore abounded in skulls :
but according to the Jewish law these must
have been buried, and therefore were no more
likely to confer a name on the spot than any
other part of the skeleton. In this case too the
Greek should be toVot Kpanlav, "of skulls,"
instead of Kpaylov, "of a skull," still less "the
skull " as in the Hebrew, and in the Greek of
St. Luke. Or (2) it may come from the look or
form of the spot itself, bald, round, and skull-like
(the French Cluxumont : Renan, I'. de J. p. 269),
and therefore a mound or hillock, in accordance
with the common phrase —for which there is no
direct authority — "Mount Calvary."* Which-
ever of these is the correct explanation — and
there is apparently no means of deciding with
• The Bordeaux Pilgrim Is the tat to call It Mrnti-
culm Golgotha (Ittn. Hieroe.); and It is possible that
the term " Mount " origin >ted In the artificial fsolatioo
of the rock at "Calvary" in the Church of the Holy
Sepulchre (Hayter Lewis, Chunhis <lf Comtantiiu at
Jcruialm, p. xiv. note).
Digitized by
Google
GOLIATH
certainty — Golgotha seems to have been a known
spot. This is to be gathered from the way in
which it is mentioned in the Gospels, each except
St. Matthew* having the definite article — " the
place Golgotha " — " the place which is called
a skull " — " the place (A. V. omits the article)
called of, or after, a skull." It was " outside the
gate," *{• Tijj *i\i)s (Heb. xiii. 12: cp. Matt.
xrriii. 1 1 ; Lev. xxiv. 14 ; Xum. xv. 35, 30 ; Deut.
xvii. 5), but close to the city, tyybs rijj
woKims (John xix. 20); apparently near a
thoroughfare on which there were passers-by
(Matt, xivii. 39 ; Mark xv. 29). This road or
path led out of the " country "• (irypis : Mark
xv. 21 ; Luke xxiii. 26). It was visible " from
afar" (Mark xv. 40), or " afar off" (Luke xxiii.
49) ; and it may perhaps be inferred from a
comparison of Matt, xxvii. 41, Mark xv. 29, with
John xviii. 28, that it was within sight of the
Temple. It was probably the ordinary spot for
executions. Why should it hare been otherwise ?
To those at least who carried the sentence into
effect, Christ was but an ordinary criminal ; and
there is not a word to indicate that the soldiers
in " leading Him away " went to any other than
the usual place for what must have been a
common operation. However, in the place (eV
ry tot?) itself — at the very spot — was a garden
or orchard (rrpros) within which was a new
tomb, " wherein was never man yet laid."
These are all the indications of the nature and
situation of Golgotha which present themselves
in the X. T. Its locality in regard to Jerusalem
is fully examined in the description of the city.
[Jerusalem.]
A tradition at one time prevailed that Adam
was buried on Golgotha, that from his skull it
derived its name, and that at the Crucifixion
the drops of Christ's blood fell on the skull and
raised Adam to life, whereby the ancient pro-
phecy quoted by St. Paul in Ephes. v. 14 received
its fulfilment — " Awake thou Adam that steep-
est," — so the old Versions appear to have run —
" and arise from the dead, for Christ shall touch
the**' — (fenfia&rci for ivupaio-ti). See Jerome,
Cumin, on Matth. xxvii. 33, and the quotation in
Keland, Pal. p. 860 ; also Epiphanius, Adv. Haer.
xlvi. 5 ; Saewulf, in Early Travellers, p. 39 ; and
the quotations from Basil, &c. in Mislin (ii. 304,
305). The skull commonly introduced in early
pictures of the Crucifixion refers to this.
A connexion has been supposed to exist be-
tween Goath and Golgotha, but at the best this
is mere conjecture, and there is not in the
original the same similarity between the two
names — fl$H and NJTO/J — which exists in their
English or Latin garb, and which probably
occasioned the suggestion. [G.] [W.]
GOLTATH (fl^3 J ToXicJO ; Goliah), a famous
giant of Gath, who " morning and evening for
forty days " defied the armies of Israel (1 Sam.
xvii.). He was possibly descended from the old
Rephaim, of whom a scattered remnant took
refuge with the Philistines after their dispersion
by the Ammonites (Deut. ii. 20, 21 ; 2 Sam.
xxi. 22). Some trace of this condition may be
preserved in the giant's name, if it be connected
GOLIATH
1205
» St. Matthew, too, has the article In B.
• But the Vulgate has it villa.
with Twi, " to wander." Simonis, however, de-
rives it from an Arabic word meaning " stout "
(Ges. Thes. s. v.). His height was "six cubits and
a span," which, taking the cubit at 21 inches,
would make him 10} feet high. But the LXX.
and Josephus read "four cubits and a span "
(1 Sam. xvii. 4 ; Joseph. Ant. vi. 9, § 1). This
will make him about the same size as the royal
champion slain by Antimenidas, brother of
Alcaeua (iaroXtlxovra /iiav fuSroy irax<W eWo
wi/iruv, ap. Strab. xiii. p. 617, with M tiller's
emendation). Even on this computation Goliath
would be, as Josephus calls him, ayi/p waft/u-
•ftOiorceros — a truly enormous man.
The circumstances of the combat are in all
respects Homeric ; free from any of the puerile
legends which Oriental imagination subsequently
introduced into it, — as for instance that the
stones used by David called out to him from the
brook, " By our means you shall slay the
giant," &c (Hottinger, Hist. Orient, i. 3,
p. Ill sq.; D'Herbelot, s. v. Gialut). The
fancies of the Rabbis are yet more extraordinary.
After the victory David cut off Goliath's head
(1 Sam. xvii. 51 ; cp. Herod, iv. 6 ; Xenoph.
Anab. v. 4, § 17 : Xiebuhr mentions a similar
custom among the Arabs, Descr. ; Winer, $. ».),
which he brought to Jerusalem (probably after
his accession to the throne, Ewald, Of sell. iii. 94),
while he hung the armour in his tent.
The scene of this famous combat was the Val-
ley of the Terebinth, between Shochoh and Aze-
kah, probably among the western passes of Ben-
jamin, although a confused modern tradition has
given the name oi'AinJahlood (spring of Goliath)
to the spring of Harod, or " trembling" (Stanley,
p. 342; Judg. vii. 1). [Elah, Valley or.]
In 2 Sam. xxi. 19, we find that another Goliath
of Gath, of whom it is also said that " the staff
of his spear was like a weaver's beam," was
slain by Elhanan, also a Bethlehemite. St.
Jerome (Quacst. Hebr. ad loc.) makes the un-
likely conjecture that Elhanan was another name
of David. The A. V. here interpolates the
words "the brother of," from 1 Ch. xx. 5,
where this giant is called " Lahmi." This will
be found fully examined under Elhanan.
In the title of the Psalm added to the Psalter
in the LXX. we find t$ Aam5 wpbs rbr roAicfS ;
and although the allusions are vague, it is
perhaps possible that this Psalm may have been
written after the victory. This Psalm is given
at length under David, p. 724. It is strange
that we find no more definite allusions to this
combat in Hebrew poetry ; but it is the opinion
of some that the song now attributed to Hannah
(1 Sam. ii. 1-10) was originally written in com-
memoration of David's triumph on this occasion
(Thenius, Die HUchcr Sam. p. 8 : cp. Bertholdt,
Einl. iii. 915 ; Ewald, Poet. Biiclter des A. B.
i. 111. Cp. Driver, Notes on the Heb. Text of
the BB. of Sam., p. 21).
By the Mohammedans Saul and Goliath are
called Talut and G'alut (see Koran), perhaps
for the sake of the hoinoioteleuton, of which
they are so fond (Hottinger, Hist. Orient, i. 3,
p. 28). Abulfeda mentions a Canaanite king
of the name G'alut (Hist. Antcislam. p. 176,
in Winer, s. v.) ; and, according to Ahmed al
Fassi, Gialout was a dynastic name of the old
giant -chiefs (D'Herbelot, s. v. Falasthin).
[GiAirrs.] [r*. W. F.]
Digitized by
Google
1206
GOMER
GOTtfEB ("IDs; ra/i4p; Gomer.) 1. The
son of Japheth, and the father of Ashkenaz,
Kiphath, and Tpgarmah (Gen. x. 2, 3). His
name is subsequently noticed but once (Ezek.
xxxviii. 6; Vofiip) as an ally or subject of the
Scythian king Gog. He is generally recognised
as the progenitor of the early Cimmerians,
thongh no longer as that of the later Cimbri
and the other branches of the Celtic family,
and of the modern Gael and Cymry (Delitzsch
[1887] on Gen. /. c). The Cimmerians, when
first known to us, occupied the Tauric Cher-
sonese, where tbey left traces of their presence
in the ancient names, Cimmerian Bosporus,
Cimmerian Isthmus, Mount Cimmerium, the
district Cimmeria, and particularly the Cim-
merian walls (Her. iv. 12, 45, 100; Aesch.
Prom. Yinct. 729), and in the modern name
Crimea. They forsook this abode under the
pressure of the Scythian tribes, and during the
early part of the 7th century B.c. they poured
orer the western part of Asia Minor, committing
immense devastation, and defying for more than
half a century the power of the Lydian kings.
They were finally expelled by Alyattes, with
the exception of a few, who settled at Sinope
and Antandrus. It was about the same period
that Ezekiel noticed them (Assyr. Gimir), as
acting in conjunction with Armenia (Togarmah)
and Magog (Scythia). The connexion between
Gomer and Armenia is supported by the tradi-
tion, preserved by Moses of Chorene (i. 11), that
Gamir was the ancestor of the Haichian kings
of the latter country. After the expulsion of
the Cimmerians from Asia Minor, their name
alone survived in a few geographical relics.
Various other conjectures have been hazarded
on the subject : Bochart (Phaleg, iii. 81) identi-
fies the name on etymological grounds with
Phrygia; Wahl (Asian, i. 274) and Lagarde
(Armen. Send. § 448) propose Cappadocia, the
Armenian name of which was Gamir (see MV.",
Dillmann, 4 and Delitzsch on Gen. /. c).
2. The daughter of Diblaim, and concubine of
Hosea (i. 3). [W. L. B.] [F.]
GOMOB'BAH (rnbl{, 'AmBrah, perhaps =
submersion, from ~\OV, an unused root ; in
Arabic -»P> ghamar, is " to overwhelm with
water ; " ToiUfta ; Gomorrha), one of the five
"cities of the plain," or "vale of Siddim,"
that under their respective kings joined battle
there with Chedorlaomer (Gen. xiv. 2-8) and
his allies, by whom they were discomfited till
Abram came to the rescue. Four out of the five
were afterwards destroyed by the Lord with fire
from heaven (Gen. xix. 23-29). One of them
only, Zoar or Bela, which was its original name,
was spared at the request of Lot, in order that
he might take refuge there. Of these Gomorrah
seems to have been only second to Sodom in
importance, as well as in the wickedness that
led to their overthrow. What that atrocity was
may be gathered from Gen. xix. 4-8. Their
miserable fate is held up as a warning to the
children of Israel (Deut. xxix. 23); as a pre-
cedent for the destruction of Babylon (Is. xiii.
19 and Jer. 1. 40), of Edom (Jer. xlix. 18), of
Moab (Zeph. ii. 9), and even of Israel (Amos iv.
11). By St. Peter in the N. T., and by St. Jude
GOMOBBAH
(2 Pet. ii. 6; Jude, tm. 4-7), it is made "an
ensample unto those that after should live un-
godly," or "deny Christ." Similarly their
wickedness rings as a proverb throughout the
prophecies (e.g. Deut. xxxii. 32; Is. i. 9, 10;
Jer. xxiii. 14; cp. Rom. ix. 29). Jerusalem
herself is there unequivocally called Sodom, and
her people Gomorrah, for their enormities ; just
in the same way that the corruptions of the
Church of Rome have caused her to be called
Babylon. On the other hand, according to the
N. T., there is a sin which exceeds even that of
Sodom and Gomorrah ; that, namely, of which
Tyre and Sidon, Capernaum, Chorazin, and Beth-
saida were guilty, when they " repented not,"
in spite of "the mighty works" which they
had witnessed (Matt. x. 15); and Si. Mark has
ranged under the same category all those who
would not receive the preaching of the Apostles
(vi. 11).
Gomorrah is first mentioned, with Sodom,
Admah, and Zeboiim, as belonging to the
Canaanites (Gen. x. 19) ; and next in connexion
with the separation of Abram and Lot (Gen. xiii.
10). Its approximate geographical position is
clear if no evidence but that of the earliest
records contained in the Bible be accepted.
The " cities of the plain " were in the Ciccar, or
plain of Jordan, and were eastward of and
visible from the heights between Bethel and Ai
(Gen. xiii. 10-12). They must therefore have
been situated in the Jordan valley, near the
northern end of the Dead Sea (PEFQy. Stat.
1869-70, p. 125). A careful examination, by ex-
perienced geologists, of the country between the
Dead Sea and the Gulf of 'Akabah, has shown
that the opinion long current, that the overthrow
of the cities was caused by the convulsion which
formed the Dead Sea, and that they were sub-
merged in the lake, is untenable. The country
must have assumed its present form long before
the advent of man upon the earth, and during the
Pluvial period the Jordan valley was filled by a
great lake, whose waters once stood about 1400 ft.
above the present surface of the Dead Sea, and
gradually subsided until they reached the level
at which they now stand, — 1292 ft. below the
Mediterranean (Hull, PEF. Geological Me-
moir, and Mount Seir; Lartet, Essai sur la Geo-
logie de la Palestine). The expression, " the vale
of Siddim (the same is the Salt Sea)" (Gen. xiv.
3), would almost seem to indicate a knowledge
of the former existence of the lake (cp. Jos.
Ant. i. 9), though it must have shrunk very
nearly to its existing dimensions long before
Sodom and Gomorrah were overthrown. There
can have been no permanent rise in the level of
the water, such as that implied by the sub-
mergence of the cities, and the presence ofwster
is not mentioned in the description of the
catastrophe (Gen. xix.). The later passages
speak of the district in which the cities were
situated as being still visible, and this agrees
with the statement of Josephus (P. J. iv. 8, § 4).
Their destruction is expressly attributed to the
brimstone and fire rained upon them from heaven
(Gen. xix. 24; see also Deut. xxix. 23, «nd
Zeph. ii. 9 ; also St. Peter and St. Jude before
cited). And St. Jerome (OS* p. 148, 31) says el
Sodom, "civitas impiorum divino igne consumpt"
iuxta mare mortuum." The whole subject i*
'ably handled by Cellarius (ap. Ugol. Thesanr. vu.
Digitized by
Google
GOMORRAH
pp. dccxxxix.-lxxviii.), though it is not always
necessary to agree with his conclusions. [Sodom.]
There is, perhaps, more to be said for the
view, that the cities were at the south end of
the Dead Sea. A town called Zoar is placed in
this direction by Josephus (B. /. iv. 8, § 4) and
by Eusebius (OS.' p. 261, 36 ; p. 299, 85) ; and
the latter states that, in his time, it had a
Roman garrison, and was to the south of
Nimrim (08* p. 231, 13; p. 284, 32). The
Arab geographers also place Sughar, or Zwjhar,
"the city of Lot," at the south end of the
Dead Sea (Le Strange, l'al. under the Moslems,
pp. 286-292); and this place, the Seger of
the historians of the Crusades, is probably
identical with the Zoar of Eusebius. There
is, however, no necessary identity between
the Zoar of Josephus, Jerome, the Arab geo-
graphers, and the Crusaders, and the Zoar of
Lot ; and there are good grounds for believing
that they were not the same place [Zoar]. The
latest exponent of the above theory, M. Clermont-
Ganneau, places Sodom at Usdum ; Zoar in the
Gltor es-Safi ; and Gomorrah at 'Am Ohamr, in
the 'Arabah about 20 leagues south of the Dead
Sea (PEFQy. Stat. 1886, 19-21: cp. Baedeker-
Socin, Hbk. p. 288, Kng. ed. ; Sepp, i. 813 sq.).
The expression "plain of Jordan," so frequently
used to indicate the position of Gomorrah and its
companion cities, is quite incompatible with the
view that they were at the south end of the
Dead Sea ; nor was this view generally adopted
by the earlier pilgrims to Palestine. S. Silvia
(circ. aj>. 385) places Segor (Zoar) and " the land
of the Sodomites" close to Mount Nebo, and
says that Segor, which then had a Bishop, was
6 miles from the Dead Sea (Per. ad L. 8. pp. 41,
42). Antoninus (circ. 570) states that Segor
was near the spot, 8 miles from Jordan, where
Moses died, and that the Jordan fell into the
Dead Sea below Sodom and Gomorrah (De L. S.
x., xxiv.); and Theodosius (circ. 530) connects
the two cities, and the pillar of Lot's wife, with
the point at which the Jordan enters the lake
(De Situ T. 8. xviii., xix.). Arculf also speaks
of the Southern Zoar as " Z. of Arabia," as if it
were distinct from the Z. of Lot (De Loc.
Sand. ii. 16). Amongst mediaeval pilgrims
Thietmar (Iter ad T. S.) places the cities east
of Jordan.
Sir G. Grove appears to have been the first in
modern times to point out [Sodom] that, ac-
cording to the terms of the ancient history, the
cities stood at the north end of the Dead Sea ;
and this view has been very generally accepted
in this country and America (Hull, Mount Seir,
p. 165; Dawson, Egypt and Syria, pp. 110-114;
Conder, Beth and Moab, pp. 149, 150; Geikie,
//. L. and the Bible, ii. 119; Merrill, East of
Jordan, pp. 232 sq. ; Harper, Bible and Modern
Discovery, pp. 20 sq.). It seems clear, from
the short time that it took Lot to reach Zoar
(Gen. xix. 15, 23), that the cities were east
of Jordan, and probably not far from the foot
of the Moabite hills. Here at any rate are
an old site called Tell esh-Shdghur, which
meets the requirements of Zoar and perhaps
retains a trace of its same (PEF. Mem. East.
Pal. p. 239); a Kh. Bel'ath, possibly the
"Bala" of Eusebius (». p. 147); and a Wddy
'Amr, close to the Dead Sea, in a very probable
site for Gomorrah (i'6. p. 252). It may be inferred
GOPHER WOOD
1207
from Gen. xix. 27, 28, that the overthrow of
the cities was not accompanied by an earthquake
or other violent convulsion of nature, and an
interesting yet simple explanation of the manner
in which they were destroyed has been suggested
by Sir J. W. Dawson. He supposes that, at
the time referred to, accumulations of inflam-
mable gas and petroleum existed below the
plain of Siddim, and that the escape of these
through the opening of a fissure along the old
line of fault might have produced the effects
described — namely, a pillar of smoke rising up
to heaven, burning bitumen and sulphur raining
on the doomed cities, and fire spreading over the
ground. The attendant phenomenon of the
evolution of saline waters, implied in the de-
struction of Lot's wife, would be a natural
accompaniment, as water is always discharged
in such eruptions ; and In this case it would be
a brine thick with mud, and .fitted to encrust
and cover any object reached by it (Egypt and
Syria, p. 112). [E. S. Ff.] [W.]
GOMO'RRHA, the manner in which the
name Gomorrah is spelt in the E. V. of the
Apocryphal books and the N. Testament, follow-
ing the Greek form of the word, To/ii^a
(2 Esd. ii. 8; Matt. x. 15 ; Mark vi. 11 ; Bom.
ix. 29 ; Jude 7 ; 2 Pet. ii. 6).
GOPHER WOOD. Only once in Gen. vi. 14.
The Heb. "I§j »W, " trees of Gopher," does not
occur in the cognate dialects. The A. V. and
K. V. have made no attempt at translation ;
Coverdale renders " Pyne trees ; " the LXX. ({vXa
TtTpdymva) and Vulgate (ligna laevigata) —
elicited by metathesis of "I and t| (TDJ=*|"ij),
the former having reference to square blocks, cut
by the axe, the latter to planks smoothed by the
plane — have not found much favour with modern
commentators.
The conjectures of cedar (Ibn Ezra, Onk.,
Jonath. and Rabbins generally), xcood most proper
to float (Kimchi), the Greek KttftXirri (Jun.,
Tremell., Bnxt.), pine (Avenar., Munst.), tur-
pentine (Castalio), are little better than gratui-
tous. The rendering cedar has been defended by
Pelletier, who refers to the great abundance
of this tree in Asia, and the durability of its
timber.
The Mohammedan equivalent is sag, by which
Herbelot understands the Indian plane-tree.
Two principal conjectures, however, have been
proposed : — 1. By Is. Vossius (Diss, de LXX.
Interp. c. 12) that T^i = ")^b, resin; whence
'i '¥£, meaning any trees of the resinous kind,
such as pine, fir, &c. 2. By Fuller (Miscell.
Sic. iv. 5), Bochart (Phaleg, i. 4), Celsius
(Hierobot. pt. i. p. 328), Hass (Entdechmgen,
pt. ii. p. 78), that Gopher is cypress, in favour
of which opinion (adopted by Ges. Lex.) they
adduce the similarity in sound of gopher and
cypress (xvitip = yo$ip), the suitability of the
cypress for ship-building, and the fact that
this tree abounded in Babylonia, and more
particularly in Adiabene, where it supplied
Alexander with timber for a whole fleet (Arrian.
vii. 161, ed. Steph.).
A tradition is mentioned in Eutychius (Annals,
p. 34) to the effect that the Ark was made of
the wood Sadj, by which is probably meant not
the ebony, but the Junipenu oxycedrus, a species
Digitized by
Google
1208
GORGIAS
GOSHEN
of cypress (Bochart and Cels. ; Rosenmiiller,
Bchol. ad Gen. vi. 14, and Alterthumsk. vol. iv.
pt. 1). [T. E. B.]
GOR'GIAS (Vopylas), .a general in the ser-
vice of Antiochus Epiphanes (1 Mace. iii. 38,
byfyp cWarbs twv $l\uv rod fiao~i\4os ; cp. 2
Mace. viii. 9), who was appointed by his regent
I.ysias to a command in the expedition against
Judaea B.C. 16G, in which he was defeated by
Judas Maccabaeus with great loss (1 Mace. iv.
1 sc|.). At a later time (n.c. 164) he held a
garrison in Jamnia, and defeated the forces of
Joseph and Azarias, who attacked hiin contrary
to the orders of Judas (1 Mace. v. 56 sq. ;
Joseph. Ant. xii. 8, § 6 ; 2 Mace. xii. 32). The
account of Gorgias in 2 Mace, is very obscure.
He is represented there as acting in a military
capacity (2 Mace. x. 14, crTpemryos tw to-
*••»» [?J, hardly of Coele-Syria, as Grimm [/. c]
takes it), apparently in concert with the Idu-
maeans ; and afterwards he is described, accord-
ing to the present text, as " governor of ldumea "
(2 Mace. xii. 32 ; cp. Zdckler), though it is pos-
sible (Grotius, Grimm, /. c.) that the reading is an
error for " governor of Jamnia " (E. V. marg.
Joseph. Ant. xii. 8, § 6, t tijj 'la/wti^s irrpa
riryox). The hostility of the Je« s towards him
is described in strong terms (2 Mace. xii. 35, roy
Kardparoy, E. V. " that cursed man ") ; and
while his success is only noticed in passing, his
defeat and flight are given in detail, though con-
fusedly (2 Mace. xii. 34—38 ; cp. Joseph. /. c).
The name itself was borne by one of Alex-
ander's generals, and occurs at later times among
the eastern Greeks. [B. F. W.]
GORTY'NA (Ifyrvmu ; in classical writers,
Tiprvya or ropriv), a city of Crete, and in
ancient times its most important city, next to
Cnossus. The only direct Biblical interest of Gor-
tyna is in the fact that it appears from 1 Mace.
xv. 23 to have contained Jewish residents.
[Crete.] The circumstance alluded to in this
passage took place in the reign of Ptolemy Phy-
scon ; and it is possible that the Jews had in-
creased in Crete during the reign of his prede-
cessor Ptolemy Philometor, who received many
of them into Egypt, and who also rebuilt some
parts of Gortyna (Strabo, x. p. 478). This city
was nearly half-way between the eastern and
western extremities of the island; and it is
worth while to notice that it was near Fair
Havens; so that St. Paul may possibly have
preached the Gospel there, when on his voyage
to Home (Acts xxvii. 8, 9). Gortyna seems to
hare been the capital of the island under the
Romans. For the remains on the old site and
in the neighbourhood, see the Museum of Classi-
cal Antiquities, ii. 277-286, and Spratt, Travels
and Researches in Crete. [J. S. H.] [W.]
GOSHEN. 1. ($J ; r«W ft r.erJ^ 'Apo/Jfoi
r«<r«V; Qessen; T6C6M), a word of uncertain
etymology, the name of a part of Egypt where
the Israelites dwelt for the whole period of their
sojourn in that country. It is usually called the
"land of Goshen" (JC*! f^B), but also " Goshen "
simply. It appears to have borne another name,
DPDri t"TK, the " land of Rameses" (Gen. xlvii.
11). ' The first mention of Goshen is in Joseph's
message to his father (Gen. xlv. 10), " Thou shalt
dwell in the land of Goshen, end thou shalt be
near unto me." This shows that the territory was
near the residence of the king. According to
the Christian tradition as related by Syncellus,
the king under whose reign Joseph was raised
I to his high position is said to have been Apophis
(Apepi), known as one of the Hyksos or Shepherd
kings. It is therefore near the cities which
have preserved traces of the Hyksos that we are
to look for the site of Goshen. These cities are
Tanis and Bubastis, in the Eastern Delta, in
both of which the name of Apophis has been
discovered.
We have not much information in Scripture
as to the nature and size of Goshen ; however,
when those scanty data are supplemented by
recent discoveries, we may have a fair idea of
what it was.
The second mention of the name of Goshen is
in this passage (Gen. xlvi. 28, 29) : " And Jacok
sent Judali before him unto Joseph, to show the
way before him unto Goshen; and they came
into the land of Goshen. And Joseph made ready
his chariot, and went up to meet Israel his father
unto Goshen." This shows clearly that Goshen
was in the eastern part of Egypt, on the way
from the capital, whatever it was, towards
Palestine. In the first of these verses the
Septuagint has an important variant: ovyavrrjaat
curry icaO* 'Hpuuv w6\iy «ti friv *Pa/i«r<ri). Thus
the entrance into Goshen is said to be near Hero-
opolis (v. Pithoji), and the two names Goshen and
Rameses are considered as equivalent. Their
identity is confirmed in the next chapter (xlvii.
6), where Pharaoh says to Joseph, " In the best of
the land make thy father and thy brethren to
dwell, in the land of Goshen let them dwell;"
while the execution of the order is related thus
(t>. 11): "And Joseph placed his father and his
brethren, and gave them a possession in the best
of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh
had commanded."
The advice that Joseph gave his brethren as to
their conduct towards Pharaoh further character-
ises the territory (Gen. xlvi. 33, 34) : " And it
shall come to pass, when Pharaoh shall call you,
and shall say, What is your occupation ? that ye
shall say, Thy servants have been keepers of
cattle from our youth even until now, both we
and our fathers ; that ye may dwell in the
! land of Goshen : for every shepherd is an abonii-
I nation unto the Egyptians." It was a land of
l pasture, particularly well adapted for shep-
I herds bringing with them large flocks. This is
| the sense in which must be construed the ex-
| pression " the best of the land." It does not
mean the most fruitful, or the most productive,
but the most favourable for the feeding of cattle.
The nearly unanimous tradition as to the exact
site of Goshen has located it in the eastern
part of the Delta, on the way to Palestine and
Syria. Already the book of Judith mentions it
with two places on the eastern frontier, and
below Memphis (Judith i. 9: ml Ttupris xoi
'Pafutrajj ko! tiwov yrjr r«ff«V, e«M too Mti'
iwiyu TdVctui ical Mtfuptus). The Arab authors
generally assign as the site of Goshen localities
at the entrance of the present Widy Tumeylit,
the valley going towards the Red Sea, and where
is now the Freshwater Canal. The two Arab
translators of Genesis, Saadiah and Aboo Said,
employ invariably for Goshen the word Sadir,
Digitized by
Google
GOSHEN
which the two French scholars, Quatremere and
Silvestre de Sacy, have determined to be a region
about Abbasah, between the present cities of
Zagazig, Belbeis, and Tell-el-Kebir. Makrizi
points very nearly to the same place, when he
says that Belbeis is the land of Goshen mentioned
in the Pentateuch.
Belbeis, considered as the centre of the land of
Goshen, already occurs in the narrative of the
famous Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela in the 7th
century, who says that the land of Goshen is
the city of Bolsir-Salbis (Belbeis), " a large city
where there are three thousand Jews." This
tradition lasted down to the 17th century,
when the celebrated traveller Pietro della Valle
visited Egypt. He describes Belbeis as an im-
portant place, where there are a few hieroglyphi-
cal inscriptions, and which is said by the Jews to
be the land of Goshen. He adds that it is the more
probable, as the place was on the way to Palestine,
and most hare been a district favourable to the
grazing of cattle.
If the region around Belbeis was the original
land of Goshen, it was certainly not sufficient to
contain a large population ; the Israelites must
hare spread to the north and south, and the
name probably extended also with them. There-
fore most of the authors, especially Ebcrs, have
considered Goshen as being the land east of the
Tanitic branch, as far as Memphis in the south ;
the present province of Sharkieh.
On (Heliopolis) is often mentioned as belonging
to the land of Goshen. It occurs first in the
Septuagiut, in the passage (Ex. i. 11) which
describes the persecution of the Israelites in
Goshen, and which reads in Hebrew, "They
built for Pharaoh store cities, Pithom and
Raamses." Here the Greek Version adds to
Pithom and Raamses a third city : " On, which
is Heliopolis." Josephus endorses this view
(Ant. Jud. ii. 188, ed. Niese), and, relating the
arrival of Jacob in Egypt, says that " Pharaoh
allowed him to dwell with his children in Helio-
polis" (<rvvtx<ipni<rev airriji fljr utrtk rmv t(kvwv
ip 'HAiovs-o'Aci). We shall see further that the
connexion between Heliopolis and Gosheu exists
in the hieroglyphical inscriptions.
In the Septuagint the name Goshen is usually
translated by Ttoip 'ApaPias. Sereral authors
since Cellarius have observed that this addition
indicated that Goshen was situate in what was
called under the Greek kings the name of Arabia,
mentioned by the geographer Ptolemy, and
having as capital Phacusa. A confirmation of
this view was found lately in the narratire of
the pilgrimage of a woman to Egypt and the
Holy Land made in the 4th century. This
document speaks repeatedly of the nome and
the city of Arabia as being the land of Goshen,
terra Gate.
Let us now turn to the hieroglyphical in-
scriptions. We find there that the nome which
Brugsch has determined to be the nome of
Arabia, the twentieth in the lists of Lower
Egypt, contains a city and a region of the name
of Keiem, sometimes abbreviated as Kes, which
has generally been considered as the Egyptian
equivalent of Goshen. This last form Kes is
preserved in the second syllable of the word
Phacusa, which thus is found to contain the
radical of Goshen, as the Dutch scholar Van der
Hardt had conjectured, at the end of the last
GOSHEN
1209
century ; the radical being preceded either by
the Egyptian article pa, or by the word pa,
which means " a house " or " a temple."
The ruins of the city of Kesem or Kes,
Phacusa, lie under a village of recent date,
called Saft el Henneh, about 6 miles east of
Zagazig, and at the same distance from Belbeis.
Until this century the place belonged to the
province of which Belbeis was the capital, and
this reminds us of the various traditions quoted
above, assigning Belbeis as the site of Goshen.
The nome of Arabia was called in Egyptian
Sopt, from the name of its god, a warlike
divinity, taking various forms, the most ancient
of which is a man wearing two feathers on his
head and holding a sceptre. It is interesting to
notice that the Arabian nome is of late forma-
tion, and that it did not exist as an indepeudent
nome at the time of the 19th Dynasty.
Under Seti I., the father of Kameses II., it still
was part of the nome of Heliopolis, and was
watered by its canal. Thus, when the Hebrews
came and settled in Goshen, it was not an
organised province occupied by an agricultural
population ; it was part of the marshland called
the water of Ha, in which the city of Bailos
(Belbeis) was situate. It could be given by the
king to foreigners, without des|>oiling the
native population. It must have been some-
thing very like the borders of the present
Sharkieh, north of Fakoos, where the Bedouins
hare their camps of black tents and graze
their large flocks of cattle. The name the
vater of Ra may have been the origin of 'Ain
Slums, a name which is often found in con-
nexion with the sojourn of the Israelites in
Egypt. There the small city of Bailos (Belbeis)
was built, near which king Menephtah, who is
considered to be the king of the Exodus, relates
that he fought a great battle against foreign
invaders. It is curious that, speaking of the
region around it, he says, " that it was not
cultivated, but left as pasture for cattle because
of the strangers."
The 'excavations made in that part of the
Delta hare shown that Bubastis, the ruins of
which exist near the city of Zagazig, was a
large and important town, already under the
Hyksos, and later under Rameses II. Apepi,
the king of Joseph, certainly resided in that city,
where he left important monuments ; and the
same must have been the case at least occasion-
ally, under Rameses II. and Menephtah, judging
from the size of their constructions there, and by
the fact that Bubastis was the key of the road
to Syria. If the kings resided there, in the
immediate vicinity of Gosheu, it makes the
narratire of Scripture more intelligible, in
shortening considerably the distance between
Joseph and the settlement of his brethren; or
between the king and the Hebrews, in the
period preceding the Exodus.
In conclusion, we may say that the original
land of Goshen, the land allotted to Jacob and
his sons, was a territory between Tell-el-Kebir,
Zagazig, and Belbeis: at that time it had no
definite boundaries; but it extended with the
increase of the inhabitants, and it applied to
the eastern part of the Delta from the Tanitic
branch to the desert and the Red Sea. This area
coincided very much with what we should call
the province of Sharkieh, and part of the
Digitized by
Google
1210
GOSPELS
Kalioubieh, as far as Heliopolis. This is the
extent we may suppose it had at the time of
the Exodus.
On Goshen may be consulted Ebers, Durch
Oosen 2Um Sinai, Leipzig, 1881 ; Naville, Goshen
and the Shrine of Saft el Henneh (Egypt. Explor.
Fund, 5th Memoir), London, 1887; Bnigsch,
SteminschriftundBibeltcort,Ber\in,l691. [E.N.]
2. (}B>i; Toirin; Gcssen, Gozen.) The "land"
or the " country (both JHt*) of Goshen " is
twice named as a district in Southern Palestine
(Josh. i. 41, xi. 16). Its position is uncertain.
From the first of these passages it would seem to
have lain between Gaza and Gibeon, and there-
fore to be some part of the maritime plain of
Judah ; but in the latter passage, that plain —
the Shefelah — is expressly specified in addition to
Goshen (here with the article). In this place
too the situation of Goshen — if the order of the
statement be any indication — would seem to be
between the "south" and the Shefelah (A. V.
"valley"). The name may be old, and may
retain a trace of early intercourse between Egypt
and the south of the Promised Land. For such
intercourse cp. 1 Ch. vii. 21.
8. A town of the same name is once men-
tioned in company with Debir, Socoh, and
others, as in the mountains of Judah (Josh,
xv. 51). There is nothing to connect (Di)lmann')
this place with the district last spoken of. It
has not yet been identified. [G.] [F.]
GOSPELS.* The name Gospel (from god
and spell, Ang.-Sax. good message or news, which
is a translation of the Greek evaryyiKiov) is
applied to the four inspired histories of the
life and teaching of Christ contained in the
New Testament. [Matthew; Mark; Luke;
John.] It may be fairly said that the genuine-
ness of these four narratives rests upon better
evidence than that of any other ancient writings.
They were all composed during the latter half
of the first century : those of St. Matthew and
St. Mark some years before the destruction of
Jerusalem ; that of St. Luke probably about
a.d. 64 ; and that of St. John towards the close
of the century. Before the end of the second
century, there is abundant evidence that the
four Gospels, as one collection, were generally
used and accepted. Irenaeus, who suffered mar-
tyrdom about a.d. 202, the disciple of Polycarp
and Papias, — who, from having been in Asia, in
Gaul, and in Rome, had ample meaus of knowing
the belief of various churches, — says that the
authority of the four Gospels was so far con-
firmed that even the heretics of his time could
not reject them, but were obliged to attempt to
prove their tenets out of one or other of them
(Cuntr. Ilaer. iii. 11, § 7). Tertullian, in a
work written about A.D. 208, mentions the four
Gospels, two of them as the work of Apostles,
and two as that of the disciples of Apostles
(apostolid) ; and rests their authority on their
apostolic origin {Adv. Marcion. iv. ch. ii.).
Origen, who was born about A.D. 185 and died
A.D. 253, describes the Gospels in a characteristic
strain of metaphor as "the [four] elements of
the Church's faith, of which the whole world,
reconciled to God in Christ, is composed" (/n
«■ See note on p. 1217, col. I. .
GOSPELS
Johan.). Elsewhere, in commenting on the
opening words of St. Luke, he draws a line
between the inspired Gospels and such pro-
ductions as " The Gospel according to the
Egyptians," "The Gospel of the Twelve," and
the like (JJomil. in Luc. iii. 932 sq.). Although
Theophilus, who became sixth (seventh ?) bishop
of Antioch about a.d. 168, speaks only of " the
Evangelists," without adding their names (Ail
Autul. iii. 124, 125), we might fairly conclude
with Gieseler that he refers to the collection ot
four, already known in his time. But from
Jerome we know that Theophilus arranged the
records of the four Evangelists into one work
(Epist. ad Algas. iv. 197). Tatian, who died
about a.d. 170 (?), compiled a Diatessaron, or
Harmony of the Gospels. The Muratorian frag-
ment (Muratori, Antiq. It. iii. 854; Routh,
Beliq. S. vol. iv.), which, even if it be not by
Caius and of the second century, is at least a
very old monument of the Roman Church, de-
scribes the Gospels of St. Luke and St. John ;
but time and carelessness seem to have destroyed
the sentences relating to St. Matthew and St.
Mark. Another source of evidence is open to us,
in the citations from the Gospels found in the
earliest writers. Barnabas, Clemens Romanus.
and Polycarp quote passages from them, but not
with verbal exactness. The testimony of Justin
Martyr (born about A.D. 99, martyred A.D. 165)
is much fuller; many of his quotations are
found verbatim in the Gospels of St. Matthew.
St. Luke, and St. John, and possibly of St. Murk
also, whose words it is more difficult to separate.
The quotations from St. Matthew are the most
numerous. In historical references, the mode of
quotation is more free, and the narrative occasion-
ally unites those of St. Matthew and St. Luke:
in a very few cases he alludes to matters not men-
tioned in the canonical Gospels. Besides these,
St. Matthew appears to be quoted by the author
of the Epistle to Diognetus, by Hegesippus,
Irenaeus, Tatian, Athenagoras, and Theophilus.
Eusebius records that Pantaenus found in India
(the south of Arabia ?) Christians who used
the Gospel of St. Matthew. All this shows that
long before the end of the second century the
Gospel of St. Matthew was in general use.
From the fact that St. Mark's Gospel has few
places peculiar to it, it is more difficult to
identify citations not expressly assigned to him ;
but Justin Martyr and Athenagoras appear to
quote his Gospel, and Irenaeus does so by name.
St. Luke is quoted by Justin, Irenaeus, Tatian,
Athenagoras, and Theophilus ; and St. John by
all of these, with the addition of Ignatius, the
Epistle to Diognetus, and Polycrates. From
these we may conclude that before the end of
the second century the Gospel collection was
well known and in general use. There is yet
another line of evidence. The heretical sects, ns
well as the Fathers of the Church, knew the
Gospels ; and as there was the greatest hostility
between them, if the Gospels had become known
in the Church after the dissension arose, the
heretics would never have accepted them as
genuine from such a quarter. But the Gnostics
and Marcionites arose early in the second cen-
tury; and therefore it is probable that the
Gospels were then accepted, and thus they are
traced back almost to the times of the Apostles
(Olshausen). Upon a review of all the witnesses,
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
from the Apostolic Fathers down to the Canon
appended to the Laodicean Council in 364, and
that of the third Council of Carthage in 397, in
both of which the four Gospels are numbered in
the Canon of Scripture, there can hardly be
room for any candid person to doubt that from
the first the four Gospels were recognised as
genuine and as inspired ; that a sharp line of
distinction was drawn between them and the
so-called apocryphal Gospels, of which the num-
ber was very great ; that, from the citations
of passages, the Gospels bearing these four
names were the same as those which we possess
in oar Bibles under the same names ; that un-
believers, like Celsus, did not deny the genuine-
ness of the Gospels, even when rejecting their
contents; and, lastly, that heretics thought it
necessary to plead some kind of sanction out of
the Gospels for their doctrines : nor could they
venture on the easier path of an entire rejection,
because the Gospels were everywhere known to
be genuine. Out of a mass of authorities the
following may be selected: — Norton, On the
Genuineness of the Gospels, 2 vols. London, 1847,
2nd ed. ; Kirchhofer, Quellensammlung zur Ge-
xhichte de$ N. T. Canons, Zurich, 1844; De
Wette, Lehrbuch der hist.-hrit. Einleitung, ic,
7th ed., Berlin, 1852; Hug's Einleitung, &c,
Fosdick's [American] translation, with Stuart's
Notes ; Olshausen, biblischer Commentar, Intro-
duction, and his Echtheit der 4 Canon. Evan-
geJien, 1823 ; Jer. Jones, Method of settling the
Canonical Authority of the N. T., Oxford, 1798,
2 vols. ; F. C. Baur, Krit. Vntersuchungen uber
die Kanon. Emngelien, Tubingen, 1847; Reuss,
Geschichte desN.T.; Dean Alford's Greek Testa-
ment, Prolegomena, vol. i. ; Rev. B. F. Westcott's
History of &. T. Canon, London, 1859 ; Gieseler,
ffistorisch-kritischer Versuch Uber die Enstehung,
ifc, der schriftlichen Emngelien, Leipzig, 1818.
On comparing these four Books one with
another, a peculiar difficulty claims attention,
which has had much to do with the controversy
as to their genuineness. In the Fourth Gospel
the narrative coincides with that of the other
three in a few passages only. Putting aside the
account of the Passion, there are only three
facts which St. John relates in common with the
other Evangelists. Two of these are, the feeding
of the five thousand, and the storm on the Sea
of Galilee (ch. vi.), which appear to be intro-
duced in connexion with the discourse that arose
out of the miracle related by St. John alone.
The third is the anointing of His feet by Mary ;
and it is worthy of notice that the narrative of
St. John recalls something of each of the other
three: the actions of the woman are drawn
from St. Luke, the ointment and its valne are de-
scribed in St. Mark, and the admonition to Judas
appears in St. Matthew ; and St. John combines in
his narrative all these particulars. Whilst the
three present the life of Jesus in Galilee, St. John
follows him into Judaea ; nor should we know,
but for him, that our Lord had journeyed to
Jerusalem at the prescribed feasts. Only one
discourse of our Lord that was delivered in
Galilee, that in the 6th chapter, is recorded by
St. John. The disciple whom Jesus loved had it
put into his mind to write a Gospel which
should more expressly than the others set forth
Jesus as the Incarnate Word of God : if he also
had in view the beginnings of the errors of
GOSPELS
1211
Cerinthus and others before him at the time, as
Irenaeus and Jerome assert, the polemical pur-
pose is quite subordinate to the dogmatic He
does not war against a temporary error, but
preaches for all time that Jesus is the Christ
the Son of God, in order that believing we may
have life through His Name. Now many of the
facts omi ed by St. John and recorded by the
rest are such as would have contributed most
directly to this great design ; why then are they
omitted ? The received explanation is the only
satisfactory one, namely, that St. John, writing
last, at the close of the first century, had seen
the other Gospels, and purposely abstained from
writing anew what they had sufficiently re-
corded. [John.]
In the other three Gospels there is a great
amount of agreement. If we suppose the history
that they contain to be divided into sections,
in 42 of these all the three narratives coincide,
12 more are given by St. Matthew and St. Mark
only, 5 by St. Mark and St. Luke only, and 14 by
St. Matthew and St. Luke. To these must be
added 5 peculiar to St. Matthew, 2 to St. Mark,
and 9 to St. Luke ; and the enumeration is com-
plete. But this applies only to general coinci-
dence as to the facts narrated: the amount ot
verbal coincidence, that is, the passages either
verbally the same, or coinciding in the use of
many of the same words, is much smaller. " By
far the larger portion," says Prof. A. Norton
{Genuineness,' i. 240), "of this verbal agree-
ment is found in the recital of the words of others,
and particularly of the words of Jesus. Thus, in
Matthew's Gospel, the passages verbally coinci-
dent with one or both of the other two Gospels
amount to less than a sixth part of its contents ;
and of these about seven-eighths occur in the
recital of the words of others, and only about
one-eighth in what, by way of distinction, 1
may call mere narrative, in which the Evan-
gelist, speaking in his own person, was un-
restrained in the choice of his expressions. In
Mark, the proportion of coincident passages to
the whole contents of the Gospel is about one-
sixth, of which not one-fifth occurs in the nar-
rative. Luke has still less agreement of ex-
pression with the other Evangelists. The pas-
sages in which it is found amount only to about
a tenth part of his Gospel ; and but an incon-
siderable portion of it appears in the narrative
— less than a twentieth part. These proportions
should be further compared with those which
the narrative part of each Gospel bears to that
in which the words of others are professedly
repeated. Matthew's narrative occupies about
one-fourth of his Gospel, Mark's about one-half,
and Luke's about one-third. It may easily be
computed, therefore, that the proportion oi
verbal coincidence found in the narrative part
of each Gospel, compared with what exists in the
other part, is about in the following ratios: in
Matthew as one to somewhat more than two, in
Mark as one to four, and in Luke as one to ten."
Without going minutely into the examination
of examples, which would be desirable if space
permitted, the leading facts connected with the
subject may be thus summed up : — The verbal
and material agreement of the first three Evan-
gelists is such as does not occur in any other
authors who have written independently of one
another. The verbal agreement is greater
Digitized by
Google
1212
G0SPEL8
where the spoken words of others are cited than
where the facts are recorded ; and greatest in
quotations of the words of oar Lord. But in
some leading events, as in the call of the first
four disciples, that of St. Matthew, and the Trans-
figuration, the agreement even in expression is
remarkable : there are also narratives where
there is no verbal harmony in the outset, but
only in the crisis or emphatic part of the story
(Matt. viii. 3 = Mark i. 41 = Luke v. 13, and
Matt. xiv. 19, 20=Mark vi. 41-t3=Luke ix.
16, 17). The narratives of our Lord's early
life, as given by St. Matthew and St. Luke,
have little in common ; while St. Mark does not
include that part of the history in his plan.
The agreement in the narrative portions of the
Gospels begins with the Baptism of John, and
reaches its highest point in the account of the
Passion of our Lord and the facts that preceded
it ; so that a direct ratio might almost be said
to exist between the amount of agreement and
the nearness of the facts related to the Passion.
After this event, in the account of His burial
and resurrection, the coincidences are few. The
language of all three is Greek, with Hebrew
idioms: the Hebraisms are most abundant in
St. Mark, and fewest in St. Luke. In quota-
tions from the Old Testament, the Evangelists,
or two of them, sometimes exhibit a verbal
agreement, although they differ from the Hebrew
and from the Septuagint Version (Matt. iii. 3=
Mark i. 3=Luke iii. 4. Matt. iv. 10=Luke iv.
8. Matt. xi. 10=Mark i. 2=Luke vii. 27, &c).
Except as to twenty-four verses, the Gospel of St.
Mark contains no principal facts which are not
found in St. Matthew and St. Luke ; but he often
supplies details omitted by them, and these are
often such as would belong to the graphic
account of an eye-witness. There are no cases in
which St. Matthew and St. Luke exactly har-
monize, where St. Mark does not also coincide
with them. In several places the words of St.
Mark have something in common with each of
the other narratives, so as to form a connecting
link between them, where their words slightly
differ. The examples of verbal agreement be-
tween St. Mark and St. Luke are not so long
or so numerous as those between St. Matthew
and St. Luke, and St. Matthew and St. Mark ;
but as to the arrangement of events St. Mark
and St. Luke frequently coincide, where St.
Matthew differs from them. These are the
leading particulars ; but they are very far from
giving a complete notion of a phenomenon that
is well worthy of that attention and reverent
study of the sacred text by which alone it can
be fully and fairly apprehended.
These facts exhibit the three Gospels as three
distinct records of the life and works of the
Redeemer, but with a greater amount of agree-
ment than three wholly independent accounts
could be expected to exhibit. The agreement
would be no difficulty without the differences;
it would only mark the one Divine source from
which they are all derived — the Holy Spirit,
Who spake by the Prophets. The difference of
form and style, without the agreement, would
offer no difficulty, since there may be a sub-
stantial harmony between accounts that differ
greatly in mode of expression, and the very
difference might be a guarantee of independence.
The harmony and the variety, the agreement
GOSPELS
and the differences, form together the problem
with which Biblical critics have occupied them-
selves for a century and a half.
The attempts at a solution are so many, that
they can be more easily classified than enu-
merated. The first and most obvious sugges-
tion would be, that the narrators made use of
each other's work. Accordingly Grot i us, Mill,
Wetstein, Gricsbach, and many others, have
endeavoured to ascertain which Gospel is to be
regarded as the first ; which is copied from the
first ; and which is the last, and copied from
the other two. It is remarkable that each of
the six possible combinations have found advo-
cates ; and this of itself proves the uncertainty
of the theory (Bp. Marsh's Michaelis, iii. 172 ;
De Wctte, Handbuch, § 22 et sqq.). When we
are told by men of research that the Gospel of
St. Mark is plainly founded upon the other two,
as Griesbach, Busching, and others assure us ;
and again, that the Gospel of St. Mark is cer-
tainly the primitive Gospel, on which the other
two are founded, as by Wilke, Bruno Bauer,
and others, both sides relying mainly on facts
that lie within the compass of the text, we are
not disposed to expect much fruit from the dis-
cussion. But the theory in its crude form is in
itself most improbable ; and the wonder is that
so much time and learning have been devoted to
it. It assumes that an Evangelist has taken np
the work of his predecessor, and without sub-
stantial alteration has made a few changes in
form, a few additions and retrenchments, and
has then allowed the whole to go forth under
his name. Whatever order of the three is
adopted to favour the hypothesis, the omission
by the second or third, of matter inserted by
the first, offers a great difficulty ; since it would
indicate a tacit opinion that these passages are
either less useful or of less authority than the
rest. The nature of the alterations is not soch
as we should expect to find in an age little
given to literary composition, and in writings
so simple and unlearned as these are admitted
to be. The replacement of a word by a
synonym, neither more nor less apt, the omission
of a saying in one place and insertion of it in
another, the occasional transposition of events ;
these are not in conformity with the habits of a
time in which composition was little studied,
and only practised as a necessity. These genera)
objections will be found to take a still more
cogent shape against any particular form of this
hypothesis : whether it is attempted to show
that the Gospel of St. Mark, as the shortest, is
also the earliest and primitive Gospel, or that
this very Gospel bears evident signs of being
the latest, a compilation from the other two;
or that the order in the Canon of Scripture
is also the chronological order — and all these
views have found defenders at no distant date —
the theory that each Evangelist only copied from
his predecessor offers the same general features,
a plausible argument from a few facts, which is
met by insuperable difficulties as soon as the re-
maining facts are taken in (Gieseler, pp. 35, 36 ;
Bp. Marsh's Michaelis, iii., Part ii., 171 sqq.)-
The supposition of a common original from
which the three Gospels were drawn, each with
more or less modification, would naturally occur
to those who rejected the notion that the Evan-
gelists had copied from each other. A passage
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
of Epiphanius has been often quoted in support
of this (Haeres. 51, 6), but the i£ alrr^s rrjs
rnyv* no doubt refers to the inspiring Spirit
from which all three drew. their authority, and
not to any earthly copy, written or oral, of His
divine message. The best notion of that class
of speculations which would establish a uritten
document as the common original of the three
Gospels, will be gained perhaps from Bishop
Marsh's (Michaclis, vol. iii., Part ii.) account of
Eichhorn's hypothesis, and of his own additions
to it It appeared to Eichhorn that the
portions which are common to all the three
Gospels were contained in a certain common
document, from which they all drew. Niemeyer
had already assumed that copies of such a docu-
ment had got into circulation, and had been
altered and annotated by different hands. Now
Eichhorn tries to show, from an exact com-
parison of passages, that " the sections, whether
great or small, which are common to St.
Matthew and St. Mark but not to St. Luke, and
at the same time occupy places in the Gospels
of St. Matthew and St. Mark which correspond
to each other, were additions made in the copies
used by St. Matthew and St. Mark, but not in
the copy used by St. Luke; and, in like manner,
that the sections found in the corresponding
places of the Gospels of St. Mark and St. Luke,
but not contained in the Gospel of St. Matthew,
were additions made in the copies used by St.
Mark and St. Luke " (p. 192). Thus Eichhorn
considers himself entitled to assume that he
can reconstruct the original document, and also
that there must hare been four other documents
to account for the phenomena of the text. Thus
he makes —
1. The original document.
2. An altered copy which St. Matthew used.
3. An altered copy which St. Luke used.
4. A third copy, made from the two preced-
ing, used by St. Mark.
5. A fourth altered copy, used by St. Matthew
and St. Luke in common.
As there is no external evidence worth con-
sidering that this original or any of its numerous
copies erer existed, the value of this elaborate
hypothesis must depend upon its furnishing the
only explanation, and that a sufficient one, of
the facts of the text. Bishop Marsh, however,
finds it necessary, in order to complete the
account of the text, to raise the number of
documents to eight, still without producing any
external evidence for the existence of any of
them ; and this, on one side, deprives Eichhorn's
theory of the merit of completeness, ami, on the
other, presents a much broader surface to the
obvious objections. He assumes the existence of —
1 . A Hebrew original.
2. A Greek translation.
3. A transcript of No. 1, with alterations and
additions.
4. Another, with another set of alterations
and additions.
5. Another, combining both the preceding,
used by St. Mark, who also used No. 2.
6. Another, with the alterations and additions
of No. 3, and with further additions, used by
St. Matthew.
7. Another, with those of No. 4 and further
additions, used by St. Luke, who also used
No. 2.
GOSPELS
1213
8. A wholly distinct Hebrew document, In
which our Lord's precepts, parables, and dis-
courses' were recorded, but not in chronological
order ; used both by St. Matthew and St. Luke.
To this it is added, that '• as the Gospels of
St. Mark and St. Luke contain Greek transla-
tions of Hebrew materials, which were incor-
porated into St. Matthew's Hebrew Gospel, the
person who translated St. Matthew's Hebrew
Gospel into Greek frequently derived assistance
from the Gospel of St. Mark, where he had
matter in connexion with St. Matthew : and in
those places, but in those places only, where
St. Mark had no matter in connexion with
St. Matthew, he had frequently recourse to
St. Luke's Gospel " (p. 3til). One is hardly sur-
prised after this to learn that Eichhorn soon
after put forth a revised hypothesis (Kinleituni
in das A. T., 1804), in which a supposed Greek
translation of a supposed Aramaic original took
a conspicuous part ; nor that Hug was able to
point out that even the most liberal assumption
of written documents had not provided for one
case, that of the verbal agreement of St. Mark
and St. Luke, to the exclusion of St. Matthew ;
and which, though it is of rare occurrence,
would require, on Eichhorn's theory, an addi-
tional Greek version.
It will be allowed that this elaborate hypo-
thesis, whether in the form given it by Marsh or
by Eichhorn, jiossesses almost every fault that
can be charged against an argument of that
kind. For every new class of facts a new docu-
ment must be assumed to hare existed ; and
Hug's objection does not really weaken the
theory, since the new class of coincidences he
mentions only requires a new version of the
"original Gospel" which can be supplied on
demand. A theory so prolific in assumptions
may still stand, if it can be proved that no
other solution is possible ; but since this cannot
be shown, even as against the modified theory
of Gratz (Aeuer Yersueh, &c, 1812), then we
are reminded of the Schoolman's caution, entia
non sunt multiplicand!! practer necessitate™. To
assume for every new class of facts the existence
of another complete edition and recension of the
original work is quite gratuitous ; the docu-
ments might hare been as easily supposed to be
fragmentary memorials, wrought in by the
Erangelists into the web of the original Gospel ;
or the coincidences might be, as Gratz supposes,
cases where one Gospel has been interpolated by
portions of another. Then the "original Gospel
is supposed to hare been of such authority as to
be circulated everywhere: yet so defective as
to require annotation from any hand, so little
reverenced that no hand spared it. If all the
Erangelists agreed to draw from such a work,
it must have been widely if not universally
accepted in the Church ; and yet there is no
record of its existence. The force of this
dilemma has been felt by the supporters of the
theory : if the work was of high authority, it
would hare been preserved, or at least men-
tioned ; if of lower authority, it could not have
become the basis of three canonical Gospels:
and various attempts have been made to escape
from it. Bertholdt tries to find traces of its
existence in the titles of works other than our
present Gospels, which were current in the
earliest ages ; but Gieseler has so diminished
Digitized by
Google
1214
GOSPELS
the force of his arguments, that only one of
them need here be mentioned. Bertholdt in-
geniously argues that a Gospel used ' by St.
l'anl, and transmitted to the Christians in
Pontus, was the basis of Marcion's Gospel ; and
assumes that it was also the " original Gospel : "
so that in the Gospel of Marcion there would be
a transcript, though corrupted, of this primitive
document. But there is no proof at all that St.
Paul used any written Gospel ; and as to that
of Marcion, if the work of Hahn had not settled
the question, the researches of snch writers as
Volckmar, Zeller, Ritschl, and Hilgenfeld, are
held to hare proved that the old opinion of
Tertullian and Epiphanius is also the true one,
and that the so-called Gospel of Marcion was
not an independent work, but an abridged ver-
sion of St. Luke's Gospel, altered by the heretic
to suit his peculiar tenets (see Bertholdt, iii.
1208-1223; Gieseler, p. 57; Weisse, Evange-
lienfrage, p. 73). We must conclude then that
the work has perished without record. Not
only has this fate befallen the Aramaic or
Hebrew original, but the translation and the
five or six recensions. But it may well be
asked whether the state of letters in Palestine
at this time was such as to make this constant
editing, translating, annotating, and enriching
of a history a natural and probable process.
With the independence of the Jews their litera-
ture had declined ; from the time of Ezra and
Nehemiah, if a writer here and there arose, his
works became known, if at all, in Greek trans-
lations through the Alexandrine Jews. That the
period of which we are speaking was for the Jews
one of very little literary activity, is generally
admitted; and if this applies to all classes of
the people, it would be true of the humble and
uneducated class from which the first converts
came (Acts iv. 13 ; Jas. ii. 5). Even the
second law (Stvrtpiatis), which grew up after
the Captivity, and in which the knowledge of
the learned class consisted, was handed down by
oral tradition, without being reduced to writing.
The theory of Eichhorn is only probable amidst
a people given to literary habits, and in a class
of that people where education was good and
literary activity likely to prevail : the conditions
here are the very reverse (see Gieseler's able
argument, pp. 59 sq. [cp. p. 1223]).
Bibliography. — The English student will find
in Bp. Marsh's Translation of Michaelii Introd.
to N. T. iii. 2, 1803, an account of Eichhorn's
earlier theory and of his own. Veysie's Ex-
amination of Mr. Marsh's Hypothesis, 1808, has
suggested many of the objections. In Bp. Thirl-
wall's Translation of Schieiermacher on St. Luke,
1825, Introduction, is an account of the whole
question. Other principal works are, an essay
of Eichhorn, in the 5th vol. Allgemeine Bibliothek
der biblischen Literatur, 1794; the Essay of
Bp. Marsh, just quoted ; Eichhorn, Einleitung in
das N. T., 1804 ; Gratz, Never Versuch die Enste-
hung der drey ersten Eoang. tu erkt&ren, 1812 ;
Bertholdt, Histor.-kritische Einleitung in sammt-
liche kanon. und apok. Schriften des A. und N. T.,
1812-1819 ; and the work of Gieseler, quoted
above. See also De Wette, Lehrbuch, and West-
cott, Introduction, already quoted ; also Weisse,
Evangelienfrage, 1856.
There is another supposition to account for
these facts, of which perhaps, Gieseler has been
GOSPELS
the most acute expositor. It is probable that
none of the Gospels was written until many
years after the day of Pentecost, on which the
Holy Spirit descended on the assembled disciples.
From that day commenced at Jerusalem the
work of preaching the Gospel and converting
the world. So sedulous were the Apostles in
this work that they divested themselves of the
labour of ministering to the poor, in order that
they might give themselves "continually to
prayer and to the ministry of the word" (Acts
vi.). Prayer and preaching were the business
of their lives. Now their preaching mutt hire
been, from the nature of the case, in great part
historical; it must have been based upon an
account of the life and acta of Jesus of Nazareth.
They had been the eye-witnesses of a wondrous
life, of acta and sufferings that had an influence
over all the world : many of their hearers had
never heard of Jesus, and many others had re-
ceived false accounts of one whom it suited the
Jewish rulers to stigmatize as an impostor.
The ministry of our Lord went on principally in
Galilee ; the first preaching was addressed to
people in Judaea. There was no written record
to which the hearers might be referred for his-
torical details, and therefore the preachers must
furnish not only inferences from the life of onr
Lord, but the facts of the life itself. The
preaching, then, must have been of such a kind
as to be to the hearers what the reading of
lessons from the Gospels is to us. So far as the
records of apostolic preaching in the Acts of the
Apost les go, they confirm this view. St. Peter »t
Cnesarea, and St. Paul at Antioch, preach alike the
facts of the Redeemer's life and death. There is
no improbability in supposing that in the coarse
of twenty or thirty years' assiduous teaching,
without a written Gospel, the matter of the
apostolic preaching should have taken a settled
form. Not only might the Apostles think it
well that their own accounts should agree, as in
substance so in form; but the teachers whom
they sent forth, or left behind in the Churches
they visited, would have to be prepared for
their mission; and, so long as there was no
written Gospel to put into their hands, it might
be desirable that the oral instruction should be
as far as possible one and the same to all. It is
by no means certain that the interval between
the mission of the Comforter and His work of
directing the writing of the first Gospel was so
long as is here supposed : the date of the Hebrew
St. Matthew may be earlier. [Matthew.] But
the argument remains the same : the preaching
of the Apostles would probably begin to take one
settled form, if at all, during the first years of
their ministry. If it were allowed us to ask why
God in His providence saw fit to defer the gift
of a written Gospel to His people, the answer
would be, that for the first few years the
powerful working of the Holy Spirit in the
living members of the Church supplied the plate
of those records, which, as soon as the brightness
of His Presence began to be at all withdrawn,
became indispensable in order to prevent the
corruption of the Gospel history by false teachers.
He was promised as One Who should "teach
them all things, and bring all things to their
remembrance, whatsoever " the Lord had "said
unto them " (John xiv. 26). And more than
once His aid is spoken of as needful, even for
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
the proclamation of the facts that relate to
Christ (Acts i. 8; 1 Pet. i. 12): and He is
described as a witness with the Apostles, rather
than through them, of the things which they
had seen daring the course of a ministry which
they had shared (John xv. 26, 27 ; Acts v. 32.
Cp. Acts xv. 28). The personal authority of
the Apostles as eye-witnesses of what they
preached is not set aside by this Divine aid :
again and again they describe themselves as
" witnesses " to facts (Acts ii. 32, iii. 15, x.
32, &c); and when a vacancy occurs in their
number through the fall of Judas, it is almost
assumed as a thing of course that his successor
shall be chosen from those " which had com-
panied with them all the time that the Lord
Jesus went in and out amongst them " (Acts
i. 21). The teachings of the Holy Spirit con-
sisted, not in whispering to them facts which
they had not witnessed, but rather in reviving
the fading remembrance, and throwing out into
their true importance events and sayings that
had been esteemed too lightly at the time they
took place. But the Apostles could not have
spoken of the Spirit as they did (Acts v. 32,
xv. 28) unless He were known to be working in
and with them and directing them, and mani-
festing that this was the case by unmistakable
signs. Here is the answer, both to the question
why was it not the first care of the Apostles
to prepare a written Gospel, and also to the
scruples of those who fear that the supposition
of an oral Gospel would give a precedent for
those views of tradition which have been the
bane of the Christian Church as they were of
the Jewish. The guidance of the Holy Spirit
supplied for a time such aid as made a written
Gospel unnecessary ; but the Apostles saw the
dangers and errors which a traditional Gospel
would be exposed to in the course of time ; and,
whilst they were still preaching the oral Gospel
in the strength of the Holy Ghost, they were
admonished by the same Divine Person to prepare
those written records which were hereafter to
be the daily spiritual food of all the Church of
Christ.* Nor is there anything unnatural in
the supposition that the Apostles intentionally
ottered their witness in the same order, and
even, for the most part, in the same form of
words. They would thus approach most nearly
to the condition in which the Church was to be
when written books were to be the means of
edification. They quote the scriptures of the
Old Testament frequently in their discourses;
and as their Jewish education had accustomed
• The opening words of St. Luke's Oospel, " Foras-
much as many have taken in hand to set forth fn order
a declaration of those things which are most surely
believed among ns, even as they delivered them unto
us, which from the beginning were eye-witnesses and
ministers of the word," appear to mean that many
persons who beard the preaching of the Apostles wrote
down what they heard. In order to preserve it In a
permanent form. The word "many" cannot refer
to St. Matthew and St. Mark only ; and if the passage
implies an Intention to supersede the writings alluded
to, then these two Evangelists cannot be included under
them. Partial and incomplete reports of the preaching
of the Apostles, written with a good aim, but without
authority, are Intended; and. If we may argue from
St. Luke's sphere of observation, they were probably
composed by Greek converts.
GOSPELS
1215
them to the use of the words of the Bible as
well as the matter, they would do no violence
to their prejudices in assimilating the new-
records to the old, and in reducing them to a
"form of sound words." They were all Jews
of Palestine, of humble origin, all alike chosen,
we may suppose, for the loving zeal with which
they would observe the works of their Master
and afterwards propagate His Name; so that
the tendency to variance, arising from peculiari-
ties of education, taste, and character, would
be reduced to its lowest in such a body. The
language of their first preaching was the Syro-
Chaldaic, which was a poor and scanty lan-
guage ; and thongh Greek was now widely
spread, and was the language even of several
places in Palestine (Josephus, Ant. xvi. 11, §4 ;
Bell. Jvd. iii. 9, § 1), though it prevailed in
Antioch, whence the first missions to Greeks
and Hellenists, or Jews who spoke Greek, pro-
ceeded (Acts xi. 20, xiii. 1-3), the Greek tongue,
as used by Jews, partook of the poverty of the
speech which it replaced; as, indeed, it is im-
possible to borrow a whole language without
borrowing the habits of thought upon which
it has built itself. Whilst modern taste aims
at a variety of expression, and abhors a repeti-
tion of the same phrases as monotonous, the
simplicity of the men and their language and
their education, and the state of literature,
would all lead us to expect that the Apostles
would have no such feeling. As to this, we
have more than mere conjecture to rely on.
Occasional repetitions occur in the Gospels
(Luke vii. 19, 20 ; xix. 31, 34), such as a writer
in a more copious and cultivated language would
perhaps have sought to avoid. In the Acts, the
conversion of St. Paul is three times related
(Acts ix., xxii., xxvi.), once by the writer anil
twice by St. Paul himself; and the first two
harmonize exactly, except as to a few expressions
and as to one more important circumstance
(ix. 7 = xxii. 9) — which, however, admits of an
explanation— whilst the third deviates somewhat
more in expression, and has one passage peculiar
to itself. The vision of Cornelius is also three
times related (Acts x. 3-6, 30-32 ; xi. 13, 14),
where the words of the Angel in the first two
are almost precisely alike, and the rest very
similar, whilst the other is an abridged account
of the same facta. The vision of St. Peter is twice
related (Acts x. 10-16, xi. 5-10), and, except in
one or two expressions, the agreement is verbally
exact. These places from the Acts which, both
as to their resemblance and their difference, may
be compared to the narratives of the Evangelists,
show the same tendency to a common form of
narrative which, according to the present view,
may have influenced the preaching of the
Apostles. It is supposed, then, that the preach-
ing of the Apostles, and the teaching whereby
they prepared others to preach, as they did, would
tend to assume a common form, more or less
fixed ; and that the portions of the three Gospels
which harmonize most exactly owe their agree-
ment not to the fact that they were copied from
each other, although it is impossible to say that
the later writer made no use of the earlier one,
nor to the existence of any original document
now lost to us, but to the fact that the apostolic
preaching had already clothed itself in a settled
or usual form of words, to which the writers
Digitized by
Google
1216
GOSPELS
inclined to conform without feeling bound to do
ao ; and the differences which occur, often in
the closest proximity to the harmonies, arise
from the feeling of independence with which
each wrote what he had seen and heard, or, in
the case of St. Mark and St. Luke, what apostolic
witnesses had told him. The harmonies, as we
have seen, begin with the baptism of John ;
that is, with the consecration of the Lord to
His Messianic office ; and with this event pro-
bably the ordinary preaching of the Apostles
would begin, for its purport was that Jesus is
the Messiah, and that as Messiah He suffered,
died, and rose again. They are very frequent
as we approach the period of the Passion, because
the sufferings of the Lord would be much in the
mouth of every one who preached the Gospel,
and all would become familiar with the words
in which the Apostles described it. But as
regards the Resurrection, which differed from
the Passion in that it was a fact which the
enemies of Christianity felt bound to dispute
(Matt, xxviii. 15), it is possible that the diver-
gence arose from the intention of each Evangelist
to contribute something towards the weight of
evidence for this central truth. Accordingly,
all the four, even St. Mark (id 14), who
oftener throws a new light upon old grouud
than opens out new, mention distinct acts and
appearances of the Lord to establish that He
was risen indeed. The verbal agreement is
greater where the words of others are recorded,
and greatest of all where they are those of
Jesus, because here the apostolic preaching
would be especially exact; and where the his-
torical fact is the utterance of certain words,
the duty of the historian is narrowed to a bare
record of them (see the works of Gieseler,
Norton, Westcott, Weisse, and others already
quoted [cp. p. 1219]).
That this opinion would explain many of
the facts connected with the text is certain.
Whether, besides conforming to the words and
arrangement of the apostolic preaching, the
Evangelists did in any cases make use of each
other's work or not, would require a more
careful investigation of details to discuss than
space permits. Every reader would probably
find on examination some places which could
best be explained on this supposition. Nor does
this involve a sacrifice of the independence of
the narrator. If each of the three drew the
substance of his narrative from the one common
strain of preaching that everywhere prevailed,
to have departed entirely in a written account
from the common form of words to which Chris-
tian ears were beginning to be familiar, would
not have been independence but wilfulness. To
follow here and there the words and arrange-
ment of another written Gospel already current
would not compromise the writer's independent
position. If the principal part of the narrative
was the voice of the whole Church, a few
portions might be conformed to another writer
without altering the character of the testimony.
In the separate articles on the Gospels it will
be shown that, however close may be the agree-
ment of the Evangelists, the independent position
of each appears from the contents of his Book,
and has been recognised by writers of all ages.
It will appear that St. Matthew describes the
kingdom of Messiah, as founded in the Old
GOSPELS
Testament and fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth ;
that St. Mark, with so little of narrative
peculiar to himself, brings out by many minute
circumstances a more vivid delineation of our
Lord's completely human life ; that St. Luke
puts forward the work of Redemption as a
universal benefit, and shows Jesus not only as
the Messiah of the chosen people, but as the
Saviour of the world; that St. John, writing
last of all, passed over most of what his prede-
cessors had related, in order to set forth move
fully all that he had heard from the Master
Who loved him, of His relation to the Father,
and of the relation of the Holy Spirit to both.
The independence of the writers is thus estab-
lished ; and if they seem to have here and then
used each other's account, which it is perhaps
impossible to prove or disprove, such cases will
not compromise that claim which alone give:,
value to a plurality of witnesses.
Each Gospel has its own features, but the
picture which they conspire to draw is one full
of harmony. The Saviour they all describe is
the same loving, tender guide of His disciples,
sympathising with them in the sorrows and
temptations of earthly life, yet ever ready to
enlighten that life by rays of truth out of the
infinite world where the Father sits upon His
throne. It has been said that St. Matthew
portrays rather the human side, and St. John
the divine ; but this holds good only in a limited
sense. It is in St. John that we read that
" Jesus wept ; " and there is nothing, even in
the last discourse of Jesus, as reported by
St. John, that opens a deeper view of His divine
nature than the words in St. Matthew (xi. 25-30)
beginning, " I thank Thee, Father, Lord of
heaven and earth, because Thou hast hid these
things from the wise and prudent, and hast
revealed them unto babes." AH reveal the
same divine and human Teacher ; four copies of
the same portrait, perhaps with a difference of
expression, yet still the same, are drawn here,
and it is a portrait the like of which no one had
ever delineated before, or indeed could have
done, except from having looked upon it with
observant eyes, and from having had the mind
opened by the Holy Spirit to comprehend features
of such unspeakable radiance. Not only does
this highest " harmony of the Gospels " manifest
itself to every pious reader of the Bible, but the
lower harmony — the agreement of fact anJ
word in all that relates to the ministry of the
Lord, in all that would contribute to a true
view of His spotless character — exists also, and
cannot be denied. For example, the Synoptists
tell us alike that Jesus was transfigured on the
Mount ; that the ihek'atah of divine glory shone
upon His face; that Moses the lawgiver and Elijah
the prophet talked with Him; and that the
Voice from heaven bare witness to Him. I* ''
any imputation upon the truth of the histories
that St. Matthew alone tells us that the wit-
nesses fell prostrate to the earth, and that Jesos
raised them ; or that St. Luke alone tells «»
that for a part of the time they were heavy
with sleep ? Again, one Evangelist, in describing
our Lord's temptation, follows the order of the
occurrences, another arranges according to the
degrees of temptation, and the third, passing
over all particulars, merely mentions that onr
Lord teas tempted. Is there anything here to
Digitized by
Google
• GOSPELS
shake oar faith in the writers as credible his-
torians ? Do we treat other histories in this
exacting spirit ? Is not the very independence
of treatment the pledge to as that we have
really three witnesses to the fact that Jesus
was tempted like as we are ? for if the Evan-
gelists were copyists, nothing would have been
more easy than to remove such an obvious
difference as this. The histories are true accord-
ing to any test that should be applied to a
history; and the events that they select —
though we could not presume to say that they
were more important than what are omitted,
except from the fact of the omission — are at
least such as to have given the whole Christian
Church a clear conception of the Redeemer's
life, so that none has ever complained of in-
sufficient means of knowing Him.
There is a perverted form of the theory we
are considering which pretends that the facts of
the Redeemer's life remained in the state of an
oral tradition till the latter part of the second
century, and that the four Gospels were not
written till that time. The difference is not of
degree but of kind between the opinion that the
Gospels were written during the lifetime of the
Apostles, who were eye-witnesses, and the notion
that for nearly a century after the oldest of
them had passed to his rest the events were
only preserved in the changeable and insecure
form of an or;il account. But for the latter
opinion there is not one spark of historical
evidence. Heretics of the second century, who
would gladly have rejected and exposed a new
Gospel that made against them, never hint that
the Gospels are spurious ; and orthodox writers
ascribe without contradiction the authorship of
the Books to those whose names they bear. The
theory was invented to accord with the as-
sumption that miracles are impossible, but upon
no evidence whatever ; and the argument when
exposed runs in this vicious circle : — " There are
no miracles, therefore the accounts of them must
have grown np in the course of a century from
popular exaggeration; and as the accounts are
not contemporaneous, it is not proved that there
are miracles ! " That the Jewish mind in its
lowest decay should have invented the character
of Jesus of Nazareth, and the sublime system
of morality contained in His teaching — that four
writers should have fixed the popular impression
in four plain, simple, unadorned narratives,
without any outbursts of national prejudice, or
any attempt to give a political tone to the events
they wrote of — would be in itself a miracle
harder to believe than that Lazarus came out
at the Lord's call from his four-days' tomb.
For a detailed harmony of the four Gospels
the following works may be consulted : —
Griesbach, Synopsis Evangeliorum, 1776; Be
Wette and Liicke, Syn. Evang. 1842 ; Rfidiger,
Syn. Evang. 1829; Clausen, Quatuor Evang.
Tabulae Synopticae, 1829; Greswell's Harmony
and Dissertations, a most important work ; the
Rev. I. Williams On the Gospels ; Theile's Greek
Testament ; and Tischendorf s Syn. Evang. 1854 ;
besides the well-known works of Lightfoot,
Mscknight, Newcome, and Robinson. [W. T.]
[This article of the late Archbishop is re-
printed without change, as being of historical
interest. More recent criticism is given in the
form of a supplement — Editors.]
BIBLE Did. — VOL. I.
GOSPELS
1217
SUPPLEMENT.
History of the Criticism of the Synoptic Gospels,
1863-1888.— The year 1863, in which the first
edition of this Dictionary appeared, might be said
to mark a turning-point in the history of
Synoptic criticism. For some twenty years up
to that date, in the land in which criticism
generally was most active, the Tubingen School
had been in the ascendant. This school owed its
characteristics to the remarkable talent for
speculative and historical combination possessed
by its founder, F. C. Baur. At the basis of his
criticism of the Gospels lay a comprehensive
theory as to the history and development of
Christianity in the first two centuries. Up to
the middle of the second century the dominant
form of Christianity was Ebionite or Judaiziug.
At the opposite pole to this lay the teaching of
St. Paul. And out of the gradual reconciliation
and combination of these two great opposing
forces Catholic Christianity at last took its rise.
Our present Gospels are the result of this
historical process. They reflect and represent
its course. We can still trace in them a number
of distinct layers, as it were, of dogmatic
tendency, deposited one after the other. What
comes to us as history was really the clothing in
narrative forms of ideas and doctrines. "The
Evangelists," wrote Hasert, the so-called " Saxon
Anonymus," in words adopted by Schwegler
{Nachapost. Zeitalt. ii. p. 41), "were by no
means the simple fisher-folk for which they
have been taken, but they have a very delicate
touch, and are in part extremely skilful and
penetrating persons (tiefsinnige Geister). Not
one little word in their writings, not even the
most insignificant, has been chosen by them
without the most deliberate intention and a
very special object " — that object being, as the
writer goes on to explain, the promotion of the
views of that party in the Church to which
each in turn belonged. As Baur and his fol-
lowers took as their starting-point Etionitisni,
it was natural that they should find the earliest
stratum of evangelical composition in those
documents which are historically associated with
the Ebionite party. At the bottom of all came
the Gospel according to the Hebrews and other
kindred writings — the Gospel according to the
Egyptians, and the Gospel according to Peter —
of all of which only small fragments have come
down to us. Latest in the group was our present
St. Matthew — a composite work, in which the
different elements were only roughly and im-
perfectly harmonized : one set of sayings which
implied the permanence of the Mosaic Law and
of the Temple-ritual appearing side by side with
another which spoke of new wine in new bottles
and distinctly recognised the admission of the
Gentiles. Not dissimilar in its composite cha-
racter, though rounded off by superior literary
skill, was the Gospel which marked the corre-
sponding approximation of parties from the
Pauline side, our present St. Luke. Here, too,
Ebionite and Pauline elements were combined,
the latter preponderating and forming the
groundwork of the Gospel : both elements were
brought nearer to each other by mutual conces-
sions. The process of reconciliation was com-
pleted in our present St. Mark, the last of all
the documents on the Jewish-Christian side, but
4 I
Digitized by
Google
1218
GOSPELS
in which the interests of party shaded off into
neutrality. This latest of the Gospels was
really little more than a colourless epitome of
the other two. By this time Catholic Chris-
tianity, or the union of modified Paulinism with
modified Ebionitism, was fully established. The
literary process occupied just the middle de-
cades of the second century, extending from
about the year 130 to 170. The canonical St.
Matthew fell about the earlier date.
It will be seen that this was essentially a
historical theory. Baur and Schwegler, who
may be taken as its most thoroughgoing repre-
sentatives, both paid considerable attention to
the passages quoted from the writings of the
second century as evidence for the use of our
present Gospels ; and such controversies as took
place within the School, like that as to the
relation of the canonical St. Luke to the Gospel
used by Marcion, turned largely upon questions
of this kind. But the foundation on which the
theory rested was the assumed persistence of
Ebionite or Judaizing Christianity within the
Church, and the gradual amalgamation of its
doctrines with those of Paulinism. The specu-
lative, dogmatic reconstruction came first in
order of time, and the literary criticism had to
follow in its train. It was a theory impressed
from above downwards. See especially for the
above : Schwegler, Das nachnpostolische Zeit-
alter, Tubingen, 1846; Baur, Kritische Unter-
suchimgen vber die ianonischen Emngelien,
Tiibingen, 1847.
It was against this method that the year 1863
brought a reaction. Not of course that the
Tubingen theory had passed without opposition
in its earlier stages. It always had a declared
and uncompromising antagonist in Ewald. And
the seeds of the theory which was to receive
tuller development in the next period had already
been laid simultaneously by Weisse and Wilke
in 1838. But the publication of Holtzmann's
Die Synoptischen Evangelien in 1863 was practi-
cally a new departure. Instead of approaching
the inquiry from above, it approached it from
below. It began, not with broad general con-
ceptions, but with a close and searching exami-
nation of the language of the Gospels and of
their relation to one another. And the method
thus inaugurated has been followed by the
majority of the more recent workers in this
department of criticism. The influence of Baur
has been felt far beyond the limits of his more
immediate following, but for the last eight-and-
twenty years the method principally in vogue
has been the opposite of his, and its resources do
not yet seem to be exhausted.
Subsequent History of the Tiibingen Theory. —
In tracing the history of this more recent period
it will probably conduce to clearness of presen-
tation if we take each of the competing theories
separately. And first to follow the fortunes of
the Tubingen theory of which we have just
been speaking. From the first the Tubingen
School had its right or more conservative wing.
While Ritschl was revising and fundamentally
modifying the whole theory of historical de-
velopment put forward by Baur, Hilgenfeld was
throwing back the dates assigned to the canonical
Gospels, and in particular contending for the
priority of St. Mark over St. Luke; Volkmar,
Professor at Zurich, who in other respects
GOSPELS
cannot be called a conservative, was demon-
strating the traditional view of the relation of
Marcion to St. Luke. When the author of
Supernatural Religion brought this latter con-
troversy on to English ground, he felt himself
compelled after a time to abandon his position.
The originality of St. Luke therefore, in relation
to Marcion, is one of the points on which scholars
may be said to be generally agreed, unless the
question is to be re-opened, as so many others
have been, in Holland. The veteran Hilgenfeld
has not relaxed his exertions, but has gone on
maintaining his position against all comers. In
his Introduction (Einleitung in d. If. X.), which
came out in 1875, he formulates his views in
some such way as this. The First Gospel, which,
like Baur, he regards as a more or iess radical
recension of an older Gospel akin to the Gospel
according to the Hebrews, he places very soon
(fuflf'tos, Matt. xxiv. 29) after the destruction
of Jerusalem. The Second Gospel follows in the
early years of the reign of Domitian (81-96 A.D.).
It is throughout dependent upon the first, with
the addition of a Petrine tradition (p. 516).
The association of this Gospel with St. Murk, as
directly or indirectly responsible for its contents,
is not without foundation. Its tendency is
Petrine. The third Evangelist has used St.
Matthew's Gospel in both its forms, and sis.)
the canonical St. Mark, besides the Gospel
according to the Hebrews and other documents.
His work was composed towards the end of
Domitian's reign in the interests of Paulinism.
More upon the original lines of Baur, though
with some recession in regard to dates, was the
arrangement advocated in England by Dr. S.
Davidson. The original Aramaic Gospel, which
was really the work of St. Matthew, he would
place between 60-70 A.D. ; our present recension
of it later ; our third Gospel (not the work of
St. Luke) about 110, and the second about 120
(Introduction to the y. 71, 2nd ed., 1882).
On the extreme verge of the School, and
representing its doctrines in their most moderate
form, would stand Dr. Keim. Beginning life as
a pupil of Baur, and inheriting his methods, he
yet reduced Baur's conclusions in every direction
within far more sober limits. Keim held that
the First Gospel was in the main written about
the year 66, in the time of feverish expectation
which preceded the great catastrophe of the fell
of Jerusalem. Some thirty years after that
event it received some not extensive interpola-
tions, which betray themselves as such by break-
ing the connexion of the narrative or bearing
signs of later origin. The passages thus obelised
were Matt. i. 18-ii. 23; iii. 14, 15; viii.11,12;
xxii. 1-14; xxv. 1-12; xxvii. 3-10, 19, 62-66;
xxviii. 11-15 (Gesch. Jes. v. Naz. i. pp. 61-63).
The author of these additions also revised and
edited the whole. The Third Gospel Keim
placed in the "times of the Gentiles " (Luke
xxi. 24), i.e. about the year 90 a.d. The author,
he thinks, had the First Gospel before him, not
in its revised but in its original form ; and he
had besides a version of the Discourses later
than that embodied in the First Gospel. Side
by side with these documents, both of Jewish-
Christian origin, he had others of a more Pauline
character — one containing the Samaritan epi-
sodes and perhaps the sending of the Seventy,
others which more directly breathed the spirit
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
01° the Pauline Gospel. Keim saw no reason to
•ioobt the identity of the Evangelist with the
companion of St. rani. The last of the Synop-
tics, St. Hark, he assigned approximately to the
year 100 ; and in regard to this he adhered to
the view of Banr, that it was for the most part
> cento made np from St. Matthew and St. Luke.
What was not referable to these sources was
derived from oral, or more probably written
(Jewish-Christian) tradition. In the popular
abridged edition of his larger work, which
represents in some respects his later views,
Keim moved forward the dates which he had
assigned to the Gospels. The revision of St.
Matthew was now circa 100 A.D. ; St. Luke
itxrat the same date, the authorship by St.
Paul's companion being abandoned ; St. Mark
about 120. At a still later date Keim showed
a disposition to make concessions to his oppo-
nents, and to take up a position which he
described as "more eclectic : "On the ground
of renewed study of the passages in Papias and
of the groups of discourse in Matt, and Luke,"
he was no longer prepared "to stand uncon-
ditionally in the way of the theory of two main
documents, one containing chiefly discourse and
the other narrative " (Aus dem urchristenthum,
Zurich, 1878, p. 30).
A truer representative of the old Tubingen
tradition is Dr. C. Holsten of Heidelberg,
though be too has very considerably modified
the ground-conception of the history on which
the Tubingen theory was based. Dr. Holsten's
work on the Synoptic Gospels was published in
two parts : the first, entitled Die drei wrspriing-
Ikhen, tuck wtgeschriebenen Evangelien, came
nut in 1883; the second, Die Synoptischcn
EamgeHen nach der Form ihres InhalUs, in
1885. The first of these is a masterly sketch
of the position of parties in the Christian
Church at the period in which the Gospels were
composed. It is the Tubingen theory stripped
of its exaggerations, conformed to facts, and
presented with great literary skill. On the
basis of this investigation into the history of
doctrine Dr. Holsten attempts in his second
treatise to explain the growth of the Synoptic
Gospels. The development of doctrine is the
only factor which he recognises; and with its
help he maintains the thesis in all its boldness
that our present St. Mark U a direct and
conscious transformation of our present St.
Matthew, and the canonical St. Luke in like
manner a direct and conscious transformation of
its two predecessors. The First Gospel is
retrine, the Second and Third represent different
shades of Paulinism. It is the old Tendenx-
KritH in its most logical and thoroughgoing
form. Dr. Holsten is, however, careful to
guard against the supposition that he uses it in
any disparaging sense. He fully recognises the
legitimacy of the Pauline conceptions, and he
sees in the Gospels which embody that concep-
tion the spontaneous outcome of a deep and
creative religious movement.
The second of these two treatises of Holsten's
a as disputable as the first was instructive, and
the scanty approval with which it has been
xterred is significant as a sign of the times.
TV Tubingen theory suggested points of view
vkieh must not be lost sight of: it contained
> of truth which have passed into other
GOSPELS
1219
systems. Doctrinal tendencies do leave their
mark upon documents and enable us to fit them
into their historical surroundings. But the
Tubingen construction of history, though
suggestive, was faulty; and the application of
it as a hypothesis to account for the literary
composition of the Gospels was to a large extent
misplaced and wholly inadequate. Men like
Hilgenfeld and Keim learnt as much from their
opponents as from their teachers, and therefore
still deserve a hearing; but the more pro-
nounced forms of the Tubingen theory have had
their day. The dates which they assigned to
the Gospels were impossible: the recondite
motives and diplomatic finesse which they
attributed to their authors were an anachron-
ism : and from the point of view of inductive
criticism, their method was a Sirrtpov itp6rtpoy —
it came to the study of the Gospel texts last
instead of first; and it brought its solutions
ready-made to the facts, instead of waiting for
the facts, by classification and analysis, to point
the way to their own solution.
The Hypothesis of Oral Tradition. — In strong
contrast to the Tendenz-Kritii, which seeks a
doctrinal motive for every literary variation, is
the hypothesis which would base our Gospels,
as we have them, directly and without the
intervention of other documents on the oral
tradition of the primitive Church. This
hypothesis, first put forward in 1818 by
Gieseler, during the last five-and-twenty years
has had but few voices raised in its favour on
the Continent. Godet and one or two Roman
Catholic commentators (not including Schanz,
the latest and probably the best among them)
have been its chief representatives. During the
same period in England it would have a better
claim than any other to be considered the
dominant theory. This is probably due in great
measure to the wide-spread influence of Dr.
Westcott, by whom the theory was adopted in
his Introduction to the Study of the Gospels
(1st ed. under the title Elements of the Gospel
Harmony, a Norriaian Prize Essay, in 1851 ;
2nd ed. under its present title in 1860 ; 7th ed.
1888). The same theory was advocated by
Abp. Thomson, both in the first edition of this
Dictionary and in the introduction to Vol. I. of
the Speaker's Commentary. Bp. Lightfoot gave
it incidental support by arguing that the
documents mentioned by Papias might well be
our first two Gospels (Contemp. Sen., August
1875, reprinted in Essays on Supernatural Re-
ligion, p. 142 sq.). And it has been accepted by
Dean Plumptre, Archdeacon Farrar, Dr. Lumby,
and many others.
It is not difficult to understand the attractions
of this hypothesis, especially for an English
mind. It accounts at once simply and naturally,
and without having recourse to any hyper-
critical theorizing, for all the differences
between the Gospels. And it has the great
recommendation that on the Baconian principle,
Hypotheses Ron fingo, it dispenses with the
necessity for inventing any other documents
than those which have actually come down to
us. The objections to assuming an earlier St.
Matthew than our present St. Matthew or an
earlier St. Mark than our present St. Mark are
stated especially by Dr. Salmon with great force
(Introduction, pp. 86 sq., 5th ed.). On the othor
4 12
Digitized by
Google
1220
.GOSPELS
hand, there is much reason to doubt whether
the German writers, like Weiss (Ziehen Jesu, i.
p. 27), who are strongest in their condemnation
of the oral theory, have really done justice to it.
With all their learning and powers of analysis,
it is perhaps a question whether the Germans
do not come somewhat short in historical
imagination. In reading many theories on the
origin of the Gospels we do not seem to get
clear of the nineteenth-century study or lecture-
room. Yet Palestine in the time of Christ was
something very different from these. The Jews
at this time were essentially a people of tradition.
The sayings of the Talmud were handed down
for centuries from mouth to mouth before they
were committed to writing. The Targums, or
Aramaic paraphrases of the Old Testament
Scriptures, repeated at the reading of the
lessons in the synagogues, were forbidden to be
set down in writing. Reader and interpreter
followed each other alternately, and the inter-
preter was obliged to speak from memory : he
was not allowed to consult a book. The earliest
written Targums of which we hear date from
the first century, and these were of Books like
Job and Esther, which were not read in the
public services. The Jews therefore were in
the habit of transmitting orally long strings of
connected sayings : the memory was constantly
practised : written compositions were the excep-
tion, and oral transmission the rule.
Our own theologians have very rightly laid
stress on this characteristic of Jewish life. And
when it is urged against them that the original
tradition would be in Aramaic and not in Greek,
that too, at least on the negative side, is not so
certain. The number of synagogues in Jeru-
salem was counted by hundreds (Edersheim,
Life, ^c, i. p. 119). Many of these, like the
synagogues of the Libertines, Cyrenians, and
Alexandrians in which St. Stephen disputed (Acts
vi. 9), would be specially intended for the Greek-
speaking Jews who came up as pilgrims to the
feasts. It was just among these Greek-speaking
Jews that the Christian propaganda was most
successful; and it seems far from improbable
that a special cycle of teaching would be
arranged for their benefit. The foreign Jews
more than the natives would need to have the
picture of the words and acts of Christ set
before them.
On all these grounds it would seem that a
stronger case can be made out for the oral
hypothesis than is often acknowledged. And
yet even when due allowance has been made
for them, it is still not clear that* the hypothesis
is adequate to account for the facts. If we put
aside for the moment the differences between
the three Synoptic Gospels and look only at the
agreement, we shall find that that agreement is
of the most thorough and searching kind. It is
agreement (1) in the selection of incidents and
sayings, (2) in their order, (3) in turns of phrase
which an oral tradition, however close, would
not be likely to preserve. A few words may be
said on each of these points.
(1) Selection of Narratives. — We are often
reminded that the Synoptic Gospels are even at
best a very fragmentary record. The Ephesian
editor of St. John was so impressed with the
abundance of the facts to be recorded as to give
utterance to the hyperbole that if all were
GOSPELS
written down "the world itself should not contain
the books that should be written " (John xxi. 25).
And yet the Synoptic Gospels, with all their
repetitions, only fill a very slender volume.
They themselves afford evidence enough that
what they contain is not the whole — even in
outline — but mere samples of the incidents in
the life of Christ. They all alike refer to
numbers of miracles of which they only par-
ticularise the same select few. They tell of the
woe denounced upon Chorazin and Bethsaida for
their unbelief in face of the wonders that had
been wrought in them. And yet not one of the
wonders wrought in these cities do they record.
Scattered over the Synoptic Gospels there are
divers hints of a Judaean ministry : and yet if
we had had these Gospels alone, we should hare
had no direct intimation that our Lord during
His public ministry had ever travelled south-
wards from Galilee. The Fourth Gospel throws
into relief the omissions of the Synoptists : but
the greater those omissions, the more remark-
able is it that they should coincide in their
choice of incidents to the extent they do.
(2) Order of Narratives. — Nor does the
strength of the case lie only in the fact that
the same incidents are chosen. The order in
which they occur is a more or less artificial
one; and yet that order is practically the
same— at least the divergences are transparent
enough to let the fundamental order be seen
through them. There is a normal order of
the incidents in the Synoptic Gospels which
underlies all three, and is capable of being
recovered. Much might be said on this head,
which was made the special subject of a paper
rend at Oxford in 1886 by the Kev. F. H. Woods
[since published in Stndia BSolica, ii. 59 sq.]. It
must suffice to refer to that paper here, or to
the discussions in Holtzmann or Weiss.
(3) Coincidences of Language. — It is hard to
believe that these coincidences in order arc
such as could be accounted for by the observ-
ance of a set type in preaching or catechetical
instruction. And the difficulty is increased
when we come to note the kind of coinci-
dences which also occur in phraseology. We
might well conceive that, even in an oral
Gospel, " single phrases would be impressed with
peculiar force," and that there would be a
" recurrence of strange words in the same con-
nexion in the different Evangelists, even when
the construction of the sentence was changed
(Westcott, Introduction, p. 193, ed. 3). But
the actual agreement in the Synoptics %ot>
beyond this. It extends to phrases which are
mere connecting links between the sections, and
which are just of a kind that in a purely oral
tradition would be the first to vary. It is e^T
to give examples. We may take for instance
four of the first consecutive sections in St
Mark's Gospel.
Mark i. 16.
Koi wapayw rapi Tqv
BdAamrav T$f TaAtAataf
tlfifr Xifutra c«l 'AySpiay
4>^aAAorrac cr rfi OaX&ovfl'
J\vav yip AAew.
Mstt. iv. 18.
ntptnTw ii «(>• *v
tiXvmr t*i r«AiW«
<U» Svo aJ.X««t. 2e«»
rbr kryiiLtmr tUTpov ««
'Aptprax »4r aStA*** •»«•"•
JSaAAomt it^i^'TVf
«cri|r WAunrv' ? w ft
aAxfit.
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
Observe especially the last clause, " for they
were fishers." This might indeed be thought
to be superfluous, and it would be so anywhere
but in this naive and simple kind of composition.
But in any case it is in a high degree improba-
ble that two independent versions of a story
orally repeated would not only both concur in
introducing such a clause, but introduce it
precisely at the same place. The conclusion
seems almost inevitable that the two Evan-
gelists are copying, not slavishly but freely,
not as scribes but as historians, from a common
document.
In the next section the coincidence is between
St Mark and St. Luke.
GOSPELS
1221
Mark i. 21, 32. Luke iv. 31, 32.
Kai c i<nro0fvo»T<u «tf Kai KKiykOiv etc Ka+ap-
Ka^apraavu' jccu tv&iit vcutiifi. *oAu> ny« raAiAatac,
rote ffafipatTtv i&iSaatnr Kai ^K &M&K&V avrovc «V
•U rijv cnivayvyqv. Kai rote aifipwtv' aai it-t-
i(iw\q<r<rwTO iwi rfi otoaxQ wkfrvwro iwi rg otoaxp
avrov K.T.A. avrov k.t.A.
The section in St. Luke is brought from an
altogether different context, and it bears marks
of this in the definition of Capernaum as " a
city of Galilee." The whole passage is still merely
an introduction to the incident which follows ;
and yet it glides at once into an identity of
language which hardly seems to be consistent
with oral tradition.
The next section belongs to the triple Synopsis : —
Matt. viii. 14. Mark i. 29, 30.
Kai eAsW o 'Ivoovc «« ver ockulv Kai «VSvc ex Tqt owaywyiif r f rX-
Qrrpov clScy ri|v vwrvcpa* avrov fit* voirec ijAoof etc tJ|V outlay StUMVOC
ftAqpcmrv Kai ropco-oovoai'. Kai *Apop«ov ucra 'lacw/Sov cat 'I»-
avrov. if 6i wcvftVpa SiiaMPOc xarc-
iCfiro wvpe'ercrovcra.
This is not one of the sections that we should
choose to prove the dependence of the threefold
narrative on a document rather than on tradi-
tion. For its proper appreciation it would
require a systematic examination of the method
and style of each of the three Evangelists. And
yet it should be noticed how closely the steps in
the narrative correspond — the synagogue; the
house ; the sick woman ; her relationship to
Peter ; the nature of her sickness. We cannot
perhaps say beforehand that an oral tradition
would not preserve all these steps, but they are
Luke Iv. 38.
'Apao-Taf 6} euro ttjc
rionjAArr etc Tip* outlay S^uivof.
vrv&tpa Off rov lUfiMvos %v owex°~
lUttj wvprrxf furyaAy.
at least more easily explicable on the assump-
tion of a common document. An exception
is presented by the additions in St. Mark
(" the house of Simon and Andrew, with Jama
and John "). These would of course be quite
as consistent with oral tradition. At the
same time they do not cause any real diffi-
culty when they come to be considered in
connexion with the general relations of the
three Gospel*.
After describing the incident in Peter's house,
the triple narrative proceeds : —
Man. viil. 16.
'GNptac *t 7<*OM«nK
«*np AauMvt^epcrovf x.T-A.
Mark I. 32.
'O^iiaf Si ycvoucV^c, ore rov 6 ijAio?
fytpor vpOf ouro* irew/rac k.t.A.
Luke lv. 40.
Avpoyroc 31 rov qAiov awame •
riyayoy . . . wpbc avror.
This passage raises a question with which we
shall have to deal presently, viz. as to the rela-
tive priority or closeness to the original
(whether oral or written) of the three Gospels.
It has been actually suggested that St. Mark's
double phrase, " at even " — " when the sun set,"
was a compound of which one part was taken
from St. Matthew, the other from St. Loke;
but Holtzmann very rightly replies to this that
the mention of the sun setting is by no means
so redundant as it may seem ; the day being a
Sabbath, the people would not be allowed to
move their sick until sunset (Einleitung, p. 344).
We may certainly discard the notion that St.
Mark has pieced together two phrases that lay
before him in different documents ; but there
is nothing at all unnatural in supposing that
the other two Evangelists drawing indepen-
dently of each other from a document like our
St Mark, the one chose one phrase and the other
another. This is just what might be expected
to happen under the circumstances, though it
might happen equally well if the common basis
was oral. The reason why the section is referred
to here is as showing that not merely the sub-
stance of the narratives but even the introduc-
tory phrases and links of transition present
strong features of identity. The four sections
together were taken almost at random as an
average specimen of the Synoptic narrative, and
yet all yield evidence — the first two strong
evidence — that the hypothesis of a written
document will better account for the phenomena
than the hypothesis of oral tradition.
No doubt the strongest point in the passages
just quoted is the identical insertion by St.
Matthew and St. Mark of the explanatory clause
3o*<u> yap aA«i». One more striking example
may be given of the same thing, from the
narrative of the Betrayal.
Matt xxvL 47. Mark xiv. 43. Luke Mil. 47.
Kat en avrov AoAovrroc ioov Kai «v0vc in avrov AaAovvTOC *Et« avrov AaAovvroc, lOov oxAoc,
T tfaS oc cle rmr SwOcKa jyVflcv Kai tier* wapoyivtrat. 'Iovoac 6 'I<r«npujinjs, Kai o Acyopcvot'Ioiftat «tf TMvteocxa
evrov egAac woAvc K.T.A. etc fuv owOCKa, Kai per* avrov oxAov vporjpxcro avrovc k.t.A.
K.T.A.
How is it that all three Evangelists must needs
tell us precisely at this point that Judas was
* one of the Twelve"? It is not that he had
K* been mentioned before, for he had been men-
tioaed several times, and once with a coincidence
nnalar to this of which we are speaking ; for
when his name occurs in the list of the Apostles
all the Evangelists alike take occasion to stigma-
tize him as " the traitor " (Matt. x. 4= Mark iii.
19 = Luke vi. 16). We should not be surprised
if some one writer, seeking to heighten the
guilt of Judas, had thought fit to remind us
Digitized by
Google
1222
GOSPELS
that he had been numbered among the Apoetles ; I
but when three together conspire to remind us I
of this at the very same juncture in the narra-
tive, some more substantial explanation appears
to be needed than is supplied by oral tradition.
Phenomena like these seem to drive us back
upon the hypothesis of a common written docu-
ment. Bnt there is one passage which goes
even further, and contains what can scarcely
be called an equivocal allusion to that docu-
ment itself. When they are recording the
prognostication of the signs which are to pre-
cede the coming of the End, the first two Evan-
gelists at least appear as if they were conscious
that the observation of those signs was a matter
of very pressing moment for their readers.
Hark xUi. it.
'Ow Si lti)rt to 0t*\irr
ijf cpiMAwawWtmpcoTa
rjf <piyui<nHf TO p^My pa TSC ipiyuianif to-npcora
AartjjA rou frpo fr j i 'Oii oirov ov Oct (6 ararftvmvicw
>f iv Tory «¥*¥ (° & *' a ~ "O«T*0» Tore oi if rp 'lou-
Mett. zztv. 15, It.
'Orwotr Wqrt to 0AV Avy-
pa r$c ipwutratc to
to
io-rof f v TOiry ctyty ^ -. -- u
yuwnwi' twin*), tot< oi oWa ^cvycrwo'ar ic.t.A.
in t§ 'Ioviatf favyfrtiaiw
K.T.A.
"Let him that readeth understand." "Him
that readeth " — what t The two Evangelists of
course mean, what they are writing. But they
would hardly coincide in inserting the warning,
in the same words, at exactly the same place in
the sentence, unless it were suggested to them
from without. But this external suggestion is
not given by oral tradition : it is not " him that
heareth," but " him that readeth." We seem to
be shut up to the conclusion that both made
use of a common written document from which
the phrase was derived.
This written document then seems to be
removed out of the category of fictitious entities,
and therefore is proof against the satire which
is sometimes directed against those who assume
the existence of what appear to be such entities.
It is true that the theory implies that a docu-
ment, which might be described as a Gospel,
has been lost. But other books which would
otherwise have been included in the New Testa-
ment have been lost. This is certainly the case
with at least one Epistleof St. Paul's (1 Cor. v. 9):
and we have only to go to St. Luke's Preface to
see that Gospels fared like Epistles. The won-
der would really have been if all the writings
of the apostolic age had come down to us. And
not only is there room for apostolic writings to
be lost, bnt there is also room for them to be
transformed in the process by which they have
reached us. Those who argue to the contrary
do not sufficiently consider the peculiar condi-
tions under which those writings arose. It is
hard to direst ourselves of the associations of a
literary age. We are apt to write and speak
as if we supposed that there must have been
always historians at hand to chronicle the
appearance of every new composition. Anyone
who has made a close study, e.g. of the Versions
of the Bible, will know how erroneous such an
idea would be. The great difficulty which
besets the origin of the Gospels arises from the
(act that they grew up, as it were, in the dark,
and that their early history can only be re-
covered by analysis. They grew up, too, under
conditions that have probably never been
repeated. The primitive Christians, with ex-
GOSPELS
tremely few exceptions, did not belong to the
literary classes. The earliest written records
were not composed by literary men ; and those
into whose hands they fell would not treat them
as we treat books, least of all as we should
treat the Bible. There was a sacredness about
them no doubt, but the sacredness attached to
the things recorded, not to the records. The
chief desire of each individual would be to hare
a full collection of the facts ; he would be far
less careful where his facts came from. We
have examples of the process from a time when
it was rapidly waning in the interpolations
which the so-called Western text (Cod. Bexae,
the Old Latin, and the Old Syriac) admitted
during the course of the second century. By the
close of that century, the time of Irenaens, the
process was practically at an end. But it is
uncritical to transfer the conditions of 160-200
A.D., or even those of the forty years preceding,
to the latter half of the apostolic and the sub-
apostolic age. When, therefore, the famous
passages which Eusebius quotes from Papias
describe the circumstances under which St.
Matthew and St. Mark wrote their Gospels, it
does not at once follow that the Gospels of
which he is speaking are in all respects the
same as those which we have now, or even
those which Papias himself had. Papias pro-
bably did not ask himself the question whether
they were or whether they were not. The
tradition that reached him was a historical
tradition, and came to him as a matter of his-
tory. It would be a further and distinct step
to turn that history into an instrument of criti-
cism, and see whether the accounts he heard of
their origin corresponded exactly with the
characteristics of the Gospels which he was in
the habit of using. If any change, or accretion
of changes, took place, it would be in that dis-
turbed and obscure time which immediately fol-
lowed the taking of Jerusalem. It would be a
great chance if anyone consciously observed the
change as it was being made, and a still greater
that he should take note of it in writing, atd
that his note should be preserved. The earliest
stages in the transmission of the New Testament
Books, we may be sure from the nature of the
case, wonld be of a very peculiar kind. They
would not be copied mechanically by profes-
sional scribes, but they would be copied with a
certain amount of freedom by persons who were
not tied by professional scruples, and from no
bad motive, but from a natural interest, made
use of the MS. before them to place on record
particulars which they had got from other
sources. And the nearer we go back to the
actual composition of the Books, the greater
would the liberties taken with them be. Nor
have we any guarantee that copies so treated
would not come down to us. The tendency
would be to preserve the fullest copy rather
than the purest.
We are able then, if this reasoning holds, to
approach the documentary hypothesis without
prejudice, not only in itself, but even if i" *"y
of its forms it should involve some distinction
between the Gospels mentioned by Papias and
those which now bear the same names, we
know from the express statement of St. Wj
that there were many Gospels in his day. » *
it would surely be strange, and not the rererse,
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
if these Gospels should hare been existing side
by side with our present St. Matthew and St.
Hark, and jet that those two Gospels should be
in no literary relation to them, but exclusively
based upon oral tradition.
The Hypothesis of oommon Documentary
Sources. — The way is now clear for the more
direct discussion of this hypothesis. In Germany,
is we hare already said, it has had the Held
almoat to itself during the period of which
we are speaking. It has, however, taken a
number of different and often complicated
forms; and we shall perhaps best avoid the
confusing effect of enumerating these if we first
gire a mere outline of the contributions that
hare been made to the study of the subject, re-
serving details, and then break up the problem
into its parts and endeavour to show how each
of these has been treated separately.
The threshold of the period is marked, as we
began by aaying, by the appearance of Dr. H.
J. Holtzmann's Die Synoptischen Evangelien
(Leipzig, 1863), a work following in the train
of Weisse and Wilke (see above, p. 1218), but
more thorough and searching than any that
hail preceded it. In his latest publication, the
Emleitung in d. A'. T. (1st ed. 1885, 2nd
ed. 1887), Dr. Holtzmann has announced some
changes of opinion which will be noted below.
Within a year of Dr. Holtzmann's appeared
another able treatise, also maintaining the docu-
mentary hypothesis, by Dr. C. Weizsacker,
Untersuchungen Sber die evangelisohe Oeschichte,
ihre Quellen und den Gang ihrer Entwickluny
(Gotha, 1864). Dr. Weizsacker, too, has recently
hod the opportunity of reviewing his previous
work in Das Apostolische Zeitalter (Freiburg i.
B., 1886). Of this also details will be given
below. The articles " Erangelien," " Geschichts-
quellen des N. T." in rol. ii., "Johannes" in
vol. iii ? and " Lukas," "Markus," "Matthaus"
in rol. ir. of Schenkel's Bibel-Lexikon (Leipzig,
1869, 1871, 1872), were all written by Holtz-
mann ; they were excellent summaries at the
time when they were written, and are still by
no means without their interest. In 1872 began
a series of very solid and elaborate works by
Dr. B. Weiss, developing in detail views to which
he had previously given a general expression :
Das Marcusevangelium, Berlin, 1872; Das
Matthausevangelium und seine Lucas-Parallelen,
Halle, 1876; Das Leben Jesu, Berlin, 1882;
EaUeitung in das N. T., Berlin, 1886. Besides
these more important works both Dr. Holtzmann
and Dr. Weiss had written frequently in perio-
dicals, in part controverting the special riews of
each other. By the side of Weiss' Leben Jesu
mention should be made of another book of the
lime kind and with the same title (Halle, 1885,
1st ed. ; 1887, 2nd ed.), by Dr. Willibald Bey-
schlag. Dr. Beyschlag had been an eager student
of the Synoptic problem, and had written articles
upon it in the Studien u. Kritiken, of which he
was joint editor. In the Introduction to his
Leben Jesu he gare a summary of results which
are much upon the same lines as those of Dr.
Holtzmann, though obtained by independent
study. The first introductory part of Die Lehrc
Jesu by Dr. H. H. Wendt (GOttingen) is really
an elaborate treatise of nearly 350 pages, on the
Gospels, and it has at least the merit of being
based upon a rery close analysis of the texts.
GOSPELS
1223
When we hare 'mentioned Scholten in Holland
QHet oudste Evangelic, 1868, with a German
translation by Redepenning, Elberfeld, 1869 ;
Het paulinisch Evangelium, 1870, also translated,
Klberfeld, 1881), Renan in France (esp. Les
tcangiles, Paris, 1877), and Dr. Edwin A. Abbott
in England (art. " Gospels " in the Encyclopaedia
Britannioa), though the list might be consider-
ably lengthened, we shall probably hare men-
tioned the most important productions on this
side of the question.
Let us first see what all these various works
hare in common before we proceed to consider
the points on which they diverge. Two leading
principles which it is believed that they all hare
more or less in common, are (1) the acceptance
of the statements made by Papias ; (2) the belief
in the priority (at least for a great part of the
Gospel) of St. Mark.
(1.) The Statements of Papias. — We might go
further and say that in contradistinction to the
upholders of oral tradition, the writers of whom
we hare been speaking are unanimously of
opinion that whatever may be the case in regard
to St. Mark, the Gospel attributed by Papias to
St. Matthew was not our present Gospel, but
an older document, of smaller extent, incor-
porated in that Gospel. This older document
they regard as in the main a "collection of dis-
courses," interpreting \iyta (lit. " oracles ") in
that sense. Now it roust be admitted that
Bp. Lightfoot proved in his article in the Con-
temporary Jleview (Aug. 1875) that the word
j does not necessarily bear this sense, and that it
' would fit just as well a mixed record of acts and
discourses, like our Gospel. At the same time
j it must also be admitted that the word might
1 have the more limited signification, or at least
might be applied to a document of which this
more limited description might be given. If
the advocates of the document theory took the
statement of Papias as their text, and argued
from it downwards, their position would be
untenable : it would at most amount to a possi-
bility that might be true or might not. They
have, however, pursued the more critical method
of keeping their analysis of the texts distinct
from their interpretation of Papias, and only
combining the two because they are found at
the end of the process to coincide. Papias then
gives us two main documents, — a Gospel by St.
Mark, which, if not our present Gospel, might
be rery like it, and a collection of discourses
composed by St. Matthew. Of the more exact
composition of each of these documents we shall
hare to speak immediately.
(2.) Priority of St. Mart.—hj "priority" of
St. Mark is meant here, either that our St. Mark
came first of the three Synoptics in order of
time, or that our St. Mark represents most
nearly in the greater number of its parts the
original Gospel which gare the framework to
the others. This is the direct antithesis to the
riew of St. Augustine ("Marcus Matthaeum
subsecutus, tamquam pedisequus et breviator
ejus ridetur," De Cons. JSv. i. 2, § 4), and of the
older TQbingen School which regarded St. Mark
as a mere epitome of St. Matthew. The inver-
sion of this riew is due mainly to two argu-
ments : (1) an examination of the order of the
narratives in all three Gospels ; (2) an examina-
tion of their language. (1) The position of the
Digitized by
Google
1224
GOSPELS
writers of whom we are speaking is based upon
this main fact, that by assuming the order of
the narratives observed by St. Mark it is not
only possible but easy to explain the order of
the other two Evangelists ; while, on the other
hand, by assuming the order either of St. Matthew
or of St. Luke, we should be wholly unable to
explain the order of the remaining Gospels. If
we divide St. Mark's Gospel into three sections
— (<«)i. 1— iii. 6; (6) iii. 7— vi. 13; (c) vi. 14—
xvi. 8 — we shall find that in section a the order
(but for some insertions on St. Luke's part) is
practically identical with that of St. Luke, and
that in section c the order is similarly identical
with that of St. Matthew. Section 6 is more
broken, but here too the order of St. Mark has
alternately the support of one or other of the
companion Gospels. The cases in which one or
other of these Gospels diverges from the order
of St Mark are accounted for either by the
general characteristics of the Gospel in question
or by some particular feature in the portion of
narrative which is transposed. This aspect of
the subject has been worked out with great
care by Mr. F. H. Woods in the paper mentioned
above. It is not contended that the order of
St. Mark, though in the main chronological, is
so in all respects : some sections (according to
Holtzmann, ii. 23 — iii. 6, iv. 21-25, ix. 33-50, x.
2-31, xi. 23-26) show marks of artificial com-
GOSPKLS
position : but it is contended — and this is one
of the concessions that the progress of criticism
has brought into ever-clearer light — that the
order of St. Mark represents the normal order of
the Synoptic narratives. (2) A very similar
conclusion holds good when the language of St.
Mark is compared with the language of the
other two Gospels. Here, too, St. Mark is
found to be in the main the middle term which
explains the parallel columns of the Synopsis.
The proposition needs some restriction — we can
only say "in the main." And ret there are
large stretches of the Gospel in which the proof
of it is overwhelming. When the language of
the Synoptic parallels is analysed, it falls under
four heads: (i.) points common to all three
Gospels ; (ii.) points common to St. Mark and
either of the other two Gospels ; (iii.) points
common to St. Matthew and St. Luke against
St. Mark ; (iv.) points peculiar to each of the
three Gospels. Now, putting aside the first and
last of these heads, which prove nothing to our
purpose, we observe at once that the second
class far exceeds the third. Some very slight
illustrations of what is meant may be gathered
from the verses of the triple synopsis printed
above. A few figures tabulated from the sections
which follow next in order may help to make it
clearer.
Point* common
to all three
Qofpela
Point* common
to St. Hark
in tarn with
St, Mattliaw
and St. Luke.
Polnbi common
tu BL Matthew
and BL Luke
again*
St Hark.
Healing of the Leper (Matt. vlli. 1-4 = Mark 1. 40-45 = Luke v. 12-16) .
Healing of the Paralytic (Matt. Ix. 1-8 = Mark il. 1-12 = Luke v. 17-26) .
Levi's Call and Supper (Matt. ix. 9-13 = Mark Ii. 13-17 = Luke v. 27-32) .
Fasting (Matt. Ix. 14-17 = Mark ii. 18-22 = Luke v. 33-39) .
Plucking the Ears of Com (Matt. xll. 1-8 = Mark II. 23-28 = Luke vi. 1-5)
Healing the Withered Hand (Matt. xii. 8-14 = Mark ill. 1-6 = Luke vi. 6-1 1 )
33
55
41
46
61
20
19 ( 8 + 11)
45 (154-30)
29(19 + 10)
47 (21+26)
33(10+23)
48(21+27)
3
11
5
H
8
5
The reader who wishes to pursue the subject
further may be referred to Mr. Rushbrooke's
sumptuous Synopticon (London, 1880, 1881),
which is specially constructed to exhibit in
detail the relation of the three Gospels to each
other. He will also find a specimen printed in
various types, with a convincing argument based
upon it, in Dr. Abbott's art. " Gospels " in the
Encycl. Brit^ p. 790 sq. Some interesting statis-
tics bearing on this point have been collected by
Dr. Schaff (Apostolic Christianity, p. 596 sq.).
The total number of words in St. Mark, includ-
ing the lost twelve verses, is 11,158: of these
2,651 are common to all three Gospels ; 2,793 to
St. Mark and St. Matthew; 1174 to St. Mark
and St. Luke. The figures for St. Matthew and
St. Luke (2,415) are not relevant to our purpose,
as they include the Sermon on the Mount, &c.,
which are omitted by St. Mark (see Schiirer,
Theol. Literaturzeitung, 1883, p. 99, for the
correction of a mistaken inference which Dr.
Schaff draws from his data). It appears that
more than half of the whole substance of St.
Mark (6,018 words out of 11,158) has been
absorbed into the other Gospels. It should be
said that the belief in the priority of St. Mark
— not necessarily in point of time, but in near-
ness to the common groundwork of the Synoptic
Gospels, whatever that groundwork might be—
is shared by defenders of the documentary hypo-
thesis, like Holtzmann, Weiss, and their allies,
with advocates of the oral theory, like Dr. West-
cott, and with writers who adopt a half-way
position between the parties, like Dr. Salmon.
The opposition to it has come chiefly from the
Tubingen school, and from those under Tubingen
influences. It is, if not an assured result of
criticism, vet rapidly becoming so.
Secondary Features in St. Mark.— The greater
originality of St. Mark, speaking broadly and
generally, has thus been, as it seems, trium-
phantly vindicated. And yet the claim is one
that cannot be made without reserve. True as
it is on the whole that St. Mark represents
more nearly the groundstock of the tradition,
he does not do so in every particular. In n'j
the sections tabulated above, though the general
preponderance was strong in favour of St. Mark,
there was still a small residuum in which
St. Matthew and St. Luke were agreed against
him. Usually these were not of great moment :
in the first of the above sections (The Leper)
there were three, ISoi, Kipu, tWus (for tWvt) >
in the second (The Paralytic) eleven, ttoi ag«i°>
M itAfnir, thtr, K\ivinv\, Airi)*.***- «'» t»» "l*"'
ainov, [f]^o0[i]6n<Tat>i, and so on. The per-
sistent way in which small points of this kino
kept recurring in each of the sections was
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
remarkable. But tbe points were not always
small. Occasionally whole sayings of a striking
kind and certainly original were found to hare
dropped ont from St. Hark while they were
retained by St. Matthew : such as " Go not into
any way of the Gentiles, and enter not into any
city of tbe Samaritans; but go rather to the
lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matt. x. 5, 6).
And if there was room to doubt whether St.
Matthew was not here drawing from a peculiar
source to which St. Mark had not access, there
was a clearer case in regard to the omission of a
saying like " I was not sent but unto the lost
sheep of the house of Israel " (Matt. it. 24).
It was natural that sayings which seemed to
breathe so much of the old particularism should
drop away when the wholesale admission of
Gentiles was a fait accompli. But the retention
of such sayings is a high testimony to the
originality of the document in which they occur,
and here the originality is on the side of St.
Matthew, not of St Mark. Besides these
isolated dicta, there were some sections like
those at the very beginning of his Gospel in
which St. Mark did present the appearance of
an abridgment.
This collection of points brings us to what is
really one of the greatest difficulties in the
whole Synoptic question — the secondary features
in St. Mark. No theory could be said to be
satisfactory until it accounted for these. We
proceed to enumerate the principal hypotheses
to which recourse has been had to account for
them. These are — (i.) the hypothesis of an Ur-
Marcus, or older form of the Gospel, nearly
resembling our present form, but containing
those features which hare been lost in it ; (ii.)
the hypothesis that St. Luke had before him
our present St. Matthew, and took from it thosa
features which he has in common with it as
against St. Mark ; (iii.) the peculiar theory of
Weiss, which will be more fully described
below ; (iv.) another theory, also suggested by
Weiss and by others, but which does not seem
as yet to have received very close attention ;
(v.) along with these solutions may be mentioned
a fifth on somewhat peculiar lines by two Eng-
lish scholars.
(i.) The Ur-Marcus Hypothesis. — This was
the hypothesis originally adopted by Holtzmann,
and fully worked out by him in the book which
we hare taken as the starting-point of our
survey. Something like it was also adopted
independently by Weizsacker in his Unter-
suchungen (1864). In the circle of those who
held that there was a documentary basis for all
these Synoptics it met with much approral.
Perhaps one of its simplest forms is that which
is put forward by Beyschlag in his Leben Jem
(1885). In describing this the opportunity may
be taken to mention that many of those who
fall back upon an Ur-Marcus still do not
believe that even this is absolutely the oldest
form of evangelical composition. Beyschlag
himself would begin the series with the notes
which Papias says were taken down by St.
Mark from the preaching of St. Peter, in regard
to which he takes the ob nivroi rdf« of Papias
in its strictest sense. He supposes that they
were mere jottings with no literary arrange-
ment (Leben Jem, p. 85). The date at which
these were made he would put about the year
GOSPELS
1225
66. These Petrine notes were combined a year
or two later with a specially Galilean tradition
into the Protevangelium, a finished literary
whole on the lines of our St. Mark, which gave
the framework of their Gospels to both St.
Matthew and St. Luke. This was still before
the taking of Jerusalem. Soon after that event
the Protevangelium, or Ur-Marcus, underwent a
slight revision (e.g. the substitution of tv
(Ktivtut rats Ti^i pais in Mark xiii. 24 for the
(iSicts of Matt. xxix. 29), and was so brought to
its present shape. Now it is not rare in English
books to find severe criticisms ou this multi-
plication of documents with imaginary names —
tlr-Marcus, Proto-Marcus, Deutero - Marcus,
Protevangelium, and the like. The names are of
course matters of pure indifference. The docu-
ments might as well be labelled A, B, and C, or
X, T, and Z. And the documents too themselves
are hypothetical ; but they are not therefore
altogether imaginary. The assumption that
there are such documents is merely the expres-
sion (which may be wrong, but cannot be known
to be so until it has been thoroughly tested) of
certain facts which are revealed by an analysis
of .our present Gospels. There are distinct
layers in our present St. Mark. There is one
layer that is earlier than our St. Matthew, and
another that is later ; one layer that is before
the fall of Jerusalem, and another that is after
it. To call these separate layers so many docu-
ments, or stages in the history of a document, is
a step, but by no means a reckless one ; and the
only condition for the verification of the hypo-
thesis is that it shall really account for all the
facts.
The natural objection to the Ur-Marcus
theory is, that it implies the existence of a
Gospel which is so like our present Gospel
without being identical with it. Under modern
conditions such a thing hardly could exist.
Under ancient conditions, in literary circles, and
where the regular machinery of book production
and propagation was at work, it would be rare.
But the particular conditions under which the
Gospels arose, as we hare seen, did not come
under these general laws. The changes that
took place in them would probably fall within
the sphere of transcription rather than of
authorship. The fate of the first two or three
copies would determine the fate of the book.
This is not equivalent to saying that the Ur-
Marcus hypothesis is proved ; it is only a plea
that it should not be dismissed in limine, as if it
were incredible. It is one of the hypotheses
which deserves renewed testing by systematic
application to the text.
(ii.) The Hypothesis that the First Gospel
teas used by the Author of the Third. — A change
has come over the attitude of many defenders
of the Ur-Marcus theory. This change dates
from the appearance of a work by E. Simons,
Hat der dritte Evangelist den kanonischen
Matthdus bemitztl (Bonn, 1881,) now un-
fortunately out of print, and not to be obtained
in this country. Simons answered the question
that he put to himself in the affirmative ; and
since he did so several leading critics have come
round to or expressed the same opinion. So
Holtzmann (Theol. Literaturzeitung, 1881,
col. 182 ; Einleitvmg, p. 339), Weizsacker (Apost.
Zeitalter, 1886, p. 414), Wendt (Lehre Jem,
Digitized by
Google
1226
GOSPELS
1886, p. 193). Holtzmann'a conversion had
taken place from independent study before
Simons' book appeared; Weizsacker gives no
details; Wendt appears to derive his view from
Simons. It is obvious that the assumption that
St. Luke had St. Matthew's Gospel before him
at once gives a satisfactory solution of all the
coincidences between them. It is, however,
essential to this theory that it should be taken
with the limitations which its cautions exponent
has given to it. Simons only contends for a
slight and incidental use of the First Evangelist's
work by the Third. Directly and systematically
he used St. Mark, indirectly and cursorily St.
Matthew. It is as if he copied the one and was
affected by an indistinct recollection of words
and phrases in the other. This is a possible
state of things: and only such very qualified
use is consistent with the marked divergence
which St. Luke presents in so many particulars
from St. Matthew.
If the First Gospel had been throughout the
work of an Apostle, then in any case St. Luke's
procedure would hardly be intelligible, as he
lays especial stress on the evidence of eye-wit-
nesses; but be may have felt that the First
Gospel, as it is, did not exclude a certain rivalry,
or he may not have had a copy in his possession
at the time of writing.
(iii.) Weiss' Theory.— Dr. B. Weiss still finds
both the Ur-Marcus hypothesis and the hypothe-
sis that St. Luke used the canonical Matthew in-
admissible, and he still holds to a theory of his
own to which there have been some approxi-
mations, but to which he does not seem to
have won many converts (see, however, Ex-
positor, 1891, p. 412). He maintains that the
Second Evangelist not only had and used the
Petrine tradition, but also the Matthaean col-
lection of discourses mingled with narrative.
The Gospel so constructed again became a main
source of our present First Gospel, the author of
which thus used the Matthaean document twice
over, itself directly, and indirectly through
St. Mark. In using it directly he at times
preserved its language more closely than St.
Mark had done. The cumbrous part of this
theory is the double use which it involves of the
same document ; and it is open to the further
objection, How did St. Mark come to leave out
from his apostolic document just those dis-
courses which were its most characteristic
features? It ought, however, to be said that
the theory that the Third Evangelist had
seen the work of the First also involves the
double use of a document— the Logia, once in
its original form, and once as worked np in our
St. Matthew.
(iv.) A modified Form of Weiss' Theory. — In his
Leben Jesu, p. 45, Weiss presents his theory with
what appears to be somewhat of a modification.
He warns us that in speaking of the use by
St. Mark of St. Matthew's collection he does not
mean a formal collating in the ordinary sense of
the term; be reminds us that St. Mark himself
had his home in Jerusalem, and would often have
heard the oral teaching of the Apostles before
he became a companion of St. Peter and con-
ceived the thought of writing a Gospel ; some-
thing of what he set down would be due to
these recollections, and they would lead him to
refer to St. Matthew's work and enrich his own
GOSPELS
from it as soon as it appeared- We are tempted
to ask if this last suggestion is necessary, and if
the first part would not be better without it.
Is it not enough to suppose that beside the
Petrine notes St. Mark would also use the
tradition of the Mother-Church, and that the
superior details in the First Gospel are only
the same tradition rather more correctly
rendered? This would at least simplify the
theory: but an opinion cannot be expressed upon
either form of it until it is confronted verse
by verse with the text*.
(v.) So far the solutions hare either treated
our St. Mark as itself an original document,
or as nearly co-extensive with the common
original of the Synoptic portions of the three
Gospels; and the divergences from St. Mark
have been explained as due in the main to
literary considerations. In this way both the
elements which are common to all three Gospels,
and those which are common to St. Mark with
either of the others, would alike form part of
the original document. But another hypothesis
was possible. It was possible to start not from
the threefold coincidences and the twofold co-
incidences, but from the threefold coincidences
alone. Dr. Edwin A. Abbott in his article in
the Encyclopaedia Britannica adopted this alter-
native, and a somewhat similar solution of
the question was worked out independently br
Dr. Edersheim. [Dr. Edersheim's ' papers are
not published, but permission was given by
the author before his death for the use which
is here made of their contents.] Both these
scholars appear to have been influenced by the
same argument, viz. by the observation that
the threefold coincidence — " the triple tradi-
tion,'' as Dr. Abbott calls it — when detached
from the rest of the context, gives by itself a
tolerably continuous narrative. Dr. Abbott's
" triple tradition " corresponds to Dr. Edersheim's
" original document " (" 0. D.") ; and a specimen
of Dr. Abbott's reconstruction of this may be
seen in the art. "Gospels" in End. Brit. vol. x.
p. 793. If the result appears to the modern
reader somewhat abrupt, disjointed, and obscure,
Dr. Abbott urges that the Mishna was trans-
mitted in a very similar fashion; he compares
the short sentences of his tradition to a telegram
which needs to be " expanded " before it can be
understood ; and he makes use in a most in-
genious manner of this very obscurity and the
differences of interpretation to which it gsre
rise as a means of accounting for some of the
more marked deviations from the original text
and from each other, in the three Gospels
{Common Tradition of the Synopt. Gospels, p. «■
London, 1884). Dr. Edersheim's reconstruction
of his "original document" does not differ
widely from Dr. Abbott's, but in the further
development of the two theories there is some
divergence. Dr. Abbott agrees with the mass
of the scholars who adopt the documentary
hypothesis in regarding our St. Mark as the
nearest representative of the common tradition,
and he believes that the First and Third Evan-
gelists have borrowed from this independently.
Dr. Edersheim finds the common tradition often
more faithfully preserved in St. Matthew, and
he thinks that St. Luke had seen both St. Mark
and St. Matthew. For a criticism (which is rather
too caustic) on the reconstructed " triple tradi-
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
tim," the reader may be referred to Dr. Salmon's
IstmhictioH, p. 132 sq, 5th edit.
The Collection of the Logia. — If the secondary
futures in St. Mark are one of the " burning
points" in the Synoptic question, the exact
■store and extent of the Logia of St. Matthew
a mother. Even the existence of this document
is net perhaps altogether proved, though there
is a strong consensus upon the point in Germany.
The assumption of it does not really rest upon
t particular interpretation of the words of
Papias, but is an independent result of analytic
criticism which appears to coincide with, and
to be confirmed by, those words. When on the
one hand it was observed — as it could not fail
to be observed — that the common matter in
St. Matthew and St. Luxe which they had over
and above the main body of the Synoptic tra-
dition shared by them with St. Mark consisted
mainly of discourse, and when on the other hand
there was the express statement of Papias that
St. Matthew composed a collection of koyia
which, whatever the other uses of the word,
would be at least an appropriate name for a
collection of discourses, it was an obvious step
to identify the common element of discourse in
the First and Third Gospels with the document
the existence of which was thus historically
attested. And there was the further reason
for this that it was improbable on a number
of grounds (which are conveniently summarised
by BeyschUg, p. 93), that the First Gospel in its
present form, though even in this form a very
primitive document, came directly from the
hands of an Apostle. That being so, it was a
simple snd natural explanation of the eccle-
siastical tradition which connects this Gospel
with the name of St. Matthew, that it embodied
the original apostolic work in so prominent and
distinctive a manner.
But was the tame apostolic work also used
by St. Luke ? The primd facie view is no donbt
that it was; nor is the presence of difficulties in
the way of this supposition at once destructive
of it. There is, for instance, such a difficulty
almost at the outset in the Sermon on the
Mount. Putting aside for a moment the
divergence in the account by the two Evan-
gelists of the circumstances under which the
discourse was delivered, and putting aside the
difference in extent of the two versions, is it
probable that if the Third Evangelist had had
before him the Beatitudes in the form in which
we have them in St. Matthew he would have
written as he did? Or if the First Evangelist
had had them before him in the form in which
they occur in St. Luke, would he have written
as be did ? The divergence seems to go beyond
the usual degree of latitude in two independent
transcriptions of the same text, nor does it seem
that an adequate motive can be assigned for it.
Something might be due to the fact that, as
Beytchlag supposes, and as the consent of all the
early authorities would lead us to expect, St.
Matthew originally wrote in Aramaic, and the
two Evangelists translated from this original
independently : but a mere difference in transla-
tion will not resolve eight (or nine) Blessings
into four Blesaings and four Woes. If we must
ssrane that both versions are derived from the
•km source, does it not seem almost necessary
to suppose that some farther step or steps inter-
GOSPELS
1227
vened before they eouU reach their present
form ? The question must be left, for it is one
that does not appear to have been grappled with
quite so thoroughly as might be desired : and it
is only a single example out of many. The
difficulties which arise out of the order of the
several discourses or sayings in the two Gospels
have been dealt with more satisfactorily, though
it would be too much to say that a full solution
has been found. This however reminds us that,
though progress may be slow, yet there has
been progress. Wendt has recently made a
bold attempt {Lehrt Jem, i. p. 50 sq.) to recon-
struct not merely the outline, but the whole
text of the original Logia from our two Gospels.
It was more than could be hoped that such an
attempt should be immediately successful. But
aiming at a higher object is often the best way
to attain a lower object ; and the experiment
can hardly nil to contribute to the furtherance
of criticism. Though agreement has not yet
been reached on a number of important ques-
tions relating to the Logia, there is at least a
tendency to agreement on two points : (i.) It is
coming to be now generally recognised that the
First Evangelist has grouped together sayings
that were not all really spoken on the same
occasion (so in the Sermon on the Mount, at
least in Matt. vii.). Holtxmann compares
many of the sayings which belong to the Logia
to " erratic blocks " which have travelled some
way from their original position. He and
others think that they are more often to be
found m situ in St. Luke (e.g. Luke xii. 13-31 ;
cp. Matt. vi. 25-33). The opposite view to
Holtzmann's is held amongst others by Dr.
Edersheim, whose reconstruction of the Logia is
peculiarly interesting. He thought that it was
a genuinely Jewish work, constructed after the
manner of such works in five Pereqs or Sec*
tions, like the five books of the Law, or the five-
fold division of the Psalter. These five Pereqs
are identified with the five great masses of dis-
course in St. Matthew. The whole theory is
attractive; but the difficulties will begin to
be felt when it is sought to explain how the
compact discourses of St. Matthew came to be
dispersed into the scattered sayings that we
find in St. Luke, (ii.) Another point on which
critics are now more agreed than they were at
the beginning of the period of which we have
been speaking is, that though the Logia consisted
of a number of more or less detached sayings,
these sayings were often prefaced with brief
historical introductions. What has been said on
the meaning of the word \6yia will show that
these were by no means excluded. Thus the
way is prepared for Weiss, who would refer to
the Logia not only narratives like the Healing
of the Centurion's' Servant — which are peculiar
to St. Matthew and St. Luke — but others like the
Healing of the Leper and of Jairus' Daughter,
and the Sabbath controversies (Mark ii. 23 sq.),
which are common to all three Gospels. This is
part of the theory which has been previously
referred to (p. 1226 above), and it has not as
yet met with much acceptance.
This glance at the history of the Synoptic ques-
tion is as far perhaps as we can go with profit
in general terms. The one thing to be depre-
cated on this even more than on other questions,
is the random use of generalities untested by
Digitized by
Google
1228
CJOSPELS
GOSPELS
facts. What has just been given does not
profess to be more than a sketch in outline of
the different solutions ; it is not even a criticism
of them, much less an attempt either to propose
a new solution or defend an old one. That can
only be done satisfactorily by going through the
whole text verse by verse and word by word.
There are doubtless some who will be
deterred by the multitude of divergent views
which are held' by critics. But it is a shallow
argument, and one that ought not to be used,
to point to the extent of this divergence as in
itself proof that all the theories alike are wrong
and a real solution impossible. No considerable
scientific question has ever escaped without a
tentative period ; least of all a question of such
extreme complexity and difficulty as the present.
The impression that is made upon the mind of
one who has studied the question mainly from
without, and not as yet, except to a limited
extent, in close detail from within, is that the
complexity is not so great as to be never un-
ravelled, and the difficulty not so great as to be
never overcome.
Little by little, untenable hypotheses are
being discarded; theories are formulated and
brought to a precise issue, to which an affirma-
tive or negative answer can be given ; and as
the issues are narrowed, the magnifying-glass of
a close criticism is brought to bear upon them.
When we remember all this, and when we take
into account some wider considerations, the
international character which theological study
of all kinds is assuming, and the many and
varied qualifications of those both in Europe and
America who are engaged upon it, it does not
seem too bold to prophesy that the end, if not
exactly near, is not very distant, and that the
twentieth century at least will not be far
advanced before the long-sought solution is found.
Comparative Table of different Forms of the
Documentary Hypothesis. — It only remains to
attempt to give some idea of the relation in
detail of these different theories to each other.
The student, it is thought, must often wish for
some means of comparing together the treat-
ment of particular sections by the different
critics ; and an attempt is made to give him
this, though it must be confessed only in a rough
and approximate way. The task was one that
it was difficult to carry out satisfactorily. In
cases like those of Weiss and Wendt and Holtz-
mann's reconstruction of 1863, the data were
sufficiently complete ; but in the case of Weiz-
sacker and Beyschlag, where the treatment was
less detailed, incidental and scattered statements
had to be picked oat and put together, and
where such statements were wanting (though
they might often be supplied by probable con-
jecture) it seemed best to leave a blank ; nor
can it be said that the examination of these
writers has been exhaustive. It was also not
found possible to represent in the tables all the
restrictions and qualifications and variations in
the assignment of position with which the
criticism of the different sections is accompanied.
The tables do not aim at giving more than a
coup (fasti of the subject, with such limitations
as appear to be inseparable from a coup cFceil ;
but it is hoped that it may prove of some use to
those who desire to attack the problem at closer
quarters. The sections are adapted from
Holtzmann's Einieitung, pp. 353-361. A short
preliminary account is given of each of the
theories tabulated, with one or two details
which may enable the English reader to judge
of its distribution. It will be seen that most of
the writers quoted are veterans who have given
prolonged attention to the subject.
Holtzmann, Dr. H. J. (b. 1832), Professor at
Strassburg. In his work on the Synoptic
Gospels in 1863 Dr. Holtzmann held that the
two main elements in the Synoptic composition
were (1) an Ur-Marcus similar to bnt in some
respects fuller than our present St. Mark ; (2) a
collection of Logia or discourses by the Apostle
St. Matthew, worked up in both the First and
the Third Gospels, and often preserved most
faithfully in the latter. In his latest work,
the Einieitung in das N. T. (1st ed. 1885), Dr.
Holtzmann has announced some modifications of
these views, due to the discussions in which he
has been engaged in the interval. He now
thinks that the Third Evangelist had the work
of the First (our present St. Matthew) before
him, " so that at least most of the reasons for
distinguishing between an Ur-Marcus and our
present Mark fall away." He also thinks that
all the discourses in St. Luke are not necessarily
to be referred to the Logia ; that some of them
have undergone still further redaction in St.
Luke than in St. Matthew ; and that the Logia
■nay not have consisted purely of discourse, but
that there may have been brief introductory
narratives as a framework for the discourses.
Dr. Holtzmann's changed views as to the dates
of the completed Gospels will be noticed below.
We are unfortunately without the materials for
representing his present position in detail, and
so have been obliged to fall back upon this
earlier construction, which has now indeed come
to have only a historical interest, but which in
its day was the most solid attempt that had been
made at the elucidation of the problem, and
which still retains much of its suggestiveness.
[Dr. Holtzmann's latest views are given in his
concise commentary on the Synoptic Gospels
{Die Synoptiker, Freiburg i. B., 1889).]
Weizsacker, Dr. C. (b. 1822), Professor at
Tubingen. Dr. Weizsacker, like Dr. Holtzmann,
has recently brought out a revised version of
his original Untersuchungen uber die eattigdische
Oeschichte. Almost the same interval of time
separates the two works: the Untersuchungen
appeared in 1864, Das Apostotische Zeitalter in
1886. Here, however, the later work is full
enough to allow us to use it directly. The
characteristic feature in Dr. Weizsicker's theory
is, that he thinks that both the narrative-ele-
ment and the discourse-element in the Gospel*
have gone through a greater number of stages
and a longer development before reaching their
final shape. According to Weizsacker, small"
collections were made up into larger before the
larger were made up in our present Gospels.
He tries to distinguish those smaller collections,
and we have endeavoured to reproduce these
distinctions, which are not so arbitrary as one
who approaches the subject from the outside
may perhaps think them. ..
Weiss, Dr. B. (b. 1827), Professor at Berlin.
In a long series of publications, enumerate
above, Dr. Weiss has held steadily, and wllh . .v
little modification, to his original idea: waicn
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
is, that the Apostle St. Matthew wrote first a
collection mainly of discourse, bat with a slight
amount of narrative appended ; that St. Mark,
haTing this before him, combined with it his
recollections of the preaching of St. Peter, and
that the work which he so produced lay before
both the First and the Third Evangelists, who
also had access to the original Matthaean collec-
tion. By "Oldest Gospel" Dr. Weiss means
this collection ; by " Petrine Gospel " he means
the tradition derived by St. Mark from St.
Peter. These two he takes to be the fundamen-
tal and primitive elements in our Gospels as we
now have them; all three being composite iu
different proportions. Mention has been made
of the slight modification which Dr. Weiss seems
disposed to admit.
Wendt, Dr. B. B. (b. 1853), Professor at
Heidelberg. As befits a younger scholar build-
ing upon the labours of his predecessors, Dr.
Wendt has stated his views with great precision,
though his object in writing was primarily to
lay the foundation for a study in Biblical Theo-
logy (Di« Lehrt Jem, 1886). He, too, seeks to
analyse St. Mark's Gospel into the different
groups of tradition of which it is composed ;
and he has also, as we have seen, made a bold
attempt to reconstruct from the texts of St.
Matthew and St. Luke the original Logia.
BeyscUag, Dr. WUUbald (b. 1823X Professor
at Halle. Dr. Beyschlag's views may be ascer-
tained from an article in Studien und Kritikcn
for 1881, and from his Leben Jem (1st ed. 1885 ;
2nd ed, which has been used here, 1887). He
hold* that the first nucleus of our Second Gospel
consisted of the loose notes taken down by St.
Mark of the teaching of St. Peter; that these
were reduced to order by a Galilean Christian,
who inserted the warning in Mark xiii. 14, and
that the Protevangelium thus formed was after-
wards edited, as we have it, for the use of the
Church of Rome. Much about the same time
with the Protevangelium, St. Matthew com-
mitted to writing his Logia, which were worked
up doubly, on the basis of the Protevangelium,
in our First and Third Gospels — in the latter
perhaps from a different version of the Aramaic
original. Of all the different forms that have
been taken by the Two-Document hypothesis,
this of Dr. Beyschlag's is perhaps the simplest
and least complicated (see Table, pp. 1230-
1236).
External History of tie Ooapels : Formation of
tie Canon. — Along with the inherent com-
plexity of the phenomena, the other main
source of difficulty is the scantiness of the
literature which might throw light upon them.
For the first hundred years of their existence —
70-170 A.D. — the Gospels pass through a region
which is only dimly and fitfully illuminated by
extant documents. The Church, in Dr. Salmon's
picturesque expression, " enters a tunnel," from
which it only emerges in the time of Irenaeus.
Hence a special importance attaches to every
addition to the literature of the period. And
the twenty-five years that we are chronicling
happen to be singularly rich in such additions.
We will first speak of the additions which have
been made to the materials of our knowledge,
then of the criticism which has gathered round
those materials, and lastly we will try to sum up
the results which seem to have been obtained.
GOSPELS
1229
Addition of New Materials. — The year 1863 is
again marked by an event of importance. It
was in this year that Tischendorf first gave to
the world the complete text of the N. T. from
the Sinaitic Codex, with the Epistle of Barnabas
and fragments of the Greek Hernias (N. T.
Sinaiticum site N. T. cum epietola Barnabae et
fragments Pastoru, Leipzig). This was the
first time that the 4) opening chapters of the
Epistle of Barnabas had been published in the
original Greek. The publication was important,
as setting at rest the question as to the genu-
ineness of ms ytypawrat introducing the much-
debated quotation xoWol K\jirot, i\iyot 8<
(TtAeKTol at the end of c. 4. Up to the finding
of Cod. M there had been room to suppose that
" sicut scripturo est " was an interpolation by
the Latin translator. Something will be said as
to the bearing of this on the history of the
Canon of the Gospels below. The evidence of
another Greek MS. was added in 1S77, when
Hilgenfeld utilised for his second edition of the
Epistle the collations of the Constantinople MS.
written in 1056, sent to him by Bryennius.
The accessions to the text of Hennas derive a
present interest from the publication (or rather
republication) of the concluding portion by
Driiseke after Simonides (Hilgenfeld's Zeitschrift,
1887, Heft 2, p. 172 sq.), and from its vindi-
cation by Hilgenfeld ; but we are forbidden to
go into this by the doubly dubious character
of the text itself and of the allusions to the
Synoptic Gospels in Hennas generally. [Si-
monides* text is now completely disposed of:
see A Collation of the Athos Codex of the Shep-
herd of flermas, by Dr. Spyr. P. Lambros,
ed. by Mr. J. Armitage Robinson, Cambridge,
1888.]
We are treading on firmer ground in following
the history of the writings attributed to Clement
of Rome. The precious Constantinople MS.
which contained the Greek text of Barnabas also
contained the two so-called Epistles of Clement ;
and the concluding portions of both of these
were published for the first time by Bryennius,
Metropolitan of Serine (now of Kicomedia), in
1875. Within a few months of the event the
University of Cambridge became possessed of a
Syriac version of the two Epistles which had
hitherto been overlooked, although it had be-
longed to the distinguished Orientalist M. Jules
Mohl. By the help of these new documents
Bp. Lightfoot was able to supplement his pre-
vious edition and to revise the text of the whole
in an Appendix which appeared in 1877. The
added chapters of the First Epistle contained no
quotations from the Gospels, but those of the
Second Epistle (which is now proved to be, as it
had been before suspected of being, really a
Homily) were found to contain a number of
important data, both for the history of the
Canon in general and for that of the Gospels in
particular. The Old Testament was called tA
$i$\ta: the New Testament, or such Books as
the writer regarded as authoritative, of ainj-
otoAoi. If, on the one hand, it was clear that
he used an apocryphal Gospel or Gospels, on the
other he was found to cite the evangelical
records not only as ypapb, but with the still
more weighty formula i e«bi \{ytu A word
will be said on the significance of these pheno-
mena presently.
Digitized by
Google
1230
GOSPELS
GQ
O
H
S5
H
-- r
6-
O
W H
« 33
(Ll
+ 5 + a
■38 oS
3 = 7
"*-
si.?
1 B '
3 s —
si— 3
Ig
■a"
-
in
Ills,
g-g C„=f
3 -St! ^
£
.EC
£
(--■iS'-i;
Hi
fr £7*0 SSsS 1 5-S
« u 3o o S S
Jo -j^ooo
2
og
■ a
! S
•si
§ 8 l«llf III
a
I
s
3
>
h-t
I
8 j
- a
3&
in
T<
S3
a a
a 1
si
£ a
■s g$
* o»
, • — . « . _:
• 4)
•-i V ..
7 ^ ^
• j".
;: -a
si J.
^
■j ..s
>' -i 2 »
•-S gl
|8JS
i w s _J
-• .5 g «
■J ■
ai
J, a
.HO"
S..S
^5
s ■%
EPJ!
P.r
*a
la
?-2
S3
►Ji
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
1231
c > a-. ■*■ *
f
1 M " £ C>
-H«OU
Jpg
■«ffi
JH1
* r! -j — — t2
o ■ a > > >£ • '5 "
2 * * *JS §
-. :.
= .
33
a a
rli.
f! s
3 bS «S T
i i
-
I|
1
-
is » I'd
o .
*a
. a .
-*a
O 'J OU 3 fM
o o coo
Digitized by
Google
1232
GOSPELS
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
1233
H > * 3 > a «
53 H?
e- 2-
25
P n
ft.
- £
= **
2 §"Es
H = a .2
5.5
• <
-™ --5 1
i 5 B \3 .. ^
2 3
~~ r ■;: »-g 3.-= ." £ ~
■3? ■
a o"3
~ 3
+ 7-"
t o |
= = =
S.1S
! = !
z ■: -
II
I'd S. a *.g.
5" ss
is-~ -a
— — -s *
oco
« 5
I?:
: - - T
300 o
» s c s
£■8.5
.So" = „ 3 r J o o
J, t* -— ~ " ^ -— "O <*> <P V-
s-^u— ^>u— o £ 2j
S-S°S n, S°2 2 2
o b. c a. o o o
a *
s -*
sis*
*H-,3
835
\ | 5 a e a ii 3
3 3 3 3
8 § S S
III
3 3 3 3
a S a
I I*
3 3
,09 .
l!
IB
H
■ s», •
s?
11
-£!_
p
a 8 ■
8 3*! . 8
E « S J
65I3S
•53SS 3
Si-Sag
li£~sl>
33 3
S3 3
2 * '
. >
S4i
ill
s K 3
•3 £ *
3 a s
•2 P. S
a n .
a a
s »
1 I
f •
o J,
5 =
3 =
a
T
a
a
3
J. h
1 5
i
mint ii
^»HVo »
S 8
i s
a a
o a
9 5
a «
S 00
1 £
* I
a a
> pi
» J.
&! a
t» £ ^
s . a
ft*
« -a f"
H £ H
a
if
4 a'
M £
IE I.
I!
U
a,
1
2 5
S 3 a
1 >§
S3 I e
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
4 K
Digitized by
Google
1234
GOSPELS
S3
§1 I s *
la.lls.dl I
"if It!!
:a P.* y — 3 •
P"
■stsatS
S3
— "3
£ E =
Sua
III
III! I
• -I I
|!*GIII|l
hjgiHli
a
5
8
2
o
■a
cSS
1
s
57 «*J
€ a -3
5 i -j~
~ s ^ j
•a j
s 5 e.35
4> a;
3 C-M
Is,
T 2
* i e
1
x . ,S"f
Sift*
I | 3 2 »
3 K"
I ■='
x» 9 S
3 a
i > 3-
I i Ism
■3
•8 §
| J
f £
ssd
& 5
5. 3*
I
I s
5 «
•§•2
5 J=
III
■> S •
p- ps fe
•A oj E <
to h<r
o
JN
*£
* s
si
P r*
apis's
g si?!
. O Fr*3-
i .l.d
. ^-1 a
S 22 .4
3 is .•
• £>> i!
g 5a .s
(3 1 = 18*
-* iO®(^«
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
1235
is
S c
S =*■£ Sol's s£»;
•* w ^ < t: f
g ■
S3
u
I s
iJS&ol=
a.
iiilffliiilsl
if
121
s *
» s 3 a
U (J o u
t- — i- k-
-. at «3 ej cj
5 T*>:
1 i* iffgi i i
— ; ™ — l
see i c
e. , e- — , ■
ZS S g 5
s.s « « .s
it £ «{ c
So E„
o .2
S- I &
5
8.1
I?
as.
"5 *-"
5*|
o a.
2
5*g ^
ifj:
. *
. Sf ■
°5a
. .
- . 8gS3
= 85S
C
»i
o) bo , c « ™ «a
.. ggS.Sgl.2
3 i
T S
.3 T
§
I
P3 rt ft CO CO CO
$ I
I
3
H
1
4 K 2
Digitized by
Google
1236
GOSPELS
!
M
M
■a
S
a §-'
sfljSj
6 3&£ i
e -ag
I «£
« tO to «o
I «
5 B
I i
^ CO
GOSPELS
While such were the fortunes of the Clemen-
tine Epistles, a more "epoch-making" work
appeared, but for a time remained practically
hidden, — the translation by Aucher and Moesinger
of an Armenian version of a Commentary by
Ephraem Syrus on a text which the editors
rightly maintained to be that of the long-lost '
Diatessaron of Tatian. This did not indeed pa.*
entirely unnoticed, but it did not attract by any
means the attention which it deserred until the
publication in 1881 of Part I. of Zahn's For-
schungm zur GeschichU dea neutestomerdlkhm
Kanons. Zahn devoted the whole of this volume
to the Diatessaron, reconstructing and analys-
ing its text, pointing out its relation to other
authorities, tracing the history both of the
Diatessaron and its author, and indeed doing all
that an accomplished critic should do. The
appearance of the veritable Diatessaron dispelled
a number of myths or figments with which some
rather hypercritical writers had surrounded it,
and a solid and most important contribution
was made to our knowledge of the history of
the Gospels in the second century. This know-
ledge will be still further enhanced when the
complete text is published of an Arabic version
of the Diatessaron, of which a preliminary account
was given by Father Ciasca in Pitra's Ataiettz
Sacra, torn. iv. p. 465 sq., Paris, 1883. [Some
sections have recently been published by De
Lagarde in Mittheilungen, ii. 30 sq., and suffice
to disappoint the expectations which the version
had excited. It is found to be based upon the
Peshitto : in other words, the Diatessaron was
adapted to the text of the current Arabic N. T.,
just as in Cod. Fuldensis it was adapted to the
Vulgate. See further Hemphill, Dial, o/ T.
(Dublin, 1888) ; Rendel Harris (Cambridge,
1890); Sellin in Zahn's Forschungcn, iv. 325 sq.
(Erlangen and Leipzig, 1891).]
In the next part of his fbnchungcn, which
appeared in 1883, Zahn was less fortunate. He
sought to recover a document which would only
have been second in importance to the Diates-
saron, viz. a Commentary by Theopbilus of
Antioch, which, if genuine, would hsve been
written about 180 A.D. But though Zahn
himself adheres to his opinion, or at most only
admits interpolations in the work which he put
forward, it is not too much to say that critical
opinion on the whole has been unfavourable to
the claim which he made for it.
Bryennius published the contents of his pre-
cious MS. by instalments, and early in the year
1884 the world was startled to find itself in the
possession of a new document belonging in all
probability to the sub-apostolic age. The echoes
of this discovery are still around us, and more
need not be said about the history of the Didachi.
The bearings of it upon the Canon of the Gospels
are similar to those of other documents of the
same date, and will be treated with them in the
general summary.
A word of mention is due here to the dis-
covery by Mommsen in the Phillipps Library at
Cheltenham of a stichometrical list of the Books
of O. T. and N. T. and of the writings of Cyprian.
This list was published by Mommsen soon after
its discovery in Hermes, vol. xxi. p. 142 so-
under the heading Zur latemitchen Stickomctrk.
It has the advantage of being definitely dated :
the MS. is of the tenth century, but it contains
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
amongst other matter a note pointing to the i
year 359 as the time of its composition, and
there is nothing to prevent the extension of this
date to the list. It would thus rank next to the
Mnratorian Fragment among the Latin lists, and
it has the Gospels in a peculiar order," — Matthew,
Mark, John, Luke, which deserves appreciation
among other phenomena of the same kind. [On
this list see Studia Biblica, iii. 217 sq., and Zahn,
Gcsch. d. Kan. ii. 143 sq.]
History of Criticism It was natural that dis-
coveries like these should give an impulse to
criticism, though in some important instances
criticism was not first stirred by them. The
activity has been greatest in the latter half of
the period over which our survey extends. It
won Id be ont of place here to attempt to notice
all the books relating to the Canon, or all the
criticism of the newly-discovered documents that
falls within this period. But a few words may
be said in regard to discussions bearing directly
upon the use of the Gospels. These may be
regarded as grouping themselves round certain
central points : (1) the use of the Gospels by
the early Gnostics ; (2) the elaborate controversy
covering the whole period of the formation of
the Canon of the Gospels, raised by Supernatural
Religion; (3) the discussions as to the genuine-
ness of the Commentary attributed to Theophilus
of Antioch ; (4) the discussions as to the Didachi.
For the reasons above mentioned, the last two
need not detain us. Enongh to say that in the
controversy about the supposed Commentary of
Theophilus, the protagonists were Dr. Theodor
Zahn and Dr. Adolf Harnack ; and that the
principal works bearing on the controversy were
Part II. of Zahn's/brscAuff<7en(Erlangen, 1883);
Vol. 1, Part IV. of Gebhardt and Harnack's
Texte u. Untersuchungen (Der angebliche Eran-
gtHenammentar des Theophilus ton Antiochien,
Leipzig, 1883) ; and a reply by Zahn in an appen-
dix to the next part of the Forschungen (Supple-
mentumClemcntinum, p. 198 sq., Erlangen, 1884).
A short account of the controversy was given
in an essay published in Studia Biblica, p. 89 sq.
(Oxford, 1885). In regard to the DidacM, there
have of course been discussions and differences
of opinion, but only to a slight degree affecting
the use of the Gospels.
The two other discussions have been of greater
moment for our particular subject. If our
inquiry had included St. John, we should have
bad to add a third in order to take special note
of the admirable monograph on the External
Evidences for the Authorship of the Fourth Gospel
(Boston, 1880) by the late Dr. Ezra Abbot ; and
the equally admirable articles, much to the
same effect, by Prof. James Drummond in the
Theological Review, Oct. 1875, and April and
July 1877, with two articles, tending to qualify
the results obtained, by Dr. Edwin A. Abbott in
the Modern Review, July and October 1882 ; the
bulky bat fantastic volume by Thoma, Die
Genesis des Johannes- Evangeliums (Berlin, 1882),
on the same side, and a brief criticism by Dr.
Salmon {Introduction, p. 78 sq.). All these deal
primarily with the Fourth Gospel, which does
GOSPELS
1237
• A St. Gall (M8. of the same list is found, however,
to be a common Western order,— Matt., John, Hark,
Lake. See an article by C. H. Turner In the Classical
Beviswfor 1893.
not come within onr present purview. The use
of St. John is the main question in connexion
with the Gnostics, but the other Gospels are
also involved in a minor degree. The most im-
portant point is in regard to Basilides, who
wrote about the year 125. There is no doubt
that the account of the Basilidiao systems by
Hippolytns (Refut. omn. Haer. vii. 20-27)
contains direct quotations from St. Luke and
St. John. The question is, Are these quotations
made by Basilides himself or by his disciples ?
Mr. Matthew Arnold answers confidently, " by
Basilides himself," and the same answer is given
by Dr. Ezra Abbot and a number of other
scholars against the opposition of Hilgenfeld,
Lipsius, and others, including now Holtzmann
(EM. p. 133). The most important discussion of
the subject— all the more important because it is
not dealing directly with the use of the canonical
Books — is that by Dr. Hort in art. " Basilides,"
Diet, of Christ. Siog. i. 270 sq. This article
does not appear to be known to Dr. Holtzmann.
Dr. Hort also is of opinion that the eight chapters
of Hippolytns represent the teaching of Basilides
himself. (For other literature, see Ezra Abbot,
Authorship, $c. p. 87 : it should perhaps be
mentioned that the series was first opened in
two directly apologetic treatises by Tischendorf,
Wann warden vnsere Etang. verfasst 1 Leipzig,
1865 sq., and Hofstede de Groot, Basilides am
Ausgange d. Apost. Zeitalters als erster Zeuge
fikr Alter u. Autorit&t d. N.TJicken Schriften,
Leipzig, 1868.) The use of the Gospels in the
other great Gnostic school, that of Valentinus,
has been treated by Heinrici in Die Valen-
tinianische Gnosis u. die heil. Schrift (Berlin,
1871). A summary, with negative leanings,
may be found in Holtzmann, EmUitung, p. 133 sq.
(cp. Weiss, Einl. p. 58).
In England by far the most agitating con-
troversy arose out of the publication in 1874 of
the work entitled Supernatural Religion, the
able and learned but strongly biassed author
of which still remains unknown. This con-
troversy certainly stirred the depths of the
English mind, and led to a great re-awakening
of the critical spirit. It is needless to say that
the leading part in it was borne by Dr. (since
Bp.) Lightfoot in a series of articles in the
Contemporary Review (Jan., Feb., Hay, Aug.,
Oct. 1875; Feb., Aug. 1876; May, 1877).
Other works on the same side were : Westcott
On the Canon, pref. to 4th ed. 1874; Sanday,
Gospels in the Second Century, London, 1876
(out of print); Sadler, The Lost Gospel and its
Contents, London, 1876 ; Baring-Gould, Lost
and Hostile Gospels, London, 1874. Mention
should also be made of an eminently clear and
impartial work by Mr. E. B. Nicholson (now
Bodley's Librarian) on The Gospel according to
the Hebrews (London, 1879). The author of
Supernatural Religion took up a number of very
untenable positions, but there are some amongst
those who opposed him who have cause to be
grateful to him for sending them back to the
detailed study of the texts.
Results. — A pledge has been given that an
attempt should be made to sum up the results
which seem to emerge from the foregoing
retrospect of the research and criticism of a
quarter of a century. The means hardly exist
for giving to such a summing up a strictly
Digitized by
Google
1238
GOSPELS
objective character ; it mast needs take a
subjective colour from the mind through which
it passes. The warning is necessary that what
follows must no longer be taken as a statement
of acknowledged facts, but simply as an in-
dividual opinion. This applies especially to
what is said under the first head : in regard to
the later periods a consensus appears to be
gradually forming.
We may map out the period which the Gospels
traversed in the process of becoming canonical
into four nearly equal sections : (1) the close of
the apostolic age, A.D. 60-90; (2) the age of
Papias and the apostolic Fathers, A.D. 90-140 ;
(3) the age of Justin and Tatian, A.D. 140-170 ;
(4) the age of Irenaeus and Clement of Alexan-
dria, A.D. 170-200.
(1.) The Apostolic Age; or Age of the Com-
position, fixing of the literary form, and first
transcription, of the Gospels. If the view here
expressed is not mistaken, all four Gospels were
written within this period. The only portion
that perhaps falls outside it would be the
editorial notes of the Ephesian elders which they
added in sending out the Gospel of St. John.
The groundstock of the Synoptic Gospels — not
only the Logia and Mark-Gospel of Papias, but
also by far the greater part of the special docu-
ments or traditions used by the First and Third
Evangelists — took their shape before the fall of
Jerusalem in A.D. 70. That date marks the
centre of a period of very considerable activity
(Luke i. I). The Gospel of St. Luke, as a whole,
lies beyond it, about the year 80. The Gospel
according to St. Matthew was compounded into
a shape very nearly resembling the present a
short time before it : tiidias in Matt. xxiv. 29
appears to mark the date not only of the parti-
cular document, but of the whole of which that
document forms a part. The Gospel of St. Mark
(by a process which further investigation is
needed to define more exactly) also reached a
shape not far removed from the present, about
the same time. But the first copies of these
Gospels fell into the hands probably of disciples,
men of simple and unsophisticated character,
who were not bound by any strict ideas as to
the duty of copyists to preserve exact diplomatic
accuracy. They did not hesitate to alter a word
here or a word there, sometimes to give it
greater point (as in Matt. xxii. 7, " The king
was wroth, and sent his armies, and burnt up
their city "), sometimes to prevent possible mis-
understanding (as in Mark xiii. 24, Iv cWycur
rats ini4patt for tiBtas), perhaps even adding
short supplementary bits of narrative that
reached them through oral tradition. Nor can
we confine this process entirely to the first
copyists: it went on even into the second
century. Its dying embers are seen in the addi-
tions which are found in the documents of the
Western text (e.g. the moving of the waters and
the paragraph of the adulteress in St. John);
perhaps also in some (e.g. the interpolation in
Matt. xxviL 49, and several of those in Luke
xxiv.) which are characteristic of other lines of
transmission. All that took place was perfectly
bond fide, though not strictly in accordance with
our modern rules or with the ideal standard of
what is permissible and what is not permissible
in copyists. Irenaeus knew better when he
inserted his famous adjuration, to those who
GOSPELS
copied his work, to compare carefully what
they wrote with the original, and see that it
was properly corrected (Eus. H. E. v. 20). But
Irenaeus belonged to a different class, and pos-
sessed a higher degree of culture than the first
transmitters of the text. With them the state
of things was similar to that which St. Augus-
tine describes (though perhaps with less justice)
in regard to the origin of the Latin versions:
" Ut enim cuique primis fidei temporibus in
manus venit codex Graecus et aliquantulum
facultatis sibi utriusque linguae habere vide-
batur, ausus est interpretari." Any one who
knew how to write thought himself fit to copy
a Gospel, and copied it often for his own use, not
without slight glosses or amplifications. But
these were made, as it were, with the pen on
the paper, not with any recondite idea of
furthering the interests of sect or party, though
it would be only natural that the writer's own
opinions should at times affect the turn of a
sentence or the choice of a phrase. All this
time, though the contents of the Gospels were
greatly valued, there was no idea of a special
sacredness attaching to the particular words.
The first step on the way to this was when the
Gospels came to be read in church. We know
that from the very first Christian writings were
read in this way. Thus St. Paul gives a special
charge that 1 These, was to be " read before all
the brethren," and in like manner that the
Epistle to Colossae should be read " in the
Church of the Laodiceans " and the Epistle to
Laodicea at Colossae. Nor was a writing of
this kind read once and then put on the shelf or
laid up among the archives. It was brought
out repeatedly and read for the edification of
those present. This is clearly expressed in the
well-known words of Dionysius at Corinth, in
which, acknowledging the letter which had just
been received from the Church of Rome, he
says: "To-day we have kept the Lord's holy
day, in which we read your letter, and we shall
be able constantly (itl tort) to read it, and
derive admonition from it as we do from the
former letter written to us by Clement." It
appears that it does not at once follow from this
church-reading that a book was regarded as
what we call "canonical." The letter of
Clement to the Corinthians was, it is true, one
of those which were tentatively put upon a
canonical level in certain Churches, but no such
claim was ever made for the Epistle of Soter, of
which Dionysius is more immediately speaking.
We must beware of carrying back our own hard
and fast lines into this primitive age. The dis-
tinction between sacred and secular was not
clearly marked as it is with us : not so much
that the sacred was secularized as that the
secular was hallowed : XP^'M "* a favourite
word, is the common term which covers both.
We must not, therefore, infer at once that
because the Gospels (or rather Gospels sine artic.)
were read in church that they were therefore
from the first upon the same footing with the
Old Testament Scriptures. The earliest direct
evidence that we have for the solemn public
reading of the Gospels is in Justin Martyr
(Apot. i. 67); but it was manifestly an esta-
blished practice in his day, and no doubt goes
back much further. We may, indeed, ask
whether a trace of it is not even to be found in
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
the i byaywuHTicair rotlrv of the ground-docu-
ment of the Synoptics. It would be too much
to say positively that thia implied public read-
ing ; but there are so many indications of this
(compare rpi<rex' V) avayviati coupled with rp
■wofaxXfatt and rfi Si&uriraAta, 1 Tim. it. 13)
that we can well imagine the reader, as the signs
of the catastrophe of Jerusalem were beginning
to thicken, turning, as if with an aside, to his
assembled hearers, and warning them to take
the words to heart. We can believe that the
author of the ground-document himself intended
this use to be made of them. But again it
would be a mistake to apply any such con-
clusion too systematically : " vigour and rigour "
are the last things that are in place in dealing
with this early time. The different Gospels
were written under different circumstances and
with different objects : St. Luke's, for instance,
was intended for the private perusal of a single
illustrious convert. Nor must we suppose that
there was any jealous exclusion of the other
documents which he mentions in favour of what
afterwards became the canonical Three.
(2.) The Age of Papias and the Apostolic
Fathers, a.d. 90-140. — The conditions which
have just been described may, it is thought,
furnish a clue to some of the difficulties which
beset this neit period, (i.) There will no
longer be any real difficulty in the yiypmrrcu
of Barnabas applied to a text from St. Matthew.
We shall have no need to have recourse to the
very forced assumption that the author is re-
ferring not to St. Matthew, but to a really
different text from 4 Ezra. That assumption
criticism has by this time entirely discarded.
But we must remember that the idea of yptuph
was elastic, and that the use of this word does
not at once and alone confer a higher authority
upon St. Matthew than a still more explicit
appeal in Jude 14 confers upon the Book of
Enoch, or than the use of equally strong ex-
pressions in 2 Clement confers upon the Gospel
according to the Egyptians, (ii.) We shall also
be prepared to understand the phenomena of the
evangelical quotations in this period. They are
seldom exact ; in particular they often show a
fusing of different passages, and especially a
fusing of expressions from St. Matthew and
St. Luke; and though these expressions are
sometimes distinctive of either Gospel, they are
not of that decisive kind which we find in Justin
Martyr, but minor and secondary. One thing is
clear — that the writers were not transcribing our
Gospels with the MS. before them. There was
no reason why they should do so in the very
incidental way in which their quotations are
introduced. The fusing that has taken place is
especially of such a kind as .comes through
quoting from memory. It is the sort of free-
dom that we ourselves use in quoting familiar
sayings, though somewhat greater, as these
were not learnt by rote from printed books.
(iii.) For all through this period there was
still at work a living and active oral tradition.
The passage where Papias lays stress on this
(Euseb. If. E. iii. 39) is of course one of the
commonplaces of criticism. But it is clear
that Papias by no means stood alone. The
substance of the Gospels lay in the brain of the
writers of this period as a confused product of a
number of different things; of oral tradition,
GOSPELS
1239
catechesis, public reading and private study;
and it came out often in the same confusion,
reminiscences of apocryphal Gospels being at
times mixed with those of the canonical. The
distinction of " apocryphal " and " canonical "
was only beginning to exist, and that in a half-
unconscious way. (iv.) But a real beginning was
being made. Another step in this direction
was being taken. It is seen in the heightened
significance which was coming to attach — not
even yet exactly to the Gospels, but — to the
evangelical sayings, which are more and more
on a level with the 0. T. The transition is
clearly seen in the places where a written
authority for the "words of the Lord" is
referred to. Thus in the Didachi: Christians
are to pray, &s M\twm i Kiptot iv ry
fiayytkltp airov (8, 2) ; they are to live (tori
rb S6y/ia toO tvayye\tov : and in 2 Clem. c. 8,
\1yti yip i Kiptot: iv rip *v*yy*Xl<p (see
Weiss, Einl. p. 41, n. 3). The authority of
the spoken word passed over to the written
word. A characteristic name marks the tran-
sition: to \Ayia is now no longer confined to
the Scriptures of the 0. T., it is used for the
written or unwritten tradition of the N. T.
We have it- in Papias (Euseb. H. E. iii. 39) ; we
have it in Polycarp (Ad Phil, c 7) ; we have it
in 2 Clem, c 13. In the last two examples
the reference is to written Gospels ; in the first
probably to the written and oral tradition com-
bined. It is significant that the Xoyoi of which
the Evangelists so often speak (ore awrrihtatv
roiis \6yovs roirovs) should now have acquired
the heightened and impressive name of \iyia.
Cp. Weizsacker, Apost. Zeitalt. p. 387.
(3.) The Age of Justin and Tatim, a.d. 140-
170. — There was still the distinction to be
drawn between recognised and unrecognised
Gospels. The Homily of Clement, as we have
seen, quotes both indifferently; so, too, does
Ignatius ; so, it used to be alleged, does Justin.
There can be no antecedent objection to the
view that Justin used an apocryphal Gospel
The author of the Homily ascribed to Clement
was his contemporary, and what one might do
the other might do. The question is only as U>
the fact whether the evidence warrants us in
believing that Justin used another Gospel or
Gospels besides the canonical. Our three
Synoptics Justin used so largely that a full
outline of the evangelical history, with the
characteristic features of each clearly marked,
has several times been constructed from his
writings (Hilgenfeld, Evangelium Justin's,
p. 101 sq. ; Westcott, Canon, pp. 102 sq., 107 n.,
ed. 5 ; Sanday, Gospels in Second Century,
pp. 91 sq., 118 sq.). There remain, however, a
few details (e.g. the Magi coming " from Arabia,"
the fire on Jordan at the Baptism, the making of
" ploughs and yokes ") which are not found in our
canonical Gospels ; and our choice lies between
supposing that these come from some apocryphal
source, and regarding them as merely free
embellishments of the narrative, similar to
those which are often found in the Western
texts, or inferential additions by Justin himself.
The balance of opinion is now, as it would seem,
somewhat in favour of the latter alternative:
so Dr. Edwin Abbott, Encycl. Brit. p. 817;
Weiss, Einl. p. 42 sq. ; not however Holtzmann,
Einl. p. 118. Tatian is upon much the same
Digitized by
Google
1240
GOSPELS
footing as Justin. If he made any use of an
apocryphal Gospel, and it is perhaps too much
to say positively that he did not (see Zahn,
p. 241 aq.), his use of this bore a quite infini-
tesimal proportion to his use of the canonical
Gospels.
(4.) The Age of Irenaeus and Clement of
Alexandria, a.d. 170-200. — The four Gospels
were thus gradually fenced off from other
writings of the same kind. The date at which
the process was complete varied somewhat in
different localities. The last stage before the
final is represented by Clement of Alexandria,
who quotes from Julius Cassianus, a Docetic
Gnostic, a passage from the Gospel according
to the Hebrews, adding the remark that the
saying in question is not found in the four
received Gospels (eV toi* wapaStSoiUyoa iifitv
rirrapaai eiiayytfdois), but in the Gospel accord-
ing to the Hebrews. From this it would seem
that though he reserves a paramount authority
for the Gospels recognised by the Church, he did
yet allow a certain authority to the apocryphal
Gospel. The incident illustrates the process by
which the restriction of the Gospel to our
present four took place. From early days, as
we hare seen — probably as far back as A.D. 125
at least — the Gospels were appealed to by the
Gnostics ; they were treated like Scriptures, and
mystical interpretations were put upon them.
This at once invested them with an authoritative
character. The Catholic party met their oppo-
nents partly by contesting their interpretations,
partly by a watchful care that the number of
authoritative Gospels should not be increased.
A process of criticism went on, which we cannot
quite describe as unconscious, though it has left
no record of itself in history. The cause of this
silence is to be sought not merely in the scarcity
of documents, but in the nature of the process
itself. It came before the synodal action of the
Church was fully organised, and it was due
rather to the personal direction of the Jiyoifuroi
or vpourr&iuvot rm> iKKkriamv forming and
guiding the opinion of their communities. That
there must have been something of a struggle is
implied in the gradual elimination of books
which Papias and Ignatius and 2 Clement had
freely quoted. But so far as the Gospels are
concerned, this struggle hardly seems to extend
beyond the space between Basilides and Tatian.
The first public recognition of the Church's
verdict is found in the Muratorian Fragment ;
but by that time the process has entered upon
its last stage. In Irenaeus it is complete — so
complete that the steps by which the result
had been gained were forgotten. Irenaeus
regards it as a fundamental axiom, an unalter-
able law of the spiritual world, that there should
be four Gospels and no more. These, though
fourfold in form, are one in substance ; the same
Spirit inspires them ; it is no longer the consent
of the Church on which they rest, but they are
themselves " the pillar and buttress (<rri\os itol
or^prvpa) of the Church, and that which
breathes into it the breath or spirit of life."
There may be some slight difference in the rate
of progress in different Churches — at Alexandria,
for instance, the dividing-line would appear to
fall between Clement and Origen, and in Asia
Minor there was a (limited) opposition to the
Fourth Gospel — but the position of Irenaeus
GOSPELS
was never afterwards seriously questioned. The
Canon of the Gospels, in the fullest sense of the
word, is established.
Inferences to be drawn from the Order of the
Gospels. — There is one more point to which
allusion may perhaps be made, though this
too cannot claim to rest on general consent, and
indeed does not seem to have engaged the
attention of scholars. By the time of Irenaeus
the order of the Gospels is well defined. The
same order appears in the Muratorian Frag-
ment, in Irenaeus, Origen, Gregory Nazianzen,
Athanasius, Jerome, Augustine, Runnus, Caasio-
dorus, with the great mass of later Greek
writers and MSS. The order which competed
most directly with this is the Western order :
St. Matthew, St. John, St. Luke, St. Mark.
This is the order of the Codex Bezae, and of
the leading texts of the Old Latin, Codd.
Vercellensis, Veronensis, Palatinus, Brixianus,
Corbeiensis II., Monacensis, Dublinensis (Usseri-
anus). This was the order of a copy of the
Gospels which was said five centuries after his
time to have belonged to Hilary (Gregory,
Proleg. p. 137). It is also inferred that St. Luke
followed St. John in the Gospels of Lucifer
Calaritanus (Hamack, TheU. JUteraturieU.
1886, p. 176). The order in which Cyprian
ranges his quotations in the Testtmonia varies
too much for a certain inference to be drawn
from it. The stichometry in Cod. Claromontanus,
which goes back to a great antiquity, was a
similar order to that of the Western docu-
ments, except that St Mark is placed before St.
Luke. A single very important Old Latin MS.,
Cod. Bobiensis (*), places St. Matthew after St
Mark at the end of the volume. The MSS. of
the Egyptian versions have the common order,
but the vocabularies, both Memphitic and The-
baic, very frequently have the order St John,
St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke (Lightfoot ap.
Scrivener, Introd. pp. 390, 399, ed. 3). The
order in the Curetonian Syriac— -St. Matthew,
St. Hark, St John, St. Luke — was unique until
the discovery of Mommsen's list, which coincides
with it [but see note on p. 1237]. The list itself,
as we have seen, was probably drawn up about
the year 359, but it may well represent an
earlier arrangement. The noticeable point in all
this is the variety which is seen to exist in the
oldest forms of the oldest Versions — the Latin,
Egyptian, and Syriac, especially the Latin and
Syriac. Does not the inference lie near at hand
that these Versions were made before there was
any accepted order, at the very time when the
Gospels were first beginning to be collected in
a single volume, and when different books were
made up in different ways? We could not, of
course, speak confidently if the order of the
Gospels stood alone, but many other phenomena
point to the same conclusion. [The evidence
bearing upon the order of the Gospels " J° n "
veniently collected by Gregory, Proleg- to ed. »
ofTischendorPs N. T., Leipzig, 1884; Baethgen,
in an admirable monograph on the Curetonian
Syriac (Evangalienfragmente, Leipzig, 1885> »
inclined to place it in the third century, W»
the arguments which he adduces are capable oi
another interpretation.] .*
It is carrying speculation a little further l
we also assign to the same period »"' , ^ #
important change in the outward form "'
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
GOSPELS
1241
Gospels — viz., their transference from the
papyrus roll to the vellum codex. For Christian
literature in general the date of this trans-
ference seems to be the middle of the fourth
century, when Jerome tells us that Euzoius,
Bishop of Caesarea, " took pains to renew on
parchment the library of Origen and Pamphilus,
which had begun to wear out." (" Corruptam
jam bibliothecam Origenis et Pamphili in
membrauis instaurare conatns est," De Vbr. III.
cxiii.) But just as we hear of law books on
vellum considerably before this date, so also
would this be the case with the Christian
Scriptures, as with Books that were much used
and in which durability of material was a
necessity. So long as the Books remained in the
roll-form, there would hardly be a fixed order.
The rolls were smaller in size, and it is not pro-
bable that there would be more than one Gospel
in a single volmmen. The four volumes would be
put together in a single rivxos or case (forming
a " Teasarateoch " by the side of the Mosaic
" Pentateuch "), but there wonld be no special
distinction of order. But as soon as the codex
took the place of the roll, the four Gospels
wonld he written continuously, and a regular
order would come to be observed.
Dates assigned to the Gospels. — The reader
may wish to have, in conclusion, some means of
obtaining a general view of the influence of
these various critical investigations, internal
and external, on the dates which have been
assigned to the Gospels, and the kind of relation
into which they are brought with the facts of
the history. A double tendency will be observ-
able : on the one hand, from the time of Baur
and Schwegler onwards, a steady pushing back of
the extravagant chronology which characterised
the Tubingen School at its outset ; and on the
other hand, in recent days, something of an ad-
vance on the part of critics like Dr. Holtzmann
and Dr. Weizsacker, whose first opinions were
decidedly conservative. A mistaken inference
might be drawn from this last fact as to the real
state of things in Germany. Of the younger
theologians there are few, so far as the present
writer's knowledge extends, who have expressed
themselves on the Synoptic question ; but the
best of them (and among these it is a pleasure
to name F. Loofs, J. Gloel, J. Haussleiter,
A. Eichhorn, and J. H. Usteri b ) have shown a
combination of openness of mind with sobriety
and soundness of judgment which is full of
promise for the criticism of the future. The
tendency to bring down the composition of the
Third Gospel to the end of the first century or
beginning of the second, is in part due to the
opinion which became widely diffused about
1873-1878, that the author knew and made use
of the Antiquities of Josephus. The arguments
in favour of this contention are fully stated in
Keim, Aut dem Vrchristenthum, pp. 1-27; on
the other side is the weighty dissent of Schurer
(Hilgenfeld's Zeitschrift, 1876, p. 574).
Dates assigned to the Gospels in their present Form.
St. Matthew.
St. Mark.
St. Luke.
St. John.
Bear
. 1-17
130-134 A.D. .
The Gos
tels generally betwe*
;n 130-170 a.d.
Wchwegler .
. IMS
Canonical Gospels nut known to Later than Marcion. Contemp. with Paschal
Justin.
controversy and Mon-
tanism.
Volkmar .
. 1870
106-110 A.D. . | 71-80 A.D. . . 1 C. 100 A.D.
150-160 A.D.
Supernatural Religion lfi
No evidence for a century ami a half after the death of Christ.
Hilgenfeld
1863, 18V5
Soonafter70A.D.|FirstyearsofDonii- c. 100 a.i>. . 1 120-140 A. 1>.
tian(81-96A.D.)|
Holtzmann
. 1863
Synoptic Gospels, both sources and finished compositions, between 60-80 A.D.
t
. 1886
After 70 a.d. . | | After 100 A.D. . j
"Weitsicker
. 1886
Synoptic Gospels at different dates after 70 a.d. outside the strictly Apostolic Age.
Keim
. 1867
c. 66 a.d.
100 A.D. .
c. 90 A.D. .
Under Trajan, 100-
117 A.D.
c. 130 a.d.
. 1S73
c. 68 A.D.
e. 120 a.d.
c. 100 or some-
what later.
Renan
. 1863
Before St. Luke.
1
Soon after 70 a.d.
After the death of John,
from notes left by hint.
. 1877
86 A.D. . . 1 76 A.D.
94 A.D.
C 126 A.D.
Weiss, Beyschlag,
*c.
Shortly before or after 70 a.d.
c. 80 A.D. .
C. 90 A.D. [1879].
Alford
•
63-70 A.D.
1
68 A.D.
Not later than 85 a.d.
The literature of the period covered by our
survey has been given with what will probably
be thought sufficient completeness, so that any
further enumeration of authorities would seem
to be unnecessary. A word of special acknow-
ledgment should, however, be given to the
excellent Einleitung of Dr. Holtzmann, a work
studded with condensed information, which it
was hopeless to think of emulating. The
similar volume by Dr. B. Weiss is also a very
conscientious piece of work, but it has been less
often consulted.
Further History of Synoptic Criticism, 1888-
1891. — The tendency of the most recent criticism
has been in much the same direction as that
described above. The two most conspicuous
exceptions would be the Rev. J. J. Halcombe's
Historic Relation of the Gospels (London, 1889),
which would invert the usual theory by making
St. John's Gospel written first, and the other
Gospels, with St. Matthew at their head, supple-
mentary to it ; and a work which has come into
the writer's hands as he is sending this to press,
Dr. C. F. Nosgen's Geschichte d. Seulestl. Offen-
barung (Munich, 1891), which goes back to
Gieseier's hypothesis and finds the common basis
of the Synoptic Gospels in oral tradition. Nbsgen
thinks that the statement of Papias about
* Two of these, alas, and those by no means the least
promising, Qloel and listen, were removed by death
in 18>1.
Digitized by
Google
1242
GOSPELS
St. Matthew refers to an older and smaller work
by the Apostle, which was not formally trans-
lated in writing, but which every one who pos-
sessed sufficient knowledge of Aramaic made
what he could of for himself. This earlier work,
he thinks, was afterwards incorporated in the
larger Greek Gospel by the same Evangelist,
and, when it had thus done its work, passed into
disuse and perished. Apart from these two
books, the general set of the tide has been in
favour of the " Two-Document " hypothesis. The
most noticeable points would be as follows : —
(1) The publication in Studia Biblict, vol. ii., of
the essay by Hr. F. H. Woods, mentioned above
(p. 1220), " On the Origin and Mutual Relation
of the Synoptic Gospels." The scope of this
essay is not quite so large as its title might
seem to imply : it does not cover the whole
problem, but is confined to an extremely close
and searching examination of the order of
Synoptic narratives, resulting in the conclusion
that the fundamental order for all three Gospels
is that of our present St. Mark. On this subject
it is likely to remain the standard treatise for
some time to come. Another argument to the
same general effect is supplied by Dr. Paul
Ewald in Das HauptproUem der Evangelien-
fragt (Leipzig, 1890). Against the view that
the common foundation of our Gospels is to be
sought in oral tradition, Dr. Ewald urges, in
addition to the usual arguments, this: that if
there was such a stereotyped oral tradition, we
must conceive of it as arising in the Mother
Church at Jerusalem ; but if so, how can we
account for the absence from it of all those
special elements which are found in the Gospel
of St. John — and not in the Gospel alone, but
also with greater or less clearness distributed
over a number of sub-Apostolic and even
Apostolic writers? From this it seems to
follow that the common foundation in question
was not the work of the Mother Church ; that
it was not an oral tradition spread over a
number of persons at all ; but that its one-
sidedness shows it to be the work of a single
individual. Dr. Ewald infers that the state-
ment of Papias respecting " Notes " put together
by St. Mark from the preaching of St. Peter
well suits the case, and is the most probable
explanation of the phenomena. He thinks that
our present St. Mark differs but little from the
original Gospel ; Mark i. 1-3, vii. 24-viii. 26,
xvi. 9-20, being the only additions. Another
writer of importance, who will be shortly men-
tioned in another connexion, Dr. A. Resch,
follows Weiss in supposing that our St. Mark is
a combination of the original Notes from the
Preaching of St. Peter with large extracts from
the Mattbaean Logia. He appears to go farther
than any other recent writer in regarding our
present Second Gospel as of composite origin
(Agrapha, p. 28) ; but his views on this subject
have not yet been fully explained.
(2) All the writers last mentioned, together
with others both in England and on the Con-
tinent (Rev. A. Wright, Composition of the Four
Gospels, London and New York, 1890 ; Rev.
J. Estlin Carpenter, The Synoptic Gospels,
London, 1890 ; Th. H. Mandel, Kephas, der Evan-
gelist, Leipzig, 1889), agree in postulating as the
second main source of the Synoptic Gospels, the
Logia, a collection primarily of discourses by
GOSPELS
St. Matthew. The more exact determination
of this document is, however, a matter of extreme
difficulty, and can hardly be said to have made
much progress since the courageous attempt of
Wendt noted in the former part of this article.
The most valuable observations on this branch
of the subject are probably those of Dr. P.
Ewald. (i.) He argues against what may be
almost called the prevailing tendency, to go for
the reconstruction of the Logia to St. Luke
rather than to St. Matthew, pointing out in
particular that the section Luke ix. 51-xviii. 14
cannot well be taken as a representative section
of the Logia, both because of the absence from
more than half of it of Matthaean parallels, and
also because of its peculiar linguistic character,
which is more in agreement with that of the
Evangelist himself than with that which is
otherwise distinctive of the Logia. As this
section shows several points of contact with
Southern Galilee (Luke ix. 51 sq., x. 29 sq.,
xiii. 1 sq., 22, and perhaps 31 sq., xvii. 11 sq. ;
cp. also vii. 11 sq.). Dr. Ewald thinks that it was
derived (orally ?) from a native of that district,
who joined our Lord while He was travelling
through it (Hauptprobkm, &c, p. 238, note),
(ii.) He observes further that in the parts which
are common to St. Luke with St. Matthew
there are great differences in the closeness of the
parallelism — sometimes almost complete identity
for two or three verses together, and sometimes
as great divergence. The former cases Dr. Ewald
would regard as examples of the manner in
which the Evangelist would naturally treat the
documents to which he had access ; the latter
as evidence of the disturbing effect produced by
the presence of more than one source (written or
oral) for the paragraph in question (ut sup.
pp. 216-226).
(3) So far the criticism of the recent past has
only been a continuation of that which was in
vogue throughout the preceding period, but a
new avenue seemed to be opened by the publica-
tions of Dr. Resch. The most considerable of
these appeared in vol. v. of Gebhardt and Har-
nack's Texte und Untersuchungen under the
title Agrapha : Ausseroanonische Evangelienfrag-
mente (Leipzig, 1889). This was accompanied
by a number of detached essays, especially in
Luthardt's Zeitschrift f. hirchl. Wissentchaft «.
iirchl. Leben for 1888 and succeeding years, and
is to be followed by a further volume, Ausser-
canonische Paralleltexte xu den Evangelim (see
Theot. Literaturblatt, 1889, col. 370). Dr. Resch
has begun with the most elaborate collection ever
yet made of sayings not found exactly in our
present Gospels, but quoted by the Fathers or
otherwise preserved, which appear to possess any
real claim to have been actually spoken by our
Lord. And the characteristic part of his theory
is that he believes that many of these sayings
were not merely derived from oral tradition or
from any later form of Gospel, but from the
oldest of all the documents which ever went by
that name, the original Logia of St. Matthew.
So far back does he throw this primitive Gospel
(which he believes to have been written not in
Aramaic but in Biblical Hebrew) that he finds
numerous traces of it in the writings of St. Paul
from 1 Thessalonians (a.d. 52) onwards. The
importance of this contention is obvious. Iti**
however, by no means certain that Dr. Resch has
Digitized by
Google
GOTHOLIAS
proved Ms point. He writes with something of
the sanguine spirit of a discoverer, and there
can be little doubt that the list of sayings put
forward as original will need considerable
pruning. It is noticeable, however, that in the
assumption of a Semitic Gospel older than the
Epistles of St. Paul Dr. Besch does not stand
alone. A similar view has been put forward
quite independently in this country by Prof.
J. T. Marshall : see his series of articles in the
Expositor for June 1890 and the first half-year
of 1891. Prof. Marshall diners from Dr. Resch
in maintaining that the language of this oldest
Gospel was not Biblical Hebrew but the current
Aramaic of our Lord's time. In this he seems
to hold the more probable view ; and his articles
are distinguished by care and orderly method,
though it is necessary to add that the validity
of many of the linguistic arguments employed
is questioned by Semitic scholars. All these
questions must be regarded as still suhjudiee.
(4) Special mention ought to be made of the
great work on the Canon by Theodor Zahn,
Oeschichte d. Neutestl. Kanons (Erlangen and
Leipzig, vol. 1. 1888, 1889; vol. ii. part 1, 1890).
The second volume contains an extremely full
and close discussion of the early lists of the
Canonical Books (the Muratorian Fragment,
Mommsen's list, the Claromontane Catalogue,
Sic). At the end of the volume is an examina-
tion, equally thorough, of the numbering and
order of the Canonical Books and of the Biblical
Stichometries (cp. Stud. Bibl. iii. 222 sq., 233 sq.,
259 sq., 261 sq., 307 sq., and the articles in Class.
Rev. referred to on p. 1237 above). Parallel to
this work is the series of Forsckungen zur Qesch.
d. Neutestl. Kanons, of which a fourth volume has
just appeared under the joint editorship of Hauss-
leiter and Zahn. This discusses, amongst other
things, the Arabic Diatessaron. The appearance
of the first instalment of Zahn's History called
forth a prompt, if not hasty, criticism from
Harnack (Das Neue Testament urn das Jahr
200, Freiburg i. B., 1889), to which Zahn at
once replied (Einige Bemerhmgen, &c. Erlangen
and Leipzig, 1889), though leaving his later
issues to speak for themselves. Jiilicher followed
with a lengthy review in Tkeol. Literaturzeitung
(1889, col. 163 sq.) in a sense similar toHarnack's.
These mutual criticisms, however unpleasant
for those concerned in them, all contribute to
clearness of ideas and exactness of statement.
In these respects Zahn's original statement may
have been somewhat wanting, but in any case
his volumes, which have so far followed each
other in quick succession, are an extraordinary
monument of diligence and learning.
This brief retrospect has been itself of the
nature of a bibliography. For fuller details on
the present position of the Synoptic problem,
refeience may be made to a series of articles in
the Expositor, Feb.-June, 1891. [W. S— T.]
GOTHOLTAS. Josias, son of Gotholias (IV
Ba\lov ; Gotholiac). was one of the sons of Elam
who returned from Babylon with Ezra (1 Esd.
Tin. 33). The name is the same as Athaliah,
with the common substitution of the Greek G
for the Hebrew guttural Am (cp. Gomorrah,
Gaza, 4c). This passage compared with 2 K.
xi. 1, &c, shows that Athaliah was both a male
and female name.
GOUKD
1243
GOTHOTJTEL (BAtF-* ro8o«<A, K». rv
$oriov, Le. Othniel ; tiothoniel), father of Chabi is,
who was one of the governors (6px orTts ) °( the
city of Bethnlia (Judith vi. 15).
GOUBD (Ji'i^p, Idka-yon, only in Jonah
iv. 6-10 ; Ko\<Mvrvi) ; hcdci-a ; Arab. , fV»f»»
tjaktin). A difference of opinion has long existed as
to the plant which is intended by this word. The
argument is as old as St. Jerome, whose render-
ing hedera was impugned by St. Augustine as a
heresy ! In reality St. Jerome's rendering was
not intended to be critical, but rather as a kind
of pi's alter necessitated by the want of a proper
Latin word to express the original. Besides, he
was unwilling to leave it in merely Latinised
Hebrew (kikayon), which might have occasioned
misapprehensions. St. Augustine, following the
LXX. and Syr. Versions, was in favour of the
rendering gourd, which was adopted by Luther,
the A. V., B. V. (text), &c. In St. Jerome's
description of the plant called in Syr. karo, and
Punic el-ieroa, Celsius recognises the Biennis
palma-Christi (R. V. marg.), or Castor-oil plant
(Hierobot. ii. 273 sq. ; Bochart, Hieroz. ii. 293,
623).
The Bicinus patma-Christi is extremely com-
mon in all the eastern countries of the Mediter-
ranean, in Persia, India, and China. The present
writer has found it in great abundance on the
banks of the Euphrates. The strongest argument
in favour of the Bicinus a the supposed derivation
of the Hebrew word used in Jonah from the Egyp-
tian name of the Bicinus or Castor-oil plant, kiki.
Cp Herod, ii. 94. The Arabic name is c»_i-
'al-khirwa'. Of the identity of AW and 'al-khirira i
with Bicinus, the Castor-oil tree, there can be no
OMtor-ou plant (Sirfau eomn»» t . L.).
question ; and the Egyptian word became
Hebraized. The Talmud speaks of castor oil as
p'p |Pg>, and Dioscondes (iv. 64) calls the oil
made from the Kptnwv or kiki, k'mivov tKatov.
But we have not yet seen any convincing argu-
Digitized by
Google
1214
GOURDS, WILD
inent to identify these names with the kikayon
of Jonah. The etymological argument is doubt-
less strong, but there are practical reasons which
incline us the other way. The Jiicinus is rather
a shrub than a tree, and has large palmate leaves
with serrated lobes, and upright spikes of
blossom. It is not a tree used for shade, being
of a straggling growth, though a man might
creep for shelter underneath it. Now Niebuhr
observes that the Jews and Christians at Mosul
(Nineveh) maintained that the tree which
sheltered Jonah was not 'ai-khineaf tout " el-
kerra'," a sort of gourd. This revival of the
Augustinian rendering has been defended by
J. i.. Faber {Notes on Manner's Observations, &c.
i. 145). And it must be confessed that the
evidently miraculous character of the narrative
in Jonah deprives the Palma-Christi of any special
claim to identification on the ground of its rapid
growth and decay, as described by Niebuhr.
The gourd, on the contrary, meets all the
conditions of the problem. We are expressly
told that Jonah " made him a booth ; " and not
till after it was made, did God prepare the
jjlikayon to cover it. This is exactly what a
climbing gourd would do, but not what a
Iticinus could effect. No one who knows the
plant can conceive its casting shade over an
existing arbour. But this is exactly what the
gourd would do. The fragile lodge of green
boughs set up by Jonah would, as soon as the
foliage withered, leave him exposed to the
scorching rays. Then the tendrils of the gourd
would seize the framework, and rapidly the
plant with its large leaves would cover the
whole arbour. In all warm climates the gourd
is used for shade and for covering trellis-work.
So rapid is its natural growth, that it is com-
monly said to grow an inch in an hour. In the
gardens about Sidon and Damascus the present
writer has seen many a trellised gourd shading a
summer-house. But it withers as rapidly as it
springs up ; and a very slight' injury to the
slender stem, the gnawing of its bark by a snail,
or a blast of wind, will shrivel every leaf and
leave the fruit .hanging from the naked foot-
stalks, a type of desolation. The " worm that
God prepared" might be one of these snails,
which could bark and thus destroy the whole
plant instantaneously. The gourd is of the
Melon family, Lagenaria vulgaris, D. C, Arab.
« j>> &""S el-fcrra' of the Syrians, and is grown
chiefly for the use made of its fruit, when emptied
of the seeds, as bottles. [H. B. T.]
GOURDS, WILD (Jl^B, paika'dth;
ro\<nrn aypla [= aypla ko\oicvv6t), Suid.];
OohcyntMdes agri; A. V. and R. V., "wild
gourds," in 2 K. iv. 39). The. Hebrew name is
derived from BJ3B, "to split or burst open."
The same word with the masculine termination,
D'I7j?B, is applied to certain ornamental carvings
in Solomon's temple, and is there translated
"knops," A. V., and R. V. marg. gourds
(1 K. vi. 18, &c). In the passage from 2 K.,
we read : " Elisha came to Gilgal, and there was
a dearth in the land . . . And one went out into
the field to gather herbs, and found a wild vine
('"nt? (98), and gathered thereof wild gourds
his lap full, and came and shred them into
GOURDS, WILD
the pot of pottage: for they knew them not.
So they poured out for the men to eat. And it
came to pass, as they were eating of the pottage,
that they cried out and said, thoa nun of
God, there is death in the pot. And they
could not eat thereof." Many conjectures have
been hazarded as to the fruit intended, and
pages have been written by Celsius, Geseniut,
and others for and against various claimants.
Cucumis prophetarum, L., the globe cucumber,
has been suggested. Ecballium etatm'wn, L,
the squirting cucumber, has found still stronger
advocacy from the derivation of the Hebrew
word, signifying " that which bursts ; " and, as
is well known, the squirting cucumber bnnts
and shoots out its seeds when touched. These
plants are common in Palestine. But the
ancient Versions support the colocynth (Citrullw
Colocynth.
colocynMs, L.). The incidents in the narrative
quoted seem to point beyond question to the
colocynth. Elisha had come down to the
Jordan valley from his ordinary residence
among the hills of Benjamin. Now in the
hill-country the globe cucumber and the
squirting cucumber are common weeds by the
wayside and in the fields, and would certainly
be known by the gatherer, the prophet's fol-
lower from the upper country. The colocynth,
which is not unlike the globe cucumber in
general appearance, on the contrary is not found
in the hills or cultivated land, but is exceedingly
common on the hot sands by the coast, and on
the sands round the Dead Sea. It abounds
about Jijili, the ancient Gilgal. What more
natural than that the man gathering herbs
should mistake it for the globe cucumber, which
is harmless and edible when cooked. The
squirting cucumber, though slightly bitter, is
not nauseous, nor does it have any resemblance
to the other plants of the family. The man, we
are told, gathered the fruit from a wild viae.
This is exactly what the colocynth plant would
be called, from its palmate vine-shaped leaves and
its tendrils, just as the word " vine " is applied
in the dialects of the West Indies and the United
Digitized by
Google
GOVEBNOB
States as a generic term for creeping plants with
tendrils — grape-vine, pumpkin-vine, melon-vine,
kc The fruit is very beautiful to look at, of
the size and colour of an orange, but smooth and
glossy. A stranger from the upper country
would be attracted at once by the beautiful
appearance of the fruit, and would eagerly
gather it as a wild melon. But when the
pottage was tasted 1 The repulsive bitterness of
the drastic colocynth will not be forgotten by
any one who has tasted it. Both at Gilgal and
in the sandy flats in front of Engedi we fonnd
the colocynth covering a great extent of ground,
and it is also fonnd on volcanic sands in other
hot countries.
Another argument in favour of the colocynth
is the use of the same word to describe some
carved ornaments in Solomon's Temple. The
shape of the colocynth would suggest a graceful
ornament, which could scarcely have been
adapted from the shape of the other fruit
suggested. On reviewing the whole question,
we may look on the identification of the
colocynth as all but indisputable. [H. B. T.]
GOVEBNOB. This English word is the
representative of no less than ten Hebrew and
four Greek words. To discriminate between
them is the object of the following article.
1. tpTK, 'ailuph, the chief of a tribe or family,
«1^K, 'ileph (Judg. vi. 15 [A. V. and R. V.
"'family"; R. V. marg. thousand]; Is. Ix. 22
[A. V. and R. V. "a thousand"]; Mic. v. 1
[Heb.; A. V. and R. V, v. 2, "thousands,"
K. V. marg. families]), and equivalent to the
" ruler of a thousand " of Ex. xvhi. 21, or the
" head of a thousand " of Num. i. 16(R. V. marg.
families). It is the term applied to the " dukes "
of Edom (Gen. xxxvi. 15, &c). The LXX. have
retained the etymological (see MV.' 1 ) signi-
ficance of the word in rendering it by x^'~
ifX»s in Zech. ix. 7, xii. 5, 6 (cp. IT'pB', from
BOC). The usage in other passages seems to
imply a more intimate relationship than that
which would exist between a chieftain and his
fellow-clansmen, and to express the closest
friendship. 'Ailuph is then " a guide, director,
counsellor" (Ps. lv. 13 [A. V. "guide," R. V.
"companion"]; Prov. ii. 17 [A. V. "guide,"
R. V. " friend," marg. guide] ; Jer. iii. 4 [A V.
and R. V. " guide," R. V. marg. companion]),
the object of confidence or trust (Mic vii. 5
[A. V. and R. V. " guide," R. V. marg. familiar
friend]).
2. P#n, chokik (Judg. r. 9 [R. V. and A. V.
"governor"]), and 3. PfATO, m'chokek (Judg.
v. 14 [R. V. and A. V. " governor "]), denote a
ruler in his capacity of lawgiver [R. V. marg.
Judg. v. 14] and dispenser of justice (Gen. xlix.
10 [A V. " lawgiver," and R. V. marg., R. V.
text "ruler"]; Prov. viii. 15 [a verb =" to
decree," A. V. and R.V.]; cp. Judg. v. 14
with Is. x. 1).
4. 75%), moshil, a " ruler " considered especially
as having power over the property and persons
of his subjects ; whether his authority were
absolute, as in Josh. xii. 2 of Sihon, and in Ps.
cv. 20 of Pharaoh ; or delegated, as in the case
of Abraham's steward (Gen. xxiv. 2), and Joseph
GOVEBNOB
1245
as second to Pharaoh (Gen. xlv. 8, 26 ; Ps. cv.
21). The "governors of the people " in 2 Ch.
xxiii. 20 appear to have been the king's body-
guard (cp. 2 K. xi. 19).
5. TJ3, nagid, is connected etymologically
with 1J3 and *1U, and denotes a prominent per-
sonage, whatever his capacity. It is applied to
a king as the military and civil chief of his
people (2 Sam. v. 2 [A. V. "captain," R. V.
" prince," marg. leader], vi. 21 [A. V. " ruler,"
R. V. " prince 'H; 1 Ch. xxix. 22 [A. V. "chief
governor," R. V. "prince," marg. leader]), to
the general of an army (2 Ch. xxxii. 21 fA. V.
and R. V. " leaders "]), and to the bead of a
tribe (2 Ch. xix. 11 [A. V. and R. V. " ruler "]).
The heir-apparent to the crown was thus desig-
nated (2 Ch. xi. 22 [A. V. "ruler," R. V. "the
prince "]) as holding a prominent position among
the king's sons. The term is also used of per-
sons who fulfilled certain offices in the Temple,
and is applied equally to the high-priest (2 Ch.
xxxi. 13, A. V. and R. V. "ruler," cp. r. 10) as
to inferior priests (2 Ch. xxxv. 8, A. V. and R. V.
" rulers ") to whose charge were committed the
treasures and the dedicated things (1 Ch. xxvi.
24 [A. V. and R. V. " ruler "]% and to Levites
appointed for special service (2 Ch. xxxi. 12 [A. V.
and R. V. " ruler "]). It denotes an officer of
high rank in the palace, the lord high chamber-
lain (2 Ch. xxviii. 7 [A. V. " governor," R. V.
" ruler "]), who is also described as " over the
household " (1 K. iv. 6), or " the governor of
his house" (1 K. xviii. 3, A. V. ; R. V. "over
the household "). Such was the office held by
Shebna, the scribe, or secretary of state (Is. xxii.
15), and in which he was succeeded by Eliakim
(2 K. xviii. 18). It is perhaps the equivalent of
oixoviiun, Rom. xvi. 23, and of i<poo-T(Err/s,
1 Esd. vii. 2 (cp. 1 Esd. i. 8).
6. K'B'J, nasi. The prevailing idea in this
word is that of eleration. It is applied to the
chief of the tribe (Gen. xvii. 20 [A. V. and R. V.
" prince "J; Num. ii. 3 [A. V. "captain," R. V.
" prince "], &c), to the heads of sections of a
tribe (Num. iii. 32 [A. V. "chief over the chief,"
R. V. " prince of the princes "], vii. 2 [A. V. and
R. V. "princes"]), and to a powerful sheykh
(Gen. xxiii. 6 [A. V. and R. V. "prince"]). It
appears to be synonymous with 'ailuph in 2 Ch.
i. 2,D'NB'3 = rtaN W1 (cp. 2 Ch. v. 2). In
general it denotes a man of elevated rank. In
later times the title was given to the president
of the great Sanhedrin (SeMen, De Synedriis, ii.
6,§1).
7. T\T\$,pechah, is probably a word of Assyrian
origin (see Schrader and Fried. Delitzsch in
MV." Others give it a Pers. origin). It is
applied in 1 K. x. 15 [A. V. and R. V.
" governors "] to the petty chieftains who were
tributary to Solomon (2 Ch. ix. 14 [A. V. and
R. V. " governors "]) ; to the military com-
mander of the Syrians (1 K. xx. 24 [A. V. and
R. V. " captains," R. V. marg. governors]), the
Assyrians (2 K. xviii. 24 [A. V. and R. V.
"captains"]), the Chaldeans (Jer. Ii. 23 [A. V.
" captains," R. V. " governors "]), and the
Medes (Jer. Ii. 28 [A. V. "captains," R. V.
"governors"]). Under the Persian viceroys,
during the Babylonian Captivity, the land of the
Hebrews appears to have been portioned out
among " governors " (nine, pachoth) inferior in
Digitized by
Google
1246
GOVERNOR
rank to the satraps (Ezra viii. 3$ [A. V. and
R. V. " governors "]), like the other provinces
which were under the dominion of the Persian
king(Neh. ii. 7, 9 [A. V. and R. V. "governors "]).
It is impossible to determine the precise limits
of their authority, or the functions which they
had to perform. They formed a part of the
Babylonian system of government, and are
expressly distinguished from the D'llD, s'gSnim
(Jer. Ii. 23, 28 [A. V. "rulers," R.' V. "de-
puties"]), to whom, as well as to the satraps,
they seem — if the order of the words be signi-
ficant of rank — to have been inferior (Dan. iii.
2, 3, 27) ; as also from the D'lb, sarin (Esth.
iii. 12, viii. 9), who, on the other hand, had a
subordinate jurisdiction. Sheshbazzar, the
"prince" (K'bj, Ezra i. 8) of Judah, was
appointed by Cyrus " governor " (fin^) of Jeru-
salem (Ezra v. 14), or " governor of the Jews,"
as he is elsewhere designated (Ezra vi. 7), an
office to which Kehemiah afterwards succeeded
(Neh. v. 14, A. V. and R. V. " governor ; " cp.
iii. 26) under the title of Tirshatha (Ezra ii. 63
[A. V. and R. V. marg. governor] ; Neh. viii. 9).
Zerubbabel, the representative of the royal
family of Judah, is also called the " governor "
of Judah (Hag. i. 1), but whether in consequence
of his position in the tribe or from his official
rank is not quite clear. Tatnai, the " governor "
beyond the river, is spoken of by Josephus ( Ant.
xi. 4, § 4), under the name of Sisines, as Ixap-
%os of Syria and Phoenicia (cp. 1 Esd. vi. 3) ;
the same term being employed to denote the
Roman proconsul or propraetor as well a» the
procurator (Jos. Ant. xi. 8, § 1). It appears
from Ezra vi. 8 that these governors were
entrusted with the collection of the king's taxes ;
and from Neh. v. 18, that they were supported
by a contribution levied upon the people, which
was technically termed "the bread of the
governor" (cp. Ezra iv. 14). They were pro-
bably assisted in discharging their official duties
by a council (Ezra iv. 7, vi. 6). In the Peshitto
Version of Neh. iii. 11, Pahath Moab is not
taken as a proper name, but is rendered " chief
of Moab " ; and a similar translation is given in
other passages where the words occur, as iu
Ezra ii. 6, Neh. vii. 1 1, x. 14. The " governor "
beyond the river had a judgment-seat at Jeru-
salem, from which probably he administered
justice when making a progress through hia
province (Neh. iii. 7).
8. Tj5B, pakid, denotes simply a person
appointed to any office. It is used of the officers
proposed to be appointed by Joseph (Gen. xli. 34
[R. V. and A. V. marg. overseers]); of Zebu),
Abimelech's lieutenant (Judg. ix. 28, A. V. and
R.V. "officer"); of an "officer "of the high-priest
(2 Ch. xxiv. 11), of "overseers" (A. V. and
R. V.) inferior to the nagid (2 Ch. xxxi. 13 com-
pared with v. 12), or pakid nagid(Jer. xx. 1) ; and
of a priest or Levite of high rank (Neh. xi. 14, 22
[A. V. and R. V. " overseer "]). The same term
is applied to the eunuch " set over " the men of
war (2 K. xxv. 19; Jer. Iii. 25), and to an
" officer " appointed for especial service (Esth. ii.
3). In the passage of Jer. xx. above quoted the
word possibly foreshadows the duties of the
captain of the Temple guard mentioned in Acts
iv. 1, v. 2, and by Josephus (B. J. vi. 5, § 3).
GOVERNOR
9. 0"7&, shallit, a man of authority. Applied
to Joseph as Pharaoh's prime minister (Gen.
xliii. 6 [A. V. and R. V. "governor"]); to
Arioch, the " captain " of the guard, to the king
of Babylon (Dan. ii. 15), and to Daniel as third
in rank under Belahazzar (Dan. v. 29 [A. V.
and R. V. " the third ruler," R. V. marg. rule at
one of three]).
10. *1C, sar, a chief, in any capacity. The
term is used equally of the general of an army
(Gen. xxi. 22 [A. V. " chief captain," R. V.
" captain "]), or the commander of a division
(1 K. xi. 24 ; xvi. 9 [A. V. and R. V. " captain "]\
as of the governor of Pharaoh's prison (Gen.
xxxix. 21 [A. V. and R. V. " keeper "]), and the
" chief" of his butlers and bakers (Gen. xL 2),
or herdsmen (Gen. xlvii. 6 [A. V. and R. V.
" rulers over my cattle "]). The chief officer of
a city, in his civic capacity as " governor " (A. V.
and R. V.), was thus designated (1 K. xxii. 26 ;
2 K. xxiii. 8). The same dignitary is elsewhere
described as " over the city " (Neh. xi. 9, A. V.
and R. V.). In Judg. ix. 30 sar (A. V. and R. V.
"ruler of the city") is synonymous with pakid
in v. 28 (A. V. and R. V. " officer "), and with
both pakid and nagid in 1 Ch. xxiv. 5. '"t?
nijHtSH, sirs hammtdinoth, " the princes of
provinces " (1 K. xx. 14), appear to have held a
somewhat similar position to the " governors "
under the Persian kings.
11. ttvdpxv't 2 C° r - xi. 32 — an officer of rank
under Aretas, the Arabian king of Damascus.
It is not easy to determine the capacity in which
he acted. The term is applied in 1 Mace xiv.
47, xv. 1, to Simon the high-priest, who was
made general and ethnarch of the Jews, as a vassal
of Demetrius. From this the office would appear
to be distinct from a military command. The
jurisdiction of Archelaus, called by Josephus
(Ii. J. ii. <5, § 3) an ethnarchy, extended over
Idumaea, Samaria, and all Judaea, the half of
his father's kingdom, which he held as the
Emperor's vassal. But, on the other hand,
Strabo (xvii. 13), in enumerating the officers
who formed part of the machinery of the Roman
government in Egypt, mentions ethnarchs appa-
rently as inferior both to the military com-
manders and to the nomarchs, or governors of
districts. Again, the prefect of the colony of
Jews in Alexandria (called by Philo ytpdpxth
lib. in Flaec. § 10) is designated by this title in
the edict of Claudius given by Josephus (Ant.
xix. 5, § 2). According to Strabo (Joseph. Ant.
xiv. 7, § 2) he exercised the prerogatives of an
ordinary independent ruler. It has therefore
been conjectured that the ethnarch of Damascus
was merely the governor of the resident Jews,
and this conjecture receives some support from
the parallel narrative in Acts ix. 24, where the
Jews alone are said to have taken part in the
conspiracy against the Apostle. But it does not
seem probable that an officer of such limited
jurisdiction would be styled " the ethnarch of
Aretas the king ; " and as the term is clearly
capable of a wide range of meaning, it was most
likely intended to denote one who held the city
and district of Damascus as the king's vassal or
representative.
12. rrytud/r, the procurator of Judaea under
the Romans (Matt, xxvii. 2, ttc). The verb is
employed (Luke ii. 2) to denote the nature of
Digitized by
Google
GOZAN
the jurisdiction of Quirinns orer the imperial
province of Syria.
13. ouroro/ios (Gal. iv. 2), a steward ; appa-
rently entrusted with the management of a
minor's property.
14. bpxirplic\tros, John ii. 9, A. V. and R. V.
"the ruler of the feast." It has been con-
jectured, but without much show of probability,
that this officer corresponded to the <rvi**ool-
apx°* °f th* Greeks, whose duties are described
by Plutarch (Sympos. Quaest. 4), and to the
arbiter bibcndi of the Romans. Lighttbot sup-
poses him to hare been a kind of chaplain, who
pronounced the blessings upon the wine that
was drunk during the seven days of the mar-
riage feast. Again, some hare taken him to be
equivalent to the rpawtfaroiis, who is defined
by Pollux (Ouom. vi. 1) as one who had the
charge of all the servants at a feast, the
carvers, cup-bearers, cooks, &c But there is
nothing in the narrative of the marriage feast
at ,Cana which would lead to the supposition
that the Apx"'^**-""" ne 'd tne ran ^ of *
servant. He appears rather to have been on
intimate terms with the bridegroom, and to
have presided at the banquet in his stead. The
duties of the master of a feast are given at full
length in Ecclus. xxxv. (xxxii.).
15. In James iii. 4, the A. V. renders 6
tvMrm by " governor " (gubernator). The R. V.
" steersman " expresses the meaning intended
more clearly.
In the Apocryphal books, in addition to the
common words ipx"** J«nroVi|s, <rrpanr/is,
which are rendered " governor," we find eVi-
vriirnt (1 Esd. i. 8 ; Judith ii. 14), which closely
corresponds to Ti?!J; trapx * usea< °f Zerub-
babel and Tatnai (1 Esd. vi. 3, 29, vii. 1), and
wpoordTi)?, applied to Sheshbazzar (1 Esd. ii.
12), both of which represent ni"IB ; fcooo-rdTijs
(1 Esd. vii. 2) and rpoardrris rod Itpov
(2 Mace iii. 4), " the governor of the Temple "
= TJ} (cp. 2 Ch. xxxv. 8) ; and <rarsaVns
(1 Esd. iii 2, 21), "a satrap," not always used
in its strict sense, but as the equivalent of <rrpa-
■my6i (Judith v. 2, vii. 8). [W. A. W.] [F.]
GCZAN (JT'U; rw{dr; Gozan; Assyr.
Ouzana) is mentioned (1 Ch. v. 26) as the place
where there was a river — " the river of Gozan "
— which river seems, in 2 K. xvii. 6 and xviii.
11 (if we omit the on supplied by the K. V.) —
to be the Habor (Khabour) ; see also 2 K. xix. 12
= Is. xxvii. 12.
Gozan was the tract to which the Assyrian
kings Pul or Tiglath-pileser (III.) and Shalma-
neser, or possibly Sargon, carried away the
Israelites (Reuben, Gad, and Manasseb) captive.
It has been identified with many different tracts
of country, but is probably the Qauzanitu
(rowfoviTii) of Ptolemy (Geograph. v. 18), and
is regarded by some as being the Mygdonia of
other writers (Strab., Polyb., &c), by the adding
of the Semitic formative D and the common
change of z into d. As it was the tract watered
by the Habor fA/ty^at or Xa/Bwpoj), the
modern Khabour, the great Mesopotamian affluent
of the Euphrates, and as it is mentioned in
2 K. xix. 12 (= Is. xxxvii. 12) in connexion
with Reseph and the Beni-Eden, it must have
lain between the Tigris and the Euphrates. Sir
GRASS
1247
H. Layard (Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 269-313)
describes the region as one of remarkable fer-
tility. In the Septuagint translation Alae and
Abor (Halab and Habor) are both given as
rivers of Gozan (4 K.=2 K. xvii. 6) : but this is
apparently a misunderstanding, as is indicated
by the next chapter (c. 1 1), where the singular,
rii er, is used, and refers to Habor only.
According to the Assyrian geographical lists,
Gozan lay between Tushan and Nasibina (Nisibis),
and is mentioned as a city ; from which fact is
to be inferred, that the name Gozan was after-
wards extended to the district in which it was
situated. When in the hands of the Assyrians,
it was placed under the authority of an Assyrian
governor, who, as one of the higher officers of
the realm, was from time to time appointed
Eponym. Those who acted in this capacity
were Mannu-ki-Aiiur (794 B.C., reign of Ram-
minu-nirari), Bur-Sagale (763 B.C., reign of
Aisur-danan), and Bel-Harran-b£la-usur (727
B.O, reign of Tiglath-pileser III.). A revolt
took place there in the year 759 B.C. (13th year
of Assur-danan). " [T. G. P.]
GRA'BA (B*»-« "Kyyafii ; Armacha), 1 Esd.
v. 29. [Haoaba.] As is the case with many
names in the E. V. of the Apocryphal books,
it is not obvious whence our translators got
the form they have here employed — without
the initial A, which even the corrupt Vulgate
retains. In Ezra ii. 45 the name is given as
Hagabah.
GRAPE. [Vise.]
GRASS. Four Hebrew words are thus
rendered in A. V. and R. V. (1) KB^., dishe,
from the root KCH, "to spring up;" Arab.
I^j-im icads; LXX. x^t X&t* ** "O".
Porivri; V. herba. It is the word most com-
monly used for grass, as distinguished from
"VXTI, chasir, " fodder," and from 2&V, 'eseb,
" herbs," i.e. herbage for cattle as distinguished
from herbs eaten by man. Thus, in Gen. i.
11, 12, " Let the earth bring forth grass (dishe),
the herb ('eseb) yielding seed." Gesenius defines
the word as comprising grasses, which have no
seed obvious to the careless observer, and all the
small herbage which springs up in meadows.
(2) Tyn,cAu*tr; LXX. xo'orof.iro^^oTaVii;
V. herba. More accurately "fodder," from a
root signifying " to be green." It is evidently
a generic term, including whatever grows in
pastures suitable for the food of cattle. In
Prov. xxvii. 25, Is. xv. 6, it is translated " hay,'
which it is not, in our sense of the term ; but
rather the meadow grass when fully ripe. As
the herbage rapidly fades under the parching
heat of Palestine, it has supplied an image of
the brevity of human life (Is. xl. 6, 7 ; Ps. xc.
5) and of the fleeting nature of human fortune
(Job vili. 12 ; Ps. xxxvii. 2). Chasir, like its
Greek equivalent xo/woJi primarily signified an
enclosure, hence an enclosed space for cattle to
feed in, and finally the food itself of the cattle.
(3) 3§>J?, 'eseb; Chald. K3DI?, K3ET, 'isba,
'osbd. Generally translated "herb," but in
twenty passages " grass.
9 C f
the Arabic
It is identical with
'ushb, "herb," and U
Digitized by
Google
1248
GRASS
frequently used for garden herbs and regetation
eaten by man, in contrast with deshe. But in
other passages, as in Deut. zi. 15, it expresses
the pasturage of cattle; and elsewhere is
rendered by the " grass of the field " and the
" grass of the mountain," i.e. herbage generally.
(4) pT, yirek, is once rendered "grass"
(Num. xxii. 4). It literally signifies " green,"
and is used for herbage exactly as the German
das Griine, and is also applied to the foliage of
trees. In the N. T. " grass," wherever it occurs,
is the rendering of the Greek \6pros.
In a country with such various climates
and soils as Palestine, there is great variety
in the natural grasses. Yet there are very
few meadows like those of our moister and
more equable climate. Two hundred and six-
teen distinct species have been described from
that country by M. Boissier and others. They
may be divided into three groups: those of
the hill-country, of the sea-coast plains, and
of the basin of the Jordan and the Dead
Sea. (1) The grasses of the hill-country,
i.e. of the bare downs of Southern Judaea,
or the Negeb, and of the barer hills of Cen-
tral Palestine, are for the most part identical
with the species of Northern Africa, Spain,
and Arabia, with a considerable admixture of
Mediterranean species in the northern part.
They are nearly all perennial, short and close,
springing up almost suddenly after the rains,
and continuing but a short time, leaving
scarcely a trace above ground. (2) The grasses
of the coast plain, of Central Galilee, and of
Gilead are chiefly of the Mediterranean and
South European species, including not a few
British species, tall and luxuriant in spring,
forming a rank meadow for a short time, and
then, after the seed has ripened, sending up a
finer after-grass under the dried stems, and so
affording pasturage more or less throughout the
year. This after-grass is alluded to in Amos vii.
1 : "In the beginning of the shooting up of
the latter growth ; and, lo, it was the latter
growth after the king's mowiugs." (3) The
grasses of the Jordan valley are rery peculiar,
most unlike those of the hills, not compact or
forming turf, but coarse and loose, shooting up
luxuriantly in early spring, then rapidly seed-
ing and dying down, scorched and burnt up at
once, and leaving for the rest of the year no
trace of their existence above ground, save the
withered and straggling stems from which the
seeds and their sheath have long been shaken.
They are for the most part Arabian and Egyp-
tian desert kinds, but include also species found
in India, as Sorghum vulgare, and in South
Africa, as Painisetum cenchroides.
The short seasonal existence of all these
grasses has supplied the writers of Scripture
with the imagery above referred to, on the tran-
sitory character of man's life; which has a
force scarcely perceived in our moist Northern
climate. "Smitten and withered like grass"
is a comparison perpetually before the mind of
Psalmist and Prophet. Our verdure, on the
contrary, is almost perpetual, and in winter our
meadows are not colourless like theirs. Bnt let
a traveller ride over the downs of Bethlehem in
February, one spangled carpet of green, and
brilliant flowers; and again in May, when all
traces of verdure are gone; or let him push his 1
GREECJb*
horse through the tall solid growth of lucernes
and grasses in the valley of the Jordan in early
spring; and then return and gallop across 8
brown, cracked, hard-baked plain, as the writer
has done, in June, with only here and there the
withered stems of grasses and thistles to tell
that life had ever existed there, and the Scrip-
ture imagery will come home to him with ten-
fold power. The grass has withered, the beauty
is gone, the flower is faded : a* brown desert has
taken the place of a brilliant garden. [II. B. T.J
GRASSHOPPER. See Locust.
GRAVE. [Bubial.]
GREAVES (finXD). This word occurs in
the A. V. and R. V. in 1 Sam. xvii. 6 only, in
the description of the equipment of Goliath —
"he had greaves of brass upon his legs." It
appears to be derived from a root signifying
"brightness," as of a star (see Gesenius and
Fiirst). Its ordinary meaning is a piece of
defensive armour which reached from the foot
to the knee, and thus protected the shin of the
wearer. This was the case with the kkjj/iis of
the Greeks, which derived its name from its
covering the KrniJ.fi, i.e. the part of the leg
above named. The Mischuh of the above
passage is usually taken in the same sense,
though the word is not in either the dual or
plural number, but is singular. All the old
Versions, including Josephus, give it the mean-
ing of a piece of armour for the leg — some even
for the thigh. [G.] [W.]
GREECE, or Hellas, as it was called by its
inhabitants, was the country which occupies
the easternmost of the three peninsulas that
project southwards into the sea from the conti-
nent of Europe. In respect to its conformation
it presents some marked points of contrast with
the other two : for while Spain is characterised
by its broad area, divided into sections by parallel
chains of mountains running from east to west,
so that Strabo has aptly compared it to a bull's
hide (ii. 5, § 27); and Italy presents a long,
unbroken coast-line, but little diversified with
bays and harbours ; Greece is distinguished both
by the extraordinary variety of its outline, and
by the irregularity of its surface. In these
respects, also, it differs from the countries in its
immediate neighbourhood. The Balkan penin-
sula, as it is called in modern times — that is,
the entire district south of the Haemus range
and the mountain chains which form a link
between it and the Alps — is composed in its
northern portion, in the provinces of Thrace,
Macedonia, and Illvria, of undulating ground,
alternating with level plains and ill-defined
mountain masses, the latter of which are closely
compacted together on the side towards the
Adriatic Sea. But as we advance further south
and approach the Aegean, the character of the
ground changes and becomes at once more definite
and more varied. The mountains now gronp
themselves into distinct chains, with well-marked
summits and delicate outlines, and the coasts
are indented with innumerable inlets, which
penetrate far into the land, and are themselves
subdivided into minute creeks and harbours.
These features are traceable in Epirus, Thessaly,
and the seaboard of Macedonia; but they are
Digitized by
Google
GREECE
GREECE
1249
much more striking in the districts to the south
of these, which were inhabited by races mure
strictly Hellenic in their origin — in Locris,
Phocis, Boeotia, and Attica ; and, above all, in
that country which was the culminating point
in the structure of the entire peninsula, the
Peloponnese. To trace these points somewhat
more in detail : the main chain of mountains,
which rum through the country from north to
sooth, halfway between the Aegean and the
Adriatic, in its northern portion bore the name
of Scardus, but further south, where it separates
Thessaly from Epirus, that of Pindus. From
this, at various points, transverse ranges radiate,
as, for instance, the Cambunian mountains to
the north of Thessaly, terminating in Mount
Olympus, at right angles to which, along the
sea-coast, is formed the chain of Ossa and Pelion.
But it is the southern extremity of Pindns that
forms the birthplace of those mountains which
are most intimately associated with the classical
history of Greece. Here, at the south-western
angle of Thessaly, the parallel ranges of Othrys
and Oeta diverge toward the east, and the Aeto-
lian mountains to the south-west ; while the
most lineal descendants of the main chain are
those which, taking a south-easterly course, are
successively known by the famous names of
Parnassus in Phocis, and Helicon in Boeotia,
after which, as Cithaeron and Parnes, they sepa-
rate the last-named country from Attica, throw-
ing off spurs southwards in Aegaleos and Hymet-
tus which bound the plain of Athens. Then
follow the mountains of the Peloponnese, which
have a separate organisation of their own, form-
ing a massive barrier in the north of Arcadia,
which throws np the conspicuous summits of
Cyllene, Aroanins, and Erymanthus; while
towards the south run down the lofty chains
of Parnon, Taygetus, and Lycaeum. As regards
their elevation. Mount Olympus reaches nearly
10,000 feet ; but with this single exception the
chief mountains range from 8,000 to 3,000 feet,
and among these there are at least twenty-five
whose names are familiar to onr ears. Many of
them are covered with snow during several
months of the year; and this feature, together
with their number and beauty of form, tends to
produce scenery of an exquisite character. Again,
to turn to the coast-line, we find that the further
the Greek peninsula advances towards the south,
the more varied is its outline and the more deeply
it it indented by the sea. At three points, in
particular, the continent is contracted by inlets
which penetrate into it from the two sides :
first, to the south of Thessaly and Epirus, where
the Maliac advances to meet the Ambracian
gulf; secondly, where the former of these two
pieces of water, in the neighbourhood of Ther-
mopylae, faces the inmost angle of the Crissaean
bay under Delphi ; and thirdly, where the
Corinthian and Saronic gulfs are only separated
by the narrow dam of the Isthmus. Besides
the bays that have now been mentioned, the
Peloponnese is deeply penetrated by three gulfs,
— the Argolic, the Laconian. and the Messenian.
The numerous small headlands which project
into these still further increase the length of
the coast-line, and form a multiplicity of tiny
harbours, of which the Piraeus is a familiar ex-
ample. It is owing to this that the sea is
rarely absent from views of Greece, and that sea
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
I and land seem to be equally component elements
of the country : in the Peloponnese, for example,
there are few of the mountains from which the
sea is not visible either on one side or on the
other. Nor must we omit to notice the islands,
whether those of the western or those of the
eastern sea. These conspicuous objects, follow-
ing one another in long succession, present the
appearance of mountain chains half submerged
in the water: and this in some cases they were;
as, for instance, the northern Cyclades — Andros,
Tenos, and Myconos — which are a continuation
of the ridge that intersects Euboea ; and the
western islands of the same group — Ceos, Cvth-
nos, Seriphos, and Siohnos,- which bear a similar
relation to the mountains of Attica. By cross-
ing from one to another oi' these it was compara-
tively easy to pass from Greece both to Asia
Minor and to the southern extremity of Italy.
In speaking of Greece in connexion with the
Bible, it is necessary to lay stress on these
points, because they exercised great influence
on the character of the Greek people, who were
appointed to bear an important part in the pre-
paration of the world for the reception of the
Gospel. To pass over for the moment what
may be called the external influences of Greece
on the world at the time of Christ's coming, in
respect of language and of social agencies and
political organisation, by means of which the
spread of Christianity was facilitated, and the
instruments of its development were prepared :
the Greeks exercised a great internal or sub-
jective influence in this respect ; and that in
two different ways. In the first place, the
speculations of Greek philosophy proved up to
what limit the human mind could advance, in-
dependently of Revelation, in the investigation
of morals and religion. The Greeks, beyond all
other nations of antiquity, performed the office
which St. Paul describes, of "seeking the Lord,
if haply they might feel after Him and find
Him;" and the result of their seeking was
to show that " the world by wisdom knew not
God." In their case also it was proved,
that after a disruption had taken place be-
tween the cultivated intelligence of the people
and their traditional religion, the highest sanc-
tions of good living failed, and a depravation of
morals was the result. As Neander expresses it
(Church History, vol. i. p. 7 ; Bohn s edit.),
" There was as yet no salt to preserve the life of
humanity from decomposing, or to restore to
purity what was passing into decomposition."
Secondly, in order that Christianity might be-
come the universal religion, it was necessary
that it should assimilate whatever good and
noble forces there were at work in the world,
and should be able to sympathise with, and
employ for its own purposes, whatever tends to
elevate human nature ; and thus the Greeks, by
cultivating the higher civilisation in the various
branches of science and art, supplied an element
necessary to full religious development, which
was wanting in Judaism. Now the peculiar
nature of Hellenic culture, and the extraordinary
richness of its growth, was due to the combined
influences of race and country, — to the character
and intellect of the Greek people, together with
the conformation of the land which they in-
habited, and to the remarkable correspondence
between the two. These influences and this
4 L
Digitized by
Google
1250
GREECE
GREECE
correspondence are especially traceable in the
most marked features of the Greek mind as seen
in its products, — its independence, its many-sided-
ness, and its temperateness. The first of these,
independence — the same characteristic which in
the political history of Greece shows itself alike in
resistance to foreign domination and in incapacity
for combination on the part of the states at
home — was fostered by the presence of the moun-
tains and the sea, by the inspiring and elevating
associations of the two, and by the close contact
of the home-loving life of the mountaineer with
the changeful occupations of the seafaring
man. Many-sidedness and versatility naturally
arose in a country where a variety of objects
were continually presenting themselves to the
eye ; where land and water, plain and moun-
tain, snow-clad peaks and fertile valleys, bright
uplands and dark ravines, were endlessly inter-
mingled. And the absence of any objects of
colossal magnitude, the moderate elevation of
the mountains, the land-locked bays and island-
studded seas, suggested the idea of limitation;
while the delicacy of the outlines, and the har-
monious grouping of the various features in the
views, inspired a feeling for symmetry and the
love of beauty. From the combination of these
proceeded that moderation, and that balanced
tone of mind, which are the secret of the good
taste and the good judgment of the Greeks.
Such influences would have been thrown away on
a people incapable of appreciating them, but found
a peculiarly congenial soil in the Hellenic mind.
A comparison of the geographical position of
Greece with that of Palestine is instructive,
both in Tespect of the resemblances and the con-
trasts which it presents. In the smallness of
the area which they occupy the two countries
have a marked point of likeness. The sarcasm
of the unbeliever, which was aimed at Palestine,
that so limited a district could not have changed
the fortunes of mankind, would apply with
almost equal force to Greece. If, on the one hand,
the Holy Land, from Mount Hermon and the
sources of the Jordan in the north to the southern
extremity of the Dead Sea, extends over only-
two degrees and a half of latitude ; on the other,
the whole length of Greece, from the northern-
most corner of Thessaly to the promontory of
Taenarum, is comprised within four degrees.
The part of the country, especially, on which its
fame chiefly depends — that which lies to the
south of Mount Othrys — is remarkably limited
in extent ; from this point onward the breadth
of the continent contracts, and its area is les-
sened by the numerous bays ami gulfs which
encroach upon the land. Similarly in respect
of the proximity in which places of world-wide
fame stand to one another — if in Palestine the
traveller is surprised at passing in the course of
a few hours from Hebron by Bethlehem to Jeru-
salem, he is not less astonished at finding that
the sites of Nauplia, Tiryns, Mycenae, and
Argos cau easily be visited in a single day, and
that by sea a short run before a favouring wind
takes him across from the Piraeus to Aegina,
and thence to Epidaurus on the coast of Argolis.
But here the correspondence between the two
countries ceases, and a strong contrast presents
itself in the isolation of the one and the accessi-
bility of the other. Palestine, hemmed in, as it
was, between the desert and the sea, and bordered
by a long and almost harbourless shore, was the
fitting home for a people set apart, among whom
the truths of morality and religion were to
receive a special and independent development.
Greece, on the other hand, both from its situa-
tion and the conformation of its territory, was,
so to speak, a naturally receptive country, and
was suited to hand on the torch of civilisation
to Western lands. Lying on the confines of
Asia and Europe, it occupied a position in many
respects similar to that of England at the pre-
sent day : it was the natural point of communi-
cation between the old world and the new ; all
the arts, the ideas, and the movements which
passed from the east to the west must neces-
sarily pass through it ; and it was in the power
of its inhabitants to modify and recast whatever
was transmitted from the one to the other. The
islands, which followed one another in irregular
chains, and were separated only by narrow
spaces of sea— especially the Cyclades and the
islands adjacent to them in the middle of the
Aegean, and those which bound that sea to-
wards the south, Crete, Casos, Carpathos, and
Rhodes — served as stepping-stones to facilitate
the approach to Greece, and lessened the dangers
of a voyage in the infancy of navigation. The
conspicuous headlands offered points to steer for,
and the innumerable harbours both provided a
refuge in case of danger and encouraged the ex-
port and import trade. It is also to be remarked
that these features of the country are much
more conspicuous on its eastern than on its
western side, for the principal bays, promon-
tories, and island-chains face in the direction of
Asia. Italy and Greece, on the other hand, may
be described as standing back to back to one
another, for the western shores of Greece offer
but few harbours, while the districts of Italy on
which its future development was destined to
depend — Campania, Latium, and Etruria —
opened not on the Adriatic, but on the Tyrrhe-
nian Sea. The result of this was, that Greek
civilisation was not passed on to Italy until
it had reached something like maturity.
It was through the Phoenicians that the
Greeks first came into contact with the Semitic
race. That people were attracted to Greece by
the purple trade, for the purple-mussel was
found at several points near the shores of that
country. Thus by way of the lower line of
islands just mentioned they reached the La-
conian gulf, where they established one of their
principal factories on the island of Crnnai!, close
to the port of Gythium. Similarly by the
southern Cyclades they made their way to
Hermione at the extremity of Argolis, which
was famed for its purple, and from that point
they advanced on the one side to Nauplia, on the
other to Corinth. The purple-mussel appears
on the coins of the last-named city, and Sisy-
phus, its local hero, was said to have been
father of Porphyrion, — that is, the purple trade ;
and to have founded the worship of Melicertes,
—that is, the Tyrian Melcarth. It was by means
of these strangers that the principal arts of life
were introduced into Greece, — m particular the
alphabet and weights and measures. At a later
period numerous traces of their presence re-
mained. Among the leading Greek divinities
Heracles and Aphrodite were of Phoenician
origin, and the latter goddess obtained her name
Digitized by
Google
GREECE
of Cytherea from her worship having been first
established on the island of Cythera, which was
one of the head-quarters of their fisheries.
Among the trees of Greece, the date-palm was
introduced by them, a* its name <poivi{ testifies ;
and also the pomegranate, which Aphrodite was
said to hare planted in Cyprus, and the cypress.
Phoenician names of places survived, whether
derived from ordinary words, as Samoa, for " a
height," or from names of deities, as Astyra,
which occurs in several places, from Astarte,
and Makaria from Makar ( = Melkar-t), the
Phoenician Heracles. Recent archaeological
discoveries tend also to show that many of the
features which are found in the earliest Greek
art ai-e due to Phoenician influence.
Of direct communication, however, between
the Hebrew and Greek peoples during the period
over which the 0. T. Scriptures extend, there is
no evidence [but see p. 710, col. 2]. It is not in-
tended to be implied by this statement that they
were wholly ignorant of one another's existence.
It is highly probable that the name Javan, which
occurs in the Hebrew prophets from the time of
Joel onwards (Joel iii. 6 ; Is. lxvi. 19 ; Ezck.
xrvii. 13, &c), is the same as "IcW or Ionian,
and signified the Greeks at large, just as 'liovts
did in the mouth of a Persian (Aesch. Pers. 178,
563 ; Aristoph. AcKarn. 104) ; and for the same
reason, viz. that the Ionians were that branch
of the Greek race with which they were most
familiar. The passage from Joel just referred
to, which speaks of the Phoenicians as selling
the children of Judah to the sons of Javan, and
that from Ezekiel, in which Javan is repre-
sented as selling the persons of men to the
Tyrians, imply that through the slave-market
the two peoples may have been able to learn
something of one another ; and this is corrobo-
rated by passages to the same effect from Homer
and Herodotus (Horn. Od. xv. 427-429 ; Herod,
i. IX which speak of persons being kidnapped
for slaves from Syria to Greece and rice ttrsa.
In Egypt also, whether through the Ionian
mercenaries, who from an early period were
employed in the service of the Egyptian mon-
archs, or through the Greek traders, who were
settled in that country, especially at the em-
porium of Naucratis, some communication may
have taken place between them. But this
amounts to little more than conjecture ; and on
the side of the Greeks there is hardly any trace
of acquaintance with the Jews as a separate
people, for the 'Sipoi TlaXaurrivoX of Herodotus
(iii. 5) would include all the nationalities of that
region, and the city of Cadytis, which be there
mentions, is much more probably Gaza than
Jerusalem : and though, when the same writer
speaks elsewhere (ii. 104) of the Syrians of
Palestine as having borrowed the custom of cir-
cumcision from the Egyptians, the Jews seem to
be referred to, it is not likely that this informa-
tion was obtained at first-hand, or with definite
knowledge of their separate existence. The
same thing in all probability is true of his men-
tion of the defeat of Josiah by Pharaoh-necho at
Megiddo as an overthrow of the Syrians at Mag-
dolus (it 159).
It was through Alexander the Great that the
influence of Greece was directly brought to bear
upon Palestine, and that those causes began to
operate through which Greek civilisation con-
GREECE
1251
tributed to promote the reception of the Gospel.
Alexander himself visited Jerusalem after the
siege of Tyre, and Joseph us has left us an
account (Ant. xi. 8, § 5) of his respectful treat-
ment of the high-priest and of the Jewish
religion on that occasion. That great prince,
whom history has been apt to regard as the
type of an ambitious youth, in accordance with
Juvenal's line, —
"Unas PelUeoJavenl non sufflclt orbls" (x. 168)—
was in reality the noblest specimen of a far-
seeing conqueror, for everywhere it was a part
of his policy to follow up his victories by the
establishment of civil institutions, and to in-
augurate a system which should promote com-
merce and a community of interests among the
various peoples of his empire. In this respect
he has been more fairly judged by the natives
of Asia, for even at the present day, from the
Mediterranean to the Indus, the name of Alex-
ander is ranked with that of Solomon, as repre-
senting the most famous of sovereigns. In
pursuance of this design, he inaugurated the
system, which was subsequently carried out
more fully by his successors, of establishing
Greek cities throughout Western Asia. Of the
extent of this clear evidence is found in the fre-
quency with which the names of Alexandria,
Seleucia, Antiochia, Ptolemais, and others of <t
similar origin, appear in Asia Minor and Syria,
and even as far east as Bactria. In doing this
he seems to have anticipated and provided
against the dismemberment of his empire, which
took place at his death, for the organisation
which he set on foot was independent of its
unity. By this means the seeds of Greek civi-
lisation were scattered broadcast over this
continent, and tjie Greek language became a
means of general communication. The import-
ance of this last point cannot be overrated, for
in all ages the multiplicity of languages pre-
sents one of the most formidable obstacles to
missionary enterprise. But what Arabic has
been to Northern Africa since the Mahometan
invasion of that country, that Greek was to
Western Asia during and subsequently to the
Macedonian period — the language of commerce
and cultivation, and an instrument of inter-
course between races separated from one another
by diversity of speech. To how great a degree
this influence had operated in certain districts,
we can see from the familiar use of Greek in
Palestine at the period of our Lord's ministry.
At the same time the effect produced by Greek
modes of thought and Greek philosophy on the
Jewish mind, owing to the contact of the two
peoples, was pregnant with important results for
religion. In particular, the acquaintance with
these subjects which St. Paul had obtained in
the schools of Tarsus enabled that Apostle to
expound the doctrines of the Gospel in such a
manner as would commend it to intelligent
Gentiles ; and also, by the definiteness of state-
ment derived from this source, Christianity was
prevented from becoming a mystical theosophy,
or being otherwise assimilated to Oriental
religions. In Egypt also, where the newly-
founded city of Alexandria became the most
lasting memorial of the author of this revolu-
tion, the same contact produced other and not
less remarkable effects, to which we can but
4 L 2
Digitized by
Google
1252
GREEK LANGUAGE
GBOVE
briefly allude. Here it was that the Septuagint
Version arose, with all the incalculable influence
which it was to exercise both on the Jewish and
the Christian Church. Here, by the contact of
Platonic with Jewish teaching, the belief in the
immortality of the soul was developed into
fuller consciousness, as is seen especially in the
Book of Wisdom. Here the Sibylline oracles
were invented, by the agency of which frag-
ments of Hebrew belief passed into the litera-
ture of Rome. Here, too, originated the alle-
gorical system of interpretation, which was
destined to affect much . Christian theology (see
Stanley's Jeicish Church, iii. Lect. 47 ; Bigg, The
Christ. Platonists of Alexandria).
In conclusion we must not overlook the
greatest of all the advantages which Greece has
conferred on the cause of religion, viz. that it
has provided in the Greek language, and
especially in the peculiar form which it assumed
in Hellenistic Greek, the most fitting of all
vehicles for recording and transmitting the facts
and doctrines of Christianity. Of the surpassing
excellences of that language there is no need to
speak, for they are universally recognised ; but
the merits of the Greek of the Septuagint and
the New Testament have not been so fully
acknowledged. Yet it is not hard to see, that a
form of speech so nicely adapted to the peculi-
arities of the Greek mind as the classical tongue
was not well suited for general reception, and
that a religion which was to embrace the world
required a less artistic instrument for its
diffusion. This was supplied by the Hellenistic
language, which is simpler in its modes of
expression, and therefore more easily intelligible
to ordinary minds ; for which reason, also, that
which is written in it is more readily translate-
able into other languages. To this it may be
added that its more analytic form causes it to
be more nearly allied to modern languages, so
that it possesses an element of permanence as
well as of universality. [H. F. T.]
GREEK LANGUAGE. [Hellenist; LajT
6UAOE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.]
GREYHOUND. The translation in the
text of the A. V. and It. V. (Prov. xxx. 31) of
the Hebrew words D'JJTO "VPt (zarzir moth-
nayim), i.e. "one girt about tie loins." But
R. V. margin gives war-horse, probably a
better rendering, as stateliness and majesty of
gait, which seem to be intended to be illus-
trated rather than speed, are exemplified in the
horse rather than in the greyhound (cp.
Strack in Strack u. Zockler's Kgf. Komm. in
loco). The LXX. (A.) has the following
curious interpretation, aXtxrup inxtpiTarSy
ir (hi\*lais (i'fivxos, i.e. " a cock as it proudly
struts amongst the hens." Somewhat similar
is the Vulgate, gallus succinctus lumbos, and
Coverdale's "a cock ready to fight." Various
are the opinions as to what animal "comely in
going" is here intended. Some think "a
leopard," others " an eagle," or " a man girt
with armour," or "a zebra," &c. Gesenius
(Thes. p. 435), Schultens {Comment, ad Prov.
1. c), Bochart (Hieroz. ii. 684), Rosenmiiller
(Schol. ad Prov. 1. c, and Not. ad Boch. 1. a),
Fuller (Miscell. Sac. 5, 12), support the ren-
dering of a " war-horse girt with trappings."
But, later, Maurer (Comment. Oram, in Vet.
Test. 1. c.) decides unhesitatingly in favour of
" a wrestler," when girt about the loins for a
contest. He refers to Buxtorf (Lex. Chald.
Tatm. p. C92) to show that zarzir is used in
the Talmud to express " a wrestler," and thus
concludes : " Sed ne opus quidem est hoc loco
quanquam minime contemnendo, quum accinc-
tum esse in neminem magis cadat quam in
luctatorem ita ut haec significatio certa sit per
se." It is certainly possible that Maurer is
correct. The grace and activity of the practised
athlete agrees well with the notion conveyed by
the expression, " comely in going ; " and the
suitableness of the Hebrew words, zarzir moth-
nayim, is obvious to every reader. Vet the
reading of the text of A. V. and R. V. is not
impossible (cp. Delitzsch in loco). The Persian
greyhound is the one race of dogs, besides the
pariah, which has been known for ages in Syria
and the neighbouring countries, and is very
highly prized for the chase of the gazelle and
other desert antelopes. It is a beautiful creature,
larger than our greyhound, with long silky hair
on the ears, and a long pendent fringe of the
same along the tail. [W. H.] [H. B. T.]
GROVE. A word used in the A. V., with
two exceptions, to translate the Hebrew Asherah
(rnB'N). This term is examined under its
own head (p. 257), where it is observed that
almost all modern interpreters agree that an
idol or image of some kind must be intended,
and not a grove, as our Translators render,
following the version of the LXX. (Iktrot)
and of the Vulgate (lucus). This is evident
from many passages, and especially from 2 K.
xxiii. 6, where we find that Josiah " brought
out the Asherah " (translated by our Version
"the grove") "from the house of the Lord"
(cp. also Judg. iii. 7; 1 K. xiv. 23, xviii.
19). In many passages the "groves" are
grouped with molten and graven images in a
manner that leaves no doubt that some idol w.->s
intended (2 Ch. xxxiii. 19, xxxiv. 3, 4; Is. xvii.
8). There has been much dispute as to what
the Asherah was ; but in addition to the views
set forth under Asherah, we must not omit to
notice a probable connexion between this symbol
or image — whatever it was — and the sacred
symbolic tree, the representation of which occurs
so frequently on Assyrian sculptures, and is
shown in the following woodcut. The con-
nexion is ingeniously maintained by Mr. Fer-
gusson in his Nineveh and Persepolis restored
(pp. 299-304), to which the render is referred.
The two exceptions noticed above are Gen.
xxi. 33 and 1 Sam. xxii. 6 (margin), where
« grove " is employed to render the word 7t?$,
'eshel, which in the text of the latter passage,
and in 1 Sam. xxxi. 13, is translated ''tree."
In these three passages 'eshel should be translated
" tamarisk" (R.V.), h&$ being equivalent to the
Arabic A}\, athl, " tamarisk." No less than
six species of the Tamarisk family occur in
Palestine. One (T. Jvnlanis) fringes nearly the
whole course of the Jordan. Others arc found
on the coast, and in the deserts, and by the
Dead Sea. All thrive, but in barren, sandy, and
salt situations, where they sometimes reach such
Digitized by
Google
GROVE
a size as to afford dense shade. The tamarisk is
a. graceful tree, with long feathery branches,
clad with the minutest of leaves, and sur-
mounted in spring with long spikes of pink
blossom, which seem to envelope the whole tree
in one gauzy sheet of colour, below Jabesh-
•jilead, where Saul and Jonathan were buried
under such a tree, the tamarisk is still plentiful.
I>t. liarth's mention of his camping under a
tamarisk in Fezzan recalls Saul abiding under
an 'eshel in Raman (1 Sam. xxii. 6). It is now
however generally recognised (among others, see
Gcsen. Tnes. p. 506; Stanley, S. d- P. § 76, 3;
pp. 142 note, 220 note, and passim), that the
word 'Hon, fl7H, which is uniformly rendered
by the A. V. " plain," signifies a grove or plan-
tation. Such were the Elon of liamre (Gen.
xiii. 18, xiv. 13, xviii. 1); of Moreh (Gen. xii.
6; Deut. xi. 30); of Zaanaim (Judg. iv. 11)
or Zaanannim (Josh. xix. 33); of the pillar
(Judg. ix. 6); of Meonenim (Judg. ix. 37);
and of Tabor (1 Sam. x. 3). In all these cases
the LXX. have tpvs or fiiKavos; the Vulgate —
which the A. V. probably followed — vallis or
contains, in the last three however querent.
GEOVE
1253
In the religions of the ancient Semites and
heathen world groves play a prominent part (cp.
R. Smith, Religion of tlie Semites, i. Index s. n.
" Trees"). Then altars only were erected to the
gods. It was thought wrong to shut up the
gods within walls, and trees were the first temples
(Tac. H. X. xii. 2, Germ. 9 ; Lucian, de Sacrific.
10; see Carpzov. App. Crit. p. 332). From the
earliest times groves are mentioned in connexion
with religious worship (Gen. xii. 6, 7, xiii. 18;
Deut. xi. 30 ; A. V. " plain "). Their high anti-
quity, refreshing shade, solemn silence, and awe-
inspiring solitude, as well as the striking illus-
tration they afford of natural life, marked them
out as the fit localities, or even the actual
objects of worship ("Lucos et in iis silentia
ipsa adoraraus," Plin. xii. 1; "Secretnm luci
. . . et admiratio umbrae fidem tibi numinis
facit," Sen. Ep. xii. ; " Quo posses viso dicere
Numen habet," Ov. Fast. iii. 295; "Sacri
nemus accubet umbra," Virg. Georg. iii. 334;
Ov. Met. viii. 743; Ezek. vi. 13; Is. lvii. 5;
Hos. iv. 13). This last passage hints at another
and darker reason why groves were opportune
for the degraded services of idolatry; their
shadow hid the atrocities and obscenities of
Sacral qrmtollc Tree at the AfluyrlAH& From Lord AN-rdtxu • itjii* * Dm
(Fenpmon's AWwA and Ptriejiotii, p. 2V8.)
heathen worship. The groves were generally
found connected with temples, and often had
the right of affording an asylum (Tac. Germ. ix.
40 ; Herod, ii. 138 , Virg. Aen. i. 441, ii. 512 ;
Sil. Ital. i. 81). Some have supposed that even
the Jewish Temple had a rd/iwos planted with
palm and cedar (Ps. xcii. 12, 13) and olive
(Pa. Iii. 8). This is more than doubtful; but
we know that a celebrated oak stood by the
sanctuary at Shechem (Josh. xxiv. 26 ; Judg. ix.
6 ; Stanley, S. $ P. p. 142). We find repeated
mention of groves consecrated with deep super-
stition to particular gods (Liv. vii. 25, xxiv. 3,
xxxt. 51 ; Tac. Ann. ii. 12, 51, &c, iv. 73, &c).
For this reason they were stringently forbidden
to the Jews (Ex. xxxiv. 13 ; Jer. xvii. 2 ; Ezek.
xx. 28), and Maimonides even says that it is
forbidden to sit under the shade of any green
tree where an idol-statue was (Fabric. Bibl.
Antiq. p. 290). Yet we find abundant indica-
tions that the Hebrews felt the influence of
groves on the mind (" the spirit in the woods,"
Wordsworth), and therefore selected them for
solemn purposes, such as great national meetings
(Judg. ix. 6, 37) and the burial of the dead
((•en. xxxv. 8 ; 1 Sara. xxxi. 14). Those con-
nected with patriarchal history were peculiarly
liable to superstitious reverence (Amos v. 5,
viii. 13), and we find that the groves of Mamre
were long a place of worship (Sozomen, H. E.
ii. 4 ; Euseb. Vit. Constant. 81 ; Reland, Palaest.
p. T14). There are in Scripture many memora-
ble trees; e.g. Allon-bachuth (Gen. xxxv. 8),
the tamarisk in Gibeah (1 Sam. xxii. 6), the
terebinth in Shechem (Josh. xxiv. 26, under
which the Law was set up), the palm-tree of
Deborah (Judg. iv. 5), the terebinth of enchant-
ments (Judg. ix. 37), the terebinth of wanderers
(Judg. iv. 11), and others (1 Sam. xiv. 2, x. 3,
sometimes " plain " in A. V., Vulg. convallis).
This admiration for particular trees was
among the heathen extended to a regular worship
of them. "Tree-worship may be traced from
the interior of Africa, not only into Egypt and
Arabia, but also onward uninterruptedly into
Palestine and Syria, Assyria, Persia, India,
Thibet, Siam, the Philippine Islands, China,
Japan, and Siberia ; also westward into Asia
Minor, Greece, Italy, and other countries ; and
in most of the countries here named it obtains
in the present day, combined as it has been in
other parts with various forms of idolatry"
(Gen. of Earth and Man, p. 139). " The wor-
ship of trees even goes back among the Irau-
Digitized by
Google
1254
GUAED
nians to the rules of Horn, called in the Zend-
Avesta the promulgator of the old law. We
know from Herodotus the delight which Xerxes
took in the great plane-tree in Lydia, on which
he bestowed golden ornaments, and appointed
for it a sentinel in the person of one of the
' immortal ten thousand.' The early veneration
of trees was associated with that of sacred
fountains. In similar connexion with the early
worship of nature among the Hellenic nations
we read of the fame of the great palm-tree of
Delos, and of an aged platanus in Arcadia. The
Buddhists of Ceylon venerate the colossal Indian
fig-tree of Anurah-depura ; those of Japan the
great pine-tree of Otzu ... As single trees
thus became objects of veneration from the
beauty of their form, so did also groups of trees,
under the name of ' groves of gods.' Pausanias
(i. 21, § 9) is full of the praise of a grove
belonging to the temple of Apollo at Grynion in
Aeolis ; and the grove of Colone is celebrated
in the renowned chorus of Sophocles " (Hum-
boldt, Cosmos, ii. 96, Eng. ed.). The custom of
adorning trees " with jewels and mantles " was
very ancient and universal (Herod, vii. 31 ;
Aelian, V. H. ii. 14; Theocr. Id. xviii. ; Ov.
Met. viii. 723, 745 ; Arnob. adv. QenUs, i. 39X
and even still exists in the East.
The oracular trees of antiquity are well
known (II. xvi. 233 ; 0(1. v. 237 ; Soph. Trach.
754; Virg. Gcorg. ii. 16; Sil. Ital. iii. 11).
Each god had some sacred tree (Virg. Eel. vii.
61 sqq.). The Etrurians are said to have wor-
shipped a palm, and the Celts an oak (Max. Tyr.
Dissert. 38, in Godwyn's Mos. and Aar. ii. 4).
On the Druidic veneration of oak-groves, see
Pliny, //. N. xvi. 44 ; Tac. Ann. xiv. 30. In
the same way, according to the missionary
Oldendorp, the negroes " have sacred groves, the
abodes of a deity, which no negro ventures to
enter except the priests " (Prichard, Xat. Hist,
of Man, pp. 525-539, 3rd ed. ; Park's Travels,
p. 65). So, too, the ancient Egyptians (Rawlin-
son's Herod, ii. 298). Long after the introduc-
tion of Christianity it was found necessary to
forbid all abuse of trees and groves to the pur-
poses of superstition (Harduin, Act. Condi, i.
988 ; see Orelli, ad Tac. Germ. 9). [F. W. F.]
GUAED. The Hebrew terms commonly used
had reference to the special duties which the
body-guard of a monarch had to perform.
1. Tabbach (11313) originally signified "a
cook ; " and as butchering fell to the lot of the
cook in Eastern countries, it gained the secondary
sense of " executioner," and is applied to the
body-guard of the kings of Egypt (Gen. xxxvii.
36 [A.V. and R.V. text "captain of the guard,"
ditto marg. chief of the executioners]) and
Babylon (2 K. xxv. 8 ; Jer. xxxix. 9, xl. 1 ; Dan.
ii. 14 [A. V. and R. V. " captain of the guard "
in all these passages]). [Executioner.]
2. Sat (yft properly means "a runner,"
and is the ordinary term employed for the
attendants of the Jewish kings, whose office it was
to run before the chariot (2 Sam. xv. 1 ; IK. i.
5), like the cursores of the Roman Emperors
(Senec. Ep. 87, 126). That the Jewish "run-
ners " superadded the ordinary duties of a mili-
tary " guard " appears from several passages
(1 Sam. xxii. 17 ; 2 K. x. 25, ii. 6; 2 Ch. xii.
10. Cp. A. V. and R. V. of these passages). It
GUNI
was their office also to carry despatches (2 Ch.
xxx. 6, A. V. and R. V. " posts "). They had a
guard-room set apart for their nse in the king's
palace, in which their arms were kept ready for
use (1 K. xiv. 28 ; 2 Ch. xii. 11). [Footman.]
3. The terms mishmireth (rniptPO) and misli-
mar (TOB'P) express properly the act of watching,
but are occasionally transferred to the persons
who kept watch (Neh. iv. 9, vii. 3, xii. 9
[A. V. " watches," R. V. " wards "] ; Job vii.
12). It is not necessary to suppose that the
A. V. substituted mishmartS (WIDE'D) for the
present reading (IPUJOB'P) in 2 Sam. xxiii. 23 or
1 Sam. xxii. 14. Benaiah was appointed " cap-
tain of the guard," as Josephus (Ant. vii. 14, § 4)
relates, and not privy councillor : and the word
JTBDB'b easily acquires that meaning (cp. MV."
and Driver, Notes on the Heb. Text of the II B. of
Sam. on 1 Sam. xxii. 14). For his duties, see
Captain. [W. L. B.] [F.]
GUD-GCDAH (with the art. JViriaPI ; BA.
ra«7it8, F. rakya' ; Qadgad), Dent. x. 7." [HOR
Haqidoad.]
GUEST. [Hospitality.]
GUL'LOTH (flfa = babblings, a spring,
plural of TlPi), a Hebrew term of unfrequent
occurrence in the Bible, and used only in two
passages relating the same occurrence, to
denote a natural object, viz. the springs added
by the great Caleb to the south land in the
neighbourhood of Debir, which formed the
dowry of his daughter Achsah (Josh. xv. 19;
Judg. i. 15). The springs were "upper" and
" lower " — possibly one at the top and the other
at the bottom of a ravine or glen ; and they may
have derived their unusual name from their
appearance being different from that of the ordi-
nary springs of the country. The root (??3) has
the force of rolling or tumbling over, and
perhaps this may imply that they welled up
in that round or mushroom form which is not
uncommon here, though apparently most rare
in Palestine. The rendering of the Vat. LXX.
(B.) is singular. In Josh, it has tV Bo$9<wfls,
and tV rovaiBKdv, the latter doubtless a mere
corruption of the Hebrew. The A. MS. follows
more closely the Hebrew text (TuKaBiud^ ■ • Tu-
Kiti). In Judges both have kvrpaxrts. The springs
were apparently known in St. Jerome's day, for
he particularly mentions Paula's visit to them,
and her astonishment at them ; magis mirabatur,
Sec. (Ep. Paul. xi.). An attempt has been made
by Dr. Rosen to identify them with the 'Ain Nun-
kur or el-Unlcur near Hebron (see Zeitschrift
der D. M. G. 1857) ; but they are more probably
the three remarkable groups of springs in the
Seil ed-Dilbeh to the north of Edh-Dhaherlyeh
(PEF. Mem. iii. 302). [Debib.] [G.] [W.]
GU'NI (♦}« [see MV .»] ; B. IW, i iW, A.
Taurt; Guni). 1. A son of Naphtali («en. xlri.
24 ; 1 Ch. vii. 13), the founder of the family of
the Gunites (Num. xxvi. 48). Like several others
of the early Israelite names, Gum is a patrony-
mic — " Gunite ; " as if already a family at the
time of its first mention (cp. Arodi, Hushim, 4c).
Digitized by
Google
GUNITE8, THE
2. A descendant of Gad ; father of Abdiel, a
thief man in his tribe (1 Ch. v. 15).
GUITITES, THE ('M3PI ; t Tawl ; Ounitae),
the "family" which sprang from Guni, son of
Naphtali (Num. xxvi. 48). There is not in the
Hebrew any difference between the two names,
of the individual and of the family.
GUB, THE GOING UP TO (lUvfcjJD
=tke ascent or steep of Gar, or the lion's whelp,
or perhaps the inn or A7.an, Ges. Thes. p. 275 ;
b rj ava&atvtiv Tai ; ascensus. Gater), an ascent
or rising ground, at which Ahaziah received his
deathblow while flying from Jehu after the
•laughter of Joram (2 K. ix. 27). It is de-
scribed as at (3) lbleam, and on the way between
Jezreel and Beth-hag-gan (A. V. "the garden-
home "). As the latter is identified with
tolerable probability with the present Jenin,
and it may be inferred from the narrative that
Ahaziah had not gone a very long distance before
he was overtaken and wounded, we may conclude
that the ascent of Gur was a hill between
Jezreel and " the garden-house." Such a place
there is midway between Zerin and Jenin, where
the direct road between the two places passes
over a spur upon which by the side of the road
stands the village of Jelameh, perhaps lbleam.
By Josephus it is mentioned (Ant. ix. 6, § 3)
merely as " a certais ascent " (I v Tin irpo<rj8d<rei).
Neither it nor lbleam have yet been certainly
recovered.
For the details of the occurrence, see Jehu.
For other ascents, see Adumiim, Acrabbim,
Zjz. [G.] [W.]
GUB BA'AL (V?3*TM = the dwelling of
Baal ; 17 wirpa. ; Gurbaal), a place or district in
which dwelt Arabians, as reorded in 2 Ch.
iivi. 7. It appears from the context to have
been in the country lying between Palestine
and the Arabian peninsula ; but no site has been
assigned to it. The Targum reads J»3nH 'tOTl?
"1153— "Arabs living in Gerar " — suggesting
Til instead of "Hi ; but there is no further
evidence to strengthen this supposition. [E. S. P.]
GUTTEB, the A. V. translation of "03V ('■>
2 Sam. v. 8 ; K. V. " watercourse "), a word the
sense of which is not certain (see MV."), occur-
ring in a passage " of which it is easier to say
what it does not mean than what it does "
(DriTer, A'otes on the Neb. Text of the BB. of
Samuel, in loco). [F.]
HA-AHASH-TA'BI CIHB'nKn, with the
article, = the Ahashtarite [possibly of Persian
signification, see MV. U ] ; B. 'Aanpav, A.
'Arihtpd; Ahasthari), a man, or a family, im-
mediately descended from Ashur, "father of
Tekoa" by his second wife Xaarah (1 Ch. iv. 6).
The name does not appear again, nor is there
say trace of a place of similar name.
HABAI'AH (HUn = Jah hath hidden; B.
Aofi«i<L A. 'O0ala (Ezra); BA. 'E$tid. K. 'A/3W
P>'eh.) ; Hubia, Habia). Bene-Chabajah were
among the sons of the priests who returned
HABAKKUK
1255
from Babylon with Zerubbabel, but whose gene-
alogy being imperfect, were not allowed to
serve (Ezra ii. 61 ; Neh. vii. 63). It is not
clear from the passage whether they were
among the descendants of Barzillai the Gilead-
ite. In the lists of 1 Esdras the name is given
as Oboia.
HABAKKUK, the eighth in order of the
Minor Prophets. 1. The name p-1j?3n, not
found elsewhere in the 0. T., means embrace or
embracing. Jerome (Prol. in Abacuc) renders
it amplexns; adding, "sive ut significantius
vertamus in Graecum vtpi\m\ns, id est amplex-
atio." The form 'AnPanob/i (in some MSS. 'A/5-
Paxou/i) of the LXX. is derived from a different
pronunciation, j>lp3n or p^pSn, by resolution
of the doubled b into mb, and assimilation of
the final consonant of the last syllable to the
final consonant of the first syllable ; unless in-
deed the change is due to an ancient corruption.
The Latin forms are Ambacum, Abacuc, or Ha-
bacuc.
2. Nothing is known about the Prophet's
life. From the specific title " the prophet " in
chs. i. 1 and iii. 1, it has been inferred that he
held a recognised official position as a Prophet ;
and the expression "on my stringed instru-
ments " in the subscription to ch. iii. has been
thought to indicate that he was a member of
the Temple choir, and therefore a Levite, or
possibly a priest. This agrees with the title
prefixed to the Septuagint recension of Bel and
the Dragon (Tischendorf, ii. p. 614 ; Fritzsche,
Libri Apocr. Vet. Test. p. 86 ; Speaker's Comm.
on the Apocrypha, ii. 350), tVc »po<pirr«fes 'Ap.-
paKav/i u'toi 'IijffoS 4k Tys 4>o\rjs Aeut: "from
the prophecy of Ambacum the son of Jesus of
the tribe of Levi."
Tradition makes up for the defects of history
with various inconsistent and fantastic legends.
According to one account, he was the son of the
Shunammite woman who was restored to life
by Elisha, an idea based on the connexion be-
tween the Prophet's name and the word " em-
brace" in 2K. iv. 16. Another tradition saw
in Hab. ii. 1 a reference to Is. xxi. 6, 8, and
supposed the Prophet to be the sentinel set to
watch for the fall of Babylon. According to
Pseudo-Dorotheus (ap. Chron. Pasch. p. 150 c)
and Epiphanius (de Yilis Proph.% he belonged
to the tribe of Simeon, and was born at Beth-
zocher, by which possibly Beth-zacharias, where
Antiochus Eupator defeated Judas Maccabaeus
(1 Mace. vi. 32, 33), is meant. On the approach
of Nebuchadnezzar he fled to Ostracine on the
way to Egypt, but returned on the departure
of the Chaldaeans, and died and was buried in
his native place two years before the return
from the Captivity. His tomb was shown at
Keilah in the time of Eusebius and Jerome
(OS* p. 143, 19 ; p. 270, 33). Sozomen (H. E.
vii. 29) relates that the graves of Habakkuk
and Micah were made known to Zebennus
Bishop of FJeutheropolis by Divine Revelation.
But in the Middle Ages his tomb was shown at
Chukkok, now Yahik, two leagues S.W. of Safed.
The best known legend about Habakkuk is that
found in "Bel and the Dragon," v. 33 sq.
He is there said to have been carried through
the air by an Angel from Judaea to Babylon to
feed Daniel, who had been thrown for the second
Digitized by
Google
1256
HABAKKUK
time into the lions' den in the reign of Cyrus,
with the dinner which he had prepared for his
reapers. The story appears to have existed in
the Midrashic literature at an early date (see
Ball's " Introduction to Bel and the Dragon "
in the Speaker's Canon, ii. 344 sq.). It is em-
bellished by Dorotheus and Epiphanius, and is
often referred to by the Fathers.
For a full collection of these traditions, see
Delitzsch, De Mabacuci prophetae vita atque
attate, 1842.
3. Date. — Habakkuk belongs, together with
Zephaninh and Jeremiah, to the Prophets of the
Chaldaean period. The date of his ministry is
not stated, but internal evidence fixes it within
comparatively narrow limits.
(a) The empire of the Chaldaeans has been
established, and has grown with incredible
rapidity. Their characteristics are well known.
Their insatiable lust of conquest, their irre-
sistible ferocity, their treachery, their wholesale
deportations of conquered peoples, their pride,
their drunkenness, their passion for magnificent
buildings, their love of hunting, their idola-
tries, are all described in forcible language
(i. 5-17 ; ii. 4-20). They are pressing forward
in their career of conquest. It was in B.C. 625
that Nabopolassar, by an act of treachery, seized
the throne, and established the independence of
Babylon. This date then is the terminus a quo
for Habakkuk 's prophecy ; but it cannot be
placed so early, as time must be allowed for the
vast development of the empire which has
clearly taken place.
(6) On the other hand, the Chaldaean invasion
of Judah, though imminent, appears to be still
future. Ewald indeed maintains that "at the
time of the prophecy of Habakkuk . . . the
Chaldaeans are in the Holy Land, cruelly
trampling down everything with irresistible
force " {Prophets, iii. 27) ; but this view rests
on a misinterpretation of i. 2—4. There is
no hint that Jerusalem has been taken. And
if so, the prophecy must be placed shortly
before, or immediately after, the great battle of
Carchemish in the fourth year of Jehoiakim
(Riehm, B.c. 606; al. 605 or 604% in which
Nebuchadnezzar defeated Pharaoh Necho, and
secured the supremacy of Western Asia. If
it was clear that the " incredible work " re-
ferred to in Hab. i. 5 meant the Chaldaean
invasion of Judah, then the prophecy must
have been published before the battle of Car-
chemish, for after that event such an invasion
must hare been foreseen by everyone. But
if (with Delitzsch) the "incredible work" is
explained to be the sudden rise of the terrible
Chaldaean power, the prophecy may be placed
between Carchemish and Nebuchadnezzar's in-
vasion of Judah. Some interval elapsed between
these events, as the death of his father obliged
Nebuchadnezzar to return to Babylon after the
battle; but the proclamation of a fast in the
ninth month of the fifth year of Jehoiakim
(Jer. xxxvi. 9) was probably prompted by the
advance of the Chaldaean array.
(c) The description of the internal condition
of Judah in ch. i. 2-4 suits the reign of Je-
hoiakim. Jeremiah expressly charges him with
crimes similar to those denounced by Habakkuk,
and contrasts the just administration of his
father Josiah (xxii. 13-19); and in other pro-
HABAKKUK
phecies of the same period the desperate moral
corruption of the nation is depicted. Cp. Jer.
vii. 1 sq., xxr. 1 sq., xxvi. 1 sq.
(<f) The whole tone of the prophecy reflects
the period of reaction and corruption under
Jehoiakim, and not the hopefulness of the
temporary amendment under Josiah (2 K. xxii.
18-20 ; xxiii. 25). The judgment is imminent
and inevitable. The pressing question is how
the faithful may be enabled to go through it
without losing their faith.
These reasons seem to be fairly conclusive for
fixing the date of Habakkuk s prophecy in the
reign of Jehoiakim, not later than his sixth
year (Driver, LOT. p. 316). The following
arguments, however, are urged in favour of
placing this prophecy in the reign of Josiah : —
(a) The position of Habakkuk in the series of
the Minor Prophets appears to represent an
early tradition that he preceded Zephaniah, who
prophesied in the reign of Josiah. (6) Zeph. i. 7
is supposed to be partly borrowed from Hab.
ii. 20. In favour of regarding Habakkuk as
the original and Zephaniah as his imitator, it
is urged that it is the habit of Zephaniah, like
Jeremiah, to borrow freely ; that in particular
this verse is an obvious mosaic, pieced together
from Hab. ii. 20, Joel i. 15, Is. xxxiv. 6, xiii. 3.
Jeremiah's earlier prophecies, moreover, are
thought to show traces of acquaintance with
Habakkuk (cp. Jer. iv. 13, v. 6, with Hab. i. 8).
(c) Habakkuk, it is said, belongs to the school of
Isaiah, Zephaniah to that of Jeremiah, (d) The
subscription to Hab. iii. implies that the Temple-
service was being carried on, and that there-
fore the Book cannot be dated earlier than the
twelfth year of Josiah, when the reformation
was commenced (2 Ch. xxxiv. 3). Zephaniah,
for various reasons, must be placed after the
eighteenth year of Josiah. Habakkuk's ministry
must therefore be placed between the twelfth
and eighteenth years of Josiah. To the objection
that Hab. i. 2-4 describes a state of things
which is hardly conceivable nnder the rule of
such a good king, it is answered that Jeremiah,
even in his earlier prophecies, delivered from
the thirteenth year of Josiah onward (ii.-vi.),
and Zephaniah (i., iii. 1-6), both speak of the
deep and widespread corruption of the people.
To these arguments it may be replied, that
the Minor Prophets are certainly not arranged
in a strict chronological order : that the ' argu-
ment from parallel passages ' is a precarious
one : that the modes of thought of two periods
frequently overlap: that the precise evils de-
scribed in Hab. i. 2-4 are really those of the
reign of Jehoiakim rather than Josiah.
The arguments for placing Habakkuk in the
reign of Josiah will be found stated with much
fulness and ingenuity in DeliUsch's Commen-
tary (1843) ; in more recent works, however,
he inclines to place Habakkuk in the reign of
Manasseh (0. T. Hist, of Redemption, 1881,
]>. 126; cp. Isaiah,* 1889, p. 15), on the ground
that the lament in i. 2 reflects the condition of
affairs described in 2 K. xxi. 16.
So early a date as the reign of Manasseh is,
however, clearly excluded by the fact that
Habakkuk describes the Chaldaean empire as
having already become the terror of the world,
and the arguments for placing the prophecy in
the reign of Josiah are inconclusive compared
Digitized by
Google
HABAKKUK
with tboee urged for placing it under Je-
hoiakim. On the other hand, the fact that the
Chaldaean invasion does not appear to have
actually reached Judah, excludes so late a date
as the reign of Zedekiah.
4. Content* and plan. — The artistic arrange-
ment and essential unity of the Book will best
be shown by an analysis of the contents.* It
falls into three main divisions.
a. Ch. i. The expostulation. — The Prophet ex-
postulates with Jehovah for allowing wrong to
triumph unrestrainedly in the land (i. 2-4) b .
Jehovah answers the Prophet's complaint, ad-
dressing at the same time the people whose sins
call for punishment, by pointing to the marvel-
lous rise and terrible character of the Chaldaeans,
whom He has raised up to be His ministers of
judgment (vv. 5-11). But the answer involves
a fresh perplexity. How can the pure and holy
God employ as His instruments these unscrupu-
lous, pitiless, self-deifying invaders (ct>. 12-17)?
6, Ch. ii. The judgment of the oppressors. —
The Prophet pauses, waiting for an answer, and
considering how he may defend his bold challenge
of the Divine action (ii. 1). He is commanded
to write the vision for all to read. Though it
may be long deferred, its fulfilment will surely
come in due time (w>. 2, 3). The oracle itself
(p. 4)' implies the destruction of the Chaldaeans,
and promises the preservation of the righteous ;
nod the thought enigmatically expressed in the
first half of it is expanded in the rest of the
chapter (to. 5-20). The debauchery, the pride,
the insatiable greed of the Chaldaeans will be
their ruin ; and the voices of their victims are
beard heaping execrations on their oppressors,
and exulting in their fall. The plunderers shall
in their turn be plundered (co. 6-8): their
magnificent buildings bear witness to their
crimes (vv. 9-11) : the state founded on injustice
will be destroyed, and make way for the king-
dom of Jehovah (to. 12-14): their savage
triumph over the ruin of others will find appro-
priate punishment in their own utter disgrace ;
outraged nature will rise in judgment against
them (w. 15-17). Idols are vain: let all the
earth keep silence before Jehovah, the living and
true God (to. 18-20).
c. Ch. iii. The Advent of the Deliverer. —
HABAKKUK
1257
•Stade (ZATW., 1884, pp. 154 sq.) maintains that
Hab. i. 2-11. 8 is the only put of the Book that belongs
to the Chaldaean period. To this was added In post-exilic
times a description of a heathen or heathenishly dis-
posed enemy of the congregation, together with a
prayer of the congregation for help In a time of extreme
distress. Bat In our scanty knowledge of the post-
exilic history, it is idle to attempt to determine the time
at which the addition was made. The exegetlcal diffi-
culties of It. 8-20 may be admitted ; bat Stage's criticism
is mere speculation, and creates more perplexities than
it solves.
B Ch. i. 2-4 certainly describes the prevailing cor-
ruption of Judah, and not the insolence of the Chal-
daean conquerors already occupying the land. The
announcement of the Judgment In v. 5 sq. is necessarily
preceded by a complaint about the sins which demand it.
* If the ** vision " was actually to be written on a
tablet to be hung In some public place (cp. Is. vlil. 1 ;
xxx. 8), It must have been brief and significant ; and It
seems best to regard v. 4 only as the '* vision," on which
vs. 5-20 are a commentary, rather than to suppose that
the " vision " includes the whole passage, vv. 4-20.
The Prophet has heard the announcement of
the judgment impending over Israel, and the
retribution ultimately in store for their proud
oppressors. But he fears that the long delay
which seems to be anticipated in ii. 2, 3 may
be too severe a trial of faith, and he prays
Jehovah to hasten His work, and shorten the
time of chastisement (t). 2). The answer
flashes upon him with the certainty of a sudden
intuition. He beholds in all its terrible splendour
the Advent of Jehovah for the deliverance of His
people and the destruction of their enemies
(vv. 3-15). The language in which it is described
recalls the great manifestations of Jehovah in
the past, at Sinai, at the Red Sea, at the Jordan,
which are at once types and pledges of this
great manifestation in the future. 11 The Prophet
is convulsed with terror at the sight, yet it
teaches him calm resignation ; and though in
the day of the Chaldaean invasion the land may
be utterly laid waste, he and the faithful few
whom he represents will rejoice in Jehovah, Who
is still the strength of His people, and will one
day restore them to the possession of their own
land (w. 16-19).
From this analysis it will be seen that though
" the prayer of Habakkuk " (ch. iii.) can be
regarded as a separate piece, and was possibly
intended for use in the Temple-worship, it is
by no means a mere appendix, but an integral
part of the Book, which is no mere aggregation
of separate prophecies, but a carefully constructed
and artistic work, from which no part can be
detached without destroying its completeness.
Though it can hardly be called an actual drama
(Ewald, Prophets, iii. 32), its dramatic character
is obvious. The dialogue in which the Prophet's
questionings and Jehovah's answers are expressed,
the bold expedient of summoning the victims of
Chaldaean cruelty to pronounce the tyrant's
doom, the magnificent scene which is the de-
nouement of the whole, as well as the representa-
tion of the successive stages in this providential
government of the world, combine to give it
this character.
5. Style. — Habakkuk was a poetical genius of
the highest order. The first two chapters are
rhythmical in form and poetical in expression :
the third is a poem which challenges comparison
with the noblest productions of Hebrew litera-
ture. "Great as Habakkuk is in thought, he is
no less so in language and literary skill ; he is
the last Prophet belonging to the age preceding
the destruction of Jerusalem who is master of a
beautiful style, of powerful description, and an
artistic power that enlivens and orders everything
with charming effect " (Ewald, Prophets, iii. 32).
6. The purpose of Habakkuk's prophecy is to
vindicate the righteousness of Jehovah in His
government of the world, and thereby to offer
comfort to the faithful Israelite in the im-
pending time of distress. The problem of the
Divine toleration of evil could not but press
* It is here assumed that tbe lmperrects of the original
should be rendered by presents as in R. V. margin, and
taken to represent the scene as it develops before tbe
Prophet's mental vision. If, however, they arc under-
stood to refer to the past, as in A. V. and R. V. text,
the general sense will not be substantially different.
The recollection of tbe great deliverances of the past Is
offered as a ground of confidence for the future.
Digitized by
Google
1258
HABAZINIAH
hardly upon the Prophet and his godly con-
temporaries, when they contemplated the social
and religious corruption around them ; and the
solution that judgment was speedily to be exe-
cuted upon the guilty nation seemed to involve
a still worse perplexity, if the executioners of
the Divine sentence were to be monsters of pride
and violence. In spite of appearances, however,
he can still appeal to the character of Jehovah
(i. 12 sq.), and he is taught to understand that
the eternal laws of right and wrong are still in
force ; that the arrogance of the Chaldaeans has
in it the germ of ruin, while the constancy of
the just is a principle of life (ii. 4). And
the sublime poem of ch. Hi., appealing to the
imagination as well as the reason, assures the
faithful heart that God will manifest His
sovereignty in the future no less victoriously
than in the past.
7. Strong as is Habakkuk's originality, he yet
shows his dependence upon earlier Books of the
0. T. Cp. Hab. ii. 14 with Is. xi. 9 ; Hab. iii. 3
with Deut. xxxiii. 2, Judg. v. 4, 5, Ps. lxviii. 7, 8.
That Hab. iii. 10-15 is related to Ps. lxxvii. 16-
20 is evident, and Delitzsch after full investiga-
tion (fiomm. pp. 119 sq.) decides that the Psalm
is the original. But Ewald, Hupfeld, and
Hitzig assign the priority to Habakkuk. (Cp.
also Hab. iii. 19 with Ps. xviii. 33. For further
parallels, see Delitzsch, p. 118 sq.)
8. N. T. quotations. — Hab. ii. 3b, 4, is quoted
in Heb. x. 37, 38 (from the LXX., which does not
agree with the Hebrew, and freely); and the
latter half of v. 4 is twice quoted by St. Paul
(Rom. i. 17 ; Gal. iii. 11). He does not, however,
follow either the Heb. or the LXX. exactly, and
he expands the truth implicitly contained in the
words, giving them " a spiritual meaning and a
general application." The word ilJIDK is no-
where else in the 0. T. rendered " faith," and
denotes " firmness, constancy, trustworthiness,"
rather than the active principle of " faith."
"But it will at times approach near to the
active sense : for constancy under temptation or
danger with an Israelite could spring only from
reliance on Jehovah. And something- of this
transitional or double sense it has in the passage
of Habakkuk ii. 4" (Bp. Lightfoot, Galatians,
p. 154, whose notes should be consulted). Hab.
i. 5 is also quoted by St. Paul in Acts xiii. 41,
from the LXX., which differs from the Heb., and
freely.
9. Literature. — Besides commentaries on the
Minor Prophets generally, the best special com-
mentary on Habakkuk is still that of Delitzsch
(Leipsic, 1843), and an exhaustive examination
of the traditions about the Prophet will be
found in the same writer's Dc Habacuci Prophetae
vita atque aetate Commentatio historico-isat/ogica
cum diatriba de Pseudo-Dorothei ct Pseudo-
Epiphanii vitis Prophetarum (Leipsic, 1842). A
list of the older commentaries will be found in
Rosenmiiller'sScholia; additions to it in Delitzsch,
p. xxiv. Later works are those of Gompaeh
(1860); Reinke(1870); Orelli (1888).
[A.F.K.]
HABAZINI'AH (iTM»n ; Btt. Xafiaatlv;
Habsania), apparently the head of one of the
families of the Reciiabites: his descendant
Jaazaniah was the chief man among them in
the time of Jeremiah (Jer. xxxv. 3).
HABOE
HAB'BACUC CArfaicoin; Habacvc), the
form in which the name of the prophet Habak-
kuk is given in the Apocrypha (Bel, ct. 33-39).
HABERGEON (A.-S. healsbeorga), a cost of
mail covering the neck and breast. The lie-
brew terms are XyiFI. .TTE', and jfXf. The
first, tachra (R. %'. "coat" of mail"), occurs
only in Ex. xxviii. 32, xxxix. 23, and is noticed
incidentally to illustrate the mode of making
the aperture for the head in the sacerdotal men.
It was probably similar to the linen corslet
(Au-ofcepijJ), worn by the Egyptians (Her.ii. Vii,
iii. 47) and the Greeks (//. ii. 529, 830> The
second, shiryah, occurs only in Job xli. 26 [Heb.
v. 18], and has been regarded as another form of
shiryan (^'"lEO, a " breastplate " (Is. lis. 17)
but the context requires offensive rather than de-
fensive armour (hence R. V. text "the pointed
shaft," with Delitzsch 4 and Dillmann*). SMryix,
in fact, is the pausal form of the third, shiryfa ;
an article of defensive armour (1 Sam. xvii.5;
2 Ch. xxvi. 14 ; Neh. iv. 10). [W. L. B.] [F.]
HA'BOR ("fall; A. *A£eip, B. 'Afl«5p and
'Apiap ; Habor), one of the rivers mentioned in
connexion with Gozan (2 K. xvii. 6, and ivii.
11), has been already shown not to be the Chebar
or Chobar of Ezekiel [Chbbae]. It is identified
beyond all reasonable doubt with the famous
affluentofthe Euphrates, which is called Aborrhu
('A/io^as) by Strabo (xvi. 1, § 27) and Procopius
(Bell. Pert. ii. 5), Aburas ('AQoipas) by Isidore
of Charax (p. 4), Abora ('A/Mpo) by Zosimus
(iii. 12), and Chaboras (Xafiiipas) by Pliny and
Ptolemy (v. 18). The stream in question still
bears the name of the Khabour. It flows from
several sources in the mountain-chain, which in
about the 37th parallel closes in the valley of
the Tigris upon the south — the Mons Matins of
Strabo and Ptolemy, at present the Kharej Dagh.
The chief source is said to be " a little to the
west of Mardin " (Layard, Sin. and Bab. p. 309.
note) ; but the upper course of the river is still
very imperfectly known. The main stream was
seen by Sir H. Layard flowing from the north-west
as he stood on the conical hill of Koukab (about
lat. 36° 20', long. 41°); and here it was joined
by an important tributary, the Jenifer, which
flowed down to it from Nisibis. Both streams
were here fordable, but the river formed by
their union had to be crossed by a raft. It
flowed in a tortuous course through rich meads
covered with flowers, having a general direction
about S.S.W. to its junction with the Euphrates
at Karkesia, the ancient Circesium. The country
on both sides of the river was covered with
mounds, the remains of cities belonging to the
Assyrian period.
_ The Habor is mentioned by Tiglath-pileser I.,
king of Assyria, about 1120 B.C., who boasts of
having killed ten mighty elephants in the land
of Haran and on the banks of the Habor; and
Assur-nasir-apli (885-860 B.C.), after crossing
the Tigris, and subjugating the people on the
banks of the river Harmis, records that he con-
tinued his conquests on the banks of the Habor,
passing afterwards towards the Euphrates (piite
ia nor Habur, "the mouths of the river
Habor ") ; and, from the words used, it would
seem that the waters of the river flowed into
Digitized by
Google
HACHALIAH
the Euphrates through several outlets. Ele-
phants frequented the neighbourhood at that
early period. [G. R.] [T. G. P.]
HACHALIAH (iPfan, of uncertain mean-
ing; B. X«Ajki<£, KA. "'Axoxro [i. 1], BK.
'Ax<Aui, A. 'Ax«Ai<{ [x. 1] ; Hechlia, Hahelia,
Achelai), the father of Nehemiah (Neh. i. 1,
i.l>
HACHTLAH, THE HILL (fl^nn HD2i,
lull of darkness, Ges. : in 1 Sam. ixiii. 19, BA.
'ExfXo ; in xxvi. 1, B. XeX/uW, A. 'AxiAd : collis,
and Gs&aa, Hachila), a hill apparently situated
in a wood* in the wilderness or waste land
P311J) in the neighbourhood of Ziph ; in the
fastnesses or passes of which David and his six
hundred followers were larkiDg when the Ziphites
informed Saul of his whereabouts (1 Sam. xxiii.
19 ; cp. tc. 14, 15, 18). The special topographical
note is added, that it was " on the right (xxiii.
19, A V. and B. V. •' south ") of the Jeshimon,"
or, according to xxvi. 1-3, " facing the Jeshi-
mon " C)B bv, A. V. and R. V. " before ") ; that
is, the waste barren district. On the first oc-
casion, David, on the approach of Saul, appears
to have removed to the wilderness of Maon, and
then to have gone down* to " the cliff" (xxiii. 25,
lfan ; R. V. " the rock ") in the same midbar.
On the second, David drew down from the hill
into the lower ground (xxvi. 3> Saul advanced
to the hill, and bivouacked there by the side of
the road (Tfl> A. V. and R. V. "way "), which
appears to have run over the hill or close below
it It was during this nocturnal halt that the
romantic adTenture of the spear and cruse of
water took place. In xxiii. 14 and xxvi. 13
this hill would seem (though this is not quite
dear) to be dignified by the title of "the
mountain " 0>J>J ; in the latter, the A. V. has
"an hill;" in both the article missed by
the A. V. is emphasized in the R. V.). Ziph
and Maon are now Tell ez-Zif and Tell M'ain,
well-known places to the south of Hebron ;
and their "wildernesses" are apparently the
desert tracts N. and S. of Wady el- War, which
for fiTe miles of its course is a narrow gorge
with precipitous sides. Major Conder has
suggested that the hill Hachilah may be the
long flat-topy^d ridge, Dhahret el-K6lah, north
of IV. el-War, which terminates in a high,
narrow, and almost isolated hill (PEF. Mem.
lii. 313). In this case " the rock " would be the
precipice on the S. side of W. el-War. The
character of the country, which bears no traces
of former cultivation or vegetation, is such as
to reader the former existence of a forest
extremely improbable ; and it seems not un-
likely that the true reading has been preserved
by the LXX. and Josephus. By Eusebius and
Jerome (OS? p. 261, 3 ; p. 153, 15), Echela is
HAD AD
1259
■ For the "wood," the LXX. of 1 Sam. xxiii. 19
*»»e it rf euro, reading gr|n *> r VfTt- -* 1 " 1 »°>
**>, JWptms.
' The Hebrew exactly answers to our expression
"descended the cliff: " the " into" in the text of the
*. V. (R. V. •' to ") la derived from the LXX. <U and
tfe? Vulgate ad. See Jerome's explanation, ad petram,
id at, ad tutiirimum ioctm, in his Quaat. Btbr. sd loc.
named as a village then standing ; but the
situation — 7 miles from Eleutheropolis, i.e.
on the N.W. side of Hebron — would be too far
from Ziph and Maon ; and as Reland has pointed
out, they probably confounded it with Keilah
(cp. OS.' p. 143, 19, "Ceeilah;" and Reland,
p. 745). [GJ [W.]
HACHMO'NI, SON OP, and THE HACH-
MO'NITE (1 Ch. xxvii. 32, xi. 11), both render-
ings — the former the correct one— of the same
Hebrew words ('JlDDITp = son of a Hachmon-
ite : in 1 Ch. xxvii. 32, B. 'Ax«M«'i A. 'Axa/aoW ;
in 1 Ch. xi. 11, B. 'Axa/uayef, X. 'Axa/icwf,
A. -avl : Achamont). Two of the Bene-
Hachmoni are named in these passages ; Jeiiiei.
in the former, and Jashobeam in the latter.
Hachmon or Hachmoni was no doubt the
founder of a family to which these men be-
longed: the actual father of Jashobeam was
Zabdiel (1 Ch. xxvii. 2), and he is also said to
have belonged to the Korhites (R. V. Korahitei,
1 Ch. xii. 6), possibly the Levites descended
from Korah. But the name Hachmon nowhere
appears in the genealogies of the Levites. In
2 Sam. xxiii. 8 the name is altered to the
Tahchemonite (R. V. See Driver in loco). Sea
Kennicott, Diss. pp. 72, 82, who calls attention
to the fact that names given in Chronicles with
Ben are in Samuel given without the Ben, but
with the definite article. [G.] [W.]
HADA'D (TJi! ; , AS<£8, Ajx£J, 'ASip, Xo8-
Sdy; Hadad). This name occurs frequently in
the history of the Syrian and Edomite dynasties.
It was originally the indigenous appellation of a
deity among the Syrians (the Sun, according to
Macrob. Saturnal. i. 23 [cp. Bathgen, Beitr. z.
Semiten Religitmsgeschichte, p. 66 sq.]; Plin.
xxxvii. 11), though little is known of the etymo-
logy of the name or of the attributes of the god ;
and was thence transferred to the king, as the
highest of early authorities, in the forms Hadad,
Benhadad (" worshipper of Hadad "), and Ha-
dadezer (" assisted by Hadad," Gesen. Thesaur.
p. 218). The title appears to have been an
official one for the kings of Damascus ; and is
so used by Nicolaus Damascenus, as quoted
by Josephus (Ant. vii. 5, § 2), in reference to
the Syrian king who aided Hododezer (2 Sam.
viii. 5). Josephus appears to have used the
name in the same sense, where he substitutes it
for Benhadad (Ant. ix. 8, § 7, compared with.
2 K. xiii. 24). The name appears occasionally in
the altered form Hadar (Gen. xxv. 15, xxxvi.39,
compared with 1 Ch. i. 30, 50).
1. The first of the name was a son of Ishmaet
(Gen. xxv. 15 ; 1 Ch. i. 30). Of him nothing is
known (see Delitzsch [1887] and Dillmann 4 on
Gen. 1. c).
2. (Tin.) The second was a king of Edom,
who gained an important victory over the
Midianites on the field of Moab (Gen. xxxvi. 35 ;
1 Ch. i. 46): the position of his territory is
marked by his capital, Avith. [AviTH.l
3. ("Tin.) The third was also a king of
Edom, with Pan for his capital (1 Ch. i. 50).
[Pau.] He was the last of the kings: the
change to the dukedom is pointedly connected
with his death in 1 Ch. i. 51. [Hadar.]
Digitized by
Google
1260
HADAD-EZEB
4. Oin.) The last of the name was a
member of the royal house of Edom (1 K. xi.
14 sq. In r. 17 it is given in the mutilated
form of "nt<). In his childhood he escaped the
massacre under Joab, in which his father ap-
pears to have perished, and fled with a band of
followers into Egypt. Some difficulty arises in
the account of his flight, from the. words " they
arose out of MiJian " (v. 18): Thenius (Comm.
in loco) surmises that the reading has been
corrupted from \WO to JHD, and that the
place intended is Moon, i.e. the residence for the
time being of the royal family (see other sur-
mises in Klostermann in Strack u. Ziickler's Kgf.
Komm. in loco). Pharaoh, the predecessor of
Solomon's father-in-law, treated him kindly,
and gave him his sister-in-law in marriage.
After David's death Hadad resolved to attempt
the recovery of his dominion : Pharaoh in
vain discouraged him, and upon this he left
Egypt and returned to his own country (see
the addition to v. 22 in the LXX.). It does
not appear from the text, as it now stands,
how Hadad became subsequently to this an
"adversary onto Solomon" (v. 14), still less
how he gained the sovereignty over Syria (c. 25).
The LXX., however, refers 'the whole of ». 25
to him instead of to Rexon, and substitutes for
Aram. D1K (Syria), 'Zt&ii (Edom). This may
be said to reduce the whole to a consistent and
intelligible narrative. Hadad, according to this
account, succeeded in his attempt, and carried
on a border warfare on the Israelites from his
own territory. The substitution is, however,
unsupported. Josephus (Ant. viii. 7, § 6) retains
the reading Syria, and represents Hadad as
having failed in his attempt on Idumaea, and
then having joined Rexon, from whom he re-
ceived a portion of Syria. If the present text
be correct, the concluding words of v. 25 must
be referred to Rexon, and be considered as a re-
petition in an amplified form of the concluding
words of the previous verse. [W. L. B.] [F.]
HADAD-E'ZER (TWTin= Hadad is help ;
i 'ASpaa(dp, in both MSS. '[2 Sam. viii. 3-12;
1 K. xi. 23]), king of Zobah, defeated by David.
The inscription on an Aramaic seal, and the
Assyrian equivalent Dad'idri, prove incontest-
ably that this, and not the reading Hadarezer
(cp. LXX.), is right (see Bathgen, Beitr. x.
Hcmit. Religionsgcschichte, p. 67, and Driver,
Notes cm tlie Heb. Text of the BB. of Sam.
in loco). [F.]
HADA'D-BIM'MON (jiBT tin,; Koxrroj
pouvos ; Adadretmnori) is, according to the
ordinary interpretation of Zech. xii. 11, a place
in the valley of Megiddo, named after two
Syrian idols, where a national lamentation was
held for the death of king Josiah in the last of
the four great battles (see Stanley, S. 4" !'•
ch. ix.) which have made the plain of Esdraelon
famous in Hebrew history (see 2 K. xxiii. 29 ;
2 Ch. xxxv. 23 ; Joseph. Ant. x. 5, § 1). The
1.X X. translate the second word " pomegranate ; "
and the Greek commentators, using that Version,
tee here no reference to Josiah. Jonathan, the
Chaldee interpreter, followed by Jarchi, under-
stands it to be the name of the son of king
Tabrimon who was opposed to Abab at Kamoth-
HADAR-EZER
gilead. But it has been taken for the place at
which Josiah died by most interpreters since
Jerome, who states (Comm. in Zach.) that it
was the name of a city which was called in his
time Maximianopolis, and was not far from
Jezreel. It is now usually identified with a
village south of Megiddo, called Rummaneh (see
Muhlau in Riehm's HWB. s. n.). See Wich-
manshausen, De planctu Hadadr. in the Nov.
T/tes. Theot.-phU. i. 101. [W. T. B.] [F.]
HAD AH (Tin; A. XoJMV, E. XoSSdt, D.
XaXti ; Hadar), a son of Ishmael (Gen. xxv.
15), a misreading for in 1 Ch. i. 30 Hadad (Tin,
XovSdv, Hadad). [Hadad, 1.] [F.]
2. (Tin, with a different aspirate to the
preceding V A. 'ApiB, B" 1 'ApiS, £>»E. BapiS ;
Adar.) One of the kings of Edom, successor
of Baal-hanau ben-Acbor (Gen. xxxvi. 39).
In the parallel list in 1 Ch. i. he appears as
Hadad (3). [F.]
HADA'B-E'ZEB 0$T1B = "nose help is
Hadar, Ges. ; BA. 'ASpaa£dp ; Adarezer), son of
Rehob (2 Sam. viii. 3) ; the king of the Aramite
state of Zobar, who, while on his way to
"establish his dominion" at the Euphrates,
was overtaken by David, defeated with great
loss both of chariots, horses, and men (1 Ch.
xviii. 3, 4), and driven with the remnant of his
force to the other side of the river (xix. 16).
The golden weapons captured on this occasion
(Ph&, A. V. and R. V. " shields of gold "), a
thousand in number, were taken by David to
Jerusalem (xviii. 7), and dedicated to Jehovah.
The foreign arms were preserved in the Temple,
and were long known as king David's (1 Ch.
xxiii. 9 ; Cant. iv. 4). [Arms : Shelet.}
Not daunted by this defeat, Hadarezer seized
an early opportunity of attempting to revenge
himself; and after the first repulse of the
Ammonites and their Syrian allies by Joab, he
sent his army to the assistance of his kindred
the people of Maachah, Rehob, and Ishtob
(1 Ch. xix. 16; 2 Sam. x. 15, cp. c. 8). The
army was a large one, as is evident from the
numbers of the slain; and it was especially
strong in horse-soldiers (xix. 18). Under the
command of Shophach, or Shobach, the captain
of the host (M3$il It?), they crossed the
Euphrates, joined the other Syrians, and en-
camped at a place called Helam. The moment
was a critical one, and David himself came from
Jerusalem to take the command of the Israelite
army. As on the former occasion, the rout
was complete, seven hundred chariots were
captured, seven thousand charioteers and forty
thousand horse-soldiers killed, the petty sove-
reigns who had before been subject to Hadar-
ezer submitted themselves to David, and the
great Syrian confederacy was, for the time, at
an end.
But one of Hadarezer's more immediate re-
tainers, Rezon ben-Eliadah, made his escape
from the army, and, gathering round him some
fugitives like himself, formed them into one of
those marauding ravaging " bands " ("IVl J),
which found a congenial refuge in the thinly
peopled districts between the Jordan and the
Euphrates (2 K. v. 2: 1 Ch. v. 18-22).
Making their way to Damascus, they possessed
Digitized by
Google
HADASHAH
themselves of the city. Rezon becaim; King,
and at once began to avenge the loss of hi»
countrymen by the course of "mischief to
Israel which he punned down to the end of
Solomon's reign, and which is summed up in
the emphatic words " he was an adversary (a
' Satan ') to Israel " ..." he abhorred Israel "
(1 K. xi. 23-25).
In the narrative of David's Syrian campaign
in 2 Sam. viii. 3-12, this name is given as
H&dad-ezer, and also in 1 K. xi. 23. But in
2 Sam. x., and in all its other occurrences in
the Hebrew text as well as in the LXX. (both
MSS.), and in Josephus, the form Hadarezer is
maintained. " [G.] [W.]
HADA'SHAH (flBnn = new [town]. Cp.
the Phoenic and cuneiform parallels in MV." ;
B. 'AScurdV, A. -d; Badasaa), one of the towns
of Judah, in the Shefelah or maritime low-
coantry, named between Zenan and Migdal-
gad, in the second group (Josh. xv. 37 only).
By Eusebius (OS. 1 p. 240, 6) it is erroneously
identified with the Adasa of the Haccabaean
historv near Gophna. The site has not yet been
discovered. [G.] [W.]
HADAS'SAH (flpnn = myrtk ; LXX. om. ;
Edissa], a name, probably the earlier name, of
Esther (Esth. ii. 7). Gesenius (Thes. p. 366)
suggests that it is identical with "Atoo-o-o, the
name of the daughter of Cyrus.
HADATTAH (Win = new ; LXX. omits ;
nova). According to the A. V., one of the towns
of Judah in the extreme south — " Hazor,
Hadattah, and Kerioth, and Hezron," &c. (Josh.
xr. 25); but the Masoretic accents of the Hebrew
connect the word with that preceding it, as if
it were (as in K. V.) Hazor-hadattah, i.e. New
Hazor, in distinction from the place of the same
name in ©. 23. This reading is expressly
sanctioned by Eusebius and Jerome, who speak
(OS* p. 238, 33 ; p. 125, 10) of " New Hazor " as
lying in their day to the east of and near
Ascalon (see also Reland, p. 708). But Ascalon,
as Robinson has pointed out (ii. 34, note), is in
the Shefelah, and not in the South, and would,
if named in Joshua at all, be included in the
second division of the list, beginning at v. 33,
instead of where it is, not far from Kedesh.
Tristram (Land of Israel, p. 370) has suggested
. its identification with ffadadah, a ruined watch-
tower at the head of W. Zuweirah, S.W. of the
Dead Sea. [G.] [W.]
HADES. [Heix.]
HA'DID (VflJ, «'•«• "sharp," possibly from
its situation on some craggy eminence, Gesen.
Thai. p. 446: in Ezra, B. Ao5aS(, A. Kv$-
larXoSaSIS ; in Neh. vii. AoSaSiS, A. \oSaSid ;
in Neh. xi. LXX. omits : Hadid), a place
named, with Lod (Lydda) and Ono, only in
the later books of the history (Ezra ii. 33 ;
Neh. vii. 37, xi. 34), but yet so as to imply its
earlier existence. In the time of Eusebius (OS. 1
p. 240, 4) a town called Aditha, or Adatha, ex-
isted to the east of Diospolis (Lydda). This
was probably Hadid. About 3 miles e:\-t of
Lydda stands a village called el-Hoditheh. which
is described by the old Jewish traveller h -I' inhi
as being "on the summit of a round hill." iml
identified by him, no doubt correct 1 > . itli
HADKACH
1261
Hadid. See Zunz, in Asher's Ben}, of Tudela,
ii. 439. It is probably identical with Adithaim,
and the Adida of the Maccabaean history
(PEF. Mem. ii. 297). [G.] [W.]
HA1TLAI O^in = resting ; B. XoiS, A.
'ASSi ; Adalt), a man of Ephraim ; father of
Amasa, who was one of the chiefs of the tribe in
the reign of Pekah (2 Ch. xxviii. 12).
HADO'RAM (DTfrtn ; 'OSo^a [Gen. ; LXX.
om. in Ch.] ; Aduram). 1. The fifth son of Joktan
(Gen. x. 27 ; 1 Ch. i. 21). His settlements, un-
like those of many of Joktan's sons, have not
been identified (cp. Dillmann s on Gen. /. c).
Bochart supposed that the Adramitae represented
his descendants; but afterwards believed, as
later critics have also, that this people was the
same as the Chatramotitne, or people of Hadra-
mant (Phaleg, ii. c. 17). [Hazarmaveth.]
Other conjectures mav be seen in Delitzsch on
Gen. /. c. [1887J or in'MV." [F.]
2. (DTVin; B. 'ltovpcutp, K. 'ItovpAp, A.
Aovpdfi ; Adoram), son of Tott king of Hamath.
He was his father's ambassador to congratulate
David on his victory over Hadarezer king of
Zobah (1 Ch. xviii. 10), and the bearer of valu-
able presents in the form of articles of antique
manufacture (Joseph.), in gold, silver, and brass.
In the parallel narrative of 2 Sam. viii. 10 sq.
the name is given as Joram ; but this being a
contraction of Jehoram, which contains the
name of Jehovah, is peculiarly an Israelite ap-
pellation, and we mar therefore conclude that
Hadoram is the genuine form of the name, a
conclusion supported in part by the LXX. read-
ing of 2 Sam. /. c. (BA. 'ItSSovoiv). By Josephus
(Ant. vii. 5, 4) it is given as 'AWpo/uoi.
3. (Dihn; B. 'ASwyttpiii, A. 'Atapd/i ; Adu-
ram.) The form assumed in Chronicles by the
name of the intendant of taxes under David,
Solomon, and Rehoboam, who lost his life in the
revolt at Shechem after the coronation of the
last-named prince (2 Ch. x. 18). He was sent
by Rehoboam to appease the tumult, possibly as
being one of the old and moderate party ; but
the choice of the chief officer of the taxes was
not a happy one. His interference was ineffec-
tual, and he himself fell a victim: "all Israel
stoned him with stones that he died." In 1 K.
iv. 6, v. 28, the name is given in the longer
form of Adoniram, but in Samuel (2 Sam. xx.
24) as Adoram ; LXX., 'AoWupdV. Adoniram
is probably the true name, Hadoram being pre-
sumably a Hamathite name (see Driver, Xotes
on the Heb. Text of the BB. of Sam. 1. c). By
Josephus, in both the first and last case, he is
called •AowpoMO!. [W. A. W.] [F.]
HAD-EACHCn"nri; SeJpo X orS«Spc£it; Ha-
drach), a district of Syria, as appears from the
context in the only passage where it is men-
tioned : —
" The burthen of Jahv&h's word is upon the land of
Hadrach,
Aud Damascus is the resting-place thereof:
For to Jahvah belongeth the people of Aram,*
And (= as well as) all the tribes of Israel."
(Zecb. ix. 1.)
• Reading D"lH O]) (Amos 1. 6) for Q-)Jt |'ff.
Digitized by
Google
1262
HAGAB
The numerous attempts of former scholars to
identify the locality have been antiquated by
Schrader's recognition of the name in the Assyrian
inscriptions. It is there variously called the
Land of Hatarakka, Hatarikka, and Hatarika ;
and is mentioned along with Damascus and
Hamath, just as it is in Zech. ix. 1, 2, as well
as with Zobah, Simvra, and Arka (see WAI. ii.
52, 46 b; iii. 10, No. 3. 34; Schrader's KGF.
p. 122, and his KAT? pp. 453, 482, 484).
[C.J.B.]
HA'GAB (3jn= locust ; 'Ayi$; ffagab).
Bene-Hagab were among the Nethinim who
returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel (Ezra
ii. 46). In the parallel list in Xehemiah, this
and the name preceding it are omitted. In the
Apocryphal Esdras (v. 30) it is given as Ag aba.
HAGA'BA(Najn; 'Aya$a; Hagaba). Bene-
Hagaba were among the Nethinim who came
back from captivity with Zerubbabel (Neh. vii.
48). The name is slightly different in form
from
HAGA'BAH (713311; 'Ayafid; Hagaba),
under which it is found in the parallel list of
Kzra ii. 45. In Esdras it is given as Gbaba.
HAGAB Oj|PI ; 'Ayip ; Agar). An Egyptian
slave of Sarah, and an inferior wife of Abraham,
who, as the mother of Ishmael, is the reputed
ancestress of the Ishmaelite Arab stocks. The
oldest traditions about her, and the names of
the twelve tribes that claimed descent from her,
are preserved in Gen. xvi., xxi. 9-21, nv. 12-18.
As might be expected, her name finds its pro-
bable explanation not in Hebrew but in Arabic,
where we have the root j£, hag'ara, " to
separate from one's friends or kindred," with
the derivatives i°J(?, hig'rah, "separation,"
the well-known designation of Muhammad's
historic departure from Mecca to Medinah ;
s- — ■
and j£ ', Ilag'ar, a province of Arabia on
the Persian Gulf, which very possibly owes its
name to ancient settlements of Hagarenes, or
tribes descended from Hagar (Ps. lxxxiii. 6 ;
1 Ch. v. 10, 20 : see Ewald, Mist. Isr. i. 315,
n. 2, Eng. Trans.). This etymology harmonizes
with* the Biblical narratives of Hagar's flight
from Sarah's tyranny, and her wanderings in
the wilderness. But to derive the name of
Hagar from that of her descendants the Hagar-
enes or Hagrites, seems gratuitous; while the
opinion, recently advanced by a distinguished
Arabist (Dr. Ignaz Goldziher), that Hagar is
simply the noon-day sun, called poetically
J W^VaJV al-hag'irah, " the Flying One," is an
arbitrary speculation. The sole meaning of that
phrase, according to the native lexicographers
(Kamiis, al-G'auhari, Ibn Mukarram), is "the
period of the noon-day heat."
The story of Hagar, in all likelihood, preserves
an historical memory of the separation of the
Ishmaelite Arabs from their kinsfolk, who after-
wards again divided into the peoples of Edom
HAGARENES, HAGABITE8
and Israel (so Kautzsch, ap. Riehm, IIWB.).
The fact that Hagar is a slave-wife, and of
Egyptian birth, indicates that the Ishmaelite
stocks were not of the purest strain of Abraham's
blood, but crossed with foreign elements. In
accordance with similar ideas, Arab historians
have called the tribes of Ishmaelite origin
CJytJUwC V_ i J j fe i 'Arab musta'ribah, "natu-
ralized (literally, Arabized) Arabs," as opposed
3** ** 3 Ss'
to the Joktanites, who are Jjj ,lp ' ' A-
'Arab 'aribah, " Pure (literally, Arabian) Arabs."
Arab tradition (al-Baidawi, al-Bagawi) re-
lates that y»-U& (Hag'ar) and Ishmael were
taken by Abraham to Mecca, and abandoned
there. The holy well Zamzam by the Caaba is
the fountain that sprang up for the relief of
Ishmael, the ancestor of the Prophet. The
tribe of G'urhum allowed the fugitives to settle
among them ; and Ishmael allied himself with
the G'urhumites by marrying a daughter of
Modad, and adopting their speech and manners ;
so that his posterity were united with them into
a single nation.
In the time of Jerome a local tradition
pointed out Hagar's Well (05.* p. 135, 3). At
present, a well in the Wad! al-Muwailih, at
some distance to the south of Beersheba, and
some chambers in the rock {Bait Hag'ar,
" Hagar's House "), are connected with her
name by the Bedawis (Robinson, Palestine,
i. 315 ; Palmer, Desert of the Exodus, ii. 354 ;
Ritter, xiv. 1086; Dillmann 1 in loco).
St. Paul makes characteristic use of the story
of Hagar, finding therein an allegory of the Two
Covenants, but not necessarily, as some would
have us think (Stanley; Riehm, HWB.), as-
suming a connexion between the Arabic term
j^ , hag'ar, "a stone," and the name Hagar
(see Lightfoot, ad Gal. iv. 21-31). The alle-
gorical application of the narrative is quite in
the manner of the Rabbinical reasonings of the
time. What is different is the new doctrine
which the argument illustrates and enforces.
It is the substance not the form, the spirit not
the letter, that is essential here as elsewhere in
the Scriptures. [C. J- B.]
HAGABE'NES, HAGARI'TES, HA-
GERi'TE, the (DWTJnn, Dnjn, njnn:
B. r&r 'KyafHivav, oi 'Aytpatoi; A. ray 'Aya-
paittv, oi 'Ayopcuoi, 1 Ch. v. 19, 20 ; B. i
Vapdrris, A. 6 'Ayaplrns, 1 Ch. wvii. 31 ; B. oi
'Ayyofntvol, B*T. 'Ayapnvol, Ps. lxxxiii. 6:
Agarei, Agareus, Agareni). One and the same
people, or group of nomadic Arabian tribes,
appears to be meant by these variant forms of
the same gcntilic name, which, however,^ hi
Hebrew reduce themselves to two, viz. Hagn in»
and the contracted Hagrlm (sing. Hagri).
According to a notice of them preserved in
1 Ch. v. 10, 19, 20, as early as the time. '
Saul the Hagrites • were a nomadic people, rich
• So R.V.. except In Ps. lxxxiii. «. » here " *"
Hagarenes (presumably to avoid ajinglo with IshmaeMcs
In the preceding line), with marg. Hagrites.
Digitized by
Google
HAGGAI
1263
HAGABENES, HAGAWTES
in flocks and herds/whose pasture-grounds lay
on the eastern border of Gilead ; a territory
from which thev were expelled by the Israelite
tribes of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh, which
held it until their own deportation by the
Assyrians (734 B.C. : see 2 K. it. 29). The fact
that they were a pastoral people is incidentally
confirmed by another notice from an ancient
source, stating that "Jazix the Hagerite," or
rather Hagnte 0"Win fT), had the charge of
David's flocks of sheep and goats (jMY): **«
1 Ch. xxvii. 31.»
Hagrim, Hagrites, as the name of an Arab
people, at once suggests that of Hagar, the
mother of all Ishmaelite Arabs. It is hardly a sjmugr n
strong objecUon to this comparison, supported , generally supposed to mean /rat irw,
as it is by linguistic ^equivalence MdJenk , and £ Wn 'given him because he was
tradition,' that tne Hagnm seem * ** dl T I born on a festival, perhaps on the Feast, that of
tinguished from the Ishmaehtes in Ps. lxxxm. 6, Tabernacles ^
of whom, in fact, they were a branch (Kautzsch g y oth ^' a known f him beside the record
ap. Riehm, BWB.). Why may not one group I of hu brief ^ t for about four month , in the
of Hagnte Arabs hare been known m antiquity , ^^ yatxoil>a ( m (B _ & 5 ._>o), contained in his
Book, and supplemented by two notices in the
! on the Persian Gulf (• Die Landschaft Lachsa
oder Hadsjar,' Kiebuhr, Arabien. pp. StiS-^?)/
Considering the migratory habits of Arabian
tribes, it seems likely enough that some portion of
the Hagrites in ancient times may have wandered
even so far to the south-east from their earlier
seats. But the name is not uncommon else-
where in Arabia, The Arab geographers men-
tion places so called in Yemen, the Hig'jz. and
Hadhramaut. [C. J. B.]
HAGGAI, the tenth in order of the Minor
Prophets.
1. The name Q in ; 'kyyeZo* ; Aggoeui) is not
borne by anyone else in the O. T. ; but the
similar names Haggi, Haggith, Haggiah are
_ the Hagrites, par excellence? This would
sorely be no bar to recognising the claim of
otheT Arabian stocks, known by special designa-
tions, to descent from Hagar through Ishmael.
Three other Arab peoples were allied with the
Hagrites in the war of 1 Cb. v. 19 ; viz. Jetur,"
Xaphish, and Nodab. These are, in all pro-
bability, the last three of the twelve tribes of
ishmael (Gen. xxv. 15), Nodab being either a
correction or a corruption of Kedemah.*
The position of Jetur, the modern G'eid&r,
being known [Itoraea], supplies another in-
dication of the original seats of the Hagrim,
which cannot hare been very far off. They are
probably identical with the 'Aypaioi or Agrei
of the classical geographers, whom Pliny
(vi. 28) twice mentions among the peoples of
Arabia; the second time, along with the
Ammonii or Ammonites (Ps. lxxxiii. 6, 7). See
also Eratosthenes in Strabo, xvi. p. 767, where
they are mentioned with the Nabataeans, and
Ptolemy, v. 19, where they appear as neighbours
of the Batanaeans (E. of the Hawan), and Dio-
nysius Periegetes, v. 956, where they are called
'Ayptts. Gesenius, to whom these references
are due (Thesaur. s. v. njn), identifies the
Hagrites with the people of j?, Hag'ar, or
s\~s~*§\ Al-Ahsa, Lahsa, a province of Arabia
' In 1 Ch. xl. 38, "MibhartbesonofHaggeri"[Heb.
napri] is due to confusion of similar Heb. letters, and
most be corrected, with KenDlcott and most modems,
from 2 Sam. xxill. 3« (■• of Zobsh ; Banl tbe Gadite ")•
« " The sons of Hagar " (oi vio't "Aya», Barnch ill.
23, may, as Kautzscb and others suppose, mean the
Hagrim. They are mentioned along with Thaiman and
Merran, the latter being probably a misreading of Heb.
Medan (Hitzlg, Ewald). If Thaiman represents Heb.
Teman, the " sons of Hagar " are hardly in the right
neighbourhood for the Hagrim. But the LXX. also use
Thaiman for Tema (Gen. xxv. 15); that is, >\-*X>'
on tbe route between Xadyim and Ifarfar on the Persian
Gulf.
« Instead of " with Jetur " of A. V. and K. V., the
Heb. text has " and Jetur."
• Heb. 2ni3, >'odab; ffiyiffc Kedemah. An Ill-
written p might be misread 1J, and 3 and •Q are often
Indistinguishable in MSS. Kedemah Is the reading of
1 Cb. 1. 31.
Book of Ezra, which couple his name with that
of Zechariah, as colleagues in persuading the
people to complete the restoration of the Temple
(v. 1, vi. 14 ; cp. 1 Esd. vi. 1, vii. 3). In the
absence of positive information it may plausibly
be conjectured that he was one of the exiles who
returned with Zerubbabel and Joshua. Ewald
would infer from ii. 3 that he was one of
the few survivors who had seen the first Temple
in its splendour. If so, he must have delivered
his prophetic message in extreme old age, and
left the younger Zechariah to continue the work
he had begun (Pusey, Introd. to Haggai). The
inference, however, is at best precarious: the
words of ii. 3 seem rather to be addressed to a
number of persons, of whom the Prophet him-
self was not one ; and according to the tradi-
tions recorded by Pseudo-Dorotheus (ap. Chirm.
Pasch. 151 d) and Pseudo-Epiphanius (De Yilis
Prophetarumy, Haggai was still a young man
when be returned from Babylon to Jeru-
salem. They add that he lived to see the
restoration of the Temple, and was buried with
honour near the sepulchres of the priests. One
Jewish tradition regards Haggai, Zechariah, and
Malachi as forming an intermediate link in the
chain of tradition between the prophets and the
" Great Synagogue ; " another reckons them
among the members of that body, though it is
not supposed to have been founded until the time
of Ezra and Nehemiah, and Ezra did not arrive
in Jerusalem until sixty-two years after the
date of Haggai's public ministry (see Carpzov's
Introductio, and Meyer's Seder 01am, p. 1076 sq.).
In St. Jerome's day a notion existed, probably
among the Origenists, that Haggai was an angel
in human form (Comm. on i. 1 3). It was based on
a misinterpretation of ch. i. 13, the phrase " the
Lord's messenger " (mil* "|N?D) being identical
with "the angel of the Lord" in Zech. i. 11,
' The Arabic translator of the Psalms appears to have
been of this opinion. In Ps. lxxxiii. 6 be has written
u o
.«> p-\jl5\. a gentllic noun from j»» according
to Al-G'auharf, cited by Gesenius.
Digitized by
Google
1264
HAGGAI
HAGGAI
&c, and it seems to hare bad some currency, as
Cyril of Alexandria thought it worth while to
refute it in his Commentary.
3. The prophecies of Haggai are expressly
stated to have been delivered "in the second
year of Darius the king " (Hagg. i. 1, ii. 10 ; cp.
Ezra iv. 24, v. 1, vi. 14). This can only mean
Darius the son of Hystospes, who reigned from
B.C. 521 to B.C. 485. None who had seen the old
Temple (Hagg. ii. 3) could have been alive in
the time of Darius Nothus (B.C. 424-405). The
date of Haggai's ministry is therefore fixed as
the year B.C. 520. Sixteen or seventeen years
had elapsed since the Return of the exiles under
the leadership of Zerubbabel and Joshua, with
an express commission from Cyrus to rebuild the
Temple of Jehovah at Jerusalem (Ezra i. 2 sq.).
In the seventh month of the first year of the
Return, the Altar was re-erected, the daily
sacrifice restored, and the Feast of Taber
nacles celebrated (Ezra iii. 1 sq.) ; and in the
second month of the second year (535) the
foundation of the Temple, for which preparations
had already been made (Ezra i. 4 sq., ii. 68 sq.),
was laid with solemn ceremonial amid general
rejoicings, chequered only by the sorrow of the
old men, who mournfully contrasted this in-
significant beginning with the grandeur of the
former Temple (Ezra iii. 8 sq.). The work had
scarcely been commenced when the " people of the
land," >.e. the mixed population inhabiting what
had formerly been the Northern kingdom, ex-
pressed their desire to join in it (Ezra iv. 1 sq.).
The acceptance of the offer would have im-
perilled the purity of the faith in the new com-
munity, and it was resolutely refused. The
consequence of this refusal was active opposition.
By intrigue or bribery they seem to have pro-
cured from the Persian court a decree inhibiting
the Jews from proceeding with the building
(Ezra iv. 4, 5). The work was at a standstill
during the remainder of the reign of Cyrus, and
during the reigns of Cambyses (B.C. 529-522) and
Pseudo-Smerdis (B.C. 521). We have no further
information about this period. The narrative
in Ezra iv. 6-23, which at first sight appears to
refer to it, is parenthetic, and relates the sub-
sequent opposition to the building of the walls
in the reigns of Ahasuerus, i.e. Xerxes (B.C. 485-
465), and Artaxerxes I. Longimanus (n.C. 405-
425). To identify the Ahasuerus of Ezra iv. 6
with Cambyses, and the Artaxerxes of Ezra iv. 7
with Pseudo-Smerdis, who only reigned for eight
months, is unreasonable [Ezka].
But though history tells us no more than that
" the work of the house of God ceased " in con-
sequence of the opposition of external adversaries,
we may infer from Haggai's prophecy that the
opposition was not such as could not have been
overcome by courage and resolution. He lays the
blame entirely on the negligence and apathy of
the people, and nowhere hints that circumstances
had made progress impossible. Initial difficulties
had paralysed their feeble energies ; and though
they had been able to rebuild their own houses
and even to decorate them (Hagg. i. 4, 9), they
had been reconciling themselves to the idea of
existence without that Temple, which they had
been commissioned by Cyrus and by their
countrymen in exile to rebuild. Some deliber-
ately excused their procrastination by artirming
that the fitting time had not yet come (Hagg. i.
2). Chastisement was sent to arouse their
consciences, and the warnings and exhortations
of Haggai and Zcchariah were given to recall
them to a sense of their duty.
No doubt the accession of Darius offered a
favourable opportunity for recommencing the
work ; and when, in the second year of his reign,
Haggai began his ministry, a change of policy
at the Persian court might well be hoped for.
Nor was the hope disappointed. The work soon
attracted the attention of Tattenai, the satrap
of the trans-Euphratensian province, and Shethar-
bozenai, the governor of Samaria. They came
to Jerusalem, and challenged the Jews to produce
their authority. They pleaded the edict of
Cyrus, and the governors wrote to Darius, with-
out, however (so it was providentially ordered),
stopping the work in the meantime (Ezra v.
3 sq.). The edict of Cyrus was found among
the archives at Ecbatana, and Darius sent orders
to Tattenai and Shethar-bozenai not only to
permit the work to continue, but to provide for
the expenses out of the royal revenues, and to
furnish materials for sacrifice (Ezra vi. 1 sq.).
The work prospered, and the Temple was com-
pleted and dedicated in the sixth year of Darius
(b.c. 516).
4. Such were the circumstances under which
Haggai's ministry was exercised, and the results
to which it led. His Book contains five addresses,
delivered within a period of less than four
months.
(1.) i. 1-11. The'Prophet's first address was
delivered on the first day of the sixth month
(Elul=Aug.-Scpt.), when the people would be
collected for the Festival of the New Moon. In
it he censures them for their selfish negligence
in letting the Temple lie desolate, while they
built luxurious houses for themselves. The
drought and scarcity which they were suffering
were the chastisement of their neglect. He
exhorts them at once to repair their error and
begin the work.
(2.) i. 12-15. The next section of the Book
records the immediate effect of his words. On
the twenty-fourth day of the same month the
work was begun. The Prophet was expressly
commissioned to deliver a brief but emphatic
message of encouragement, conveying the assur-
ance of God's approval and assistance. " I am
with you, saith the Lord."
(3.) ii. 1-9. The Messianic Hope of the New
Temple. The enthusiasm of the people seems to
have flagged, and, as at the laying of the
foundation-stone (Ezra iii. 12, 13), some depre-
ciated the new Temple by comparing its insig-
nificance with the glory of the Temple they had
known. On the twenty-first day of the seventh
month (Tisri), the seventh day of the Feast of
Tabernacles, Haggai re-animated their spirits
by a renewed assurance that God's Presence was
with them, and by the prediction that through
the accession and offerings of all nations the
latter glory of the house would be greater than
the former glory.
(4.) ii. 10-19. For two months Haggai was
silent, and in this interval Zechariah began his
ministry (Zech. i. 1) ; but on the twenty-fourth
day of the ninth month he again addressed the
people. He explains the cause of their disasters,
and once more promises their removal. According
to the ceremonial law, those who carried holy
Digitized by
Google
HAGGAI
thing* could not communicate holiness, while
those who were unclean communicated defile-
ment. So the neglect to rebuild the Temple
defiled the people and the land, nor could their
offerings avail to counteract the pollution. Hence
their disasters ; bat from this day forward they
ihonld be blessed.
(5.) ii. 20-23. The fifth and last prophecy,
delivered on the same day as the preceding one,
is addressed to Zerubbabel, as the ruler of the
people and the representative of the house of
David. It assures him that in the midst of the
convulsions impending among the surrounding
nations he will be preserved, and honoured with
singular distinction as the chosen of Jehovah.
5. The style of Haggai is tame and prosaic ;
it lacks the grace and poetry of the earlier
Prophets. It is,' no disrespect to say that he
was not a brilliant literary genius. But he gave
plain warnings and plain commands in strong,
simple, and straightforward words. Emphatically
he reiterates his message of warning, " Consider
your ways," " consider " (i. 5, 7 ; ii. 15, 18) ; or
of exhortation, " Be strong," separately addressed
to prince and priest and people (ii. 4). The fre-
quent questions give force and earnestness to his
expostulations (i. 4, 9 ; ii. 3, 12, 13, 19) ; and
touches of vivid description are not wanting
(i. 6, 9 ; ii. 16). But his work is to be measured
by the success of his mission, and not by the
literary merits of his Book. Indeed, it is ex-
tremely probable that (as in the case of some
other Prophets) no more than mere outlines and
summaries were committed to writing, preserving
only the pith and point of the discourses actually
delivered.
The decay of the Hebrew language after the
Return is marked by departures from the older
usages and by awkwardnesses of expression (i. 6 ;
ii. 6, 16, 17).
6. The importance of Haggai's work is some-
times in danger of being overlooked. It was a
critical moment in the history of Israel. The
scanty " remnant of the people " (i. 14) which
had returned, disappointed perhaps at the non-
falnlment of the glowing prophecies of a glorious
restoration, discouraged by weakness within and
opposition without, were in imminent danger of
coming to believe that the restoration of the
Temple might safely be neglected. Yet the
Temple was for the time the indispensable con-
dition of the fulfilment of their national calling.
Existence as an independent nation was no longer
possible for them. Their religion must be for
the future, as it should have been in the past,
the bond of national union. The Temple was
the sign, nay, the outward condition, of Jehovah's
Presence in their midst. It was the visible
symbol of the unity of their religion, the centre
round which all the loose elements of the nation
Bight rally. Haggai, seconded by his colleague,
Zechariah, roused his countrymen to a sense of
their duty, and saved the Jewish Church in a
crisis of peril.
But his view was not limited to the present.
(1.) In a truly " Messianic " prophecy * (ii. 7) he
*xs inspired to foresee the true glory of the Tetn-
HAGGI
1265
* It is hardly necessary to say that the reference of
"*> passage to the personal Messiah, to which the
Vatglie Tendering, " venlet desiderates cunctis genti-
•as," has given wide currency, must be abandoned.
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
pie in the accession of the nations, repeating the
prophecies of Is. lx., lxi. The convulsions of
nature and of the nations would but promote
its glory, and in the midst of them all the
Divine gift of peace would be found there.
(2.) The promise to Zerubabbel, made to him
not as an individual, but as the worthy repre-
sentative of the family of David, is also a
Messianic prophecy. He was Jehovah's chosen
servant, the type as well as the ancestor of Him
in Whom the prophecies were to be fulfilled,
and as such he receives a typical honour. In
the destruction of the kingdoms of the world,
he (and by implication his family and the nation
which he represented) were to be preserved
safely. He was to be made Jehovah s signet,
not only a most prized possession in closest
association with Him, but the sign and attesta-
tion of His words and acts (see Orelli, 0. 1.
Prophecy, p. 424 sq.).
7. Other writings of Haggai. — It has been
argued with much probability that a narrative
written by Haggai is embodied in Ezra iii. 2-iv.
5, iv. 24-vi. 22 [Ezra].
The names of Haggai and Zechariah appear
in the LXX. in the titles of Pss. exxxvii. (exxxviii.)
(not in Cod. Sin.), cxlv.-cxlviii. (cxlvi.-cilviii.) ;
in the Vulgate in Pss. cxi., cxlv., cxlvi. (cxlvi.,
cxlvii.). The nnrevised Old Latin in Ps. lxir.
(lxv.) curiously joins Jeremiah and Haggai ; cp.
thePeshittoSyriacincxxv.,cxxvi.(cxxvi.,cnvii.),
cxlv.-cxlviii. (cxlvi.-cilviii.). These titles cannot
denote authorship, but may preserve a tradition
that Haggai and Zechariah adopted these Psalms
for use in the service of the Temple. There is a
curious and obscure passage in Pseudo-Epiphanius,
de Vitit Prophetarum, to the effect that " Haggai
was the first to sing Alleluia there (at Jerusalem),
. . . and Amen . . . Wherefore we say Alleluia,
which is the hymn of Haggai and Zechariah."
8. There is a reference to Hagg. ii. 23 in
Ecclus. xlix. 11, and Hagg. ii. 6 is quoted in
Heb. xii. 26.
9. Literature. — Beside the commentaries on
the Minor Prophets in general may be mentioned
among more recent works Kobler's very thorough
Nachexilische Propheten, 1860; Reinke, Der
Prophet Haggai, 1868 ; T. T. Perowne in Camb.
Bible for Schools and Colleges, 1886. A full list
of older works will be found in Rosenmuller : with
continuation in Reinke, p. 37 sq. [A. F. K.]
HAG-GERI, R. V. HAGBI (njn, i.e. a
Hagarite; B. 'Kyapti, A. 'Arapoi; Agarai).
" Mibhar, son of Haggeri," was one of the
mighty men of David's guard, according to
the catalogue of 1 Ch. xi. 38. The parallel
passage — 2 Sam. xxiii. 36 — has " Bani the
Gadite " OIITI). This Kennicott decides to
have been the original, from which Haggeri
has been corrupted (Dissert, p. 214. Cp. Driver,
Notes on the Heb. Text of the BB. of Sam. in
loco). The Targum has Bar Geda (K13 "13).
HAG'GI ('JPI = festive : A. 'Ayyeir ; in
Numb., B. 'Ayvei, A. 'Ayyi: Haggi, Aggi),
second son of Gad (Gen. xlvi. 16 ; Num. xxvi.
15), founder of the Haggites 0?nn). It will
be observed that the name, though given as that
of an individual, is really a patronymic, pre-
cisely the same as that of the family.
4 M
Digitized by
Google
1266
HAGGIAH
HAGGI'AH (fMn; A. "Ay^o, B. 'Ajai;
Haggia), a Levite, one of the descendants of
Merari (1 Ch. vi. 30).
HAG'GITES, THECJnn; B. i 'Ay)**,
AP. -( ; Agitae), the family sprung from Haggi,
second son of Gad (Num. xxvi. 15; LXX. v. 22).
HAG'GITH (rVin, ?= « *mcer: 'AyyW;
A. +tvyt$, 'Kyle ; B. **yyM, 'AyyilB ; Joseph.
'A77187) : Aggith, Haggith), one of David's
wires, of whom nothing is told us except that
she was the mother of Adonijah, who is com-
monly designated as " the son of Haggith "
(2 Sam. iii. 4; 1 K. i. 5, 11, ii. 13; i Ch.
iii. 2). He was, like Absalom, renowned for
his handsome presence. In the first and last of
the above passages Haggith is fourth in order
of mention among the wires, Adonijah being
also fourth among the sons. His birth happened
at Hebron (2 Sam. iii. 2, 5) shortly after that of
Absalom (1 K. i. 6 ; where it will be observed
that the words [in A. V.] his mother are
inserted by the translators). [G.] [W.]
HAGIA ('A-yfa; Aggia), 1 Esd. v. 34.
[Hattil.]
HA1, R. V. AT QVn = the heap of stones ;
'Ayyal; Hat). The form in which the well-
known place Al appears in the A. V. on its first
introduction (Gen. xii. 8, xiii. 3). It arises
from the translators having in these places,
and these only, recognised the definite article
with which Ai is invariably and emphatically
accompanied in the Hebrew; or it may have
come from the Vulgate, if Jer. xlix. 3 be not
an exception (see the Comm.). In the Samari-
tan Version of the above two passages, the
name is given in the first Amah, and in the
second Cephrah, as if Cephirah. [G.] [W.]
HAIR. The Hebrews were fully alive to the
importance of the hair as an element of per-
sonal beauty, whether as seen in the "curled
(R. V. " bushy ") locks, black as a raven," of
youth (Cant. v. 11), or in the " crown of glory "
that encircled the head of old age (Prov. xvi.
31). The customs of ancient nations in regard
to the hair varied considerably : the Egyptians
allowed the women to wear it long, but kept the
heads of men closely shaved from early child-
hood (Her. ii. 36, iii. 12 ; Wilkinson's Ancient
Egyptians, see Index [1878]). The Greeks ad-
mired long hair, whether in men or women, as
is evidenced in the expression KapnKOfi6m/r<s
'Axatot, and in the representations of their
divinities, especially Bacchus and Apollo, whose
long locks were a symbol of perpetual youth.
The Assyrians also wore it long (Herod, i. 195),
the flowing curls being gathered together in a
heavy cluster on the back, as represented in the
sculptures of Nineveh. The Hebrews on the
other hand, while they encouraged the growth
of hair, observed the natural distinction between
the sexes by allowing the women to wear it
long (Luke vii. 38 ; John xi. 2; 1 Cor. xi. 6 sq.),
while the men restrained theirs by frequent
clippings to a moderate length. This difference
between the Hebrews and the surrounding
nations, especially the Egyptians, arose no doubt
partly from natural taste, but partly also from
HATR
legal enactments: clipping the hair in a certain
manner and offering the locks was, according to
the oldest Semitic usage, connected with re-
ligions worship. To sacrifice the hair of child-
hood, both in Arabia and Syria, was the pre-
liminary to admission to the religious and social
status of manhood (Robertson Smith, Religion
of the Semites, i. 312). The Arabians practised
a peculiar tonsure in honour of their god Orotal
(Her. iii. 8, ntlpovrcu nperp6xaKa, Tept{vpoSrres
robs KporiiQovs \ see Robertson Smith, i. 307),
and hence the Hebrews were forbidden to "round
the corners (DMB, lit. the extremity) of their
heads " (Lev. xix. 27), meaning the locks along
the forehead and temples, and behind the ears.
This tonsure is described in the LXX. by a
peculiar expression, <rwroS)(=the classical aicd-
$><o»), possibly derived from the Hebrew JViPV
(cp. Bochart, Can. i. 6, p. 379. Fried. Delitrsch
compares the Assyrian sisu; see Baer's ed. of
Ezekiel, p. xv. sq.). That the practice of the
Arabians was well known to the Hebrews,
appears from the expression ilKB '¥1¥p, " that
have the corners of their hair polled" (R. V.),
by which they are described (Jer. ix. 26, xxv. 23,
xlix. 32 ; see marginal translation of the A V.).
The prohibition against cutting off the hair on
the death of a relative (Deut. xiv. 1) was pro-
bably grounded on a similar reason. In addition
to these regulations, the Hebrews dreaded bald-
ness, as it was frequently the result of leprosy
(Lev. xiii. 40 sq.), and hence formed one of the
disqualifications for the priesthood (Lev. xxi. 20,
LXX.). [Baldness.] The rule imposed upon
the priests, and probably followed by the rest of
the community, was that the hair should be
polled (QD3, Ezek. xliv. 20), neither being shaved
nor allowed to grow too long (Lev. xxi. 5 ; Ezek.
1. c). What was the precise length usually
worn, we have no means of ascertaining ; but
from various expressions — such as t?K*l 1HB,
lit. to let hose the head or the hair f =soicere
crines, Virg. Aen. iii. 65, xi. 35 ; demissos lugentis
more capillos, Ov. Ep. x. 137) by unbinding the
head-band and letting it go dishevelled (Lev. x.
6, R. V. " let not the hair of your heads go loose "),
which was done in mourning (cp. Ezek. xxiv.
17); and again Jtk Twt, to uncover the ear,
previous to making any communication of im-
portance (1 Sam. xx. 2, 12, xxii. 8, A. V. and
R. V., margin), as though the hair fell over the
ear — we may conclude that men wore their hair
somewhat longer than is usual with us. The
word PID, used as = hair (Num. vi. 5 ; Ezek.
xliv. 20), is especially indicative of its free
growth (cp. Knobel-Dillmann, Comm. in Lev. xxi.
10). Long hair was admired in the case of
young men ; it is especially noticed in the de-
scription of Absalom's person (2 Sam. xiv. 26),
the inconceivable weight of whose hair, as given
in the text (200 shekels; Lucian [LXX.], 100),
has led to a variety of explanations (cp. Banner's
Observations, iv. 321): Josephus (Ant. vii. 8, § 5)
adds, that it was cut every eighth day. The
hair was also worn long by the body-guard of
Solomon, according to the same authority (Ant.
viii. 7, §3, laiKiaras KaBtiixtroi xcur<u). The
care requisite to keep the hair in order in such
cases must have been very great, and hence the
practice of wearing long hair was unusual, and
Digitized by
Google
HAIR
only resorted to as an act of religions observance,
in which case it was a "sign of humiliation and
self-denial, and of a certain religions slovenli-
ness " (Lightfoot, Exercit. on 1 Cor. xi. 14), and
was practised by the Nazarites (Num. vi. 5;
Jndg. liii. 5, xvi. 17 ; 1 Sam. til), and occa-
sionally by others in token of special mercies
(Acts zviii. 18) ; it was not unusual among the
Egyptians when on a journey (Diod. i. 18).
[Nazarite.] In times of affliction the hair was
altogether cut off (Is. iii. 17, 24, xv. 2, xxii. 12 ;
Jer. vii. 29, xlviii. 37 ; Amos viii.10 ; Joseph. B. J.
ii. 15, § 1), the practice of the Hebrews being iu
this respect the reverse of that of the Egyptians,
who let their hair grow long in time of mourn-
ing (Herod, ii. 36), sharing their heads when
the term was over (Gen. xli. 14) ; but resembling
that of the Greeks, as frequently noticed by
classical writers (e.g. Soph. Aj. 1174; Eurip.
Electr. 143, 241). tearing the hair (Ezra ix. 3)
and letting it go dishevelled, as already noticed,
were similar tokens of grief. [MOURNIKO.] The
practice of the modern Arabs in regard to the
length of their hair varies ; generally the men
allow it to grow its natural length, the tresses
hanging down to the breast and sometimes to
the waist, affording substantial protection to the
head and neck against the violence of the sun's
rays (Burckhardt's Notts, i. 49; Wellsted's
Travels, i. 33, 53, 73). The modern Egyptians
retain the practices of their ancestors, shaving
the heads of the men, but suffering the women's
hair to grow long (Lane's Modern Egypt, i. 52,
71). Wigs were commonly used by the latter
people (Wilkinson, ii. 324, &c. [1878]), but not
HAIR
1267
EerPttU) TO*"- (WUKmon.)
bv the Hebrews: Josephus (TO. § 11) notices an
instance of false hair (tiptBer^ koVti) being
used for the purpose of disguise. Whether the
ample ringlets of the Assyrian monarchs, as re-
presented in the sculptures of Nineveh, were
real or artificial, is doubtful (Layard's Nineveh,
ii. 328). Among the Medes the wig was worn
by the upper classes (Xen. Cyrop. i. 3, § 2).
The nsual and favourite colour of the hair
was black (Cant. v. 11), as is indicated in the
comparisons to a "flock of goats" and the
"tents of Kedar" (Cant. iv. 1, i. 5): a similar
hue is probably intended by the purple of Cant,
vii. 5, the term being broadly used (as the
Greek xopQiptos in a similar application =
iUXms, Anacr. 28). A fictitious hue was occa-
sionally obtained by sprinkling gold-dust on the
hair (Joseph. Ant. viii. 7, §3). It does not
appear that dves were ordinarily used ; the
" Carmel " of Cant. vii. 5 (R. V.) has been
understood as = WT3 (A. V. margin, crwuon),
but without good reason. Herod is said to
have dyed his grey hair for the purpose of con-
cealing his age (Ant. xvi. 8, § 1), but the practice
may have been borrowed from the Greeks or
Romans, among whom it w-as tommon (Aristoph.
Ecdes. 736; Martial, Ep. iii. 43; Propert. ii.
18, 24, 26): from Matt. v. 36, we may infer
that it was not usual among the Hebrews.
The approach of age was marked by a sprinkling
(pit, Hos. vii. 9 ; cp. a similar use of spargere,
Propert. iii. 4, 24) of grey hairs, which soon
overspread the whole head (Gen. xlii. 38, xliv.
29; IK. ii. 6, 9; Prov. xvi. 31, xx. 29). The
reference to the almond in Eccles.xii.5 is explained
of the blossoms of that tree, as emblematic of
old age : these blossoms turn to a snowy white
before they fall from the tree (Wright, Ecctesi
asttt, p. 259). Pure white hair was deemed
characteristic of the Divine Majesty (Dan. vii.
9 ; Rev. i. 14).
The chief beauty of the hair consisted in cans,
whether of a natural or artificial character.
The Hebrew terms are highly expressive: to
omit the word iTOX, — rendered "locks" in
Cant. iv. 1, 3, vi. 7, and Is. xlvii. 2, but more
probably meaning a veil (R. V.), — we have
Dvlw) (Cant. v. 11), properly pendulous
flexible boughs (according to the LXX., ixireu,
the shoots of the palm-tree), which supplied an
image of the coma pendula ; hX 1 V (Ezek. viii. 3),
a similar image borrowed from the curve of a
blossom ; plV (Cant. iv. 9), a lock falling over
the shoulders like a chain of ear-pendant (in
una crine colli tut, Vulg., which is. better than
the A. V. and R. V., " with one chain of tin-
neck ") ; D'Bfn (Cant. vii. 5, A. V. « galleries,"
R. V. "tresses"), properly the channels by
which water was brought to the flocks, which
supplied an image either of the coma fluent, or of
the regularity in which the locks were arranged ;
iTH (Cant. vii. 5), again an expression for coma
peiiduli, borrowed from the threads hanging
down from an unfinished woof; and lastly
n^pD ttfttO (Is. iii. 24, A V. and R. V. " well
set hair"), properly plaited icork, i.e. gracefully
curved locks (see Delitzsch' and Dillmann* in
loco). With regard to the mode of dressing
the hair, we have no very precise information ;
the terms used are of a general character, as of
Jezebel (2 K. ix. 30), SD'Fll, i.e. she adorned her
head; of Judith (x. 3), titrate, i.e. arranged
(the E. V. has " braided," and the Vulg. dis-
criminant, here used in a technical sense in the
reference to the discriminate or hair-pin); ot
Herod (Joseph. Ant. xiv. 9, § 4), Kticoannniros
TJ7 trvvBiat i rijs xifais ; and of those who adopted
feminine fashions (B. J. iv. 9, § 10), k6jms
ffvv9ert(6pfvoi. The terms used in the N. T.
(tXiyiioiaai, 1 Tim. ii. 9; iuxXonris rpixmr,
1 Pet. iii. 3) are also of a general character ;
Schleusner (Lex. s. v.) understands them ot
curling rather than plaiting. The arrangement
of Samson's hair into seven locks, or more
properly braids (niB7lTD, from «|7n, to inter-
change; aupai, LXX.;' Judg. xvi. 13, 19), in-
volves the practice of plaiting, which was also
familiar to the Egyptians (Wilkinson, ii. 335
[1878]) and Greeks (Horn. II. xiv. 176). The
locks were probably kept in their place by a
fillet as in Egypt (Wilkinson, I. c).
Ornaments were worked into the hair, as
practised by the modern Egyptians, who " add
to each braid three black silk cords with little
4 M 2
Digitized by
Google
1268
HAIR
ornaments of gold" (Lane, i. 71): the LXX.
understands the term D'p'aC? (Is. iii. 18, A. V.
and R. V. "cauls"; R. V. marg. neticorks)
as applying to such ornaments (inw\iiaa);
Egyptian Wig*. (Wilkinson.)
Schroeder (<fc Vest. Mul. Ileb. cap. 2) approves
of this, and conjectures that they were sun-
shaped, i.e. circular, as distinct from the " round
tires like the moon," i.e. the crescent-shaped
ornaments used for necklaces; but the true
meaning can hardly be said to be settled (see
Delitzsch' and Dillmann 5 ). The Arabian women
attach small bells to the tresses of their hair
(Niebuhr, Voyage, i. 133). Other terms, some-
times understood as applying to the hair, are of
doubtful signification (consult on each Delitzsch*
and Dillmann*), e.g. D , D , "in (Is. iii. 22; acus;
" crisping-pins "), more probably purses (R. V.
"satchels"), as in 2 K. v. 23 ("bags"); D'lP'p
(Is. iii. 20, "head-bands"; R. V. " sashes "X
bridal girdles, according to Schroeder and other
authorities; D ,- 1NB (Is. iii. 20, discrimmalia,
Vulg., i.e. pins used for keeping the hair parted ;
cp. Jerome in fiufin. iii. cap. ult.), more probably
turbans (R. V. " head-tires "). Combs and hair-
pins are mentioned in the Talmud ; the Egyptian
combs were made of wood and double, one side
having large and the other small teeth
(Wilkinson, ii. 343 [1878]); from the orna-
mental devices worked on them we may infer
that they were worn in the hair. With regard
to other ornaments worn about the head, see
Head-drkjss. The Hebrews, like other nations
of antiquity, anointed the hair profusely with
ointments, which were generally compounded of
various aromatic ingredients (Ruth iii. 3 ; 2
Sim. xiv. 2 : Ps. xxiii. f>, xiv. 7, xcii. 10 ; Eccles.
ix. 8 ; Is. iii. 24) ; more especially on occasion
HALAH
of festivities or hospitality (Matt. vi. 17, nvi. 7 ;
Luke vii. 46 ; cp. Joseph. Ant. xix. 4, § 1,
XPta&iuvos uipois tV K«paXi)y, Sis 4»o avyov-
ffioj). It is perhaps in reference to the glossy
appearance so imparted to it that the hair is
described as purple (Cant. vii. 5).
It appears to have been the custom of the
Jews in our Saviour's time to swear by the hair
(Matt. v. 36), much as the Egyptian women
still swear by the side-lock, and the men by
their beards (Lane, i. 52, 71, notes).
Hair was employed by the Hebrews as an
image of what was least valuable in man's person
(1 Sam. xiv. 45; 2 Sam. xiv. 11; 1 K. i. 52;
Matt. x. 30; Luke xii. 7, xxi. 18; Acts xxvii.
34), as well as of what was innumerable (Ps. xl.
12, Ixix. 4), or particularly fine (Jndg. xx. 16).
In Is. vii. 20, some writers consider the hair to
represent the various productions of the field,
trees, crops, &c. ; like upos K»o/iq/tcVor SAji of
Callim. Dian. 41, or the Aumus comans of Stat.
The b. v. 502 ; but this interpretation is not in
favour with Delitzsch* or Dillmann 1 . Hair, "as
the hair of women " (Rev. ix. 8), is taken by
some to mean long and undressed hair, which
in later times was regarded as an image of
barbaric rudeness (Hengstenberg, Coram, in loco).
[W.L.B.] [F.]
HAK-KA'TAN QQ%T\ = the young or the
small; B. 'Akotov, A. 'hutta-riv ; Eaxtan).
Johanan, son of Hakkatan, was the chief of the
Bene-Azgad who returned from Babylon with
Ezra (Ezra viii. 12). The name is probably
Katan, with the definite article prefixed. In
the Apocryphal Esdras it is Acatan.
HAK-KOZ (fipn; B. i KeSr, A. 'AonfrV,
Accos), a priest, the chief of the seventh course
in the service of the sanctuary, as appointed by
David (1 Ch. xxiv. 10). In Ezra ii. 61 (B.
'Akovs, A. 'Akk&j) the name occurs again as
that of a family of priests; though here the
prefix is taken by our translators — and no doubt
correctly — as the definite article, and the name
appears as Koz. The same thing also occurs in
Neh. Ui. 4 (BK. 'AkcSs, A. 'AitKtis), 21 (B. 'A/c»ft
A. 'Akk&). In Esdras, Aocoz.
HAKU'PHA (KMpn,?=4en<; B. 'A«*uh»,
A. 'Axovfi [Ezra];' B." 'Axtupi, **• 'Amupi,
A. 'Ax'tpd [Neh.] ; Hacupha). Bene-Chakupha
were among the families of Nethinim who re-
turned from Babylon with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii.
51 ; Neh. vii. 53). In Esdras (v. 31) the name
is given as Acipha.
HA'LAH (rbr\; 'AW, XaXcfc; ffala),
which has nothing to do with the Calah of Gen.
x. 11 [Calah], is referred to as one of the
places where Shalmaneser or Sargon settled the
Israelites from Samaria (2 K. xvii. 6; xviii. 11:
cp. also 1 Ch. v. 26). Being mentioned with
Habor, on the river of Gozan, it has been
identified with the Chalcitis (XaA«iVis) of
Ptolemy (v. 18), placed bv him between .Anthe-
musia (cp. Strabo, xxvi. 1, § 27) and Gauzanitis
[see Gozan]. The Calachene mentioned by
Strabo, upon the east side of the Tigris near
Adiabene and the borders of Armenia, ate
regarded as lying too far north-eastwards ; but
it is worthy of notice that an Assyrian geo-
Digitized by
Google
HALAK, THE MOUNT
graphical list mentions, between Arbaha (Arra-
pachitis) and Rasappa (Reseph), a city called
Halahhu (zHalahu), a name which corresponds
perfectly with the Hebrew Halah, and may,
therefore, be identified with it. Its exact
position can hardly be determined. fT. G. P.]
, HAXAK, THE MOUNT (with the article,
pTTin "inn = the smooth or bare mountain :
in* Josh. Yt B. 'Ax^A, A. 'AA<U, F. 'AoAd*; in
xii. B. XeAgd, A - 'AAok, F. 'AAcfx: parsmontis),
a mountain twice, and twice only, named as the
southern limit of Joshua'sconqnests— M the Mount
Hal&k which goeth up to Seir " (Josh. xL 17,xii.
7), bat which has not yet been identified. It is
apparently the mountain range on the east side of
the 'Arabah, or one of the bare mountain summits
in that range. The word which is at the root
of the name (supposing it to be Hebrew), and
which has the force of smoothness or baldness,
has ramified into other terms, as Helkah, an
even plot of ground, like those of Jacob (Gen.
xxxiii. 19) or Naboth (2 K. ix. 25); cp. also
Helkath has-jurim, the " field of the strong "
(Stanley, &> P., App. § 20). [G.] [W.]
HAL/HUL &r6n ; B. 'AAowf, A. 'AAooA ;
IfalhiU), a town of Judah in the mountain
district, one of the group containing Bethzur
and Gedor (Josh. xv. 58). Jerome, in the
Onomasticm (under Elul, 0&* p. 152, 7), re-
ports the existence of a hamlet (villuia) named
" Alula," near Hebron.* The name still remains
unaltered, attached to a large village, Ifulhul, on
a conspicuous hill a mile to the left of the road
from Jerusalem to Hebron, nearly 4 miles from
the latter. Opposite it, on the other side of the
road, is Beit Sur, the modern representative of
Bethzur, and further to the north is Jedur, the
ancient Gedor. The site is marked by numerous
rock-hewn tombs and by the ruins of walls and
foundations, among which stands a dilapidated
mosque bearing the name of Neby funis — the
prophet Jonah (Rob. i. 216; PEF. Mem. iii.
329; Guerin, Judtfe, iii. 284 sq.). In a Jewish
tradition quoted by Hettinger (Cippi Bebraici,
p. 32) it is said to be the burial-place of Gad,
David's seer. See the citations of Zunz in
Asher's .Ben;. o/Tu<fcto(ii. 437,n.). [<>•] [W-]
HALT (^n = necklace; B. 'AAeVp, A. (?)
'Oo\ti ; CAa/i)," a town on the boundary of Asher,
named between Helkath and Beten (Josh. xix.
25). Nothing is known of its situation. Schwarz
(p. 191) compares the name with Chelmon, the
equivalent in the Latin, of Cyamok in the Greek
of Judith vii. 3. Guerin (QaVUe, ii. 62) proposes
to identify it with Kh. 'Alia, about 13 miles
aE.of.loVo. [C] [W.]
HALICABNASSUS ( , AA«a>i'ao-o-oj) in
Caria, a city of great renown, as being the
birthplace of Herodotus and of the later his-
torian Dionysius, and as embellished by the
Mausoleum erected by Artemisia, but of no
Biblical interest except as the residence of a
Jewish population in the periods between the
Old and New Testament histories. In 1 Mace.
HAM
1269
» It is not unworthy of notice that, though so far
from Jerusalem, Jerome speaks of It as '■ in the district
of Aelia."
xv. 23, this city is specified as containing such a
population. The decree in Joseph. Ant. xiv. 10,
§ 23, where the Romans direct that the Jews
of Halicarnassus shall be allowed tAi rpoa-
tv%as TottTcrBai irpor tjj daAaWp Kara to
■tr&rptor (80s, is interesting when compared with
Acts xvi. 13. This city was celebrated for its
harbour and for the strength of its fortifications ;
but it never recovered the damage which it suf-
ferred after Alexander's siege in B.C. 334. A
plan of the site is given in Ross, Return auf den
Griech. Jnseln (iv. 30). Many of the sculptures
of the Mausoleum are now in the British Mu-
seum, and are fully described by Sir C. Newton
in Discoveries at Halicarnassus. The modern
name of the place is Budrum. [J. S. H.] [W.]
HALL (abK-fi ; atrium), used of the court of
the high-priest's house (Luke xxii. 55). Ai\ii
is in A. V. Matt. xxvi. 69, Mark xiv. 66, John
xviii. 15, " palace ;" Vulg. atrium ; — xpoavKwv,
Mark xiv. 68, " porch ;" Vulg. ante atrium. In
Matt, xxvii. 27, and Mark xv. 16, aiX.ii is syn.
with Tpatriipioy, which in John xviii. 28 is in
A. V. "judgment-hall." A4A^ is the equiva-
lent for "IVTI, an enclosed or fortified space
(Ges. p. 512), in many places in 0. T., where Vulg.
and A. V. have respectively villa or ticulus,
"village," or atrium, "court," chiefly of the
Tabernacle or Temple. The hall or court of a
house or palace would probably be an enclosed
but uncovered space, impluvium, on a lower
level than the apartments of the lowest floor
which looked into it. The tpoaiXiov was the
vestibule leading to it, called also Matt. xxvi.
71, irwAoV. [House.] [H- W. P.]
HALLO'HESH (&r?bn = the whisperer or
exorcist ; B. 'AAwf) j, A 'AW ; Alohes), one of
the " chief of the people " who sealed the cove-
nant with Nehemiah (Neh. x. 24). The name
is Lochesh, with the definite article prefixed.
That it is the name of a family, and not of an
individual, appears probable from another pas-
sage in which it is given in the A. V. as
HALO'HE8H(BiTI$>n; B. 'HAsid, A 'AA-
A»4r; Alohes). Sballum, son of Hal-lochesh,
was " ruler of the half part of Jerusalem " at
the time of the repair of the wall by Nehemiah
(Neh. iii. 12). According to the Hebrew spell-
ing, the name is identical with Hallohesh (so
R.V.here). [W. A. W.] [F.]
HAM(Dn;Xd>; Cham). 1. The name of
one of the three sons of Noah, always holding the
middle place, when they are mentioned together
and in the list of their descendants in Gen. x.,
where Japheth instead of Shem has the first
place. It is probably derived from DOI1, "to be
warm," and may mean "swarthy " or "sunburnt."
The name of Ham alone of the three brothers
appears in that of a country, Egypt being called
the land of Ham (Ps. cv. 23, cvi. 22; cp. "tents
of Ham," lxxviii. 51). These are poetical
passages, and scarcely warrant onr connecting
the name Ham with the common Egyptian name
of Egypt, Kemi, the "black" land. A more
plausible comparison is with the Egyptian word
Khem, the name of the god of generation, ac-
cording to most Egyptologists, which however
Mr. Renouf reads Ames. This divinity was
Digitized by
Google
1270
HAM
regarded as the parent of the Negroes, the
Nehes-u, the race-name for the blacks, and as
having come from Punt, the Egyptian terrestrial
Paradise, Arabia Felix and the opposite coast of
Ethiopia (Lefeoure, Le Cham et FAdam 4gyp-
tiens : TSBA. ix. 167 sq.). It must, however,
be proved that Khem is the usual name of this
divinity before the comparison can be accepted.
The list of Ham's descendants in Gen. x. is
peculiar in consisting of names of persons or
tribes not in ethnic form, in ethnic names in the
singular and plural, and for its historical inci-
dents. The order is first Cush, giving a list of
tribes occupying a zone from Babylonia to
Ethiopia above Egypt [Cush.] The next in
the list of sons is Mizraim, a name in dual form,
like Ephraim, but apparently not a personal
name, the singular Mazor occurring. The name
is commonly applied to Egypt, and the dual
form held probably to indicate the twofold
division of the country into the valley of Upper
Egypt and the plain of Lower Egypt, or the
Delta. The names of the Hizraite tribes which
follow are all in the plural, and therefore we
may here point D'lvb in the pi. instead of
following the Masoretes in the dual pointing.
Brugsch has discovered in hieroglyphics the
transcription, letter for letter, of Mizraim in
Mazrima, the brother of the Hittite king Khe-
tasar, contemporary with Ramses II. (Qeogr.
Ituchrift. ii. p. 25, No. 77, pL xviii.). This
Hebrew name, if it be so, in the midst of Hittite
names of another stock of language, would be
most noteworthy, and would point to the use -f
Hebrew in Egypt then prevalent, supposing
that the name was there given to the Hittite
prince. It is obvious that if this be an instance
of the use of the dual form Mizraim as a singu-
lar proper name, it would modify what has been
just said on the subject. The names of the
tribes are very hard to identify. It is clear
that their extension is along the North African
coast, and that of Phoenicia, and possibly the
Island of Crete. The first tribe, the Ludim,
have the same name as the Ludim mentioned in
Gen. x. under the name of their eponym, Lud
the son of Shem (v. 22). According to the
principle suggested in art. Cush, that the occur-
rence of the same names in different genealogies
indicates the settlement of the same tracts by
different races, — a principle which seems to be
proved in the case of the settlements in Arabia
in the art. referred to, — the Hamite and Shemite
Ludim would point to a double occupation of
some country by the dark and tawny races.
The Shemite Ludim have generally been identi-
fied with the Lydians, but only on account of
the close similarity of name. In certain passages
of the prophets Lud is mentioned with African
nations as supplying mercenaries to Egypt
(Jer. xlvi. 9 ; cp. Ezek. xxx. 4, 5). No African
nation can be suggested at this time, and it is
most likely that the Ionian and Carian mer-
cenaries of the Saite kings are intended. These
kings were allied with the Lydian sovereigns,
who could have sent them forces drawn from
their Ionian and Carian neighbours and ultimately
subjects. To conclude : it is possible that the
original text read Lubim instead of Ludim, 1
and 2 being similar in the old Hebrew character.
The Anamim have not been identified. [Ana-
mim.] The Lebabim have been supposed to be
HAM
the Lubim or Libyans, the Rebu or Lebu of the
Egyptian records, the elision of the weak gut-
tural being common in Hebrew. If, however,
the Ludim are Lubim, the Lebabim must be a
different tribe. [Lehabim.] The Naphtuhim
are probably to be traced in the Coptic
rtl4><UA.T, It!$£.t£.X, the name of the
city of Marea and the surrounding territory.
[Naphtuhim.] Pathrusim, the ethnic of
Pathros, Pa-to-res, the south land, or Upper
Egypt, is a clear identification. It may be
observed that Mazor in the sing, occurs in
apposition to Pathros, and that thus it would
seem that Mazor and even Mizraim, dual in
form but perhaps not dual in sense, may desig-
nate Lower Egypt. [Pathrusim; Pathbos.1
Casluhim has not been identified. [CASLunni.]
Caphtorim, the ethnic of Caphtor, may be Crete.
The nation corresponds, according to the
Egyptian data, to the Phoenicians. [CAPHTORm ;
Caphtor.] The Philistines are mentioned as
emigrants from the Casluhim, but their nation-
ality seems fixed by their being apparently called
Caphtorim, and stated to have come out of
Caphtor [Caphtob; Philistines]. Phut, the
third in order of the sons of Ham, is in the later
notices a nation conneeted with Egypt on the
side of Africa, for which no likely identification
has yet been proposed. Clearly the people were
closely allied with Egypt in the time of the
Assyrian and Babylonian wars, but more than
this we cannot say. De Rouge' indeed proposed
to identify Phut with the Egyptian Punt, the
name of the country and people of Arabia Felix
and the opposite Ethiopian coast (Kec/wrches tar
les Monuments, Sfc. : Mem. da I'lratitut, xxv. 2,
pp. 228, 229). Cesare de Cara, the latest writer
on the subject, rejects the identification on
philological grounds (Gli HyksCs, p. 170, note 2).
See Phut.
The Canaanites, unlike the rest of the Hamites,
have been completely traced at least to their
settlements in the land of Canaan. Recently,
however, an important discovery has been made.
The phrase " afterward were the families of the
Canaanite spread abroad" (Gen. x. 18), inter-
vening between the list and the statement of th»
limited extent of what we may call the first
Canaanite settlement, is now of striking signifi-
cance. Professor Sayce has restored to history
the lost fact of the great Hittite dominion.
From about B.C. 1400 for seven centuries the
Hittites ruled or controlled Northern Syria and
Asia Minor, being the most formidable rivals of
the Egyptians ; and thus at the same time the
Egyptians, only kept in check by the Hittites on
the east and the Libyans on the west, formed
the central Hamite power, while the Phoenician
merchants were already the carriers of the
commerce of the world.
The race characters of the Hamites are pro-
bably best defined by the Egyptian representa-
tions of themselves, the Punt or Ethiopians of
Arabia Felix and the opposite coast of Africa,
and the Phoenicians, whom they call Kefa.
They are brown, but fairer in the north, with
straight hair and scanty beards. The Libyans
are, in very early monuments of about B.C. 2500,
of the same aspect, but In about B.O. 1400 of a
different type ; white, more muscular, and with
fuller beards. This difference may have been
Digitized by VjOOQIC
HAMAN
due to the colonization of Northern Africa by
Iberians of the south of Europe, or pre-Hellenic
islanders.
The Hamitic languages mainly belong to the
Ethiopian stock, discussed in the Nvbache Oram-
matik of Lepsius. The language of the Asiatic
Cuahites has not been recovered. The Canaan-
ites all spoke Hebrew in Canaan, and the Phoe-
nician is merely a dialect of Hebrew. The
Hittites out of Canaan, however, spoke another
language, not yet classed, but undoubtedly not
Hebrew. It may therefore be doubted whether
Hebrew was not adopted by them in Palestine
from an older population, the extinct races of
Palestine, the Rephaim, &c. ; but this is a very
obscure question.
An enquiry into Hamite civilization would
lead us beyond the limits of an article. If we
exclude the Libyans — who, as already shown, do
not seem in the time at which they play a part
in history, from B.C. 1400 downwards, to have
been pure Hamites — we trace in all the race a
power of administration, and thus of establishing
settled government; in fact the earliest states
seem to have been Hamite. Love of adventure
in war or commerce is marked. Of their reli-
gions we cannot yet generalize. They certainly
played a great part in history, though they fell
before the vigour of the sons of Shem and the
intelligence of those of Japheth. [R. S. P.]
2. (DH, Gen. xiv. 5 ; Sam. DH, Cham.) Ac-
cording to the Hasoretic text, Chedorlaomer and
his allies smote the Zuzim in a place called
Ham. If, as seems likely, the Znzim be the
same as the Zamzummim, Ham must be placed
in what was afterwards the Ammonite territory.
Hence it has been conjectured by Tuch and
Delitzsch [1887], that Ham is but another form
of the name of the chief stronghold of the chil-
dren of .Amnion, Rabbah, now .Am-man. The
LXX. and Tulg., however, throw some doubt
upon the Masoretic reading: the former has,
as the rendering of QiTO DnWrn^l, koI (»m
'urxvpb ifia attrratt; and the latter, et Zuzim
cum eis, which shows that they read DH3 :
but the Has. rendering seems the more likely,
as each clause mentions a nation, and its
capital or stronghold. The place cannot be
identified for certain.
3. In the account of a migration of the
Simeonites to the valley of Gedor, and their de-
stroying the predecessors (see R. V.) of the
pastoral inhabitants, they are said to have been
" of Ham " (DITJp ; iic rm vl&v Xip ; de stirpe
Cham, 1 Ch. iv. 40). This may indicate that a
Hamite tribe was settled here, or, more pre-
cisely, that there was an Egyptian settlement.
Others understand by the term Canaanite no-
mads (see Eeil and Oettli [Strack u. Zdckler's
Kgf. Komm.] in loco). [G.] [F.]
HATtfAN (JOn, meaning uncertain. Cp.
MV. U ; 'ApdV ; Aman), the chief minister or
vizier of king Ahasuerus (Esth. iii. 1). After
the failure of his attempt to cut off all the Jews
in the Persian empire, he was hanged on the
gallows which he had erected for Mordecai. It
is very improbable that he is the same Aman
who is mentioned as the oppressor of Achiacharus
(Tobit xiv. 10 ; see Speaker's Comm. in loco).
The Targum and Josephus (Ant. xi. 6, § 5)
HAMATH
1271
interpret the description of him — the Agagite
— as signifying that he was of Amalekitish
descent ; but the opinion that he was of neces-
sity an enemy to Israel, because called a Mace-
donian by the LXX. in Esth. iv. 24 (cp. iii. 1 ;
Additions to Esther, xii. 6, xvi. 10), and therefore
also hostile to Jewish interests, is not now so uni-
versally accepted as of old (see Speaker's Comm.
on "Additions," Ice 11. cc.y. Prideaux (Con-
nection, anno 453) computes the sum which he
offered to pay into the royal treasury at more
than £2,000,000 sterling. ' [F.j
HA'MATH (TlOn I fortress, cttoaVJ]; 'H/«to,
'HuiS, AlpiS; EmatK) was probably the prin-
cipal city of Upper Syria from the time of the
Exodus until that of the Prophet Amos. It is
situated in the valley of the Orontes, having, to
the north- and south-east, the district of Jebel-
al-A'la, and on the west, the Nusairiyeh Moun-
tains (the Morn Bargylus of the ancients). The
Orontes, which flows through Hamath from
S.E. to N.W., forms a bend in the middle of
the town. To the S.W., above Tripoli, there
is an opening between the Nusairiyeh Moun-
tains and the northern point of the Lebanon
chain — the "entrance of Hamath," as it is
called in Scripture, and the northern border of
the Promised Land (Num. xxxiv. 8; Josh. xiii.
5 ; Ezek. xlvii. 13-21). A similar opening, but
of much greater extent, occurs between the Anti-
Lebanon and the low hills which lie eastward of
Hamath. The valley of the Orontes runs N.E.
and S.W., the city of Horns being situated near
the intersection of the arms of the cross-shaped
depression or valley thus formed. Northward
the pass leads to Hamath, southward towards
Baal-Gad in Coele-Syria, eastward to the great
plain of the Syrian Desert, and westward to
Kat'at-al-Hosn and the Mediterranean. The
whole of the tract around the city seems to have
formed the kingdom of Hamath during the time
of its independence, extending to the south of,
and including, Riblah.
The Hamathites, like the Hittites, were a
Hamitic race, and are included among the
descendants of Canaan (Gen. x. 18). Though
not in any way Semites, they possibly inter-
married with the Semitic nations around.
Being closely akin to the Hittites, whose
neighbours they were, they were naturally
often in alliance with them. The earliest
notices of the city (Num. xiii. 21, xxxiv. 8;
Josh. xiii. 5, &c.) show that it was a well-
known place, but no mention of its power occurs
until the time of David (2 Sam. viii. 10), when
we learn that Toi, king of Hamath, with whom
Hadadezer, king of Zobah, had "had wars,"
sent his son to David to congratulate him upon ,
his victory over that king — an act of homage
not without political significance. Hamath
seems afterwards to have come under the
dominion of Solomon (cp. 1 K. iv. 21-24 with
2 Ch. viii. 4), and its king was, no doubt, one of
the many princes over whom that monarch
ruled, who "brought presents and served
Solomon all the days of his life." The " store-
cities " which Solomon built in Hamath (2 Ch.
viii. 4) were, perhaps, staples for trade, the
importance of the Orontes valley as a line of
traffic being always great. On the death of
| Solomon, and the division of his kingdom,
Digitized by
Google
1272
HAMATH
Hamath seems to hare regained her inde-
pendence. In the Assyrian inscriptions of the
time of Shalmaneser II. (about 860 B.O.) it
appears as an independent power, under its own
king Irhuleni, in alliance with the Hittites,
Damascus (under Addu-idri)*, Ahab of Israel,
and several other states. About the year
810 B.c. Jeroboam the second "recovered Ha-
math " (2 K. liv. 28). He seems to have dis-
mantled the place, and on this account the
prophet Amos (i. 1) couples "Hamath the
great " with Gath, as an instance of desolation
(Amos vi. 2). Tiglath-pileser, about 730 B.C.,
took tribute, among others, from Eni-ilu
QWtf), king °f Hamath ; and Sargon boasts
of having " rooted out (?) the land of Hamath,
and dyed the skin of the foolish (?) Ilu-bi'di
(variant Tau-bi'di) like wool." Judging from
the words of Sennacherib's Rabshakeh or " chief
of the captains " (2 K. xviii. 34, xix. 13, &c),
that king seems also to have captured the
place, but this may be simply a reference to
the exploits of Sargon. From this time, how-
ever, it seems to have ceased to be a place of
much importance. Antiochus Epiphanes changed
its name to Epiphaneia, under which it was
known to the Greeks and Romans from his time
to that of St. Jerome (Comment, in Ezek. xlvii.
16), and possibly later. The natives, however,
still called it Hamath; and its present name,
Hamak, is but very slightly altered from the
ancient form. In 639 A.D. the city surrendered
without resistance to the Moslems. Abulfedd,
the eminent Arab scholar, a descendant of the
family of Saladin, was appointed governor of the
district in 1310, and with his death in 1331
Hamah's prosperity declined.
Burckhardt visited Hamah in 1812. He
describes it as situated on both sides of the
Orontes, partly on a slope of a hill, partly on
the plain, and as divided into four quarters, —
Hadher, El Djisr, El Aleyat, and El Medine,
the last being the quarter of the Christians.
The city contained 4,446 houses, and the number
of male inhabitants was nearly 11,000. The
place has but few attractions. A number of
catacombs are said to exist on the right bank,
at some height above the river, and Burckhardt
mentions the so-called " Hamqh-stones " (now
regarded as "Hittite") which have since at-
tracted the attention of scholars, but resisted
ail attempts at decipherment. These stones
are of black, close-grained basalt, and contain
live inscriptions, one evidently imperfect. The
town is dirty, the streets badly paved, and
most of the houses are built of mud. It is
remarkable for its water-wheels, some of which
are of huge dimensions, and are used for raising
the water of the Orontes to supply the houses
and gardens in the upper part of the town.
Though the town is unhealthy, the neighbour-
hood is very fruitful, and the commerce of the
place is still of some importance (Burckhardt,
Travels in Syria, pp. 146, 147 ; Pococke, Travels
in the East, vol. i. ; Irby and Mangles, Travels,
p. 244 ; Stanley, S. $ P. pp. 406. 407 ; Murray's
Handbook of Syria, pp. 538, 583.)
[G. R.] [T.G. P.]
• Identified with Ben-Hadsd, whose full name was
possibly Ben-Hadad-taidr'
HAMMEDATHA
HATHATH-ZO'BAH (n^VnOTI; B«u-
o-oj/M; [A. hipae 2«/3d;] 'Emath-Suba) is
spoken of as having been attacked and con-
quered by Solomon (2 Ch. viii. 3). Many
scholars regard it as the same as Hamath,
looking upon it as being included in Aram-
Zobah — a geographical expression which has
usually a narrower meaning. It is possible,
however, that Hamath-Zobah was another Ha-
math, so named to distinguish it from " Great
Hamath," like Ramoth-Wi'iW, which is dis-
tinguished by the addition of Gilead from Ram ah
in Benjamin. It has also been conjectured that,
at the time of Solomon's attack, Hamath and
Zobah were united under the same king ; hence
the joining of the two names.
[G. R.] (T. G. P.]
HAMA'THITE, THE Ononn ; i 'April;
Amathaeus, Hamathaeus), one of the families de-
scended from Canaan, named last in the list (Gen.
x. 18 ; 1 Ch. i. 16, B. om.). The place of their
settlement was doubtless Hamath.
HAMITAL, 2 K. xxiii. 31, the reading of
A. V. [1611] for Hamd'tal.
HAM'MATH (JWI =_worm *prmg;_B.
'nuadaSaicie — the last two syllables a corrup-
tion of the name following — A. 'A/xdS ; Emath),
one of the fortified cities in the territory allotted
to Naphtali (Josh. xix. 35). It is not possible
from this list to determine its position, but the
notices of the Talmudists, collected by Lightfoot
in his Chorographical Century and Chor. Decad,
leave no doubt that it was near Tiberias, one
mile distant (Tal. Bab. Megilla, 26) —in fact that
it had its name, Chammath, "hot baths," be-
cause it contained those of Tiberias. In accord-
ance with this are the slight notices of Josephua,
who mentions it under the name of Emmaus as
a "village not far («»^ . . . oft* &imB*v) from
Tiberias " (Ant. iviii. 2, § 3), and as where Ves-
pasian had encamped "before (*po) Tiberias"
(x>. J. iv. 1, § 3). In both cases Josephus names
the hot springs or baths, adding in the latter,
that such is the interpretation of the name
'Afi/iaoSs, and that the waters are medicinal.
The Hammdm still send up their hot and sul-
phureous waters, at a spot rather more than a mile
south of the modern town, at the extremity of
the ruins of the ancient city. The waters of the
several springs have a temperature of from
142°-2 to 132°-2 Fahr., and are much used by
the Jews of Tiberias for rheumatism (Rob. ii.
383-4; Van de Velde, ii, 399; Wilson, Secovy.
of Jcrusm. p. 362). These springs are sometimes
confused with the hot springs of Gadara, which
were situated at Hamtha in the valley of the
1 armuk, a sabbath day's journey from the town.
[Gadara.] The traveller Parchi mentions a
place called El-Hami, which he rightly identified
with Hamtha (Zunz's Appendix to Benjamin of
Tudela, ii. 403).
In the list of Levitical cities given out of
Naphtali (Josh. xxi. 32) the name of this place
seems to be Hammoth-dor, and in 1 Ch. vi. 76
it is further altered to Hammon. [G.] [W.j
HAMMED A'TH A (NJlTlpP! ; B.'A/«aM»or ;
A. 'KvafurtiXot, 'AjujtfdoVw [".24] ; Amadathus),
father of the infamous Hainan, and commonly de-
Digitized by
Google
HAMMELECH
tignated as the " Agagite " (Esth. iii. 1, 10, viii.
5, ix. 24), though also without that title (ix. 10).
By Gesenius(Zix. 1855, p. 539 ; MV." s. n.)the
name is taken to be Medatha (WaSdras), pre-
ceded by the definite article. For other expla-
nations, see Ffirst, HWB., and Simonis, Ono-
norftcort, p. 586. The latter derives it from a
Persian word meaning "doable." For the
termination, compare Abidatha. [G.] [F.]
HAMMETECH Ol^©n = tte king; rov
BaaiXias ; Amelech), rendered in the A. V. as a
proper name (Jer. xxxri. 26, xxxviii. 6) ; but
there is do apparent reason for supposing it to
be anything but the ordinary Hebrew word for
" the king," i.e. in the first case Jehoiakim, and
h> the latter Zedckiah. If this be so, it enables
as to connect with the royal family of Judah
two persons, Jerachmeel and Malciah, who do
not appear in the A. V. as members thereof.
K- V. reads " the king's son " in the text, and
the son of H. in marg. [G.] [W.]
HAMMER. The Hebrew language has seve-
ral names for this indispensable tool. (1) Pat-
tish (BT3B, connected etymologically with wo-
•riarm, to strike), which was used by the gold-
beater (Is. xli. 7, A. V. and R V. "carpenter ")
to overlay with silver and "smooth " the surface
of the image ; as well as by the quarry-man
(Jer. xxiii. 29). (2) Maqqabah (n3j3D. Cp. the
name Maccabee), properly a tool for hollowing,
hence a stonecutter's mallet (1 K. vi. 7), and
generally any workman's hammer (Judg. iv. 21 ;
la. xliv. 12 ; Jer. x. 4). (3) Balmith (TMD^fl),
used only in Judg. v. 26, and then with' the
addition of the word "workmen's" by way
of explanation. It was probably of wood,
and "the hammer" kept for driving in tent-
pegs (see Bertheau* on iv. 21). (4) A kind
of hammer, named mappit (yBD), Jer. li. 20
(A V. " battle-axe," R. V. marg. Or, maul), or
aiphit (VBD), Prov. xxv. 18 (A. V. and K. V.
" maul '*), was used as a weapon of war.
" Hammer " is used figuratively for any over-
whelming power, whether worldly (Jer. 1. 23)
or spiritual (Jer. xxiii. 29). [W. L. B.]
HAMMOLE'KETH, R. V. HAMMOLE-
CHETH (na^fen, with the article, = the
Queen [cp. Ham-melech] ; 4 MaAex^S ; Regina),
a woman introduced into the genealogies of
Manasseh as daughter of Machir and sister of
Gilead (1 Ch. vii. 17, 18), and as having among
her children Abi-ezeb, from whose family sprang
the great judge Gideon. The Targum translates
the name by rOTO H = who reigned. The
Jewish tradition, as preserved by Kimchi in his
commentary on the passage, is that " she used
to reign over a portion of the land which be-
longed to Gilead, and that for that reason her
lineage has been preserved. [G.] [F.]
HAM'MON (f\m~hot or sunny; B. '£/•«-
pmtw, A 'K\ukr ; Hamon, Ammon). 1. A city in
Asher (Josh. xix. 28), apparently not far from
Zidon-rabbah, or " Great Zidon." Guerin (Oalile'e,
ii. 141) proposes to identify it with Kh. Umm.
il-'Amad, near the coast, about 1 1 miles S. of Tyre,
HAMOB
1273
on the grounds that H. Renan found on the spot
a Phoenician inscription, dedicated to " the God
Hammon," and that the name may be traced
in W. Hamul and 'Aim Hamul close by. Dr.
Schultz hod previously suggested its identifica-
tion with 'Ain Hamul (Rob. iii. 66), but this is
doubtful both in etymology and position. There
is a similar objection to Major Conder's suggcs
Hon (Hbk. to Bib. p. 413) that it was at Kh. el-
Mima, to the E. of Kh. Umm el-'Amud. Knobel
(». v.) identifies it with Ilammana, in W. Ham-
mdna, £. of Beirut, but this is too far north for
a town in Asher.
2. B. Xapuie; A. Xap.dy. A city allotted
out of the tribe of Naphtali to the Levites
(1 Ch. vi. 76), and answering to the somewhat
similar names Hammath and Hammoth-dob
in Joshua. [G.] [W.]
HAM'MOTH-DOE (T»ft Tlbri = vcarm
springs of Dor ; Ne/ijirfS, A. 'E/iaB&dp ; Ammoth
Dor), a city of Naphtali, allotted with its suburbs
to the Gershonite Levites, and for a city of refuge
(Josh. xxi. 32). Unless there were two places of
the same or very similar name in Naphtali, this
is identical with Hammath (see Dillmann * on
Josh. xix. 35). Why the suffix Dor is added it is
hard to tell, unless the word refers in some way
to the situation of the place on the coast, in
which fact only had it (as far as we know) any
resemblance to Dor, on the shore of the Medi-
terranean. In 1 Ch. vi. 76 the came is con-
tracted to Hammo.v. [G.] [W.]
HAMCN AH (rWDn ; noKiavfpiov ; Amona),
the prophetic name of a city mentioned in a
highly obscure passage of Ezekiel (xxxix. 16);
apparently that of the place in or near which
the multitudes of Gog should be buried after
their great slaughter by God; hence its name
—"multitude." [G.] [W.]
HAMO'N-GOG, THE VALLEY OP (K'jt
l\i port = the ravine of Oog's multitude; Tol
to woXvirtptop rou T&y ; vallis multitudinis
Qog), the name to be bestowed on a ravine or
glen, previously known as "the ravine of the
passengers on the east of the sea," after the
burial there of " Gog and all his multitude "
(Ezek. xxxix. 11, 15).
HAMOTR (lion, i.o. in Heb. a large he-ass,
the figure employed by Jacob for Issachar;
'Efipu&p ; Hemor), a Hivite (or according to the
LXX. of Gen. xxxiv. 2, 6 Xoppaios, a Horite),
who at the time of the entrance of Jacob on
Palestine was prince (Nasi) of the land and city
of Shechem, and father of the impetuous young
man of the latter name whose ill-treatment of
Dinah brought destruction on himself, his father,
and the whole of their citv (Gen. xxxiii. 19;
xxxiv. 2, 4, 6, 8, 13, 18, 20, 24, 26). Hamor
would seem to have been a person of great
influence, because, though alive at the time,
the men of his tribe are called after him Bene-
Hamor, and he himself, in records narrating
events long subsequent to this, is styled Hamor-
Abi-Shechem (Josh. xxiv. 32 ; • Judg. ix. 28 ; Acts
• The LXX. have here read the word without its
Initial guttural, and rendered It vapa tup 'A^ioppaiwv,
" from the Amorltes."
Digitized by
Google
1274
HAMUEL
vii. 16). In the second of these passages his
name is used as a signal of revolt, when the
remnant of the ancient Hivites attempted to
rise against Abimelech son of Gideon. [She-
chem.J For the title Abi-Shechem, "father of
Shechem," cp. " father of Bethlehem," " father
of Tekoah," and others in the early lists of 1 Ch.
ii. iv. In Acts vii. 16 the name is given in the
Greek form of Emmor, and Abraham is said to
have bought his sepulchre from the " sons of
Emmor." [G.]
HAMU-EL (^WBn, i.«. Hammtt'el [of un-
certain etymology]; B. om, A. 'AfioirfiK ; Amuel),
a man of Simeon ; son of Mishma, of the family
of Shanl (1 Ch. ir. 26, ed. Baer), from whom,
if we follow the records of this passage, it
would seem that the whole tribe of Simeon
located in Palestine were derived.
HA'MUIi fan = spared; Sam. talDII;
'Upoviik ; Amu/), the younger son of Pharez,
Judah's son by Tamar (Gen. xlvi. 12 ; 1 Ch. ii.
5). Hamul was head of the family of the
Hamulites (Num. xxvi. 21 ; LXX. t>. 17 ; B.
'lafioiv, AP. 'Ioutoi/^A), but none of the genea-
logy of his descendants is preserved in the
lists of 1 Chronicles, though those of the
descendants of Zerah are fully given.
HAMULITES, THE O^DPin ; B. 'la/towl,
A. 'lafwvrjXl, F. 'Uft-; Amulitae), the family
(iinBt?3) of the preceding (Num. xxvi. 21).
HAMU'TAL (felDn ; AmitaT), daughter of
Jeremia of Libnah ; one of the wives of king
Josiah, and mother of the unfortunate princes
Jehoahaz (2 K. xxiii. 31, B. 'Aptirai, A. 'Api-
raA) and Mattaniah or Zedekiah (2 K. xxiv.
18, B. Mn-dr, A. 'Afurie ; Jer. Hi. 1, B. 'A/ttt-
TadA, MA. 'A/u-). In the last two passages the
name is given in the original text as 73'On,
Chamital.
HANAM-EEL (^WMIl; , Ara f u^\; JTana-
meel ; R. V. Hanamel), ' son of Shallum, and
cousin of Jeremiah. When Judaea was occu-
pied by the Chaldaeans, Jerusalem beleaguered
and Jeremiah in prison, the Prophet (as ?K3),
having the right of redemption, bought a
Held of Hanameel in token of his assurance
that a time was to come when land should be
once more a secure possession (Jer. xxxii. 7, 8,
9, 12; and cp. t>. 44). The suburban fields
belonging to the tribe of Levi could not be sold
(Lev. xxv. 34); but commentators see in
Hanameel's invitation to Jeremiah that he
should purchase the field a desire that a Leviti-
cal and priestly possession should not pass into
non-priestly hands. The restriction imposed by
the Law was less strictly observed as time went
on. Cp. the case of Barnabas, a Levite (see
Speaker's Comm., note on Acts iv. 37). [F.]
HA'NAN (}3PI = gracious; 'Aydy; Hanan).
1. One of the chief people of the tribe of Ben-
jamin (1 Ch. viii. 23).
2. The last of the six sons of Azel, a de-
scendant of Saul (1 Ch. viii. 38, ix. 44).
3. " Son of Maachah," i.e. possibly a Syrian
of Aram-Maacah, one of the heroes of David's
HANAN1
guard, according to the extended list of 1 Ch.
xi. 43.
4. Bene-Chanan were among the Nethinim
who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel
(Ezra ii. 46 ; Neh. vii. 49). In the parallel list,
1 Esd. v. 30, the name is given as As as.
6, (LXX. omits.) One of the Levites who-
assisted Ezra in his pnblic exposition of the Law
(Neh. viii. 7). The same person is probably
mentioned in x. 10 (B. om. ; &***)A. 'A*i»\ as
sealing the covenant, since several of the same
names occur in both passages.
6. One of the "heads" of the " people ; " that
is, of the laymen, who also sealed the covenant
7. (Aluir; see Svete in loco.) Another of
the chief laymen on the same occasion (x. 26).
8. Son of Zaccur, son of Mattaniah, whom
Nehemiah made one of the storekeepers of the
provisions collected as tithes (Neh. xiii. 13).
He was probably a layman, in which case the
four storekeepers represented the four chief
classes of the people — priests, scribes, Levites,
and laymen.
9. Son of Igdaliah, " the man of God " (Jer.
xxxv. 4). The sons of Hanan had a chamber in
the Temple. The LXX. B. gives the name twice
— 'Ivvar vlov 'Aravtov: K. reads 'Amav vlou
•Amwlov. [G.] [F.]
HANA'NE-EL (B. V. HANANELX THE
TOWER OF (^KMn^WO; B. ripyot 'Ara-
k«^X, A. -/»-, X. (iii. 1) Nac^X ; turns Hana-
neel), a tower which formed part of the wall
of Jerusalem (Neh. iii. 1, xii. 39). From
these two passages, particularly from the for-
mer, it might almost be inferred that Hananeel
was but another name for the Tower of Heah
<nNEn=" the hundred ; " R. V. Hammeah) : at
any rate they were close together, and stood
between the sheep-gate and the fish-gate. This
tower is further mentioned in Jer. xxxi. 38, as
one of the limits of the restored Jerusalem, which
the Prophet is announcing shall be " rebuilt to
Jehovah," and " not be thrown down any more
for ever." The remaining passage in which it
is named (Zech. xiv. 10) also connects this tower
with the "corner gate." In the Targum of
Jonathan it is called Pekfa or Piikus. [Jeru-
salem.] [G.] [F.j
HANA'NI O^n, possibly contracted from
n'MH: B. omits from v. 4, and reads 'Avavias
in o. 25 ; A. in both cases, 'Arari : Hanani).
1. One of the sons of Heman, David's Seer, who
were separated for song in the house of the
Lord, and head of the eighteenth course of the
service (1 Ch. xxv. 4, 25).
2. B. 'Avaptt, A. 'Avart. A Seer who re-
buked Asa, king of Judah, for his want of faith
in God, which he had shown by buying off the
hostility of Benhadad I., king of Syria (2 Ch.
xvi. 7). For this he was imprisoned by Asa
(v. 10). He (or another Hanani) was the father
of Jehu the Seer, who testified against Baasha
(1 K. xvi. 1, 7) and Jehoshaphat (2 Ch. xix. 2,
xx. 34).
8. One of the priests who in the time of Etra
were connected with strange wives (Ezra x. 20).
In Esdras the name is Ananias.
4. A brother of Nehemiah, who returned
Digitized by
Google
HANANiAH
B.C. 446 from Jerusalem to Suss (Neh. i. 2) ;
and was afterwards made governor of Jerusalem
under Nehemiab (vii. 2).
5. A priest mentioned in Neh. xii. 36 (B.
omits ; A. 'ArwQ. [W. T. B.] [F.]
HANANI'AH (rp»n and VTOjn = ToA is
gracious; B. [usually] 'Aravlas; Ananias and
llanaraas. In N. T. 'Avarlas; Ananias).
1. One of the fourteen sons of Heman the
singer, and chief of the sixteenth out of the
twenty-four courses or wards into which the
288 musicians of the Levites were divided by
king David. The sons of Heman were especially
employed to blow the horns (1 Ch. xxv. 4, 5, 23).
8. One of the chief captains of the army of
king Uzxiah (2 Ch. xxvi. 11).
3. Father of Zedekiah, one of the princes in
the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah (Jer.
xxxvi. 12).
4. Son of Azur, a Benjamite of Gibeon and a
false prophet in the time of Zedekiah king of
Judah. In the fourth year of his reign Haua-
niah withstood Jeremiah the Prophet, and pub-
licly prophesied in the Temple that within two
years Jeooniah and all his fellow-captives, with
the vessels of the Lord's House which Nebuchad-
nezzar had taken away to Babylon, should be
brought back to Jerusalem (Jer. xxviii.): an
indication that treacherous negotintions were
already secretly opened with Pharaoh-Hophra
[Egypt, p. 888, col. 1], and that strong hopes
were entertained of the destruction of the
Babylonian power by him. The preceding
chapter (xxvii. 3) shows farther that a
league was already in progress between Judah
and the neighbouring nations of Edom, Am-
nion, Moab, Tyre and Sidon, for the purpose
of organising resistance to Nebuchadnezzar,
in combination no doubt with the projected
movements of Pharaoh - Hophra. Hananiah
corroborated his prophecy by taking from
off the neck of Jeremiah the yoke which he
wore by Divine command (Jer. xxvii., in token
of the subjection of Judaea and the neighbour-
ing countries to the Babylonian empire), and
breaking it, added, " Thus saith Jehovah, Even
so will I break the yoke of Nebuchadnezzar
king of Babylon from the neck of all nations
within the space of two full years." But Jere-
miah was bidden to go and tell Hananiah that
for the wooden yokes which he had broken he
should make yokes of iron, so firm was the
dominion of Babylon destined to be for seventy
years. The Prophet Jeremiah added this rebuke
and prediction of Hananiah's death, the fulfil-
ment of which closes the history of this false
prophet : " Hear now, Hananiah ; Jehovah hath
not sent thee; but thon makest this people to
trust in a lie. Therefore thus saith Jehovah,
Beheld I will send thee away from off the face
of the earth : this year thon shalt die, because
thou hast taught rebellion against Jehovah. So
Hananiah the prophet died the same year, in
the seventh month " (Jer. xxviii. 15, 16, R. V.).
The above history of Hananiah is of great
interest, as throwing much light upon the
Jewish politics of that eventful time, divided as
parties were into the partisans of Babylon on the
one hand, and of Egypt on the other. It also
exhibits the machinery of false prophecies, by
which the irreligious party sought to promote
HANANIAH
1275
their own policy, in a very distinct form. At
the same time that it explains in general the
sort of political calculation on which such false
prophecies were hazarded, it supplies an impor-
tant clue in particular by which to judge of the
date of Pharaoh-Hophra's (or A pries') accession
to the Egyptian throne, and the commencement
of his ineffectual effort to restore the power of
Egypt (which had been prostrate since Necho's
overthrow, Jer. xlvi. 2) upon the ruins of the
Babylonian empire. The leaning to Egypt,
indicated by Hananiah's prophecy as having
begun in the fourth of Zedekiah, had in the
sixth of bis reign issued in open defection from
Nebuchadnezzar, and in the guilt of perjury,
which cost Zedekiah his crown and his life (Ezek.
xvii. 12-20 ; the date being fixed by a compari-
son of Ezek. viii. 1 with xx. 1). The temporary
success of the intrigue which is described in
Jer. xxxvii. was speedily followed by the return
of the Chaldaeans and the destruction of the
city, according to the prediction of Jeremiah.
This history of Hananiah also illustrates the
manner in which the false prophets hindered
the mission, and obstructed the beneficent effects
of the ministry, of the true Prophets ; and it
affords a remarkable example of the way in
which they prophesied smooth things, and said
peace when there was no peace (cp. 1 K. xxii.
11,24,25).
6. Grandfather of Irijah, the captain of the
ward at the gate of Benjamin who arrested
Jeremiah on a charge of deserting to the Chal-
daeans (Jer. xxxvii. 13).
6. Head of a Benjamite house (1 Ch. viii.
24).
7. The Hebrew name of Shadrach. [Shad-
BACB.] He was of the house of David, accord-
ing to Jewish tradition (Dan. i. 3, 6, 7, 11, 19 ;
ii. 17). [Ananias.]
& Son of Zerubbabel (1 Ch. iii. 19), from
whom Christ derived His descent. He is the
same person who is by St. Luke called 'Utayyas,
Joanna, and who, when Rhesa is discarded, ap-
pears there also as Zerubbabel's son. [Genea-
Loar of Christ.] The identity of the two
names Hananiah and Joanna is apparent im-
mediately we compare them in Hebrew. This
identification is of great importance, as bringing
St. Luke's genealogy into harmony with the
Old Testament. Nothing more is known of
this Hananiah.
9. The two names Hananiah and Jehohanan
stand side by side (Ezra x. 28) as sons of Bebai,
who returned with Ezra from Babylon.
10. A priest, one of the "apothecaries" or
makers of the sacred ointments and incense
(Ex. xxx. 22-38 ; 1 Ch. ix. 30), who built a
portion of the wall of Jerusalem in the days of
Nehemiah (Neh. iii. 8). He may be the same as
the man mentioned in v. 30 as having repaired
another portion. If so, he was the son of
Shelemiah ; perhaps the same as is mentioned in
xii. 41.
11. Head of the priestly course of Jeremiah
in the days of Joiakim the high-priest (Neh. xii.
12).
12. Ruler of the place (HTSn ~W; R. V.
" governor of the castle ") at Jerusalem under
Nehemiah. He is described as " a faithful man,
and one who feared God above many." His office
seems to have been one of authority and trust,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
1276
HANDICRAFT
and was perhaps the same as that of Eliakim,
who was "over the house" in the reign of
Hezekiah. [Eliakim.] The arrangements for
guarding the gates of Jerusalem were entrusted to
him with Hanani, the
Tirshatha's brother.
The opinion that the
appointment of Hanani
and Hananiah indicates
that at this time Ne-
hemiah returned to
Persia, has no sufficient
ground (see Hunter,
After the Exile, ii.
172). Nehemiah seems
to have been continu-
ously at Jerusalem for
some time after the
completion of the wall
(vii. 5, 65 ; viii. 9 ;
x. 1). If, too, the term
flTSfl means, as tte-
senius supposes, and as
the nse of it in Neh.
ii. 8 makes not impro-
bable, not the palace,
but the fortress (see
R. V.) of the Temple,
called by Josephus
fidpis, there is still less
reason to imagine Ne-
hemiah's absence. In
this case Hananiah
would be a priest,
perhaps of the same
family as the pre-
ceding.
18. An Israelite
(Neh. x. 23; Heb.
v. 24). [Ananias.]
Other Hananiahs
will be found under
Ananias. [AC. H.]
HANDICRAFT
{r4xni, ipyaala; ar$,
artificium ; Acts xviii.
3, xix. 25 ; Rev. xviii.
22). Although the
extent cannot be ascer-
tained to which those
arts whose invention
is ascribed to Tubal-
Cain were carried on,
it is probable that
this was proportionate
respectively to the no-
madic or settled habits
of the antediluvian
races. Among nomad
races, as the Bedouin
Arabs, or the tribes of
Northern and Central
Asia and of America,
the wants of life, as
well as the arts which
supply them, are few ;
and it is only among
the city-dwellers that both of them are mul-
tiplied and make progress. This subject cannot,
-of course, be followed out here : in the present
article brief notices can only be given of
HANDICRAFT
such handicraft trades as are mentioned in
Scripture.
1. The preparation of iron for use either in
war, in agriculture, or for domestic purposes,
was donbtless one of the earliest applications of
labour; and, together with iron, working in
brass, or rather copper alloyed with tin, bronze
(rii?rU, Gesen. p. 875), U mentioned in the
Digitized by
Google
HANDICRAFT
same passage as practised in antediluvian times
(Gen. iv. 22). The use of this last is usually
considered as an art of higher antiquity even
than that of iron (Hesiod, Works $ bays, 150 ;
Wilkinson, Arte. Egypt, ii. p. 152 [1878]), and
there can be no doubt that metal, whether iron
or bronze, must have been largely used, either
in material or in took, for the construction of
the ark (Gen. vi. 14, 16). Whether the weapons
for war or chase used by the early warriors of
Syria and Assyria, or the arrow-heads of the
archer Ishmael, were of bronze or iron cannot be
ascertained; but we know that iron was used
for warlike purposes by the Assyrians (Layard,
Aim. & Bab. p- 19*)> a >'d on * ne other hand that
stone-tipped arrows, as was the case also in
Mexico, were used in the earlier times by the
Egyptians as well the Persians and Greeks,
and that stone or flint knives continued to be
used by them, and by the inhabitants of the
dese a, and also by the Jews, for religious pur-
pose after the introduction of iron into general
use (Wilkinson, Anc. Eg. i. 353, 354, u. 163 ;
Prescott. Mexico, i. 118; Ex. iv. 25; Josh. y.
2 ; 1st Egypt. Room, Brit. Mus. case 36, 37).
In the construction of the Tabernacle, copper,
but no iron, appears to have
been used, though the use of
iron - -^ i' tin 1 same period
well known to the Jews, both
from their owe use of it and
from their Egyptian education,
whil I the Canaanit" inhabit-
ants of Palestine aod Syria
wen in fall possession of its
use both for warlike and do-
mestic purposes (Ex. xx. 25,
xxr. 3, xxvii. 19 ; Num. xxxv.
16 ; Deut. iii. 11, iv. 20, viii. 9 ;
Josh. viii. 31, xvii. 16, 18).
After the establishment of the
Jews in Canaan, the occupation
of a smith (CHII) became re-
cognised as a distinct employ-
ment (1 Sam. xiii. 19). The
designer of a higher order, such
as Bezaleel, Aholiab, and others,
appears to have been called
specially 3BTI (Gesen. p. 531 ;
Ex. xxxv. 30, 35, xxxvi. 1, 2;
2 Ch. xxvi. 15 ; Saalschiitz,
Arch. Hebr. c. 14, § 16). The
smith's work and its results
are often mentioned in Scrip-
ture (2 Sam. xii. 31 ; 1 K. vi.
7 ; 2 Ch. xxvi. 14 ; Is. xliv. 12,
liv. 16). Among the captives
taken to Babylon by Nebu-
chadnezzar were 1000 "crafts-
men " and smiths, who were
probably of the superior kind
(2 K. xiiv. 16 ; Jer. xxix. 2).
The worker in gold and silver
ppl ¥ ; bpyvpoiciros, x< avlvT M* \
argentornu, aurifex) must have
bund employment both among
the Hebrews and -the neigh-
bouring nations in very early
times, as appears from the ornaments sent
by Abraham to Rebekah (Gen. xxiv. 22, 53,
hit. 4, xxxviii. 18 ; Deut. vii. 25). But, what-
HANDICBAFT
1277
ever skill the Hebrews possessed, it is quite clear
that they must have learned much from Egypt
ErrpUan Blowpipe, and mull fireplace with checks to confine and
redact tho heat. (Wilkinson.)
and its " iron-furnaces," both in metal-work and
in the arts of setting and polishing precious
stones ; arts which were turned to account both
in the construction of the Tabernacle and the
making of the priests' ornaments, and also in the
casting of the golden calf as well as its de-
struction by Moses, probably, as suggested by
Goguet, by a method which he had learnt in
Egypt (Gen. xli. 42; Ex. iii. 22, xii. 35, xxxi.
Tools of an Egyptian Carpenter. (Wilkinson.)
Figs. 1. 1. S, 4. Child! and drills.
8. Fart of drill.
6. Hut of wood belonging to drill.
7. «. Saws.
Fig. 9. Horn of oil.
10. Mallet.
11. Basket of nails.
12. Basket which held them.
4, 5, xxxii. 2, 4, 20, 24, xxxvii. 17, 24, xxxviii.
4, 8, 24, 25, xxxix. 6, 39; Neh. iii. 8; Is. xliv.
12). Various processes of the goldsmiths' work
Digitized by
Google
1278
HANDICRAFT
are illustrated by Egyptian monuments (Wilkin-
son, Anc. Eg. ii. 136, 152, 162 [1878]).
After the conquest frequent notices are found
both of moulded and wrought metal, including
HANDICBAPT
soldering, which last had long 6een known in
Egypt; but the Phoenicians appear to have pos-
sessed greater skill than the Jews in these arts,
at least in Solomon's time (Jndg. yiii. 24, 27,
xrii.4; 1 K.rii. 13, 45,46; Is. xli. 7; Wisd.
it. 4; Ecclus. xnviii. 28; Bar. vi. 50, 55, 57 ;
Wilkinson, ii. p. 162). [Zabephath.] Even
in the desert, mention is made of beating gold
into plates, cutting it into wire, and also of
setting precious stones in gold (Ex. xxxix. 3,
6, &c. ; Beckmann, Hist, of Inv. ii 414 ; Gesen.
p. 1229).
Among the tools of the smith are mentioned
—tongs (D^ni>?p, Aoj8(t, forcept, Gesen. p. 761,
Digitized by
Google
r drilling a hole in the mt
m, man
HANDICRAFT
k ri. 6), hammer (E*t2B, o-o>i>fj<£, moWmw,
Gesen. p. 1101), anvil (DBS, Gesen. p. 1118),
bellows (TIBD, ipvairrfip, tsufflatorium, Gesen.
p. 896 ; Is. xli. 7 ; Jer. vi. 29 ; Ecclus. xxxviii.
28; Wilkinson, ii. 316 [1878]).
In the N. T. Alexander " the coppersmith "
(i xaAacvi) of Ephesus is mentioned, where
ilto was carried on that trade in "silver
shrines" («wl kpyvpoT) which was represented
by Demetrius the silversmith (ipyupoitoVos) as
being in danger from
the spread of Chris-
tianity (Acts xix. 24,
28; 2 Tim. it. 14).
2. The work . of
the carpenter (£On
O'XD, Wvrssr, artifex
lignarnu) is often men-
tioned in Scripture
(e.j. Gen. vi. 14 ; Ex.
iixvfi.; Is. xliv. 13).
In the palace built
by David for himself,
the workmen em-
ployed were chiefly
Phoenicians sent by
Hiram (2 Sam. v. 11;
1 Ch. xiv. 1), as most
probably were those,
-or at least the prin-
cipal of those, who
were employed by
Solomon in his works
(1 K. v. 6). But in
the repairs of the
Temple, executed un-
der Joash king of
Judah, and also in
the rebuilding under
Zernbbabel, no men-
tion is made of foreign
workmen, though in
the latter case .the
timber is expressly
aid to have been
brought by sea to
Joppa by Sidonians
(2 K. xii. 11 ; 2 Ch.
MJT. 12 ; Ezra iii. 7).
That the Jewish car-
penters must have
been able to carve
with some skill is
evident from Is. xli. 7,
iliv. 13, in which last
passage some of the
implements used in
the trade are men-
tioned : — the rule
OX', VeVpov, norma, possibly a chalk pencil,
Gesen. p. 1337), measuring-line (lp, Gesen.
n. 1201), compass (TWITD, vapaypatyis, oircinra,
Gesen. p. 450), plane, or smoothing instrument
(riSlXiJD, itiWa, ruacma, Gesen. pp. 1228,
1336V axe Q\~)b Gesen - P- 302 » or °^1P'
Gesen. p. 1236, &£(«?, securii).
The process of the work, and the tools used
by Egyptian carpenters, and also coopers and
wheelwrights, are displayed in Egyptian monu-
HANDICBAFT
1279
I ments and relics; the former, including dove-
1 tailing, veneering, drilling, glueing, varnishing,
' and inlaying, may be seen in Wilkinson, Arte.
• Eg. ii. 111-119. Of the latter many specimens,
including saws, hatchets, knives, awls, nails, a
hone, and a drill, also turned objects in bone,
exist in the British Museum, 1st Egyp. Room,
case 42-43, Nos. 6046-6188. See also Wilkin-
son, ii. p. 113, fig. 395.
In the N. T. the occupation of a carpenter
(rimwv) is mentioned in connexion with Joseph
Carpenters. (WUUnaon.)
of a chair, «. I I, legs of chair, mm,
planing or polishing the leg of a chair.
adzes. «. a niuaro.
Parti.
(Wilkinson.)
1 levelling, and Parti squaring, a stone.
the husband of the Virgin Mary, and ascribed to
our Lord Himself by way of reproach (Mark
vi. 3; Matt. iiii. 55; and Just Mart. Dial.
Tryph. c. 88).
3. The masons (D'TlS, wall-builders, Gesen.
p. 269) employed by 'David and Solomon, at
least the chief of them, were Phoenicians, as is
implied also in the word Dv?J, » en of Gebal,
Jebail, Byblus (Gesen. p. 258; 1 K. v. 18;
Ezek. xxvii. 9; Burckhardt, Syria, p. 179).
Digitized by
Google
1280
HANDICRAFT
Among their implements axe mentioned the saw
(mjp, 'play), the plumb-line 0)JM, Gesen.
p. 125), the measuring-reed (TUp, ' Ki\a/tos,
calamus, Gesen. p. 1221). Some of these, and
also the chisel and mallet, are represented on
Egyptian monuments (Wilkinson, Anc, Eg. ii.
313, 314), or preserved in the Brit. Mus.
(1st Egyp. Boom, Nos. 6114, 6038). The large
stones used in Solomon's Temple are said by
Josephus to have been fitted together exactly
without either mortar or cramps, but the found-
ation stones to have been fastened with lead
(Joseph. Ant. viii. 3, §2; xv. 11, § 3). For
ordinary building, mortar, i'tf (Gesen. p. 1328),
was used ; sometimes, perhaps, bitumen, as was
the case at Babylon (Gen. xi. 3). The lime,
clay, and straw of which mortar is generally
composed in the East, requires to be very care-
fully mixed and united so as to resist wet (Lane,
Mod. Eg. i. 27 ; Shaw, Irav. p. 206). The wall
" daubed with untempered mortar " of Ezekiel
(xiii. 10) was perhaps a sort of cob-wall of mud
or clay without lime pgfl, Gesen. p. 1516),
An Egyptian loom. (Wilkinson.)
* la ft shuttle, cot thrown, but pot in with the hand. It hid ft hook at each end.
which would give way under heavy rain. The
use of whitewash on tombs is remarked by our
Lord (Matt, xxiii. 27. See also Mishn. Maaser
Sheni, v. 1). Houses infected with leprosy
were required by the Law to be replastered
(Lev. xiv. 40-45).
4. Akin to the craft of the carpenter is that
of ship and boat building, which must have
been exercised to some extent for the fishing-
vessels on the lake of Gennesaret (Matt. viii. 23,
ix. 1 ; John xxi. 3, 8). Solomon built, at Ezion-
geber, ships for his foreign trade, which were
manned by Phoenician crews, an experiment
which Jehoshaphat endeavoured in vain to
renew (1 K. ix. 26, 27, xxii. 48; 2 Ch. xx.
36, 37).
5. The perfumes used in the religious ser-
vices, and in later times in the funeral rites of
monarch*, imply knowledge and practice in the
art of the " apothecaries " (D'npH, ftvpeijioi,
pigmentarii), who appear to have formed a guild
or association (Ex. xxx. 25, 35; Neh. iii. 8;
2 Ch. xvi. 14; Eccles. vii. 1, x. 1 ; Ecclus.
xxxviii. 8).
HANDICBAFT
6. The arts of spinning and weaving both
wool and linen were carried on in early times,
as they are still usually among the Bedouins, by
women. The women spun and wove goat's hair
and flax for the Tabernacle, as in later times
their skill was employed in like manner for
idolatrous purposes. One of the excellences
attributed to the good housewife is her skill sod
industry in these arts (Ex. xxxv. 25, 26 ; Lev.
xix. 19; Deut. xxii. 11; 2 K. xxiii. 7; Exek.
xvi. 16 ; Prov. xxxi. 13, 24; Burckhardt, Abbs
on Bed. i. 65: cp. Horn. It. i. 123; Od. i. 356,
ii. 104). The loom, with its beam pUD.
Utaivrtov, liciatorium, 1 Sam. xvii. 7; Gesen.
p. 883), pin CD). woWsAoi, clams, Judg. xvi.
14 ; Gesen. p. 643), and shuttle (J^tf, Soopffc,
Job vii. 6 ; Gesen. p. 146), was, perhaps, intro-
duced later, but as early as David's time (1 Sam.
xvii. 7), and worked by men, as was the case in
Egypt, contrary to the practice of other nations.
This trade also appears to have been practised
hereditarily (1 Ch. iv. 21 ; Herod, ii. 35 ; Soph.
Oed. Col. 339).
Together with weaving we read
also of embroidery, in which gold
and silver threads were interwoven
with the body of the stufl; some-
times in figure patterns, or with
precious stones set in the needle-
work (Ex. xxvi. 1, xxviii. 4, xxiii.
6-13).
7. Besides these arts, those of
dyeing and of dressing cloth wen
practised in Palestine, and those also
of tanning and dressing leather
(Josh. ii. 15-18 ; 2 K. i. 8 ; Matt.
iii. 4; Acts ix. 43; Mishn. MtgUl.
iii. 2). Shoemakers, barbers, sod
tailors are mentioned in the Mishits
(Peaach. iv. 6) : the barber (afo
xovptvs, Gesen. p. 283), or his
occupation, by Ezekiel (v. 1 ; Lev.
xiv. 8 ; Num. vi. 5 ; Josephus, Ant.
xvi. 11, § 5; B.- J. i. 27, § 5;
Mishn. Shabb. i. 2), and the tailor
(i. 3): plasterers, glaziers, glass
vessels, painters, and goldworkers are mentioned
in the Mishna (CW. viii. 9, xxix. 3-8; xxx. 1>
Tentmakers (irsrnvoToiol) are noticed in the
Acts (xviii. 3), and frequent allusion is made to
the trade of the potters.
8^ Bakers (D'sjfc, Gesen. p.
136) are noticed
in Scripture as carrying on their trade (Jer.
xxxvii. 21 ; Hos. vii. 4 ; Mishn. CW. xv. 2) ;
and the well-known valley Tyropoeon probably
derived its name from the occupation of the
cheese-makers, its inhabitants (Joseph. B. J. v.
4, 1). Butchers, not Jewish, are spoken of in
1 Cor. x. 25.
Trade in all its branches was much developed
after the Captivity ; and for a father to teach
his son a trade was reckoned not only honour-
able but indispensable (Mishn. Pirke Ab.'n.'i;
Kiddush. iv. 14). Some trades, however, were
regarded as less honourable (Jahn, Bibl. Arch.
§84).
Some, if not all trades, had special localities,
as was the case formerly in European, and is
now in Eastern, cities (Jer. xxxvii. 21 ; 1 Con
x. 25; Joseph. B. J. v. 4, § 1, and 8, § 1;
Digitized by
Google
HANDKERCHIEF
Mishn. Bear. v. 1; Russell, Aleppo, i. 20; I
Chardin, Foyogex, viL 274, 394 ; Lane, Mod. Eg. \
iL 145> I
One feature, distinguishing Jewish from other
workmen, deserves peculiar notice, viz. that :
they were not slaves, nor were their trades
necessarily hereditary, as was and is so often i
the case among other, especially heathen nations
(Jahn, BM. Antiq. c t. §§ 81-84; Saalschntz, ,
Hear. Arch. c 14; Winer, s.v. Handxerkey ',
[Mcmcal brarwjiuans; Pottery; Glass;
Leather.] [H. W. P.] :
HANDKERCHIEF, NAPKIN, APBON. '
Of these terms, as used in the A V., the first .
two = croviiftar, the last = rututirtior : they
are classed together, inasmuch as they refer to
objects of a Tery similar character. Both words I
are of Latin origin : aovSapwr = sudarium from '
sudo, " to sweat ; " the Lutheran translation ,
preserres the reference to its etymology in its
rendering, ScktKisstvch ; aiuucirOior = semicinc-
ti-tm, Lc "a half girdle." Neither is much
used by classical writers; the sudarium is re- ,
ferred to as used for wiping the face (candido
fronton sudario Urgent, Vuintil. tL 3). or
hands (sudario minus tergens, quod in collo hahc-
bat, Petron. in Fragm. Tragur. cap. 67) ; and i
also as worn over the face for the purpose of
concealment (Sueton. in Heron, cap. 48) ; the i
word was introduced by the Romans into Pales- |
tine, where it was adopted br the Jews, in the i
form MTrDas=nriBpp, in Ruth iii. 15. The I
sudarium is noticed in the N. T. as a wrapper in
which to fold up money (Luke xix. 20) — as
a cloth bound about the head of a corpse
(John xi 44, xi. 7% being probably brought
from the crown of the head under the chin
— and lastly as an article of dress that
could be easily removed (Acts xix. 12), proba-
bly a handkerchief worn on the head like the
ieffieh of the Bedouins. The semicinctium is no-
ticed by Martial xir. Epigr. 153, and by Petron.
in Satyr, cap. 94. The distinction between the
cinctus and semicinctium consisted in its width
(Isidor. Orig. ziz. 33): with regard to the
character of the aiuutlwQuw, the only inference
from the passage in which it occurs (Acts xix.
12) is that it was easily removed from the
person, and probably was worn next to the skin.
According to Suidas, the distinction between the
sudarium and the semicinctium was very small,
for he explains the latter by the former, aiut-
KtvQiov QaxioKior * aovSipiov, the ipaxiiKiov
being a species' of head-dress : Hesychius like-
wise explains vi/ukMiov by QojuiXior, Accord-
ing to the scholiast (in Cod. Steph.% as quoted
by Schleusner (Lex. s. v. aovS&pior), the distinc-
tion between the two terms is that the sudarium
was worn on the head, and the semicinctium
used as a handkerchief. The difference was
probably not in the shape, but in the use of the
article. We may conceive them to have been
bands of linen of greater or less size, which might
be adapted to many purposes, like the lungi of
the Arabs, which is applied sometimes as a
girdle, at other times as a turban (Wellsted,
Travels, i. 321). [W. L. B.]
HANDMAID. [Concubine, Slave.]
HA'NES (Dill; Banes), a place in Egypt, only
mentioned in Is. zxx. 4 : " For his princes are at
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
HANES
1281
Zoan, and his ambassadors are come to Hanes."
The I. XX. has Sti turlr «'r Taixt a*x*/r*i
(eyytXt nrtjw, evidently following an entirely
different reading.
Two identifications have been proposed: (1)
with Tehaphnehes or Daphnae; (2) with Khi-
nensu or Ueracleopolis Magna. It has been
argued (see the 1st edition of this Diet.) that
Hanes must hare been on the eastern frontier.
When the princes had come to Zoan, the chief
royal city at the time, it is quite reasonable to
suppose that the ambassadors were at Daphnae.
The Chald. Paraph, may have been innuenced by
this idea in choosing Tehaphnehes. But as an
abbreviation of this name, Hanes seems out of
all analogy, and thus the identification philolo-
gically too daring. On examining the text, the
alternative seems preferable. The verb M3, used
of the ambassadors, both in Kal and in Hiphil, as
here, means primarily " to touch " or "reach to " ;
and in a secondary sense, " to come to." If there-
fore we would be strictly literal, the verb pro- .
bablv implies that Hanes was beyond Zoan. The
old Egyptian civil name of Heracleopolis Magna,
Khinensu, in Assyrian Khi-ni-in-shi, is preserved
■n the Coptic £,itec, £,itHe, tf£,rtec.
and the Arabic Ahnas-el-Medeeneh, (j«»\j*\
8 > *A »JV tn * name of a modern village be-
lieved to mark the site. The city of Khinensu
was anciently the capital of two dynasties of
Heracleopolite kings, the ninth and tenth of
Manetho's list, who intervened between the last
Memphite dynasty and the first Theban. They
have recently been identified by Mr. F. LI.
Griffith, from the inscriptions of the tombs of
Asyoot (Report of Egypt Exploration Fund,
1889, p. 11 sq.). In later times Heracleopolis
does not seem to have played an important part
in history until the break-up of the Egyptian
monarchy, about B.C. 750, when the country
was resolved into its original elements, the
nomes ; a condition which lasted about a century,
until the successful effort of Psammetichus II.
to reunite Egypt under a single sceptre. During
this period Khinensu was the seat of one of the
petty kings. At the date of the prophecy the
titular king of all Egypt had his seat at Zoan,
or Tanis, while the real over-lord was the Ethio-
pian of Napata. The rule of the Ethiopian
depended on his power to resist the strength of
Assyria. Consequently the phantom Pharaoh
of Zoan and the little kings of the nomes occa-
sionally rose to comparative importance. At a
moment of this kind a neighbouring power
would naturally address itself to Zoan and to
one of the Upper Egyptian rulers, of whom the
prince of Khinensu was the most northern, and
would thus naturally represent the second chief
addressed by envoys from a Palestinian kingdom.
The princes would be more properly sent to
Pharaoh at Zoan, the ambassadors to the inferior
ruler of Hanes. We have still to determine
the date of the embassy. It was addressed to
Pharaoh (re. 2, 3) and the Egyptians (cr. 2, 3, 7 ;
xxxi. 1, 3). It therefore cannot be the embassy
of Hoshea, king of Israel, to So, or Shebek
(2 K. xvii. 4), the Ethiopian king or over-lord of
Egypt. The conditions suit the embassy of
Hezekiah to Pharaoh, to which Sennacherib
made contemptuous allusion in his message to
4 N
Digitized by
Google
1282
HANGING
the king of udah (2 K. iviii. 20, 21). The
whole context of the two chapters of Is. xxx.,
xxxi. points to Jerusalem and her miraculous
deliverance from Assyria. [R. S. P.]
HANGING. [Punishment.]
HANGING ; HANGINGS. These terms
represent both different words in the original,
and different articles in the furniture of the
Temple. (I.) The " hanging " CiJDD ; Mtnra-
arpoy ; tentorium) was a curtain or " covering "
(as the word radically means) to close an en-
trance ; one was placed before the door of the
Tabernacle (Ex. xxvi. 36, 37, xxxix. 38) ; it was
made of variegated stuff wrought with needle-
work, and was hung on five pillars of acacia
wood : another was placed before the entrance
of the court (Ex. xxvii. 16, xxxviii. 18; Num. iv.
26) ; the term is also applied to the vail that
concealed the Holy of Holies, in the full ex-
pression "vail of the covering" (Ex. xxxv. 12,
xxxix. 34, xl. 21 ; Num. iv. 5). [Curtains, 2.]
(2.) The "hangings "(D»l&i?; lirrta; tentoria)
were used for covering the walls of the court of
the Tabernacle, just as tapestry was in modern
times (Ex. xxvii. 9, xxxv. 17, xxxviii. 9 ; Num.
iii. 26, iv. 26). The rendering in the LXX.
implies that they were made of the same sub-
stance as the sails of a ship, ue. (as explained
by Rashi) " meshy, not woven : " this opinion
is, however, incorrect, as the material of which
they were constructed was " fine twined linen."
The hangings were carried only five cubits high,
or half the height of the walls of the court
(Ex. xxvii. 18 ; cp. xxvi. 16). [Tabernacle.]
In 2 K. xxiii. 7, the term bdttim, O'FD, strictly
" houses " (A. V. and R. V. text " hangings "), is
probably intended to describe tents (A. V.
marg.) used as portable sanctuaries. [W. L. B.]
HAN-I-EL (Van, '•«• Channiel, R. V. « Han-
niel "=gift (or grace) of Qod ; 'Avti$\ ; Hanicl),
one of the sons of Ulla, a chief prince, and a
choice hero in the tribe of Asher (1 Ch. vii. 39).
HAN'NAH (i\in=grace, or beauty; 'Ami;
Anna), one of the wives of Elkanah, and mother
of Samuel (1 Sam. i. ii.) ; a prophetess of con-
siderable repute, though her claim to that title
is based upon one production only, viz. the
hymn of thanksgiving for the birth of her son.
The hymn is in the highest order of prophetic
poetry ; its resemblance to that of the Virgin
Mary (cp. 1 Sam. ii. 1-10 with Luke i. 46-55 ;
see also Ps. cxiii.) has been noticed by com-
mentators ; and it is specially remarkable as
containing the first designation of the Messiah
under that name. In the Targuin it has been
subjected to a process of magniloquent dilution.
[Samuel.] Modern critics do not hesitate
to affirm that "in style and tone the Song
throughout bears the marks of a later age than
that of Hannah," even if it be admitted that
" sober criticism " will " not assert categorically
that the Song cannot be by Hannah " (cp.
Driver, Notes on the Heb. Text of the SB. of
Sam., p. 21). [T. E. B.] [P.]
HANNA'THON (tfnjri, (?) = graceful; B.
'Afuie, A. 'EyyaOde ; Hanathon), one of the cities
of Zebu lun, a point apparently on the northern
HAPA
boundary (Josh. xix. 14). Major Conder ims
proposed its identification with Kefr '.ilium, S.W.
of Safed, which is mentioned in the Mishna
(Shebiilh, ix. 2) as marking the northern limit
of Lower Galilee (PEF. Mem. i. 205).
[G-] [W.]
HAN-NI-EL(^OJPI; 'A««\; Hanniel), son
of Ephod; as prince (Nasi) of Manasseh, he
assisted in the division of the Promised Land
(Num. xxxiv. 23). The name is the same as
Haniel.
HANO'CH Ojiin [see Enoch]; 'En&x ;
Henoch). 1. The third in order of the children
of Midian, and therefore descended from Abra-
ham by Keturah (Gen. xxv. 4). In the parallel
list of 1 Ch. i. 33, the name is given in the A. V.
as Henoch (R. V. " Hanoch ").
2. (Tpjn; 'E»<Sx; Henoch.) Eldest son of
Reuben (Gen. xlvi. 9; Ex. vi. 14; Num. xxvi.
5 ; 1 Ch. v. 3), and founder of the family of
HANO'CHITES, THE (\3Jnn ; oV" "5
'Ek«x ; familia ffenochitarum), Num. xxvi. 5.
HA'NDN (JOn=A« teAo hath received mercy ;
B. 'Aypdv, A. 'Aitv and 'Kv&* [Sam.], BA.
'Avar, M. sometimes 'Amir [Ch.]; Hanon;
Assyr. Hanunu), 1. Son of Nahash (2 Sam. x.
1, 2; 1 Ch. xix. 1, 2), king of Ammon, who dis-
honoured the ambassadors of David (2 Sam. x. 4),
and involved the Ammonites in a disastrous war
(2 Sam. xii. 31 ; 1 Ch. xix. 6). [W. T. B.]
2. A man who, with the people of Zanoah,
repaired the ravine-gate in the wall of Jerusalem
(Neh. iii. 13 ; 'Amir).
3. A man specified as "the sixth son of Zalaph,"
who also assisted in the repair of the wall, appa-
rently on the east side (Neh. iii. 30 ; BA. 'Ayov/i,
tt.'ArAii). [W. A. W.].
HAPA (Man; 'At.s). The name of the
Egyptian sacred bull Apis occurs in the LXX.
of Jer. xlvi. (LXX. xxvi.) 15, where the Masoretic
T?3St P|npj SVfO, " Why are thy valiant
men swept away?" (A V. "Why are thy
strong ones ? " or marg. Why ii thy strong one t
R. V.) is rendered by the LXX. Sid rl l<pvytr i
'Aim, 6 IkAcktoi aov. Hence it is conjectured
by Frankl that the text from which the LXX.
was translated read ?IHn3 NBn D3 VWQ
1 V • : T T T
(Studien ueber die Septuaginta und Peschito zu
Jeremia, pp. 14, 20, 21). This is certainly
agreeable with the imagery of this prophecy,
in which there are two other similar figures.
" Egypt ' s a Ter 7 fa" heifer ; but destruction
[marg. Or, the gadfly] out of the north is come "
[marg. it is come upon her] (v. 20). The merce-
naries are also compared to '• calves of the
stall" (c. 21). The parallel allusion to the
sacred bull of Osiris, Apis, and to the sacred
cow Aha-t, sometimes represented as a heifer
(Lanzoni, Dizionario di Mitoiogia Egixia, pi. i.
1, 2), of the mother-goddesses Athor and Isis
(id. p. 3), is sufficiently remarkable ; and if the
reading "gadfly" be correct, the reference to
the Graeco-Phoenician story of Io, or Aha-t, is
probable. But it may be argued that the re-
ference to the heifer led the LXX. translators to
imagine Apis, and there is no doubt that either
Digitized by
Google
HAPHBAIM
HARAN
1283
they had a very different text here from the
Masoretic, or that they allowed themselves a
great liberty of translation. [R. S. P.]
HAPHRA'IM, R. V. and A. V. 1611 HA-
PHABATM {D^Dn, »'■«• Chaphariim ; B.
'Ayttr, A. 'A<p<patifi; Hapharawi), a city of
lssachar, mentioned next to Shunem (Josh. xix.
19). The name possibly signifies " two pits." By
Eusebius and Jerome it is spoken of as still known
nnder the name of Afarea (A<pf>a!a) and as stand-
ing 6 miles north of Legio ( OS.* p. 241, 61 ; p. 130,
28). The Afarea of Eusebius and Jerome is now
apparently the important ruin, A'A. el-Farrtyeh,
5| Eng. miles N.W. of Lejjun. But this site
seems too far to the west for Haphraim, which
should be looked for nearer to Solam (the ancient
Shunem). Two miles west of this place stands
the village of el-'Afuleh (aJJuJ\), which may
be the representative of Chapharaim, Ain having
taken the place of the Cheth. [G.] [W.]
HA'BA (tOH = mountain land; LXX. om. ;
Ara\ a place mentioned with Halah, Habor, and
the river of Gozan, in connexion with the de-
portation into captivity of the Reubenites,
Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh by the
king of Assyria (1 Ch. v. 26). It may be Media
magna (MV."); it is hardly probable that it
was the same as Harran. [F.]
HAKATJAH (rnTrJrt, with the article, =the
trembling; XapaSdO; AradV), a desert station
of the Israelites (Num. xxxiii. 24, 25); its
position is uncertain. [H. H.]
HAH AN. 1. (J VI: *A#dV; Jos. 'Apdwjt :
Aran). The third son of Terah, and therefore
youngest brother of Abram (Gen. xi. 26). Three
children are ascribed to him — Lot (vv. 27, 31),
and two daughters, viz. Milcah, who married her
uncle Nahor (r. 29), and Iscah (v. 29), of whom we
merely possess her name, though by some (e.g.
Josephus) she is held to be identical with Sarah.
Haran was born in Ur of the Chaldees, and he
died there while his father was still living (r. 28).
His sepulchre was still shown there when
Josephus wrote his history (Ant. i. 6, § 5).
The ancient Jewish tradition is that Haran was
burnt in the furnace of Nimrod for his wavering
conduct during the fiery trial of Abraham (see
the Targum Ps.-Jonathan ; Jerome's Quaest. in
Genesim, and the notes thereto in the edit, of
Migne). This tradition seems to have originated
in a translation of the word Ur, which in
Hebrew signifies " tire." It will be observed that
although this name and that of the country
appear the same in the A. V., there is in the
original a certain difference between them ; the
latter commencing with the harsh guttural
Cheth.
2. (B. AlSdV, A. 'ApdV; Aran.) A Gershonite
Levite in the time of David, one of the familv of
Shimei (1 Ch. xxiii. 9). [G.] [W.]
HA'BAN (J"in, LXX. Xafi&dv; Haran) is the
name of the place to which Abraham migrated
from Ur of the Chaldees, and where the descend-
ants of his brother Nahor established themselves.
Haran is therefore called " the city of Nahor "
(cp. Gen. xxiv. 10 with xxvii. 43). It is said to
be in Mesopotamia (Gen. xxiv. 10), or more
definitely in Padan-aram (xxv. 20), which is tho
"cultivated district at the foot of the hills"
(Stanley, 8. $ P. p. 129 n.), a name well apply-
ing to the beautiful stretch of country which
lies below Mount Masius between the Khabour
and the Euphrates [Padan-aram]. Here, abont
midway in this district, is a town still called
Harran, which really never seems to have
changed its appellation, and beyond any reason-
able doubt is the Haran or Charran of Scripture
(Bochart's Phaleg, i. 14; Ewald's GescAichte, i.
384).
The foundation of the city is lost in antiquity,
but Assyrian or Babylonian influence probably
predominated at an early date, as is indicated
by the fact that the name, in Assyro-Babylonian,
is Harran, meaning " road, and is written with
the ideograph expressing that word. It was
probably so called as the crossing-point of the
Syrian, Assyrian, and Babylonian trade-route.
It is often mentioned in cuneiform literature,
Tiglath-pileser I. (about 1120 B.C.) boasting of
having taken or killed elephants " in the land of
Haran (ina mat Harrani) and on the banks of
the Khabour ;" and Sargon says that he " spread
out his shadow over the city Haran (eli ali
Harrana salula-iu itrusu), anil as a soldier of
Ann and Oagon wrote its laws." Sennacherib
(2 K. ix. 12) boasts of having conquered Gozan,
Haran, Reseph,and the Beni- Eden ; and the city
is mentioned as a considerable trading-centre in
Ezek. xxvii. 23. The patron-deity of the city
was the moon-god, called Sin by the Assyrians,
and the city was celebrated for his worship from
exceedingly ancient times, as is indicated by
Assurbanipal, and also by Nabonidus, who
relates that the god Sin was angry with Haran
and with his temple E-hulhul (" the house of
joy ") within it, and he therefore allowed the
Umman-ilanda (Medes or Scyths) to come ami
destroy the temple. Nabonidus, however, re-
ceived (so he relates) from the gods Merodach
and Sin, in a dream, instructions to rebuild the
temple ; and when Nabonidus pointed out that
the Umman-Manda still surrounded the city,
the destruction of those hordes was revealed to
him, which destruction took place under Cyrus
three years later. Nabonidus was thus enable'!
to continue and complete the work of Shal-
maneser II. and Assurbanipal with great mag-
nificence, and he adorned the city of Haran at
the same time. It was famous among th«
Romans for being near the scene of the defeat of
Crassus (Plin. A'. H. v. 24). About the time of
the Christian era it appears to have formed part
of the kingdom of Edessa (Mos. Chor. ii. 32),
which was ruled by Abgarus. Afterwards it
passed with that kingdom under the dominion of
the Romans, and appears as a Roman city in the
wars of Carncalla (Mos. Chor. ii. 72) and Julian
(Jo. Malal. p. 329). It was the seat of a
bishopric in the 4th century, and possessed a
magnificent cathedral, the ruins of which still
remain. It is remarkable that the people of
Haran retained until a late date the Chaldean
language and the worship of Chaldean deities.
Haran lies on the Belias (Belich, ancient
Bilichus), a small affluent of the Euphrates,
which falls into it at about long. 39°. It now
consists of a low range of mounds or hills on
4 N 2
Digitized by
Google
1284
HABAN
both aides of the river. The rains of the castle,
with its square columns 8 ft. thick supporting
an arched roof 30 ft. high, are very conspicuous.
There are also several more modern ruins. The
walls, though in a state of dilapidation, are
yet continuous throughout. They are very
HABABITE, THE
Irregular. One of the gateways is flanked by
three towers. Near the city is a well, tra-
ditionally pointed out as the one at which
Rebekah was met, and there is also a mosque
outside the walls. A fragment of an Assyrian
lion has been found among the ruins of the town.
The modern Haran is now a small village inhabited
by a few families of 'Arabs (cp. Ainsworth, in
the PSBA., May 5, 1891, pp. 385-391).*
• Dr. Beke's view, that Haran Is to be identified with
1 he village Haran-tl-Awamad, about four hours east of
Damascus, cannot be accepted. — [F.j
In the A. V. of the New Testament the name
follows the Greek form, and is given as Charran
(Acts vii. 2, 4), but the R. V. has Haran.
[G. R.] [T. G. P.]
HABA'RITE, THE ('Tinn, perhaps = the
mountaineer, Ges. Thes. p. 392 ; de Aran, or
Digitized by
Google
HABBOXA
Orori, ArariUs) : the designation of three men
connected with David's guard.
1. (A 'Apo«x<uiK.) "AGEE.a Hararite* , (R.V.),
father of Shammah, the third of the three chiefs
of the heroes (2 Sam. xxiii. 11. In the parallel
passage, 1 Ch. xi_, the name of this warrior is
entirely omitted).
2. (o 'Afmofnts.) "Sha*»ah the Hararite"
is named as one of the thirty in 2 Sam. xxiii. 33.
In 1 Ch. xi. 34 the name is altered to Shage
(Lac fafiniif). Kennicott's conclusion, from a
minute investigation, is that the passage should
stand in both, "Jonathan, son of Shammah the
Hararite" (2 Sam. xxiii. 11)— Shammah being
identical with Shimei, David's brother (see
Driver, Notes cm the Beb. Text of the BB. of
Sam. in loco).
8. CZapaovplrnt. i 'ApopL) " So ARAB (2 Sam.
xxiii. 33) or Sacab (1 Ch. xi. 35) the Hararite "
(R. V. « the Ararite ") was the father of Ahiam,
another member of the guard. Kensicott is
inclined to consider Sacar to be the correct
HABBOTJA (Nji3"!PI, possibly from the
Pers. = ass-driver; Btt. Bipha, A. 'Oapc/W ;
Bartxma), the third of the seven chamberlains,
or eunuchs, who served king Ahasoerns (Esth.
i. 10), and who suggested Hainan's being hung
on his own gallows (vii. 9). In the latter
passage the name is
HARBO-NAH (Hjimn; BA. Bovyottr,
N*. -d\ K— -fa ; Barbona).
HABE (ri3|TX, 'arnibeth; taavxtms ; Upas ;
Arab. < Q .\, 'ameV) occnrs only in Lev. xi. 6
and Dent. xiv. 7, amongst the animals disallowed
HABE 1285
as food by the Mosaic Law. There is bo doubt
at all that 'amebeth denotes "a hare." The hare
is at this day called arneb ( • .\ \\ by the
Arabs in Palestine aad Syria (see Russell's Sat.
Bist. of Aleppo,* ii. 154). The ivrm, U.
"rough foot," is identical with Asr/wt, and is
the term which Aristotle generally applies to
the hare: indeed he only uses the latter word
once in his History of Animals (riii. 27, § 4).
The rabbit (Z. cuaumJus) was unknown to the
ancient Hebrews ; nor is it known in Syria or
Palestine. It is indigenous only in Western
Europe and North Africa : wherever it is found
elsewhere, it has been introduced. It is doubtful
whether Aristotle was acquainted with the rabbit,
as he never alludes to any burrowing Xmyms or
oturvaevs ; but, on the other hand, see the passage
in vi. 28, § 3, where the young of the ttrmn
are said to be " born blind," which will applv
to the rabbit alone. Pliny (W. B. riii. 55)
expressly notices rabbits (cumcWi), which occur
in such numbers in the Balearic Islands as to
destroy the harvests. He also notices the
; practice of ferreting these animals, and thus
driving them out of their burrows. The hare
i is considered by the Syrians as well as the Arabs
i as an animal of the chase, and is pursued by
greyhounds, or more frequently, among the
Bedouin, by trained falcons. Its flesh is highly
I prized by the Arabs, though some of the more
scrupulous of the Turks decline to eat it. But
j the Moslems tell one that the hare chews the
■ cud, and therefore is clean. The Armenian Chris-
tians refuse to eat it, but not Greek Christians.
The hare was forbidden to the Israelites because
it has not a cloven hoof; the remark that it
chews the cud being only parenthetical. It was
generally believed that it chewed the cod from
J Hin. (Frvrm > tn-onxe buwi. XimraJ.)
its habit of constantly grinding its teeth and
moving its jaws, after the manner of ruminating
animals. But in rodents such as the hare, the
incisor teeth continue to grow through life, and
must be kept to the proper length, by this con-
stant grinding. If one tooth be accidentally
broken off, the tooth that meets it grows on, and
often by its length prevents the animal from
feeding.
Moses speaks of animals according to appear-
ances, and not with the precision of a com-
parative anatomist, and his object was to show
why the hare should be interdicted, though to
all appearance it chewed the cud, viz. because it |
did not divide the hoof.
There are two species of hares natives of
different parts of Palestine, and two or three
others which occasionally occur near the borders
of the land : —
1. Lepus syriaaa (Hemp, and Ehr. Symi.
Phys. ii. tab. 15). — This is the only species in
the wooded and cultivated districts of Palestine.
Down the coast it is fonnd from Lebanon and
Lepiu tfriami (Hemp, and Ebr.).
Digitized by
Google
1286
HABE
Hermon to Philistia. I have also found it every-
where in the wooded and mountainous regions
of Northern Syria, north of Lebanon. It is very
little smaller than the English hare, and very
like it in colour, being about 2 inches less in
total length, and with rather shorter ears. It
has four young at a birth. It has not been
observed beyond the limits of Syria.
2. Lepus aegyptius (Geoffr. Doer, de CEgypte,
Mamm. tab. 6). — The Egyptian is the common
hare of the southern region of Judaea, of the
wilderness of Becrsheba, and of the Jordan
valley. It is smaller than our hare, the body
from tip of nose to root of tail measuring only
18 inches. The ears are very long, fringed
inside with white hairs. It is of a light sandy
«r isabelline colour above, and almost white
beneath. It is found through all the desert
parts of Egypt, reaching Palestine from the
south-west, as the following species does from
the south-east.
3. Lepus sinaiticus (Hemp, and Ehr. Symb.
l'hys. ii. tab. 15), — This species is smaller than
Lfj'U4 tinaiti
the preceding, but with ears fully as long. It
has a long and very narrow head, and the fur of
a sandy colour, but with a reddish hue which
distinguishes it from the Egyptian hare. It is
the hare of the Sinaitic Peninsula, and I never
obtained it in Palestine except in the w&dys by
the Dead Sea.
4. Lepus isabelllnus (Riipp, Atlas, p. 52,
tab. 20). — The Nubian hare is very rare, only
found in the sandy deserts of the South-East.
I possess one specimen which I procured there,
and I have never seen another. It is of a rich
yellowish fawn colour, lighter than that of the
Egyptian hare, which it generally resembles, but
is decidedly smaller. It is the hare of Nubia
and Sennaar, but not of Abyssinia and Egypt.
The distribution of these various hares seems to
be not so much geographical, as dependent on
the character of the soil, and their ranges over-
lap and cross each other most irregularly.
5. Lepus judaeus (Gray, Ann. and Mag. Nat.
Hist. 3rd ser. vol. xx. p. 222). — Dr. Gray named
as above a specimen collected by me and placed
it in a new genus (eulagos). But it seems to
me so like the Persian species, described by
Mr. Blanford {Eastern Persia, ii. p. 80) as Lepus
iraspedotis, that I do not propose to separate
them. My specimen came from the N.E. corner
or" Palestine, near the Syrian desert. [H. B. T.]
HARHAS
HAB'EL (with the def. art. htTVWl ; to
iptfa ; Ariel). In the margin of Ezek." xliii. 15
(A. V.) the word rendered " altar " in the text
(R. V. " upper altar ") is given Harel, i.e. the
mountain of God. The LXX., Vulg., and Arab,
evidently regarded it as the same as "Ariel"
in the same verse (see Delitzsch * on Is. xxix. 1,
whose opinion is not accepted by Dillmann s ).
Our translators followed the Targum of Jonathan
in translating it "altar." Junius explains it of
the icrx&pa or hearth of the altar of burnt offer-
ing, covered by the network on which the sacri-
fices were placed over the burning wood. This
explanation Gesenius adopts, and brings for-
ward as a parallel the Arab, "j \, 'ireh, " a hearth
or fireplace," akin to the Heb. "flK, 'ir, " light,
flame." The QPB." (Ezek. /. c), adopting the
sense of hearth, connects the text and marg.
rendering by taking " the altar to be the lesser
symbol of the mountain of the Elohim." [F.]
HA'BEPH (tfTH; B. 'Apttu, A. , Apti; Ha-
riph), a name occurring in the genealogies of
Jndah, as a son of Caleb, and as " father of Beth-
gader" (1 Ch. ii. 51, only). In the lists of
Ezra ii. and Neh. vii. the similar name Habiph
is found ; but nothing appears to establish a
connexion between the two. [G-] [F.J
HA'BETH (R. V. HEBETH), THE
POBEST OP (Jinn 1|P; i»ri\u' [reading
•VO for TIP], B. Sapef* A. 'ApuU; m saltum
Ilnret), in which David took refuge, after, at
the instigation of the prophet Gad, he had
quitted the " hold " or fastness of the cave
of Adullam — if indeed it was Adullam and not
Mizpeh of Moab, which is not quite clear
(1 Sam. xxii. 5). Nothing appears in the
narrative by which the position of this forest,
which has long since disappeared, can be ascer-
tained, except the very general remark that it
was in the " land of Judah," i.e. according to
Josephus, the inheritance proper of that tribe,
tV Khripovxlav tjjj (pvKfu, as opposed to the
" desert," r^y IpniAay, in which David had before
been lurking (Ant. vi. 12, § 4). We might take
it to be the " wood " in the " wilderness of
Ziph " in which he was subsequently hidden
(xxiii. 15, 19), but that the Hebrew term is
different (chorcsh instead of ya'ar). According
to Eusebius ( OS.* p. 243, 21) Arith was in his day
the village Arath, to the west of Jerusalem.
The name is perhaps preserved in Kharas, a
small village, surrounded bv olive-trees, about
3 miles S.E. of 'Aid el-Ma, Adullam (PER
Mem. iii. 305). [G.] [W.]
HABHAI'AH (njlYVl; V. 'Apaxfor, Swete
om. ; Araia). Uzziel, son of Charhaiah, of the
goldsmiths, assisted in the repair of the wall of
Jerusalem under Nehemiah (Neh. iii. 8 [see Baer
in loco]).
HAB'HAS (DPnri; B. 'hpuis, B. ? [M»«]
Apia's, A. 'Apis ; Araas), an ancestor of Shal-
lum, the husband of Huldah, the prophetess in
• The same reading is found In Josephus (Ant. vi.
12,(4). This Is one of three Instances in this chapter
stone in which the reading of Josephus departs from the
Hebrew text, and agrees with the LXX.
Digitized by
Google
HABHUB
the time of Josiah (2 K. xxii. 14). In the
I*rallel paasage in Chronicle* the name is given
a* H ABR A H
HAB'HUB ("WnTn, ?= inflammation; 'Apoip
[Ezra]; Ilarhur). Bene-Charchur were among
the Nethinim who returned from Babylon with
Zernbbabel (Ezra ii. 51 ; Neh. vii. 53, b.,'Apoin,
A. -/>> In the Apocryphal 1 Esd. (v. 31), the
name has become AasuR.
HA'BEM (Dnri). 1. (B. Xapfa A. XapV;
Harim.) A priest who had charge of the third
division in the house of God (1 Ch. ixiv. 8).
2. (B. om., A. 'Hpiu [Ezra] ; B. 'Hpd>, K.
'Hoi [Neh.].) Bene-Harim, probably descendants
of the above, to the number of 1017, came up
from Babylon with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii. 39;
Neh. vii. 42). [Carme.] The name, probably
as representing the family, is mentioned amongst
tbose who sealed the covenant with Nehemiab
(Neh. x. 5, B. Eipdxt [see Swete, /. c.]); and
amongst the priests who had to put away their
foreign wives were five of the sons of Harim
(Ezra x. 21, BKA. 'Hstiu> In the parallel to
this latter passage in 1 Esd. ix. 21, the name is
given Eases (but see Speaker's Comm. in loco).
3. (B. om., A. 'Ooifi.) It further occurs in a
list of the families of priests "who went up
with Zerubbabel and Jeshua," and of those who
were their descendants in the next generation —
in the days of Joiakim the son of Jeshua (Neh.
ii. 15). In the former list (xii. 4; BA. om.,
fit*^**). P«oo» the name is changed to Kehum
(Din to Dni) by a not unfrequent transposition
of letters. [Kehcm.]
4. Another family of Bene-Harim, 320 in
number, came from the Captivity in the same
caravan (Ezra ii. 32 ; Neh. vii. 35 ; 'Hpa/i)-
These were laymen, and seem to have taken
their name from a place ; at least the contiguous
names in the list are certainly those of places.
These also appear among those who had married
foreign wives (Ezra x. 31 ; *Hod», as well as
those who sealed the covenant (Neh. x. 27;
BA. 'HpaV, «• P««W. [G.] [F.]
HA'BIPH (tpri ; HarepK). 1 12 of the Bene-
Chariph returned' from the Captivity with
Zernbbabel (Neh. vii. 24; B. 'Ap*i<t>, A. -/i).
The name occurs again among the "heads of
the people " who sealed the covenant (x. 19 ; B.
'Apeip, see Swete. /. c). In the lists of Ezra ii.
18, and 1 Esd. v. 16, Hariph appears as Jorah*
and AZEPHURITII respectively. An almost
identical name, Hnreph, appears in the lists of
Judah (1 Ch. iii. 51 ; B. 'Aptia, A. 'Aotl) as the
father of Bethgader [Harophitf]. [G.] [P.]
HABLOT (il3it, often with nfX, nj"135.
nenp). That this condition of persons existed
in the earliest states of society is clear from
Gen. xxxviii. 15. So Rahab (Josh. ii. 1), who is
said by the Chaldee paraph, (ad loc.) to have
* Dr. Hackett (B. D. Am. ed. t. n.\ giving to Jorah
(HIV) the meaning otjlrtt or early rain, makes It =
Hariph, to which Oesenius gives the significance of
autumnal rain, or the early rain which begins to fall In
Palestine about the middle of October.
HABLOT
1287
been an innkeeper ; * but if there were such per-
sons, considering what we know of Canaanitish
morals (Lev. xviiL 27), we may conclude that
they would, if women, have been of this class.
The Law forbids (xix. 29) the father's compelling
his daughter to sin, but does not mention it as
a voluntary mode of life on her part without
his complicity. It could indeed hardly be so.
The isolated act which is the subject of Dent,
xxii. 28, 29, is not to the purpose. Male rela-
tives b were probably allowed a practically un-
limited discretion in punishing family dishonour
incurred by their women's unchastity (Gen.
xxxviii. 24). The provision of Lev. xxi. 9, re-
garding the priest's daughter, may have arisen
from the fact of his home being less guarded
owing to his absence when ministering, as well
as from the scandal to sanctity so involved.
Perhaps such abominations might, if not thus
severely marked, lead the way to the excesses
of Gentile ritualistic fornication, to which in-
deed, when so near the sanctuary, they might
be viewed as approximating (Michaelia, Lavts of
Motet, art. 268). Tet it seems to be assumed
that the harlot class would exist ; and the pro-
hibition of Dent, xxiii. 18, forbidding offerings
from the wages of such sin, is perhaps due in
the contagion of heathen example, in whose
worship practices abounded which the Israelites
were taught to abhor. The term nenp (mean-
ing properly "consecrated") points to one
description of persons, and fl'TM ("strange
woman ") to another, of whom this class mostly
consisted. The first term refers to the impure
worship of the Syrian * Astarte (Num. xxv. 1 :
cp. Herod, i. 199 ; Justin, xviii. 5 ; Strabo, viii.
378, xii. 559; Val. Max. ii. 6, 15; August.de
Civ. Dei, iv. 4), whose votaries, as idolatry
progressed, wonld be recruited from the
daughters of Israel; hence the common men-
tion of both these sins in the Prophets, the one
indeed being a metaphor of the other (Is. i. 21,
lvii. 8 ; Jer. ii. 20 : cp. Ex. xxxiv. 15, 16 ; Jer.
iii. 1, 2, 6 ; Ezek. xvi., xxiii.; Hos. i. 2, ii. 4, 5,
iv. 11, 13-15, v. 3). The latter class wonld
grow up with the growth of great cities and of
foreign intercourse, and would hardly enter into
the view of the Mosaic institutes. As regards
the fashions involved in the practice, similar
outward marks seem to have attended its earliest
forms to those which we trace in the classical
writers, e.g. a distinctive dress and a seat by
the wayside (Gen. xxxviii. 14: cp. Ezek. xvi. 16,
25 ; Bar. vi. 43 ; 4 Petron. Arb. Sat. xvi. ; Jnv.
vi. 118 sq. ; Dougtaei Analect. Sacr. Exc. xxiv.).
Public singing in the streets occurs also (Is. xxiii.
16 ; Ecclus. ix. 4). Those who thus published
their infamy were of the worst repute, others
had houses of resort, and both classes seem to
• Deyllng, OUen. Sacr. 11. 470, ttrVplJS. »*•
*w&NrevTpto*
» Pbilo {lib. it Spec. Ugib. 6, 1) contends that whore-
dom waa punished under the Mosaic Law with stoning ;
but this Is by Selden (de Ux. Btb. ill. 18) shown to be
unfounded.
« So at Corinth were 1,000 iipotevAot dedicated to
Aphrodite and the (cross sins of ber worship, and
similarly at Comana, In Armenia (Strabo, U. c).
* Avtox at ywauctt ix Ttjf oBov tot* mpunraf (wop-
n-ofovcri (Theophr. Char. xxxL). So Catullus (Carm.
xxxvU. is) speaks conversely of wautarii moedti.
Digitized by
Google
1288
HABNEPHEB
HAROEH
have been known among the Jews (Pror. vii.
8-12, xxiii. 28; Ecclus. lx. 7, 8); the two
women in 1 K. iii. 16 lived as Greek hetacrae
sometimes did, in a house together (Diet. Gr. <$•
Rom. Ant. s. v. Hetaera). The baneful fascina-
tion ascribed to them in Prov. v., vi., vii., may be
compared with what Chardin says of similar
effects among the young nobility of Persia
( Voyages en Perse, i. 163, ed. 1711), as also
may Luke xv. 30, for the sums lavished on
them (ik. p. 162). In earlier times the price of a
kid is mentioned (Gen. xxxviii.), and great wealth
doubtless sometimes accrued to them (Ezek. xri.
33, 39 ; xxiii. 26). But lust, as distinct from
gain, appears as the inducement in Prov. vii. 14,
15 (see Dougtaei Anal. Sacr. ad loc), where the
victim is further allured by a promised sacrificial
banquet (cp. Ter. Eun. iii. 3). Some of the ex-
pressions in Prov. vii. 22-27, cp. v. 4, 5, seem to
point to private assassination as an object, to
which such women, used as a lure, were the
means — a practice known to have recently pre-
vailed among theOrient.il Thugs. The "harlots"
are classed with " publicans," as those who lay
under the ban of society, in the N. T. (Matt. xxi.
32). No doubt they multiplied with the increase
of polygamy, and consequently lowered the esti-
mate of marriage. The corrupt practices im-
ported by Gentile converts into the Church
occasion most of the other passages in which
allusions to the subject there occur (1 Cor. v. 1,
9, 11 ; 2 Cor. xii. 21 ; 1 Thess. iv. 3 ; 1 Tim. i.
10). The decree in Acts xv. 29 has occasioned
doubts as to the meaning of woprda there,
chiefly from its context, which may be seen
discussed at length in Deyling's Observ. Sacr. ii.
470 sq. ; Schoettgen, Bar. Hebr. i. 468 ; Spencer
and Hammond, ad loc. The simplest sense,
however, seems the most probable. The children
of such persons were held in contempt, and could
not exercise privileges nor inherit (John viii. 41 ;
Deut. xxiii. 2 ; Judg. xi. 1, 2). On the general
subject see Michaelis* Laws of Moses, Bk. v. art.
268; Selden, de Vx. Heb. i. 16, iii. 12, and de
Jur. Xatur. v. 4 ; Schoettgen and the authori-
ties quoted by him. [H. H.]
The words 4XPfl Jlblm, A. V. "and they
washed his armour " (1 K. xxii. 38), should b*
(cp. R. V.) " now the harlots washed themselves
there," which is not only the natural render-
ing, but in accordance with the LXX. and
Josephus.
HABNE'PHEB ("I^Tt ; B. 'Avap^ip, A.
' Apva<pdp ; Harnapher), one of the sons of Zophah,
of the tribe of Asher (1 Ch. vii. 36).
HABCD, THE WELL OP (better " the
spring of Charod," i.e. " of the trembling," ]*}} \
"PPI ; B. rnyif 'ApotS, A. •ri)»"v5<' 'lose ;fons qui
tocatur Harod), a spring by (7J7) which Gideon
and his great army encamped on the morning of
the day which ended in the rout of the Midianites
(Judg. vii. 1), and where the trial of the people
by their modeof drinking apparently took place.
The word, slightly altered, recurs in the pro-
clamation to the host — "Whosoever is fearful
and trembling O^ chirid) let him return "
(v. 3) : but it is impossible to decide whether
the name Charod was, as Dean Stanley proposes,
bestowed on account of the trembling, or
whether the mention of the trembling was
suggested by the previously existing name of
the fountain : either would suit the parono-
mastic vein in which these ancient records so
delight. The word chared (A. V. " was afraid ")
recurs in the description of another event which
took place in this neighbourhood, possibly at
this very spot — Saul's last encounter with the
Philistines — when he " was afraid, and his
heart trembled greatly," at the sight of their
fierce hosts (1 Sam. xxviii. 5). The 'Ain Jalid,
" spring of Goliath," with which Dean Stanley
would identify Harod (S. $ P.), is very suitable
to the circumstances, as being at present the
largest spring in the neighbourhood, and as
forming a pool of considerable size, at which
great numbers might drink (Rob. ii. 323; cp.
Guerin, Samaric, i. 308 sq.). Bnt if at that
time so copious, would it not have been seized
by the Midianites before Gideon's arrival?
However, if the 'Ain Jalid be not this spring,
we are very much in the dark, since the " hill
of Moreh," the only landmark afforded us (vii.
1), has not been recognised. The only hill of
Moreh of which we have any certain knowledge
was by Shechem, 25 miles to the south. If 'Ain
Jalid be Harod, then Jebel Duhy must be
Moreh. Riehm (s. r.) suggests that the spring
may be identical with " the fountain that is in
Jezreel " (1 Sam. xxix. 1). Conder (Tent Work,
ii. 69) identifies it with 'Ain el-Jem'aSn, " spring
of the two assemblies," at the foot of the
eastern slope of Mt. Gilboa.
Josephus (Ant. v. 6, § 3) seems to have believed
that Gideon assembled his men east of Jordan, and
tried them at " the river " that is at the Jordan,
on the left bank of which they encamped before
passing over.
It is quite possible that the name Jalid is a
corruption of Harod. In that case it is a good
example of the manner in which local names
acquire a new meaning in passing from one
language to another. Harod itself probably
underwent a similar process after the arrival of
the Hebrews in Canaan, and the paronomastic
turn given to Gideon's speech, as above, may be
an indication of the change. On the other hand
Jalid may be a corruption of the name Gilead,
which seems to have been attached to a portion
of the range of Gilboa (Judg. vii. 3) ; or it may
have had its origin in a confusion between
Taluth and Jaluth, the Arab names of Saul and
Goliath. A curious tradition, perhaps due to
this confusion, existed in the 4th century (/tin.
Hierosol.), that David killed Goliath near Jez-
reel. During the Crusades 'Ain Jalid was
known to the Franks as Tubania (Win. of
Tyre, xxii. 26). [G.j [W.]
HAROTUTE, THE (HTHPI ; B. S 'Prntaws,
A. 6 'ApovSaios, 'EpokA i 'Apataios ; de Harodi),
the designation of two of the thirty-seven war-
riors of David's guard, Shammah and Elika
(2 Sam. xxiii. 25), doubtless derived from a place
named Harod, either that just spoken of or some
other. In the parallel passage of Chronicles
by a change of letter the name appears as
Harorite.
HABCEH (n^'tn, i.e. ha-Ro'eh = the seer ;
B. AW, A. 'Apai), a name occurring in the
genealogical lists of Judah as one of the tons of
Digitized by
Google
HABOBITE, THE
"Shobal, father of Kirjath-jearim " (1 Ch. il.
52). The Vnlg. translates this and the follow*
ing words, qui ndebat dxmidxum requietionam. A
somewhat similar name — Reaiah — is given in
ir. 2 as the son of Shobal, but there is nothing
to establish the identity of the two.
HABOBITE, THE OTnrjn; B. i 'AM,
A. Bail ; Arorites), the title given to Shammoth,
one of the warriors of David's guard (1 Ch.
xi. 27). We have here an example of the
minute discrepancies which exist between these
two parallel lists. In this case it appears to
have arisen from an exchange of "I, D, for 1, R,
and that at a very early date, since the LXX. is
in agreement with the present Hebrew text.
But there are other differences, for which see
Shajucah.
HABCSHETH {Ptfin, Charisheth=zwork-
ing in wood, stone, &c, Ges. : B. 'Ape urctt, A.
'AcrtipA8; ins. 16, A. tpv/wi: Haroseth), or rather
" Harosheth of the Gentiles," as it was called
(probably for the same reason that Galilee was
similarly defined afterwards), from the mixed
races that inhabited it, was the residence of
Sisera, captain of Jabin, king of Canaan (Judg.
iv. 2), whose capital, Hazor, was one of the fenced
cities assigned to the children of Naphtali (Josh,
xix. 36). It was from Harosheth that Sisera
marched, with 900 chariots, when he heard that
Barak was at Mount Tabor (Judg. iv. 13); and
to the same place his discomfited host was
pursued by the victorious Israelites (v. 16).
Probably from intermarriage with the conquered
Canaanites, the name of Sisera became after-
wards a family name (Ezra ii. 53). Neither is it
irrelevant to allude to this coincidence in con-
nexion with the moral effects of this decisive
victory ; for Hazor, once " the head of all those
kingdoms " (Josh. xi. 6, 10), had been taken
and burnt by Joshua; its king, Jabin I., put
to the sword ; and the whole confederation of the
Canaanites of the north broken and slaughtered
in the celebrated battle of the waters of Meroni
(Josh. xi. 5-14) — the first time that "chariots
and horses " appear in array against the invad-
ing host, and are so summarily disposed of,
according to Divine command, under Joshua;
bat which subsequently the children of Joseph
feared to face in the valley of Jezreel (Josh,
xvii. 16-18), and which Judah actually failed
before in the Philistine plain (Judg. i. 19).
Herein was the great difficulty of subduing
plains, similar to that beside which Harosheth
stood. It was not till the Israelites had asked
for and obtained a king, that they began "to
multiply chariots and horses" to themselves,
contrary to the express words of the Law (Deut.
xvii. 16), as it were to fight the enemy with his
own weapons. The first instance occurs in 2 Sam.
viii. 4, cp. 1 Ch. xviii. 4; next in the histories
of Absalom, 2 Sam. xv. 1, and of Adonijah, 1 K.
i. 5 ; while the climax was reached under
Solomon (1 E. iv. 26). And 'then it was that
their decadence set in 1 They were strong in
faith, when they hamstrung the horses, and
burned the chariots with fire, of the kings of
Hazor, of Madon, of Shim-on, and of Achshaph
(Josh. xi. 1). And yet so rapidly did they
decline when their illustrious leader was no
more, that the city of Hazor had risen from its
HARP
1289
ruins; and in contrast to the kings of Meso-
potamia and of Moab (Judg. in.), who were both
of them foreign potentates, another Jabin, the
territory of whose ancestors had been assigned
to the tribe of Naphtali, claimed the distinction
of being the first to revolt against and shake off
the dominion of Israel in his newly acquired
inheritance. But the victory won by Deborah
and Barak was well worthy of the song of
triumph which it inspired (Judg. v.), and of
the proverbial celebrity which ever afterwards
attached to it (Ps. lxxxiii. 9, 10). The whole
territory was gradually won back, to be held
permanently, as it would seem (Judg. iv. 24) ;
at all events we hear nothing more of Hazor,
Harosheth, or the Canaanites of the north, in
the succeeding wars.
The site of Harosheth has not yet been cer-
tainly identified; but el-Harithiyeh, first pro-
posed for it by Thomson {Land $ Book, ii. 143),
and accepted by Riehm (s. v.), Conder {Tent
Work, i. 132), and Geikie {H. L. * the Bible, ii.
262), seems best to meet the requirements of
the Bible narrative. El-Harithiyeh, situated in
the gorge of the Kishon, and commanding the
road between the two plains of Acre and
Esdraelon, must have been a place of great
military importance, and one well adapted to be
the head-quarters of the commander of the kiug
of Canaan's army. Dr. Thomson supposes that
Heber the Kenite was encamped on Esdraelon at
the time of the battle, and mentions (/. c) in
support of this view, that, on one occasion, he
met Bedawin who had come down from the high
ground north of Nazareth to pass the cold
winter months on the plain. Conder {Tent
Work, i. 133) identifying Kedesh with Kh.
A'adish, near the sea of Galilee, and Zaanajm
with Bcssum, places Heber's camp on the
basaltic plain, Sahel el-Ahma ; but it seems
scarcely probable that Sisera would have fled to
a place in rear of the victorious Israelites.
Stanley, who gives a graphic description of the
battle {Jewish Church, i. 322 sq.), supposes
Harosheth to have been in the north, " on the
outskirts of Lebanon," and Sisera to have met
his death, three days after the battle, on the
plain near Kedesh Naphtali. But a more natural
inference from the narrative (Judg. iv., v.) is
that Sisera was killed on the day of the battle,
and that the pursuit to Harosheth ended the
same day. Tristram {Bib. Places, p. 278) identifies
Harosheth with Tell Hara, on a hill above the
el-mieh lake, near Kades. [E. S. Ff.] [W.]
HARP is the uniform rendering in the A. V.
of the Hebrew Einnor ("1133), and is for the
first time mentioned in Gen. iv. 21. Yet,
although it is of all musical instruments the first
named in the Bible, it would be a mistake to
suppose that the Scriptures wished thereby to
convey the idea that Kinntr' was the oldest
musical instrument invented. On the contrary,
in the nature of things, proceeding from the
simple to the complicated, wind-instruments
must have preceded instruments of percussion,
as these again must have preceded stringed
• Kinnir, though not the oldest musical instrument,
by being a term for a contrivance from which all
stringed Instruments have successively sprung, has
although of masculine gender itself, a feminine plural.
Digitized by
Google
1290
HABP
instruments. People first whistled, then sang,
then blew, then beat, and finally touched stiings
with fingers, or plectron, or bow. [Dance ;
Flute.]
The shape as well as the size of the Kinndr
differed not only in different ages and different
countries, but also on different occasions in the
same age and the same country. In 1 Sam. x. 5
it is mentioned as one of the four musical in-
struments borne before the young prophets.
This would show that Kinnir was a portable
instrument, whilst it would appear from the
same book (xviii. 10) that it was an instrument
of somewhat large proportions, as it had to be
placed near a wall.
Although Kinnor h is uniformly rendered by the
A. V. " harp," it is yet a question to be settled
Indent AwyrlM barp. (Htmrad.)
whether it really means a " harp," or a " lute,"
or a " lyre," or a " psaltery," or a " guitar," &c.
One of the Rabbis (Midrash Tehiilim, lxxxi. 3)
identifies the Kinndr with the " psaltery "
(Nebet), the only difference between the two being
the number of strings they respectively had. If
this were true, it would show both great poverty
of original invention, and great fertility in the
modification of old inventions, in the time of
David. For it mnst not be forgotten that there
were four thousand musicians (1 Ch. xxiii. 5)
b On the other hand, the KinnBrUk <Al-Bai$hminUh
(I Ch. xv. 21) cannot signify harps with eight strings,
or harps on, or set to, the Shemmilh, as the Shtmfnith
!« clearly a music-band (Auklgth Shahas\ and the
KinnSrdth were only pUyed by the music-masters to
direct (n-V 3^>) this eighth band [Alahoth).
HABP
and probably many somewhat different musical
instruments in existence at his time, and yet
Later Aarjrrlan harp. (KonyunJIk )
there are not twelve entirely different ones
mentioned. Hence there must have been various
ICTPfon o«rp. CHms i)
Digitized by VjOOQIC
HABBOW
kinds of Kitmforoth, even as we positively know
that there were at least ten kinds of Ketitim,
if not more, to which the expression "on the
tenth Nibel " piBT? ^>333, Ps. xxxiii. 2)« clearly
points. [This, of coarse, does not exclude the
possibility of the " tenth Nebel " having had ten
strings.]
King David most have been a musician of no
mean order on various instruments, as appears
from the Scriptures, but the Kmnvr was his
favourite one. On it he composed his wonderful
rhythmical Psalms, and on it he chieflv excelled.
The Rabbis (Talmud Yerushalmi Berakhoth, i. 1;
Babli Undent, leaf 3 6) suggested his partiality
for, and dexterity on, this instrument, by ascrib-
ing to his Kinnir the virtues of an Aeolian
harp, which played of its own accord under the
influence of the " midnight air." [S. M. S.-S.]
HABBOW. The word so rendered 2 Sam.
xii. 31, 1 Ch. xx. 3 (P"TI), is probably a thresh-
ing machine ; the verb rendered " to harrow "
(TIB\ Job xxxix. 10), and "to break clods"
(Is. xxviii. 24; Hos. x. 11), expresses apparently
this latter process, and is
so far analogous to our
harrowing: but whether
done by any such machine
as we call " a harrow," is
very doubtful. Possibly
the instrument called
"HBO, "mattock," in Is.
vii. 25 (specially there for
hill-culture), might have
been used. In modem
Palestine, oxen are some-
times turned in to trample
the clods, and in some
parts of Asia a bush of
thorns is dragged over
the surface ; but all these
processes, if used, occur
(not after, but) before the
seed is committed to the
soil. This is clearly shown in Is. xxviii. 24,
Hos. x. 11, where "plow " and "open and break
clods" are distinguished in the earlier verse,
and followed by "sow" in the next. [See
AoaiCCLTtTRE.] [H. H.]
HAB'SHA (HEnri, MV." = deaf: in Neh.
BXA. 'Aiao-dV; in* Ezra, BA. 'Apn<ri: Harsa).
Bene-Charsha, sons of Charsha, were among the
families of Nethinim who came back from
Babylon with Zerubbabel (Ezra li. 52; Neh.
vii. 54). In the parallel list in Esdras the name
is Chabea.
HABSITH, THE GATE (Jer. xix. 2, R.V.).
In A. V. the text reads "east gate," marg.
sun gate; R. V. marg. gate of potsherds. A
gate of Jerusalem which led to Tophet (cp.
HABT, HIND
1291
rr. 6, 14) in the valley of Hinnom, and on
the S. side of the city [Jerusalem]. [W.]
HABT, HIND (W. n^JK 'ayyat, 'ayyalah ;
Arab. AA «Jj\ ; ttoupos ; cervus'). All English
versions, hart, hind — the male and female of the
deer. The hart is mentioned incidentally among
clean animals in Deut. xii. 15, and from the
many allusions to it in O. T. must have been
familiar to the Israelites. It is not mentioned
in the lists of clean and unclean animals in
Lev. or Dent. ; for though well known in Egypt
and Palestine, it could not exist in the Arabian
desert, fitted only for antelopes, and not for
deer. No species of deer, except the more
diminutive roebuck, can be said to be common
in Palestine at the present day, though the
fallow deer, Cervus dama, L. (Dama tulgaris of
later writers), is not quite extinct in the north.
Hasselquist found it on Mount Tabor in the last
century, and we once met with it in some wood not
many miles N.W. of Safed. We believe there are
still a few on the banks of the Litany river and
in the wooded district behind Sidon. It most
• "lid? is, and cannot be anything else than, an
T
ordinal. Genesis xxlv. 55 must therefore be translated
thus : M And her brother and her mother said. Let the
damsel abide with us a year or a (the) tenth part
thereof." Tost Q»Q' may. and often does, mean a year
will be seen from Ex. xiii. 10; Lev. xxv. 29, tx. A
few days are called In Hebrew D'inN D*D* (Sea.
xxix. 30).
Dear on Aayrlui monmnenta.
have been very common in ancient times, as it
is the native deer of Asia Minor, Cilicia, the
Southern Taurid, and Armenia, where in suitable
cover we found it still abundant; and if our
identification be correct, it is mentioned in
1 K. iv. 23, among the daily articles of food at
king Solomon's table. Our English fallow deer,
never found except semi-domesticated, are de-
rived from Asia Minor ; though the species is
now found wild in Sardinia and Spain. It must
have existed in the Lebanon in very early times,
as its teeth have been found there in bone
breccia, in caves along with those of other
animals. It would be more easily exterminated
than the antelopes or the wild goats, from its
partiality for open glades, and the outskirts of
forests.
The only other deer to which 'ayyal can refer
is the red deer, Cervus etaphus, L., of which we
found the teeth in considerable abundance in the
breccia of caverns in Lebanon. As however these
were mingled with those of the reindeer {Cervus
tarandus, L.) and the elk (Cervus alces, L.), they
probably belong to the prehistoric period. But it
should be noted that though no red deer is non-
found in Egypt or its frontiers, yet we find it de-
picted in the temples at Beni-Hassan ; and a small
Digitized by
Google
1292
HAHT, HIND
race of red deer, which has been separated by
zoologists as Cervua barbarus, Bennet, is still
found in the Djereed in the south of Tunis, and
in parts of Algeria and Morocco. It is probably
this species which was known to the Egyptians,
and it is the only one of the Deer family which
exists in Africa. But there is do evidence that
the Barbary deer ever extended east of the Nile.
BaitaqrAttr.
The name Ajalon, given to more than one
place in Palestine, means " the place of deer,"
and the many scriptural allusions to its habits
show that the deer was familiar to the inspired
writers. The first occurrence of the word in
Scripture is in Jacob's blessing of his children :
" Naphtali is a hind let loose " (Gen. xlix. 21),
which has been explained as prophetic of the
gallant conduct of that tribe when, under
Barak, " Zebulun and Naphtali jeoparded their
lives unto the death in the high places of the
field." In the passage in Genesis the LXX.
have evidently read 717*1$ for fl7»t$, and ren-
dered it by <tt<?\«x°* avttpevor, " a luxuriant
terebinth," but in this they have not been
followed by the Vulgate. The inscription to
Ps. xxii., Aijeleth Shahar, translated in the
margin as " the hind of the morning," has been
supposed to refer to some tune or melody known
by that name. [Aijeleth Shahar.]
Many characteristics of the deer are used as
illustrations in the poetical Books of Scripture.
Its swiftness : " Then shall the lame man leap
as a hart" (Is. xxxv. 6). " Behold, he cometh
leaping upon the mountains, skipping upon the
hills. My beloved is like a roe or a young
hart " (Cant. ii. 8, 9). Its surefootedness : " He
maketh my feet like hinds' feet " (2 Sam. xxii.
34 ; Ps. xv'iii. 33 ; Hab. iii. 19). Its activity is
the quality referred to in Jacob's blessing of
Naphtali. Its gentle and affectionate disposition
is taken by the wise man as an image of a
tender wife : " Let her be as the loving hind "
(Prov. v. 19). Its shyness and avoidance of the
haunts of men (Job xxxix. 1) are noted, and its
timidity, which causes it to cast its young at
the sound of thunder (Ps. xxix. 9). Its maternal
affection is used by Jeremiah to illustrate the
dire pressure of famine upon Jerusalem, under
the misery of which "the hind also calved in
HASHABIAH
the field and forsook it, because there was
no grass " (xiv. 5). As the deer could only
obtain water at certain places in the wilder-
ness, and those far off, so the Psalmist could
only join in the ordinances of God at the Taber-
nacle, from which he was far distant: "As the
hart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth
my soul after Thee, God " (Ps. xlii. 1).
All these traits correspond with the character
of the fallow deer better than with that of
any other. [H. B. T.]
HARTJ'M (DTI, ? = elevated; BA. 'lepcf/i;
Arum). A name occurring in one of the most
obscure portions of the genealogies of Judah, in
which Cox is said to have begotten "the
families of Aharhel son of Harum " (1 Ch.
iv. 8>
HARU'MAPH (C|Dnn = slit-noted, Ges. ;
B. 'Epa/idB, A. -tp, K. Elani8; Haromaph),
father or ancestor of Jedaiah, who assisted in the
repair of the wall of Jerusalem (Neh. iii. 10)l
HABU'PHITE, THE QWCVm ; B. i Xapai-
<t>ti, A. 'Apov<pt ; Maruphites), the designation of
Shephatiahu, one of the Korhites who repaired
to David at Ziklag when he was in distress
(1 Ch. xii. 5). The Masorets read the word
Hariphite, and point it accordingly, 'B^n-
[Habtph.] The town of Haruph is perhaps
represented by Kh. Kharif, south of 'Aid el-Ma,
Adullam {PEF. Mem. iii. 313).
HA'BUZ (ynn = zealous; 'Apovs; Bona),
a man of Jotbah, father of Meshullemeth, queen
of Manasseh, and mother of Axon king of Judah
(2 K. xxi. 19).
HABVEST. [Agmcultube.]
HASADrAHrnj-JDn; B. 'Ao-oJfa, A. 'A«ro-
jSatao" ; Hasadia), one of a group of five persons
among the descendants of the royal line of
Judah (1 Ch. iii. 20), apparently sons of Zerub-
babel, the leader of the return from Babylon.
It has been conjectured that this latter half of
the family was born after the restoration, since
some of the names, and amongst them this one
— beloved of Jehovah — appear to embody the
hopeful feeling of that time. [Abasias.]
HASENU'AH (fWUDn, i.e. has-Senfi'&h =the
hated; B. 'Aarct, A. 'Atrayova; Asana), a Ben-
jamite, of one of the chief families in the tribe
(1 Ch. ix. 7). The name is really Senuah, with
the definite article prefixed.
HASHABI'AH (JV3t5>n, and with final A,
•WatPn ; Hasabias, Ilasabia, Hasebias, Easebia),
a name signifying regarded of Jehovah, much in
request among the Levites, especially at the date
of the return from Babylon.
1. A Merarite Levite, son of Amaziah, in the
line of Ethan the singer (1 Ch. vi. 45,
Hebr. o. 30; B. 'A<rc0«f, A. -•).
2. Another Merarite Levite (1 Ch. ix. 14 ; B.
'Aoa&id, A. -0iov).
8. Chashabiahtj : another Levite, the
fourth of the six sons of Jeduthun (the sixth is
omitted here, but is supplied in e. 17), who
Digitized by
Google
HASHABNAH
HASHUBAH
1293
played the harp in the service of the house of
God under David's order (1 Ch. xxv. 3; B.
'Aoafiti, A. -tax), and had charge of the twelfth
•ourse (o. 19).
4. Chashabiahu: one of the Hebronites,
i*. descendant* of Hebron the son of Kohath,
one of the chief families of the Levitts (1 Ch.
xxvi. 30 ; BA. 'Ao-a/Sios). He and the 1700
men of his kindred had superintendence for king
David over business both sacred and secular on
the west * of Jordan. Possibly this is the same
person as
6. The son of Eemuel, who was "prince
(TBO of the tribe of Levi in the time of David
(1 Ch. xxvii. 17 ; BA. 'Avaflias).
6. Chabhabiahc : another Levite, one of the
" chiefs " CyP) of his tribe, who officiated for
king Josiah at his great Passover-Feast (2 Ch.
xxxv. 9 ; BA. 'Ao~a0td). In the parallel account
of 1 Esdras the name appears as Assabias.
7. A Merarite Levite who accompanied Ezra
from Babylon (Ezra viii. 19; B. 'Ao-ejSeuE, A.
-«). In 1 Esdras the name is Asebla.
8. One of the chiefs of the priests (and there-
fore of the family of Kohath) who formed part
of the same caravan (Ezra viii. 24 ; B. 'Acafiii,
A"* 2a/Xa). In 1 Esdras the name is Assahias.
9. "Ruler" ("K!>) of half the circuit or
environs 01?$) of Keilah ; he repaired a portion
of the wall of Jerusalem under Nehemiah (Neh.
iii. 17; BKA. 'Aaafiii).
10. One of the Levites who sealed the
covenant of reformation after the return from
the Captivity (Neh. x. 11 ; B. om., K"<=w>A.
"Eo-«/Kas). Probably this is the person named as
one of the " chiefs " O^T) of tn « Levites in
the times immediately subsequent to the return
from Babylon (xii. 24 ; cp. v. 26).
11. Another Levite, son of Bunni (Neh. xi.
15; BA. om., H"""*"* 'Atra&tas). Notwith-
standing the remarkable correspondence between
the lists in this chapter and those in 1 Ch. ix. —
and in none more than in this verse compared
with 1 Ch. ix. 14 — it does not appear that they
can be identical, inasmuch as this relates to the
times after the Captivity, while that in Chroni-
cles refers to the original establishment of the
Ark at Jerusalem by David, and of the Taber-
nacle (cp. to. 19, 21, and the mention of Gibeon,
where the Tabernacle was at this time, in e. 35).
But see Nehemiah.
12. Another Levite in the same list of
attendants on the Temple; son of Mattaniah
(Neh. xi. 22 ; B. 'Aaafiti, K. -co).
13. A priest of the family of Hilkiah in the
days of Joiakim son of Jesbua ; that is, in the
generation after the return from the Captivity
(Neh. xii. 21, om. BS»A., «""»'•>' 'Atrafilas ;
cp. ro. 1, 10, 26).
HASHAB'NAH (nj3B>n»; BA. 'Zec&wi
[see Swete in loco] ; Ilasebna), one of the chief
* This is one of the Instances In which the word 'iber
(beyond) Is used for the west side of Jordan. To
remove the anomaly, the A. V. bas rendered it "on this
side"(R. V. "beyond").
b This and the name following are considered by
Olshanaen (UKrb. d. Heb. Spraehe, y 37! h) as forms
•MiT3B>n (Hasbabuh).— (F.)
("heads") of the "people" (U. the laymen)
who sealed the covenant at the same time with
Nehemiah (Neh. x. 25).
HA8HABNI'AH(.T33C'PI;B. 'Ao-a/Su-oV,
A. 'Aafamla ; Hasebonia). ' 1.' Father of Hat-
tush, who repaired part of the wall of Jerusalem
(Neh. iii. 10>
8. Hasebnia. A Levite who was among
those who officiated at the great fast under Ezra
and Nehemiah when the covenant was sealed
(Neh. ix. 5). This and several other names are
omitted in the LXX.
HASHBADA'NA (n]TOt?n, see Olshausen,
Lehrb.% 277, k. 4; B. om.*A." 'Affafiaand, «»»*»
'Atra&Saya; Hasbadana), one of the men (pro-
bably Levites) who stood on Ezra's left hand
while he read the Law to the people in Jerusalem
(Neh. viii. 4).
HA'SHEM (DOTI; BK. om., A. 'A<rd>; As-
sent). The sons of Hnshem are named amongst
the members of David's guard in the catalogue
of 1 Ch. (xi. 34). In the parallel list of 2 Sam.
xxiii. 32, we find " the sons of Jashen." The
text is corrupt, and is variously restored by
Driver (Art. Text of the SB. of S>im. I.e.), and
by Kennicott (Dissertation, pp. 198-203).
HASHMAN'NIM (D'JDCTI = fat ones;
■noiofitis; legati).' This word only occurs in the
Hebrew of Ps. Ixviii. 31 : " Princes [hashman-
niml shall come out of Egypt ; Ethiopia [Cush]
shall haste to stretch out her hands unto God "
(R. V.). This has been thought to be an Egyp-
tian word, but the idea must now be abandoned
in favour of the rendering of the A. V. and
R. V. [R. S. P.]
HASHMO'NAH (njbB'n=/nut/u/ness; B.
ScAjuoro, A. 'Ao*< ATOM'S ; I/esmona), a station of
the Israelites, mentioned Num. xxxiii. 29, as
next before Moseroth, which, from xx. 28 and
Dent. x. 6, was near Mount Hor ; this tends to
indicate the locality of Hashmonah. Palmer
(Desert of the Exodus, ii. 509) takes Hash-
monah to be the same as Heshmon (Josh. xv. 21),
and locates it in the mountains of the 'Azdzi-
meh ; but this is too far from Mount Hor.
[H.H.] [W.]
HASHU'B (3Wn, »>. Chashshtkb = intelli-
(lent; 'Avoid; Asub). The reduplication of the
Sh has been overlooked in the A. V., but re-
tained by the R. V., and the name is identical
with that elsewhere more correctly given as
Hassiiub.
1. A son of Pahath-Moab who assisted in the
repair of the wall of Jerusalem (Neh. iii. 11).
S. Another man who assisted in the same
work, but at another part of the wall (Neh.
iii. 23).
3. The name is mentioned again among the
heads of the "people" (that is, the laymen) who
scaled the covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x.
'15). It may belong to either of the foregoing.
4. A Merarite Levite (Neh. xi. 15). In 1 Ch.
ix. 14, he appears again as Hasshub.
HASHU'BAH (rop ; n = esteemed; B.
'Aaov$i, A. 'Aotfii; Hasaba), the first of a
Digitized by
Google
1294
HASHUM
group of five men, apparently the latter half of
the family of Zerabbabel (1 Ch. Hi. 20). For
a suggestion concerning these persons, see
Hasadiah.
HA'SHUM (Opn=rich, distinguished: B.
'Afft'u, A. (Ezra) 'Avoifi ; B. 'HireE/t, A. -t (Neh.) :
Hasum, Hasom, Hasem). 1. Bene-Chashum,
two hundred and twenty-three in number, came
back from Babylon with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii.
19 ; Neh. vii. 22). Seven men of them had
married foreign wives, from whom they had to
separate (Ezra x. 33). The chief man of the
family was among those who sealed the covenant
with Nehemiah (Neh. z. 18).
8. (A. 'A<t6(l, B. omits; Aston.) The name
occurs amongst the priests or Levites who stood
on Ezra's left hand while he read the Law to
the congregation (Neh. viii. 4). In 1 Esd. ix. 44
the name is given corruptly as Lothasubus.
HA8HUTHA(KB6?n = «ncoMmJ; B. 'Aer-
ipd, NA. 'AtriKpi ; Hasupha), one of the families
of Nethinim who returned from captivity in the
first caravan (Neh. vii. 46). The name is ac-
curately Hasupha, as in Ezra ii. 43. [Asipha.]
has'Eah (rnpn ; b. xtwfa, a. 'E<r<r«frfj ;
Hasra), the form In which the name Hariias
is given in 2 Ch. xxxiv. 22 (cp. 2 K. xxii. 14).
HASSENA'AH (ntODH;' B. 'Aa&v, K.
'Aaania, A. 'Aaayi ; Asnaa). The Benfi-has-
sena'ah, " sons of Hassenaah," rebuilt the fish-
gate in the repair of the wall of Jerusalem (Neh.
iii. 3). The name is doubtless that of the place
mentioned in Ezra ii. 35, and Neh. vii. 38 —
Senaah, with the addition of the definite article.
Perhaps it has some connexion with the rock or
cliff Seneh (1 Sam. xiv. 4).
HASSHU'B (3-1 BTI = intelligent; <A<rtb8;
Assub), a Herarite Levite (1 Ch. ix. 14). He
appears to be mentioned again in Neh. xi. 15,
in what may be a repetition of the same genea-
logy ; but here the A. V. has given the name
as Hashdb.
HASU'PHA (*Q)bn=uncovered; B. *A<rou-
<t>4, A. -a; Hasupha). Beng-Chasupha were
among the Nethinim who returned from Babylon
with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii. 43). In Nehemiah
the name is inaccurately given in the A. V.
Hashupha ; in Esdras it is Asipha.
HAT. [Head-dress.]
HATA'CH Oinn-, B. 'AxpaBaios; Athach),
one of the eunuchs (A. V. and R. V. " chamber-
lains ") in the court of Ahasuerus, in immediate
attendance on Esther (Esth. iv. 5, 6, 9, 10). The
LXX. alters v. 5 to rbv trwoSx"" ct&rqr.
HATHA'TH (nnn = fearful; 'Aii»: Ha-
that), a man in the genealogy of Judah : one of
the sons of Othniel the Kenizzite, the well-
known judge of Israel (1 Ch. iv. 13).
HATIP'HA (KB'Ipn,? = captive: B. 'Atow-
<pi, A. 'Arupd; in Neh. BNA. 'Areupd: Hatipha).
HAURAN
Bene-Chatipha were among the Nethinim who
returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel (Ezra
ii. 54 ; Neh. vii. 56). [Atipha.]
HATITA (KOn?n: A. 'At.t<£; in Ezra, B.
'Arnri, in Neh. B. 'At«it<(: Hatita). Bene-
Chatita were among the " porters " or " children
of the porters " (D ,- WBTI, i.e. the gate-keepers),
a division of the Levites who returned from the
Captivity with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii. 42 ; Neh.
vii. 45). In Esdras the name is abbreviated to
Teta.
HATTIL (^BPI : in Ezra, B. 'Artti, in Neh.
B. 'Ey<)A ; in Ezra, A. 'ArrlX, in Neh. 'Ett^A :
Hatil). Bene-Chattll, " sons of C," were among
the "children of Solomon's slaves" who came
back from Captivity with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii.
57 ; Neh. vii. 59). [Haoia.]
HATTUSH (PUSH ; B. Xarrois, A. Xrr- ;
I/attus). 1. A descendant of the kings of Judah,
apparently one of the "sons of Shechaniah"
(1 Ch. iii. 22), in the fourth or fifth generation
from Zerubbabel. A person of the same name,
expressly specified as one of the "sons of David
of the sons of Shechaniah,'* accompanied Ezra
on his journey from Babylon to Jerusalem (Ezra
viii. 2), whither Zerubbabel himself had also come
only seventy or eighty years before (Ezra ii. 1, 2).
Indeed in another statement Hattush is said to
have actually returned with Zerubbabel (Neh.
xii. 2). At any rate he took part in the sealing
of the covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x. 4). To
obviate the discrepancy between these last-men-
tioned statements and the interval between
Hattush and Zerubbabel in 1 Ch. iii., Lord A.
Hervey proposes to read the genealogy in that
chapter as if he were the.nephew of Zerubbabel,
Shemaiah in v. 22 being taken as identical with
Shimei in v. 19. For these proposals the reader
is referred to Lord H.'s Genealogies, pp. 103,
307, 322, &c. [Lettcs ; Shechaniah.]
2. (BK. 'Aroit, A. Aiirois.) Son of Ha-
shabniah ; cue of those who assisted Nehemiah
in the repair of the wall of Jerusalem (Neh.
iii. 10).
HAURAN Q11D; AipartTis; the modern
Arabic \ -^ Geseniua derives it from "lin,
" a cave," but possibly the meaning is " hollow "
or " vale "). This word only occurs in Ezek.
xlvii. 16, 18, as the name of a region. It was
the eastern part of Bashan joining Golan
(which see), and formed one of the four pro-
vinces north of Gilead, which Josephus enume-
rates as Auranitis, Trachonitis, Gaulanitis, and
Batanea ( Wars, i. 20, §4), now called the dis-
tricts of Hauran, Lejja, Jaulan, and El Butein.
It was part of the tetrarchy of Philip (Luke
iii. 1 ; Josephus, Ant. xvii. 11, § 4). The name
seems to occur in its Hebrew form in the Mishna
(A'cwA hash-Shanah, ii. 4), and was never lost,
being well known to the Arab geographers and
to the Crusaders.
The passage in Ezekiel is somewhat difficult
of translation ; it appears to draw the boundary
of the land of Israel between (PSD) Damascus
on the one side, and Hauran and Gilead on the
other (see the rendering of the R. V.).
Digitized by
Google
HAURAN
The Hauran is a level plain of rich volcanic
arable soil, still celebrated for its corn, but
having little natural supply of water. In the
Roman period it supported a large population,
and it contains a great number of ruined sites
of cities and villages dating from the 2nd to
the 6th century a.d. The theory that these
are "giant cities" of the time of the Hebrew
conquest has no foundation: the remains are
not superior in size to those of the same period
found in other parts of Palestine and Syria, and
the age of the buildings is attested with un-
usual exactitude by the dates giving often the
day of the month as well as the year of their
erection. Of these Greek inscriptions no leas
than twenty are known within the limits of the
Hauran, and a yet larger number in other parts
of Bashan (see Waddington, InscriptiOTU Grecques
et Latines de la Syrie, Nos. 2392-2413). The
earliest belong to the time of Herod the Great ;
the latest perhaps is a Christian text of 641 a.d.
at the monastery of Job, in the traditional
"land of Uz," which was in the 4th century
supposed to be in the Hauran, though clearly
placed in Edom by the 0. T. account. Nothing
is known of the condition of this region before
the Christian era, with the exception of
the names of certain of its towns mentioned
in the Book of Joshua. The region is enu-
merated with Beth Ammon, Edom, Moab, and
Zobah on Cylinder A of the Annals of Assur-
bani-pal. It was conquered in 13 A.H. by the
Moslems, and its period of civilised prosperity
seems then to have passed away. It is described
in Burckhardt's Travels and in the works of De
Vogue 1 and Waddington, and has also been well
described by G. Schumacher (Across the Jor-
dan) in 1886, though his journey did not
extend to the eastern part of the region, which
has, however, been frequently visited, and is
fairly well known. The name is often loosely
applied to the whole of Bashan, which included
the four provinces named above ; but the strict
application is to the eastern part of the plain —
east of the Jaulan. Wetzstein's Seisebericht
uber den Hauran, 1860, is one of the best books
on the subject, and Graham's tour is given in
the Journal of the Royal Geographical Society,
xxviii. 226-263. The bnildings standing in
ruins in the cities are well given in the plates
of De VogWs Syrie Centrale, and many of these,
including Herod's temple at Si'ah, he discovered
in 1862.
The Hauran is remarkable for its subterranean
buildings, which are usually some 10 or 12 yards
in length by about 6 in breadth, and 10 ft.
high, often forming cave villages difficult of
access. The name of the region may perhaps
be derived from them, for they are mentioned
very early in a Greek text from Canatha (Wad-
dington, 2329), which includes the words, " King
Agrippa, friend of Caesar and friend of the
Romans, says ... of a life like that of wild
beasts ... I know not how till now in many
parts of the country dwelling in caves ..."
This custom is, however, not altogether peculiar
to the Hauran. Dolmens and other rude stone
monuments occur in the Hauran as in the
Jaulin, and in Gilead and Moab, which are
probably of high antiquity. The modern vil-
lages are poor and small, but the region being
1500 to 2000 feet above the sea, is healthy,
HAVILAH
1295
with a dry air and a constant breeze from the
sea. The inhabitants are mainly Druses or
nomadic Arab tribes (see Bashan). [C. R. C]
HAVENS, FAIR. [Fair Havens.]
HAVILAH (rr^in ; EoeiAdr, EfoAdr, Ee«\d,
EfoAd ; Hevila). l'. "The Land of the Havilah ; "
a region famed for its products of fine gold,
" bdellium," and " onyx stone," and surrounded
by the river Pison (Gen. ii. 11, 12). [Eden.]
2. One of the five sons of Cush the son of
Ham (Gen. x. 7; 1 Ch. i. 9). Cush is the
Assyrian Kusu, Kushu ; that is, Upper Egypt,
including MeroS or Ethiopia.
8. One of the thirteen sons of Joktan, a
descendant of Shem (Gen. x. 29 ; 1 Ch. i. 23).
The seats of the Joktanites appear to have lain
along the west and south sides of the great
peninsula of Arabia, where some of their tribal
names, notably Sheba and Hazarmaveth, the
Arabic Iladhramaut and Saba, are identified with
certainty. This agrees fairly well with the
datum of Gen. xxv. 18, where Havilah appears
as the south-eastern limit of the Ishmaelite
Arabs ; and with that of 1 Sam. xv. 7, where,
however, the reading is doubtful.*
That we should find indications of kindred
stocks on the opposite sides of a narrow sea
like the Arabian Gulf is not, perhaps, remark-
able. The existence of a Cuahite or African
Havilah and Joktanite or Arabian Havilah may
be taken as evidence of an early connexion
between the peoples thus known by a common
designation. But when we come to ask whether
that name itself can be identified in later
geography, we are somewhat embarrassed by
the number of suggestions offered by modern
writers. Bochart thought of ^JyJ>; KJtau-
lan; a district in Tihdmah, midway between
Sana'a and Mecca. E. Niebuhr (Beschr. von
Arabiai, S. 270) and J. D. Michaelis (Spicileg.
202 ; Suppl. 685) agree with him.* Gesenius
( Thesaur. s. v.) is for Strabo's XmiXeraun, the
Chaulotaeans, who were neighbours of the
Nabataeans and Hagarenes in Northern Arabia.
The uniform spelling of the Septuagint may,
however, indicate that the initial sound
of the Hebrew fP'lfl was the soft heth («»),
rather than the harsh cheth (»•). EfaiA&r or
EueiAik may be contrasted with spellings like
X($pdif. This suggestion derives some support
from the fact that the Arabic Version has
^bja», HavXla, with the soft letter (—), in
Gen. x. 29 ; 1 Sam. xv. 7. The name of the
• Wellbausen proposes Maim, comparing 1 Sam.
xxvtl. g.
» Niebuhr, referring to Oen. x. 1 and xxv. 18,
observes that "this little district "or Khaulan was
apparently the Havilah of the CushUes and " the
southern border of the Ishmaelites" (p. 2?0). He also
mentions another small district of the same name,
situate a few miles S.E. of Sana'a, which he thinks may
may have been the Havilah of Gem. x. 29.
Digitized by
Google
1296
HAVOTH-JAIR
town &Ji>y»». Huwailah, in the district of
LaksO. or Ilag'ar, on the Persian Gulf, would
therefore agree better with the Hebrew Havilah,
with which, indeed, Kautiach has compared it
(Riehm, s. v. Harrila). But this point perhaps
lies too far to the east for a Joktanite settlement.
No clear trace of the name Harilah has yet
been found in the cuneiform inscriptions.
A remarkable notice in Jacut's Mu'g'am
(vol. iii. p. 636) states that ,bj»-» B<w*l>
was the dialect spoken by "the descendants
of Midian, the son of Abraham," and by the
people of 5 JL«i Mahrah, the well-known dis-
trict situate to the east of Hadhramaut. This
looks like an unquestionable relic of the ancient
name Havilah.
The Cushite Havilah, on the other hand,
appears to have survived in the classical
Aualitae (Ptol. iv. 7; Plin. vi. 28); a people
with a town Aualis, now «Jj *, Zeila', on the
African coast, south of the straits of Bab-el-
Mandeb. As Gesenius points out, this may
have been the opinion of Saadiah, who tran-
scribes nVlfl by Si> » Ji ZaieUah, in Gen. ii.
11, i. 7, xiv. 18 ; cp. 1 Ch. i. 9, 23. [C. J. B.]
HA'VOTH-JA-IB, K. V. HAWOTH-
JA-IR (p'tfj nin, ml Chawoth Jair, " villages
of J. ;" iwai\us and wi/tai 'latp, QauuB ; vicus,
Avoth Jair, viculus Jair), certain villages on
the east of Jordan, in Gilead or Bashan. The
word Chawah, which occurs in the Bible in this
connexion only, is perhaps best explained by the
similar term in modern Arabic, which denotes a
small collection of huts or hovels in a country
place (see the citations in Gesenius, Thet. p. 451 ;
and Stanley, S. f P., App. § 84>
(1.) The earliest notice of the Hawoth-jair is
in Num. xxxii. 41, in the account of the settle-
ment of the Transjordanic country, where Jair,
son of Mana&seh, is stated to hare taken some
villages (A. V. "the small towns," R. V. "the
towns ") of Gilead — which was allotted to his
tribe — and to have named them after himself,
Hawoth-jair. (2.) In Deut. iii. 1+ (R. V.) it
is said that Jair " took all the region of Argob,
unto the border of the Geshurites and the
Maacathites ; and called them, even Bashan,
after his own name, Hawoth-jair." (3.) In the
records of Manasseh in Josh. xiii. 30, and 1 Ch.
ii. 23 (A. V., in both "towns of Jair"), the
Hawoth-jair are reckoned with other districts
as making up sixty " cities " (D'TB). In 1 K.
iv. 13 they are named as part of the com-
missariat district of Ben-geber, next in order
to the "sixty great cities" of Argob. They
had evidently become more important, as has
been the case in our own country with more
than one place still designated as a " hamlet,"
though long since a populous town. (4.) No
less doubtful is the number of the Hawoth-
jair. In 1 Ch. ii. 22 they are specified as
twenty-three, but in Judg. x. 4, as thirty. In
the latter passage, however, the allusion is to a
second Jair, by whose thirty sons they were
HAWK
governed, and for whom the original number
may have been increased. The word D ,- TD,
"cities," is perhaps employed here for the sake
of the play which it affords with D'ljff, "ass-
colts." [Jair; Bashan-havoth-jair.J
[G.] [W.]
HAWK (f)., nis; Kpof; accipiter), the
translation of the above-named Hebrew term,
which occurs in Lev. xi. 16 and Deut. xiv. 15 as
one of the unclean birds, and in Job xxxix. 26,
where it is asked, " Doth the nes fly by thy
wisdom and stretch her wings towards the
south?" This may apply either to the migra-
tory habits of many of the smaller birds of prey,
or to their power of flying right in the sun's
eye without being dazzled by its rays. The
ancients believed this to be a power peculiar to
eagles and hawks (Aelian, H. A. x. 14). Pliny
believed that all hawks except one were migra-
tory (x. 9). In this, however, he was in error.
Moreover many species are residents in one
country and migrants in another. The com-
monest of the smaller raptorial birds in Palestine
is the kestrel, Tinnuncuius alaudarius (Gm.),
identical with our common but very beautiful
English bird. In the Jordan valley and in the
Eastern forests, among the ruins of Rabbath Am-
nion and Gerash, in the desolate gorges of the
Dead Sea up to the confines of the Southern
deserts, among the luxuriant gardens of the
coast and in the sacred recesses of the mosques
of Hebron and Jerusalem, it equally abounds.
It is generally gregarious, ten or twenty pairs
nesting in the same ruins. It often builds in the
recesses of caverns occupied by griffons, and is
the only bird which the eagles appear to admit
as close neighbours. Another very pretty spe-
cies is the lesser kestrel {Tinnuncuius cenchrit,
Naum.), always distinguished by the natives,
and, unlike the last, only a spring and summer
resident. It lives in large colonies often in the
towns, as in the roofs of the old quarried caves
at Nazareth, or in the towers of mosques and
churches. It feeds entirely on insects, and may
Digitized by
Google
HAWK
be seen towards evening in the open glades, or
in the lanes between the gardens about villages,
catching cockchafers in its claws on the wing.
Jt is distinguished by its white claws. The
word nets is doubtless generic, as appears from
the espression in Deut. and Lev. "after his
.kind," and includes various other species of the
smaller Falconidae, such as the sparrow-hawk
(Accipiter nisus, L.), which is very common in
the country districts, and a permanent resident ;
the rarer Levant sparrow-hawk {Accipiter
bretipes, Sev.), the black-shouldered hawk
(Elanus caeruleus, Desf.). the hobby (Fatco sub-
buteo, L.), the merlin (Fako aesalon, Tnnst.),
Eleonora's falcon (>'. eleonorae, Giui), and a few
other rarer visitors. Besides the above-named
smaller hawks, the two magnificent species,
F. later and F. lanarius, are snmmer visitors to
Palestine. On one occasion, while riding with
an Arab guide, I observed a falcon of large size
rise close to us. The guide, when I pointed it
out to him, exclaimed, " Talr Saq'r." Talr, the
Arabic for " bird," is universally throughout
N. Africa and the East applied to those falcons
which are capable of being trained for hunting,
Le. " the bird," par excellence. These two species
of falcons, and perhaps the hobby and goshawk
( Astur palumbarius), are employed by the Arabs
in Syria and Palestine for the purpose of taking
partridges, sand-grouse, quails, herons, gazelles,
hares, &c. Dr. Russell (A'ar. Hist, of Aleppo,'
ii. p. 196) has given the Arabic names of
several falcons, but it is probable that some at
least of these names apply rather to the different
sexes than to distinct species. See a very graphic
description of the sport of falconry, as pursued
by the Arabs of N. Africa, in the Ibis, i. p. 284 ;
and cp. Thomson, T/ie Land and the Book,
p. 208.
Whether falconry was pursued by the ancient
Orientals or not, is a question we have been
unable to determine decisively. No represen-
tation of such a sport occurs on the monuments
of ancient Egypt (see Wilkinson, Anc. Eg. i.
221), neither is there any definite allusion to
falconry in the Bible. With regard, however,
to the negative evidence supplied by the monu-
ments of Egypt, we must be careful ere we draw
a conclusion ; for the camel is not represented,
though we have Biblical evidence to show that
this auimal was used by the Egyptians as early
as the time of Abraham ; still, as instances of
various modes of capturing fish, game, and wild
animals are not un frequent on the monuments,
it seems probable the art was not known to the
Egyptians. Nothing definite can be learnt from
the passage in 1 Sam. xxvi. 20, which speaks of
" a partridge hunted on the mountains," as this
may allude to the method of taking these birds
by "throw-sticks," &c- [Partridge.] The
hind or hart " panting after the water-brooks "
(Ps. xlii. 1) may appear at first sight to refer to
the mode at present adopted in the East of
taking gazelles, deer, and bustards, with the
united aid of falcon and greyhound; but, as
Hengstenberg {Comment, on Pt. 1. c) has
argued, it seems pretty clear that the exhaus-
tion spoken of is to be understood as arising not
from pursuit, but from some prevailing drought,
as in Ps. Ixiii. 1, " My soul thirsteth for Thee in
a dry land " (see also Joel i. 20). The poetical
version of Tate and Brady —
BIBLE D1CT. — VOI» 1.
HAY 1297
" As pants Uie hart for cooling streams
When heated In the chase,"
has therefore somewhat prejudged the matter.
For the question as to whether falconry was
known to the ancient Greeks, see Beckmann,
History of Intentions (i. 198-205, Bohn's ed.).
[W. H.] [H. B. T.]
HAY ("V¥n, chaslr; ir to? rtSlip x**ph,
Xoproj; prata, herba), the rendering of the
A. V. in l'rov. xxvii. 25, and Is. xv. I), of the
above-named Heb. term, which occurs frequently
m the 0. T., and denotes " grass " of any kind,
from an unused root, " to be green." [Grass.]
In Num. xi. 5, this word is properlv translated
"leeks." [Leek.] Harmer (Obse'rrat. i. 425,
ed. 1797), quoting from a MS. paper of Sir J.
Chardin, states that hay is not made anywhere
in the East, and that the/oenum of the Vulg.
(aliis locit) and the " hay " of the A. V. are
therefore errors of translation. It is true that
the modern Orientals do not make hay in our
sense of the term ; but they do mow thin grass
with a scythe, and that both when withered
and green, and lay it up in heaps for future use.
I have often seen a considerable quantity thus
piled up. The ancients did the same, as we
see from.Ps. xxxvil. 2, "They shall soon be cut
down (1 7©'), and wither as the green herb ; "
Ps. lxxii. 6, " Like rain upon the mo\rn grass "
(Tjj). See also Amos vii. 1, "The king's mow-
ings" OlJ^H *JI); and Ps. exxix. 7, where of
the " grass upon the housetops " (Poa annua ?)
it is aaid that " the reaper (itf P) filleth not
his hand " with it, " nor he that bindeth sheaves
his bosom." We do not see therefore, with the
author of Fragments in Continuation of Calmet
(No. clxxviii.), any gross impropriety in our
version of Pror. xxvii. 25, or in that of Is. xv. 6.
"Certainly," says this writer, "if the tender gran,*
is but just beginning to show itself, the hay,
which is grass cut and dried after it has arrived
at maturity, ought by no means to be associated
with it, still less ought it to be placed before it."
But (accepting the A. V. translation) when is
the impropriety ? The tender grass (K^)
may refer to the springing after-grass, and the
"hay" to the hay-grass. However, in the two
passages in question, where alone the A. V.
renders chaslr by " hay," the word would cer-
tainly be better translated by " grass " (R. V.
marg.). We may remark that there is an
express Hebrew term for " dry grass " or
"hay," viz. chishdsh,'' which, apparently from
an unused root signifying "to be dry,"* ia
• * The hay appeareth (R. V. " Is carried "), and the
tender grass sbewetb itself, and herbs of the mountains
are gathered " (Pror. xxvii. 25).
• E'C'I"! 1 *" led *° the Arabic iftf *■— - (<*e»alrt),
which Freytag thus explains, "Herbs, pecul. slcdor:
sett. Papulum slccum, foenum (ut ) ■■*». vlrlde et
weens)."
• The Arabs of the desert always call the dry
Julceless herbage of the Sahara, which Is ready-made
hay while it Is growing, cheihlth. In contradistinction
to the fresh grass of better soils.— {H. B. T.J
4 O
Digitized by
Google
1298
HAZAEL
rendered in the only two places where the
word occurs (Is. v. 24 [R. V. " dry grass "], xxxiii.
11) "chaff" in the English Versions. We do
not, however, mean to assert that the chashash
of the Orientals represents our modern English
hay. The " dry grass " was not stacked, but
only cut in small quantities, and then con-
sumed. The grass of " the latter growth after
the king's mowings " (Amos vii. 1) or second crop
(Cfa?), like our after-grass, denotes the mown
grass as it grows afresh after the first cutting ;
like the Chordum foenum of Pliny (A T . H. viii.
28). [W. H.] [H.B. T.]
HAZA'-EL(^Ktn = (?orfAaM seen; 'Afafa;
Hazalf) was a king of Damascus, who reigned
from about B.C. 886 to B.C. 840. He appears
to hare been previously a person in a high
position at the court of Benhadad, and was sent
by his master to Elisha, when that prophet
visited Damascus, to inquire if he would re-
cover from the malady under which he was
suffering. Elisha's answer that Benhadad would
surely recover, but that he would also surely
die, and his announcement to Hazael that he
would one day be king of Syria, which seems
to have been the fulfilment of the commission
given to Elijah (1 K. xii. 15) to appoint Hazael
king, led to the murder of Benhadad by his
ambitious servant, who forthwith mounted the
throne (2 K. viii. 7-15. Sec Benhadad). He
was soon engaged in hostilities with Ahaziah
king of Judah, and Jehoram king of Israel, for
the possession of the city of Ramoth-Gilead
(ibid. viii. 28). The Assyrian inscriptions show
that about this time a bloody and destructive
war was being waged between the Assyrians on
the one side, and the Syrians, Hittites, Hama-
thites, and Phoenicians on the other. [See
Damascus.] Benhadad had recently suffered
several severe defeats at the hands of the As-
syrian king, Shnlmaneser II. ;'and upon the ac-
cession of Hazael the war was speedily renewed.
Hazael took up a position in the fastnesses of
the Anti-Libanus, but was there attacked by
the Assyrians, who defeated him with great loss,
killing 16,000 of his warriors, and capturing
1121 chariots, with his camp. Hazael fled, and
was besieged by Shalmaneser in Damascus.
Three years later the Assyrians once more
entered Syria in force, and took possession of
some of his strongholds. After this, internal
troubles appear to have occupied the attention
of the Assyrians, who made no more expeditions
into these parts for about a century. The
Syrians rapidly recovered their losses ; and to-
wards the close of the reign of Jehu, Hazael led
them against the Israelites (about B.C. 860),
whom he " smote in all their coasts " (2 K. x.
32), thus accomplishing the prophecy of Elisha
(ibid. viii. 12). His main attack fell upon the
eastern provinces, where he ravaged "all the
land of Gilead, the Gadites, and the Reubenites,
and the Manassites, from Aroer, which is by the
river Arnon [R. V. " by the valley of Arnon "],
evon Gilead and Bashan" (ibid. x. 33). After
this he seems to have held the kingdom of
Israel in a species of subjection (ibid. xiii.
3-7, and 22); and towards the close of his
life he even threatened the kingdom of Judah.
Having taken Gath (ibid. xii. 17 ; cp. Amos
HAZAE-MAVETH
i. 2), he proceeded to attack Jerusalem, de-
feated the Jews in an engagement (2 Ch. xxiv.
24), and was about to assault the city, when
Joash induced him to retire by presenting
him with " all the gold that was found in the
treasures of the house of the Lord, and in the
king's house" (2 K. xii. 18). Hazael appears
to have died about the year B.C. 840 (ibid. xiii.
24), having reigned 46 years. He left his crown
to his son Benhadad (2 K. xiii. 3). His " house '"
at Damascus is alluded to in Amos i. 4, probably
as a well-known or beautiful palace.
[G. R.] fj. G. P.]
HAZAI'AH (nnn = Jah Iiath seen; B.
'0(tid, A. -la ; ffazia), a man of Judah of the
family of the Shilonites (R. V. ; A. V. " Shi-
loni "), or descendants of Suelah (Nch. xi. 5).
HAZAR-ADDAR, &c. [Hazeb.]
HAZA'R-MA'VETH (njOIVn = the court of
death, Ges. : B. 'Aavp/jube, A. Sap/t<(0 [Gen.] ; B.
om., A. 'Apapd0 [1 Ch.] : Asarmoth), the third,
in order, of the sons of Joktan (Gen. x. 26 ;
1 Ch. i. 20). The name is found on Sabaean
inscriptions, and is preserved, almost literally,
in the Arabic Hadramaut (d^yeuA^), and
as the appellation of a province and an ancient
people of Southern Arabia (cp. MY". 11 s. n. ;
Delitzsch [1887], and Dillmann' on Gen. /. c).
The province of Hadramaut is situate east of
the modern Yemen (anciently, as shown in
Arabia, the limits of the latter province em-
braced almost the whole of the south of
the peninsula), extending to the districts of
Shihr and Mahreh. Its capital is Shibam, a
very ancient city, of which the native writers
give curious accounts, and its chief ports are
Mirbat, Zafiiri [Sephah], and Kishcem, from
whence a great trade was carried on, in ancient
times, with India and Africa. Hadramaut itself
is generally cultivated, in contrast to the con-
tiguous sandy deserts (called El-Ahkaf, where
lived the gigantic race of 'Ad) ; is partly moun-
tainous, with watered valleys, and is still
celebrated for its frankincense (EMdrisi, ed.
Jomard, i. p. 54 ; Niebuhr, Descr. p. 245), ex-
porting also gum-arabic, myrrh, dragon's blood,
and aloes ; the latter, however, being chiefly from
Socotra, which is under the rule of the Sheykh
of Kesneem (Niebuhr, /. e. sq.). The early
kings of Hadramaut were Joktanites, distinct
from the descendants of Yaarub, the progenitor
of the Joktanite Arabs generally ; and it is
hence to be inferred that they were separately
descended from Hazarmaveth. They main-
tained their independence against the powerful
kings of Himycr, until the latter were subdued
at the Abyssinian invasion (Ibn-Khaldoon,
ap. Caussin, Essai, i. 135 sq.). The Greeks
and Romans called the people of Hadramaut.
variously, Chatramotitae, Chatrammitae, &c. ;
and there is little doubt that they were the
same as the Adramitae. The modern people,
although mixed with other races, are strongly
characterised by fierce, fanatical, and restless
dispositions. They are enterprising merchants,
well known for their trading and travelling
propensities. [E. S P.]
Digitized by
Google
HAZAZON-TAMAB
HAZAZON-TAMAB, 2 Ch. xx. 2. [Haze-
zoji-Tahab.]
HAZEL. The translation in A. V. of H7,
lux; Arab. *J, lout. The R. V. renders it
" almond tree," in Gen. xxx. 37, the only passage
where the word occurs, as one of the three trees
from which Jacob cut the rods which he peeled.
The LXX. render it by xipvoy, a generic term for
any kind of kernel fruit, and equally applicable
to the almond and the hazel. The Vulgate
has virgaa amygdalinas. There can be no
question that the identification of the Vulgate
and the R. V. is correct. We hare for it the
high authority of Celsius, who has exhaustively
discussed the subject; and the fact of the
common Arabic name of the almond-tree being
identical should be conclusive. Besides which
the almond is indigenous in Palestine and in
Mesopotamia; the bazel is not found in these
countries, being a native of more northern and
western regions. [Almond.] [H. B. T.]
HAZELELPO'NI O^B^n, of uncertain
meaning; B. 'EirnXt&ptip, A. 'E<ri)Mtk<p<iv;
Amlflphmii), the sister of the sons of Etam in
the genealogies of Judah (1 Ch. ir. 3). The
name has the definite article prefixed, and is
accurately "the Tzelelponite," as of a family
rather than an individual. [F.]
HA'ZEB OVn, •".*. Chaser, from "IVr!, to
surround or enclose), a word which is of not
unfrequent occurrence in the Bible in the sense
of a "court" or quadrangle to a palace* or
other building, but which topographically seems
generally employed for the " villages " of people
in a roving and unsettled life, the semi-perma-
nent collections of dwellings which are described
by travellers among the modern Arabs to consist
of rough stone walls covered with the tent
cloths, and thus holding a middle position
between the tent of the wanderer — so transitory
as to furnish an image of the sudden termina-
tion of life (Is. xxxviii. 12) — and the settled,
permanent town.
As a proper name it appears in the A. V. —
1. In the plural, Hazeium and Hazeroth,
for which see below.
2. In the slightly different form of Hazor.
3. In composition with other words, giving a
special designation to the particular " village "
intended. When thus in union with another
word, the name is Hazar (Chasar). The follow-
ing are the places so named, and it should not
be overlooked that they are all in the wilderness
itself, or else quite on the confines of civilised
country : —
1. Hazar-addar (TIN ~fST] : in Num. trav-
Xts'ApdS; in Josh. B. ZapdSa, A. 'ASSapd : Villa
•nomine Adar, Addar), a place named as one of
the landmarks on the southern boundary of the
land promised to Israel, between Kadesh-barnea
and Azmon (Num. xxxiv. 4). In the specification
of the south boundary of the country actually
possessed (Josh. xv. 3), the name appears in the
• In 2 K. xx. «, the Masorets (Art) have substituted
IVn (A. V. "court") for the 1»J>P| or the original
text. The same change should probably be made In
Jer. xU. 1. [See Iskxail, «.]
HAZEE
1299
shorter form of Addar (A. V. Adar), and an ad-
ditional place is named on each side of it. The
site of Hazar-addar does not appear to have been
encountered in modern times. Riehm (s. r.)
suggests that it may possibly be the same place
as Hezron (Josh. xv. 3).
The LXX. reading might lead to the belief
that Hazar-addar was identical with Abac, a
Canaanite city which lay in this direction, but
the presence of the Aia in the latter name
forbids such an inference.
2. Hazar-enan QVy lVn = village of
springs ; in Num., B. 'Kpatvtulu, AF. 'Katpralr ;
Villa Anon, Atrium Enon, A. Euan), the place
at which the northern boundary of the land
promised to the children of Israel was to
terminate (Num. xxxiv. 9), and the eastern
boundary commence (c. 10). It is again men-
tioned in Ezekiel's prophecy (xlvii. 17, xlviii. 1)
of what the ultimate extent of the land will
be. These boundaries are traced by Mr. Porter,
who would identify Hazar-enan with Kuryetein
= "the two cities," a village more than 60
miles E.N.E. of Damascus, the chief ground for
the identification apparently being the presence
at Kuryetein of " large fountains," the only ones
in that " vast region," — ■ circumstance with
which, the name of Hazar-enan well agrees
(Porter, Damascus, i. 252, ii. 358). The great
distance from Damascus and the body of
Palestine is the main impediment to the recep-
tion of this identification. Keil (s. r.) suggests
the springs near the waterparting between the
Orontes and Leontes ; Conder (Heth and Moab,
p. 8), l Ain cl-'Asy, one of the principal sources
of the Orontes.
3. Hazar-oaddah (mi "VSR; B. 2tp*l,
A. 'AatpyaStd ; Aser-Gadda), one of the towns
in the southern district of Judah (Josh. xv. 27),
named between Moladah and Heshmon. No
trace of the situation of this place appears in
the Onomasticon, or in the works of modern
travellers. In the map of the PEF. (Sheet
xxv.) a site named el-Ghurra is marked as close
to Moladah (el-Mil/t), but it is perhaps too much
to assume that Gaddah has taken this form by
the change so frequent in the East of D to R.
4. Hazar-hat-ticon, B. V. Hazer-hat-
ticon (J13W 1Xn = tt* middle village; A4A*
too 3aurii>, A. corrupt ; Domus Tichon), a
place named in Ezekiel's prophecy of the ulti-
mate boundaries of the land (Ezek. xlvii. 16),
and specified as being on the boundary ("vtt
7433) of Hauran. It is not yet known; but
Wetzstein (Seisebericht, p. 100) suggests its
identification with Hadhar, to the north of
Jebel Druze, and on the east border of el-Lejah.
6. Hazab-shdai. (7CTC> ISn = fox-village:
B. XoAao-fwAd, 'Apaa>\d, 'E<rnptov\dfi ; A.'Avap-
ffouAd, 2tptrov\d, 'ZotpooviX : ffasersual, Hasar-
suhal), a town in the southern district of Judah,
lying between Hazar-gaddah and Beersheba
(Josh. xv. 28, xix. 3 ; 1 Ch. iv. 28). It is
mentioned in the same connexion after the
return from the Captivity (Neh. xi. 27). The
site has not yet been conclusively recovered;
but in the map of the PEF. (Sheet xxv.) a
site, Kit. Saaeh, is marked at about the right
spot, which may be a corruption of the original
name.
40 2
Digitized by
Google
1300
HAZEBIM
6. Hazab-susaii (DfrtD *1VPI = horse-vil-
lage; B. 'iapaovaiv, A. 'Kotpaovoiu; Hastr-
■susa), one of the " cities " allotted to Simeon in
the extreme south of the territory of Jndah
(Josh. xix. S). Neither it nor its companion
Beth-marcaboth, the " house of chariots," are
named in the list of the towns of Jndah in
chap, xv., but they are included in those of
Simeon in 1 Ch. iv. 31 (see v. 7), with the ex-
press statement that they existed before and up
to the time of David. Dean Stanley has sug-
gested (S. $ P. p. 160) that they were the
depots and stations for the chariots and horses,
such as those which in Solomon's time went to
and fro between Egypt and Palestine. This view
is supported by the inscriptions of Thothmes 111.,
and by the Tell Amtrna letters which mention
Canaanite and Egyptian chariots in Palestine at
a very early period. The names, if not Hebrew,
-are apparently Semitic. But they may perhaps
be in the former language of the country, adopted
by the Hebrews, and so altered as to bear a
meaning in Hebrew. This is exactly the process
which the Hebrew names hare in their turn
undergone from the Arabs, and is in fact one
which is well known to have occurred in all
languages, though not yet recognised in the
particular case of the early local names of
Palestine. Guenn (Judee, iii. 172) suggests its
identification with Susieh, E.N.E. of es-Semu'a,
Eshtemoa ; Tristram ( DM. Places, p. 25) with
Beit Sushi, on the caravan road from Gaza to
Egypt.
7. Hazar-susiji (D»P?D "Wl = the tillage
of horses ; B. 'Hfuovatoopdfi, A. 'HpurvtinrlfL ;
Itasarsusim), the form nnder which the pre-
ceding name appears in the list of the towns of
Simeon in 1 Ch. iv. 31. [G.] [W.]
HAZE'BIM. The Arras, or more accu-
oratcly the Avrim, a tribe commemorated in a
fragment of very ancient history, as the early in-
habitants of the south-western portion of Pales-
tine, are therein said to have lived (R. V.) " in
villages (A. V. "Hazerim," DnvriB; 'A<n)8«i9,
AF.'A«n)p<S9; Haserim) as far as Gaza "(Dent. ii.
23), before their expulsion by the Caphtorim.
The word is the plural of Hazeb, noticed above,
and, as far as we can now appreciate the signi-
ficance of the term, it implies that the Avvim
were a wandering tribe who had retained in
their new locality the transitory form of en-
campment of their original desert life. Pro-
fessor Palmer (Desert of the Exodus, ii. 428)
points out that the Avvim were the southern-
most of the tribes inhabiting the Canaanitish
territory (Josh. xiii. 3, 4), and identifies Hazerim
with the mountains of the 'Azaximeh, at the
southern extremity of the Negeb. [G.] [W.]
HAZETtOTH (I\\-\)fr]= pastoral enclosures,
camping grounds ; 'Aaripi&B, in Deut. Ai\&r ;
ffaseroth: Num. xi. 35, xii. 16, xxxiii. 17 ; Deut.
i. 1), a station of the Israelites in the desert,
mentioned next to Kibroth-Hattaavah, and
perhaps recognisable in the Arabic "j fnaf-t
Hudherah (Robinson, i. 151 ; Stanley, 8. f P.
pp. 81, 82), which lies about eighteen hours' dis-
tance from Sinai on the raid to 'Akabah. For
a description of 'Am Hudherah,' and the curious
HAZO
Bedawi legend connecting it with a lost caravan,
see Ordnance Survey of Sinai, i. 66, 122, 303 ;
and Palmer, Desert of the Exodus, i. 258 sq.
[Hazeb,] [VV.]
HAZEZO'N-TA'MAR and HAZAZO'N-
TA'MAE (lOR 1'VSn ; in Gen. 'Awwnu- Bapip,
in 2 Ch. B. 'Aaap 0a/lapd, A. 'Kvaakv B' ; Asasoti
Thamar), the names under which, at a very early
period of the history of Palestine, and in a docu-
ment believed by many to be the oldest of all these
early records, we first hear of the place which
afterwards became En-gem. The Amorites
were dwelling at Hazazon-tamar when the
four kings made their incursion, and fought
their successful battle with the five (Gen. xiv.
7). The name occurs only once again — in the
records of the reign of Hezekiah (2 Ch. xx. 2) —
when he is warned of the approach of the
horde of Ammonites, Moabites, Mehunim, and
men of Mount Seir, whom he afterwards so
completely destroyed, and who were no doubt
pursuing thus far exactly the same route as the
four kings had done a thousand years before
them. Here the explanation, " which is En-
gedi," is added. The existence of the earlier
appellation, after En-gedi had been so long in
use, is a remarkable instance of the tenacity of
these old Oriental names, of which more modern
instances are frequent. See Aocho, Bethsaida,
&c. The name possibly survives in Wddy
Husdsah, north of 'Ain Jidy, En-gedi.
Hazazon-tamar is interpreted in Hebrew to
mean the " pruning or felling of the palm "
(Gesen. Thes. p. 512). Jerome (Quaest. in Gen.)
renders it twos palmarum. This interpretation
of the name is borne out by the ancient reputa-
tion of the palms of En-gedi (Ecclus. xxiv. 14,
and the citations from Pliny, given nnder that
name). The Samaritan Version has ^3 31?D
= the Valley of Cadi, possibly a corruption of
En-gedi. The Targums have En-gedi.
Perhaps this was " the city of palm-trees "
('Ir hat-temarim) out of which the Kenites, the
tribe of Moses' father-in-law, went up into the
wilderness of Judah, after the conquest of the
country (Judg. i. 16). If this were so, the
allusion of Balaam to the Kenite (Num. xxiv.
21) is at once explained. Standing as he was
on one of the lofty points of the highlands
opposite Jericho, the western shore of the Dead
Sea as far as Engedi would be before him, and
the cliff, in the clefts of which the Kenites had
fixed their secure " nest," would be a prominent
object in the view. This has been already
alluded to by Dean Stanley (S. #• P. p. 225,
n. 4). The allusion may, however, be to Cain,
Yuldn, which forms a conspicuous point on the
horizon as seen from the Moabite hills (Conder,
MS. note). [G.] [W.]
HAZI-EL (Vtn=secn of God ; B. EledJA,
A. 'AfrijA ; Hosiet), a'Levite in the time of king
David, of the family of Shimei, the younger
branch of the Gershonites (1 Ch. xxiii. 9).
HAZO' (ltn ; "Afau ; Azau), a son of Nahor
by Milcah his wife (Gen. xxii. 22). The name
is compared by Friedrich Delitzsch (Parodies,
p. 307) with the cuneiform (mat) ffa-zu-u,
Digitized by
Google
HAZOB
(the land) Hazu; a district bordering on
Northern Arabia, and mentioned in the inscrip-
tions along with Bdzu, which is the Assyrian
equivalent of the Biblical Buz (Gen. zxii. 21).
The phonetic correspondence of the two names
ia complete (Heb. 6 = Assyr. u). See also
Schrader, KAT. 1 p. 141. [C. J. B.]
HA'ZOB O'lVn : 'Atrip; A. in 1 K. ix. 15,
'Kaip : Asor, Hasor). 1. A fortified city, which
on the occupation of the country was allotted
to Naphtali (Josh. xii. 36). Its position was
apparently between Raman and Kedesh (ib. xii.
19), on the high ground overlooking the Lake
of Merom (faiptctirat rfjj S<>t ( X "'' T '' o, *'/**')*?
Joseph. Ant. v. 5, § 1). There is no reason for
supposing it a different place from that of which
Jabin was king (Josh. xi. 1), both when Joshua
gained his signal victory over the northern con-
federation, and when Deborah and Barak routed
his general Sisera (Judg. ir. 2, 17 ; 1 Sam. xii.
9). It was the principal city of the whole
of North Palestine, " the head of all those
kingdoms " (Josh. xi. 10, and see Onomasticon,
Asor). Like the other strong places of that
part, it stood on an eminence (7FI, Josh. xi. 13,
A. V. "strength," R. V. "mounds"), but the
district around must have been on the whole
flat, and suitable for the manoeuvres of the
" very many " chariots and horses which formed
part of the forces of the king of Hazor and his
confederates (Josh. xi. 4, 6, 9; Judg. iv. 3).
Hazor was the only one of those northern cities
which was burnt by Joshua ; doubtless it was
too strong and important to leave standing in
his rear. Whether it was rebuilt by the men
of Naphtali, or by the second Jabin (Judg. iv.),
we are not told, but Solomon did not overlook
so important a post ; and the fortification of
Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer, the points of de-
fence for the entrance from Syria and Assyria,
the plain of Esdraelon, and the great maritime
lowland respectively, was one of the chief
pretexts for his levy of taxes (1 K. ix. 15).
Later still it is mentioned in the list of the
towns and districts whose inhabitants were car-
ried off to Assyria by Tiglath-pileser (2 K. xv.
29; Joseph. Ant. ix. 11, § 1). It also not im-
probably occurs in Tobit i. 2, under the corrupt
form of Aser. We encounter it once more in
1 Mace xi. 67, where Jonathan, after encamp-
ing for the night at the " water of Gennesar,"
advances to the " plain of Asor " (Joseph. Ant.
xiii. 5, § 7 : the Greek text of the Maccabees
has prefixed an n from the preceding word,
tcoW; E. V. Nasor) to meet Demetrius, who
was in possession of Kadesh (xi. 63 ; Joseph, as
above). [Nasor.]
The site of Hazor has not yet been certainly
ascertained, but it has been proposed to identify
it with : — (1) Tell Harrah, a prominent isolated
hill, rising steeply above 'Ain el-Meltahah, at
the N. end of the great plain Ard el-Kheit, and
1$ miles from Lake Hileh, "waters of Merom."
On the top of the hill, which is 2} miles S.E. of
Kedesh, are extensive ruins of an old town,
with its enclosing wall and acropolis. Much of
the masonry, undressed blocks of stone set
without mortar, seems to be very old (Wilson,
PEF. Mem. i. 238 ; Guerin, QalUe'e, ii. 363 sq.).
(2) Tell el-Khurcibeh, a hill at the S. end of the
HAZOR
1301
Merj Kades, 2} miles from Kedesh, and 3.J
miles from Lake Hileh. The ruins on the hill
consist of shapeless heaps of stones, with no
trace of fortifications or large structures (Rob.
iii. 364-5; Riehm, s. v.). (3) Conder has
pointed ont (PEF. Mem. i. 204) that the name
Hadireh, the Arabic equivalent of Hazor, occurs
in Jebel Hadireh and Merj Hadireh, 3J miles
S.S.W. of Kedesh and 5§ miles from Lake Hileh.
Though Jebel Hadireh is close to the point at
which the main road to the north crosses the
deep, rocky W. Henddj, it does not appear to
have been occupied by a fortress, for no ruins
are mentioned in connexion either with the hill
or the plain. The distance from the lake is
also too great if the statement of Josephus be
accepted as correct.
Several places bearing names probably derived
from ancient Hazors, hare been discovered in
this district. A list will be found in Rob. iii.
366, note (and cp. also Van de Velde, Syria d"
P. ii. 178; Porter, Damascus, i. 304). But
none of these answer to the requirements of
this Hazor.
2. (B. 'Aaopiupratr, A. omits ; Asor.) One of
the " cities " of Judah in the extreme south,
named next in order to Kedesh (Josh. xv. 23)„
It is mentioned nowhere else, nor has it yet
been identified. The LXX. B. unites Hazor
with the name following it ; which causes
Reland to maintain that tbey form but one
(Pal. pp. 144, 708) : but the LXX. text of this
list is so corrupt, that it seems impossible to
argue from it.
3. (LXX. omits ; Asor nana.) Hazor-Hadat-
tah, = " new Hazor," possibly contra-distin-
guished from that just mentioned; another of
the southern towns of Judah (Josh. xv. 25).
The words are improperly separated in the A. V.
[Hadattah.]
4. (B. 'Aafpdy atrrti 'Acraip, A. 'Aatpwfi i.tA ;
Aesron, haec est Asor.) " Hezron which is
Hazor " (Josh. xv. 25) ; but whether it be in-
tended that it is the same Hazor cs either of
those named before, or that the name was
originally Hazor, and had been changed to.
Hezron, we cannot now decide.
5. (A. 'Aaiip, B. omits; Asor.) A place in
which the Benjamites resided after their return
from the Captivity (Neh. xi. 33). From the
places mentioned with it, as Anathoth, Nob,
Raman, &c, it would seem to have lain north
of Jerusalem, and at no great distance there-
from. It is perhaps A'A. Hazzur, E. of Xeby
Somali (PEF. Mem. iii. 43, 114); or the same
place with Baal-hazor, though there is no
positive evidence beyond the name in favour of
such an identification.
6. (i) o6A^; visor.) In Jer. xlix. 28-33-
Hazor apparently denotes a region of Arabia
under several sheikhs, " kingdoms of H."
(r. 28 ; cp. xxv. 24), whose desolation is pre-
dicted in connexion with Kedar. The inhabit-
ants are described as dwelling, like the Bedawin
tribes of the present day, without gates or bars.
(v. 31; cp. Ezek. xxxviii. 11, and see Hazer,
Hazerim), from which circumstance the name
is perhaps derived (Winer, S WB. s. v. Hazor ;
Riehm, H WB. s. v. ; Diet, of Bible, Amer. ed.,
art. Hazor (6)).
The word is combined with Baal in Baal-
hazor, with Ain in En-hazor. [G.] [W.}
Digitized by
Google
1302
HEAD-DBESS
HEAD-DRESS
HEAD-DRESS. The Hebrews do not appear
to have regarded a covering for the head as an
essential article of dress. The earliest notice
we hare of such a thing is in connexion with
the sacerdotal vestments, and in this case it is
described as an ornamental appendage "for
glory and for beauty " (Ex. xxviii. 40). The
absence of any allusion to a head-dress in
passages where we should expect to meet with
it, as in the trial of jealousy (Num. v. 18) and
the regulations regarding the leper (Lev. xiii.
45), in both of which the " uncovering of the
head " refers undoubtedly to the hair, leads to
the inference that it was not ordinarily worn in
the Mosaic age ; and this is confirmed by the
practice, frequently alluded to, of covering the
head with the mantle. Even in after-times it
seems to have been reserved especially for pur-
poses of ornament : thus the Sdnlph (*|*3 X) is
noticed as being worn by nobles (Job xxix. 14),
ladies (Is. iii. 23), and kings (Is. lxii. 3), while
the Pe'er OXS) was an article of holiday dress
(Is. lxi. 3, A. V. "beauty," B. V. "garland;"
Ezek. xxiv. 17, 23), and was worn at weddings
(Is. lxi. 10): the use of the fikpa ro restricted
to similar occasions (Judith xvi. 8 ; Bar. v. 2).
The former of these terms undoubtedly de-
scribes a kind of turban: its primary sense
(*|3¥, " to roll around ") expresses the folds of
linen wound round the head, and its form pro-
bably resembled that of the high-priest's Mis-
nipheth (a word derived from the same root,
and identical in meaning, for in Zcch. iii. 5
Sdmph = Mitncpheth), as described by Jose-
phus (Ant. iii. 7, § 3). The renderings of the
term in the A. V., " hood " (Is. iii. 23, R. V.
"turban"), A. V. and R. V. "diadem" (Job
xxix. 14, R. V. marg. turban; Is. lxii. 3),
A. V. and R. V. " mitre " (Zech. iii. 5, R. V.
marg. 'turban), do not convey the right idea
of its meaning. The other term, Pe'er, pri-
marily means an ormment, and is so rendered
in the A. V. (Is. lxi. 10 ; see also t>. 3, " beauty,"
R. V. " garland " in both vv.\ and is specifically
applied to the head-dress from its ornamental
character. It is uncertain what the term
properly describes: the modern turban con-
sists of two parts — the Kaook, a stiff, round cap
occasionally rising to a considerable height, and
the Shash, a long piece of muslin wound about
it (Russell, Aleppo, i. 104): Josephus' account
of the high-priest's head-dress implies a similar
construction ; for he says that it was made of
thick bands of linen doubled round many times,
and sewn together; the whole covered by a
piece of fine linen to conceal the seams. Saal-
schiitz (Archaeol. i. 27, note) suggests that the
Siniph and the Pe'er represent the Shash and
the Kaook, the latter rising high above the
other, and so the more prominent and striking
feature. In favour of this explanation it may
be remarked that the Pt'ir is more particularly
connected with the Afujba'ah, the high cap of
the ordinary priests, in Ex. xxxix. 28 ; while
the Siniph, as we have seen, resembled the
high-priest's mitre, In which the cap was con-
cealed by the linen folds. The objection,
however, to this explanation is that the
etymological force of Pe'er is not brought out :
may not that term have applied to the jewels
and other ornaments with which the turban
is frequently decorated (Russell, i. 106), some
of which are represented in the illustra-
tions below taken from Lane's Mod. Hgypt.
Appendix A? The term used for putting on
either the Siniph or the Pe'er is P30, "to
bind round " (Ex. xxix. 9 ; Lev. viii. 13) : hence
the words in Ezek. xvi. 10, " 1 girded thee about
Modem Syrian ftnd Egyptian Hand-drefML
with fine linen," are to be understood of the
turban ; and by the use of the same term Jonih
(ii. 5) represents the weeds as wrapped like a
turban round his head. The turban now worn in
Modem Egyptian Head-dlvnos. (TaneJ
the East varies very much in shape ; the most
prevalent forms are shown in Russell's Aleppo,
i. 102.
If the Siniph and the Pe'er were reserved
for holiday attire, it remains for us to inquire
whether any and what covering was ordinanlr
worn over the head. It appears that frequently
the robes supplied the place of a head-dress,
being so ample that they might be thrown over
the head at pleasure : the Radid and the Tsilph
at all events were so used [Dress], and the veil
served a similar purpose. [Veil.] The ordi-
nary head-dress of the Bedouin consists of the
Digitized by
Google
HEARTH
HEATH
1303
kifijeh, a square handkerchief, generally of red ' One way of baking much practised in the East
and yellow cotton, or cotton and silk, folded so ' is to place the dough on an iron plate, either
that three of the corners hang down over the
back and shoulders, leaving the face exposed,
Bedouin H«*d-dr?*i: the Klffyeh.
and bound round the head by a cord (Burck-
hardt, Soto, i. 48). It is not improbable that
a similar covering was used by the Hebrews ou
certain occasions: the "kerchief" in Kzek. xiii.
IS being understood by some as a kind of wrap
■or head-covering (see Fried. Delitzsch in Baer's
ed. of Ezekiel, p. xiii.) ; and the aiiunlvSioy
<Acts xix. 12, A. V. and R. V. "apron"), as
-explained by Suidas (to t^i KtipaArjs Qipji/ia),
was applicable to the purposes of a head-dress.
[Handkerchief.] Neither of these cases,
however, supplies positive evidence on the
point, and the general absence of allusions
leads to the inference that the head was
usually uncovered, as is still the case in many
parts of Arabia (Wellstecl, Trench, i. 73).
The introdnction of the Greek hat (tc'too-os) by
Jason, as an article of dress adapted to the
gymnasium, was regarded as a national dis-
honour (2 Mace. iv. 12): in shape and material
the Petatus very much resembled the common
felt hats of this country {Diet, of Gk. $ Rom.
Ant. art. Pileus).
The Assyrian head-dress is described in Ezek.
xxiii. 15 under the terms D*^3t? 'finD, A. V.
"exceeding in dyed attire " (R. V. marg., with
dyed turbans). The R. V. marg. is the more
correct, tebulim describing not the coloured
material of the head-dress, but a head-band or
turban (fasciis obcolvit, Gesen. Thesaur. p. 542 ;
cp. Fried. Delitzsch in Baer's ed. of Ezek. I. c).
The term ttruche expresses the flowing character
of the Eastern head-dress, as it Kills down over
the back (Layard, Nineveh, ii. 308). The word
rendered A. V. "hats." (R. V. marg., turbans)
in Dan. iii. 21 (K7313) is more probably a cloalt
(R. V. " tunics "). ' ' " [W. L. B.] [F.]
HEARTH. 1. nK; i<rx&pa; arula (Ges.
p. 69), a pot or brazier for containing Are.
2. IpID m. and mpID /. ; Kaitrrpa, xavais ;
incendium (Ges. p. 620). 3. "I»3, or "li»3 (Zech.
iii. 6); Sa\4s; caminns; in dual, D^V3 (Lev.
xi. 35) ; %wtpixotts ; chytropodes ; A. V. and
R. V. text "ranges for pots," R. V. marg.
stewpans (Gea. p. 672).
laid on or supported on legs above the vessel
sunk in the ground, which forms the oven.
This plate or "hearth" is in Arabic . ->.\^>
tnjen ; a word which has probably passed into
Greek in rfacwor. The cakes baked "on the
hearth " (Gen. xriii. 6, iyxpviplas, subcinericios
panes) were probably baked in the existing
Bedouin manner, on hot stones covered with
ashes. The " hearth " of king Jehoiakim's
winter palace, Jer. xxxvi. 23, was possibly a pan
or brazier of charcoal (Burckhardt, A'otes on
Bed. i. 58 ; P. della Valle, Viaggi, i. 437 ; Harmer,
Obs. i. p. 477, and note ; Rauwolff, Travels,
ap. Ray, ii. 163; Shaw, Travels, p. 231; Ni«-
buhr, t>esc. de FArabie, p. 45 ; Schleusner, Lex.
Vet. Test, rlryarov; Gesen. s. v. TWO, p. 997).
[Fire.] [H. W. P.]
HEATH, A. V. and R. V. ("IjniB, 'Si-Mr,
and "UnB, 'ar'ar* ; j) aypioftvplicn, lyos typtos ;
myrica). The prophet Jeremiah compares the
man " who maketh flesh his arm, and whose
heart departeth from the Lord," to the 'ar'iir
in the desert (xvii. 6 ; R. V. marg. a tamarisk
[see below]). Again, in the judgment of Moab
(xlviii. 6), to her inhabitants it is said, " Flee,
save your lives, and be like the 'SrC'er in
the wilderness," where the margin has a
naked tree, R. V. marg. as in xvii. 6. There
seems no reason to doubt Celsius' conclusion
(ffierob. ii. 195), that the 'ar'ar is identical
with the 'ar'ar t &£•) °f Arabic writers,
which is a species of juniper. Robinson (Bib.
Bes. ii. 125-6) states that when he was in
the pass of Nemela he observed juniper trees
(Arab, 'ar'ar) on the porphyry rocks above.
The berries, he adds, have the appearance
and taste of the common juniper, except that
there is more of the aroma of the pine. " These
trees were ten or fifteen feet in height, and
hung upon the rocks even to the summits of
the cliffs and needles." This is the Junipena
Sabina, L., or savin, with small scale-like leaves,
which are pressed close to its gnarled stem, a
gloomy-looking bush of stunted appearance, and
cropped close by tho wild goats, inhabiting the
most sterile soil (see English Cycl. N. Hist. iii.
311); a character which is obviously well
suited to the naked or destitute tree spoken of
by the prophet. The R. V. marg. has tamarisk
(MV."),on what ground it is difficult to conceive,
for the tamarisk is well known as the \jjo,
tarfa, and not 'ar'ar. There is no true heath
in Palestine south of Lebanon. Rosenmiiller's
explanation of the Hebrew word, which is also
adopted by Maurer, "qui destitutus versatur"
(Schol. ad Jer. xvii. 6), is very unsatisfactory.
Not to mention the tameness of the comparison,
it is evidently contradicted by the antithesis in
v. 8 : " Cursed is he that trusteth in man ...
• From the root Til?. " to be asked," in allusion to
-T
the bare nature of the rocks on which the Juniperut
Sabina often grows. Cp. Ps. ell. 17, TUTDil Jl^BR.
" the prayer of the destitute " (or 111 clad). '
Digitized by
Google
1304
HEATHEN
HEATHEN
he shall be like the juniper that grows on the
bare rocks of the desert. Blessed is the man
that trusteth in the Lord ... he shall be as a
tree planted by the waters." The contrast be-
tween the shrub of the arid desert and the tree
growing by the waters is very striking ; but
Rosenmiiller's interpretation appears to us to
spoil the whole. Even more unsatisfactory is
Michaelis (Supp. Lex. //eft. p. 1971), who thinks
" guinea hens " (Aumic&i melengra) are in-
tended! Geseniiis (Thes. pp. 1073-4) under-
stands these two Hebrew terms to denote
" parietioae, aedificin eversa " (ruins) ; but it is
more in accordance with the scriptural passages
to suppose that some t<ree is intended, which ex-
planation, moreover, has the sanction of the
LXX. and Vulgate, and of the modern use of a
kindred Arabic word. [W. H.] [H. B. T.]
HEATHEN. The Hebrew words «'», 0%
goi, gdylm, together with their Greek equivalents
(•rot, tiro (see Cremer, Bibl.-theolotj. W6rterb. d.
N.Tlichcn Gracitat, s. n.), have been somewhat
arbitrarily rendered " nations," " Gentiles," and
" heathen " in the A. V. It will be interesting
to trace the manner in which a term, primarily
and essentially general [including the Jews
themselves] in its signification, acquired that
more restricted sense which was afterwards
attached to it. Its development is parallel with
that of the Hebrew people, and its meaning at
any period may be taken as significant of their
relative position with regard to the surrounding
nations.
1. While as yet the Jewish nation had no
political existence, gdylm denoted generally the
nations of the world, especially including the
immediate descendants of Abraham (Gen. xviii.
18 ; cp. Gal. iii. 16). The latter, as they grew
in numbers and importance, were distinguished
in a most marked manner from the nations by
whom they were surrounded, and were provided
with a code of laws and a religious ritual which
made the distinction still more peculiar. They
were essentially a separate people (Lev. xx. 23) ;
separate in habits, morals, and religion, and
bound to maintain their separate character by
denunciations of the most terrible judgments
(Lev. xxvi. 14-38; Deut. xxviii.). On their
march through the desert they encountered the
most obstinate resistance from Amalek, "chief
of the gdylm" (Num. xxiv. 20), in whose sight
the deliverance from Egypt was achieved (Lev.
xxvi. 45). During the conquest of Canaan and
the subsequent wars of extermination, which
the Israelites for several generations carried on
against their enemies, the seven nations of the
■^anaanites — Ainorites, Hittites, Hivites, Jebu-
sites, Perizzitcs, and Girgoshites (Ex. xxxiv. 24),
together with the remnants of them who were
left to prove Israel (Josh, xxiii. 13 ; Judg. iii. 1 ;
Ps. lxxviii. 55), and teach them war (Judg. iii.
2)-- received the especial appellation of gdylm.
With these the Israelites were forbidden to
associate (Josh, xxiii. 7), not in any spirit of
hatred, but as a defensive measure ; inter-
marriages were prohibited (Josh, xxiii. 12 ; IK.
xi. 2) ; and as a warning against disobedience
the fate of the nations of Canaan was kept
constantly before their eyes (Lev. xviii. 24, 25 ;
Deut. xviii 12). They are ever associated with
the worship of false gods, and the foul practices
of idolaters (Lev. xviii., xx.), and these consti-
tuted their chief distinctions, as gdylm, from
the worshippers of the one God, the people of
Jehovah (Num. xv. 41 ; Deut. xxviii. 10). This
distinction was maintained in its full force
during the earlv times of the monarchy (2 Sam.
vii. 23 ; 1 K. xi. 4-8, xiv. 24 ; Ps. cvi. 35). It
was from among the gdylm, the degraded tribes
who submitted to their arms, that the Israelites
were permitted to purchase their bond servants
(Lev. xxv. 44, 45), and this special enactment
seems to have had the effect of giving to a
national tradition the force and sanction of a
law (cp. Gen. xxxi. 15). In later times this
regulation was strictly adhered to. To the
words of Ect'les. ii. 7, " I bought men-servants
and maid-servants" the Targum adds, " of the
children of Ham, and the rest of the foreign
nations."
And not only were the Israelites forbidden to
intermarry with these gdylm, but the latter
were virtually excluded from the possibility of
becoming naturalised. Au Ammonite or Moab-
ite was shut out from the congregation of
Jehovah even to the tenth generation (Deut.
xxiii. 3), while an Edoinite or Egyptian was
admitted in the third (rr. 7, 8). The necessity
of maintaining a separation so broadly marked
is ever more and more manifest as we follow
the Israelites through their history, and observe
their constantly recurring tendency to idolatry.
Offence and punishment followed each other
with all the regularity of cause and effect (Judg.
ii. 12, iii. 6-8, Sec). On the other hand,
heathen who turned from their idolatrous and
evil ways to the purer faith, were assured of
God's forgiveness and of a welcome from Israelites
(cp. Is. lvi. 3, 6, 7).
2. But, even in early Jewish times, the term
gdylm received by anticipation a significance of
wider range than the national experience (Lev.
xxvi. 33, 38; Deut. xxx. 1); and as the latter
was gradually developed during the prosperous
times of the monarchy, the giijim were the
surrounding nations generally, with whom the
Israelites were brought into contact by the ex-
tension of their commerce, and whose idolatrous
practices they readily adopted (Ezek. xxiii. 30 ;
Amos v. 26). Later still, it is applied to the
Babylonians who took Jerusalem (Neh. v. 8 ;
Ps. lxxix. 1, 6, 10), to the destroyers of Moab
(Is. xvi. 8), and to the several nations among
whom the Jews were scattered during the Ca|i- '
tivity (Ps. cvi. 47 ; Jer. xlvi. 28 j Lam. i. 3,
&c), the practice of idolatry still being their
characteristic distinction (Is. xxxvi. 18 ; Jer. x.
2, 3, xiv. 22). This signification it retained
after the return from Babylon, though it was
used in a more limited sense as denoting the
mixed race of colonists who settled in Palestine
during the Captivity (Neh. v. 17), and who are
described as fearing Jehovah, while serving their
own gods (2 K. xvii. 29-33; Ezra vi. 21).
Tracing the synonymous term fflw) through
the Apocryphal writings, we find that it is
applied to the nations around Palestine (1 Mace,
i. 11), including the Syrians and Philistines of
the army of Gorgias (1 Mace. iii. 41 ; iv. 7, 11,
14), as well as the people of Ptolemais, Tyre
and Sidon (1 Mace. v. 9, 10, 15> They were
image-worshippers (1 Mace. iii. 48; Wisd. xv.
15), whose customs and fashions the Jews seem
Digitized by
Google
HEATHEN
still to hare had an unconquerable propensity
to imitate, but on whom they were bound by
national tradition to take vengeance (1 Mace. ii.
68 ; 1 Esd. viii. 85). Following the customs
of the gOi/'un at this period denoted the neglect
or concealment of circumcision (1 Mace i. 15),
disregard of sacrifices, profanation of the Sabbath,
eating of swine's flesh and meat offered to idols
(2 Mace. vi. 6-9, 18 ; zv. 1. 2), and adoption of
the Greek national games (2 Mace iv. 12, 14).
In all points Judaism and heathenism are
strongly contrasted. The "barbarous multi-
tude" in 2 Mace ii. 21 are opposed to those
who played the man for Judaism, and the dis-
tinction now becomes an ecclesiastical one (cp.
Matt, zviii. 17). In 2 Esd. iii. 33, 34, the
" gentes " are defined as those " qui habitant in
seculo " (cp. Matt vi. 32 ; Luke xii. 30).
As the Greek influence became more exten-
sively felt in Asia Minor, and the Greek language
was generally used, Hellenism and heathenism
became convertible terms, and a Greek was syno-
nymous with a foreigner of any nation. This
is singularly evident in the Syriac of 2 Mace,
v. 9, 10, 13: cp. John vii. 35; 1 Cor. x. 32;
2 Mace. xi. 2.
In the X. T. again we find various shades of
meaning attached to (Byy. In its narrowest
sense it is opposed to "those of the circumcision "
(Acts x. 45 ; cp. Esth. xiv. 15, where iWorptos
=iir<p<r/(^roj), and is contrasted with Israel,
the people of Jehovah (Luke ii. 32), thus repre-
senting the Hebrew D'13 at one stage of its
history. But, like git/lni, it also denotes the
|>eople of the earth generally (Acts xvii. 26;
Gal. iii. 14). In Matt. vi. 7 Urucbs is applied
to an idolater.
But, in addition to its significance as an
ethnographical term, goijhn had a moral sense
which must not be overlooked. In I's. i.x. 5, l.i, 17
(cp. Ezek. vii. 21) the word stands in parallelism
with IRJH, riitha", the wicked, as distinguished
by his moral obliquity (see Hupfeld on Ps. i. 1);
and in v. 17 the people thus designated are
described as " forgetters of God," that know not
Jehovah (Jer. x. 25). Again in I's. lix. 5 it is
to some extent commensurate in meaning with
J1K '"WSi hvtfdi 'ieen, "iniquitous transgres-
sors ; " and in these passages, as well as in Ps.
x. 15, it has a deeper significance than that of a
merely national distinction, although the latter
idea is never entirely lost sight of.
In later Jewish literature a technical definition
of the word is laid down which is certainly not
of universal application. Elias Levita (quoted
by Eisenmenger, Entdecktes Judcnthum, i. 665)
explains the sing, gii as denoting one who is
not of Israelitish birth. This can only have
reference to its after signification ; in the 0. T.
the singular is never used of an individual, but
is a collective term, applied equally to the
Israelites (Josh. iii. 17) as to the nations of
Canaan (Lev. xx. 23), and denotes simply a body
politic. Another distinction, equally unsup-
ported, is made between DM3, goy'im, and D'SK,
'ummim, the former being defined as the nations
who had served Israel, while the latter were
those who had not (Jalkut Chadash, fol. 20, No.
20 ; Eisenmenger, i. 667). Abarbanel on Joel
iii. 2 applies the former to both Christians and
HEAVEN
1305
Turks, or Ishmaelites, while in Sepher Juchasia
(fol. 148, col. 2) the Christians alone are distin-
guished by this appellation. Eisenmenger gives
some curious examples of the disabilities under
which a goi laboured. One who kept sabbaths
was judged deserving of death (ii. 206), and the
study of the law was prohibited to him under
the same penalty ; but on the latter point the
doctors are at issue (ii. 209). On the other
hand, the Talmud has many beautiful passages
recognising the virtues and rights of the
heathen, and inspired by the same tenderness as
that of Isaiah lvi. (see Hamburger, RE. s. n.
"Heiden"). [W. A W.] [F.]
HEAVEN. There are four Hebrew words
thus rendered in the O. T., which we may
briefly notice. 1. JPfH (trrtpiufw.; firmamen-
twn; Luth. Veste), a solid expanse, from Dj5>
"to beat out"; a word used primarily of the
hammering out of metal (Ex. xxxix. 3 ; Num.
xvi. 38). The fuller expression is D'DB'n tPp")
(Gen. i. 14 sq.). That Moses understood it to
mean a solid expanse is clear from his repre-
senting it as the barrier between the upper and
lower waters (Gen. i. 6 sq.), i.e. as separating
the,' reservoir of the celestial ocean (Ps. civ. 3,
xxix. 3) from the waters of the earth, or those
on which the earth was supposed to float (Ps.
exxxvi. 6). Through its open lattices (ni3"IK.
Gen. vii. 11 ; 2 K. vii. 2, 19 ; cp. icSaiuva'v,
Aristoph. A'u6. 373) or doors (Djrta, Ps.
lxxviii. 23) the dew and suow and hail are
poured upon the earth (Job xxxviii. 22, 37,
where we have the curious expression " bottles
of heaven," utrcs coeli). This firm vault,
which Job describes as being "strong as a
molten looking-glass " (xxxvii. 18), is trans-
parent, like pellucid sapphire, and splendid as
crystal (Dan. xii. 3 ; Ex. xxiv. 10 ; Ezek. i. 22 ;
Rev. iv. 6), upon which rests the throne of God
(Is. lxvi. 1 ; Ezek. i. 26), and which is opened
for the descent of Angels, or for prophetic
visions (Gen. xxviii. 17 ; Ezek. i. 1 ; Acts vii.
56, x. 11). In it, like gems or golden lamps,
the stars are fixed to give light to the earth,
and regulate the seasons (Gen. i. 14-19) ; and
the whole magnificent, immeasurable structure
(Jer. xxxi. 37) is supported by the mountains as
its pillars, or strong foundations (Ps. xviii. 7 ;
2 Sam. xxii. 8 ; Job xxiv. 11). Similarly the
Greeks believed in an oipavbs woXvxaXjcos (Horn.
II. v. 504), or atMiptos (Horn. Od. xv. 328), or
AJdjuao-ros (Orph. Hymn, ad Coclum), which the
philosophers called <rrtpiiunov, or kowtoA-
AoeioVs (Emped. ap. Pint, de Phil. plac. ii. 11 ;
Artemid. ap. Sen. Nat. Qnaest. vii. 13 ; quoted
by Gesenius, s. 17.). It is clear that very many
of the above notions were mere metaphors
resulting from the simple primitive conception,
and that later writers among the Hebrews had
arrived at more scientific views, although of
course they retained much of the old phrase-
ology, and are fluctuating and undecided in
their terms. Elsewhere, for instance, the
heavens are likened to a curtain (Ps. civ. 2 ; Is.
xl. 22). In A. V. "heaven" and "heavens"
are used to render not only IPpI, but also
D'DE^ D'nD, and CpnC, for which reason wo
have thrown together under the former word
Digitized by
Google
1306
HEAVEN
the chief features ascribed by the Jewish writers
to this portion of the universe.
2. DW (Ch. }T3C J ) U derived from fTOC',
" to be high." This is the word used in the
expression " the heaven and the earth," or " the
upper and lower regions " (Gen. i. 1), which was
a periphrasis to supply the want of a single
word for the Cosmos (Deut. xxxii. 1 ; Is. i. 2 ;
ps. cilviii. 13). "Heaven of heavens" is the
Hebrew expression for infinity (N'eh. ix. 6 ;
Ecclus. xvi. 18).
3. D1TO, used for " heaven "in Ps. xriii. 16 ;
Jer. xxv.*30; Is. xxiv. 18 (A. V. "on high").
Properly speaking, it means a mountain, as in
Ps. cii. 19, Ezek. xvii. 23. It must not, how-
ever, be supposed for a moment that the
Hebrews had any notion of a " Mountain of
Meeting," like Albordsh, the northern hill of
Babylonish mythology (Is. xiv. 13), or the Greek
Olympus, or the Hindoo Meru, the Chinese
Kuatlun, or the Arabian Caf (see Kalisch, Gen.
p. 24, and the authorities there quoted), since
.such a fancy is incompatible with the pure
monotheism of the Old Testament.
4. D'pnB', " expanses," with reference to the
extent of heaven, as the last two words were
derived from its height ; hence this word is
often used together with E^DC, as in Deut.
xxxiii. 26 ; Job xxxv. 5. In the A. V. it is
sometimes rendered " clouds," for which the fuller
term is D'pnt? '3T (Ps. xviii. 12). The word
priC means first " to pound," and then " to
wear out." So that, according to some,
" clouds " (from the notion of dust) is the
original meaning of the word. Gesenius, how-
ever, rejects this opinion (Thesaur. s. v. ; see
MV .»).
In one passage ?J?3 is rendered " heaven " (Ps.
lxxvii. 18), but the word means "awheel," as it
is everywhere else translated. The verse should
be rendered " The voice of thy thunder was in
the rolling," or " in the whirlwind " (K. V. ; in
Wirbel, Ewald, and so too Gesenius, Hitzig, &c).
Kimchi, however, understands it of the globe or
sphere of heaven, and he is followed by Luther
and the A. V. Some have compared it to t/»x«j
T7Jt •yeWffcwi (J as. iii. 6), which has no connexion
with it.
In Ps. lxviii. 4 fl3^ is rendered " heavens,"
T T-!
but the meaning is " Him Who rideth through
the deserts" (R. V). The Targum and Talmud
were here probably led astray by the analogy
of Deut. xxxiii. 26. The LXX. and the Vulg.
erroneously render it " the West " (Perowne on
the Psalms, in loco).
In Is. v. 30 D'DHC is rendered "heavens."
The R. V. renders it "clouds," and tbemarg.
gives destructions. The Hebrew text is here
doubtful.
In the N. T. we frequently have the word
abpayol, which some consider to be a Hebraism,
or a plural of excellence (Schleusner, Lex. Nov.
Test. s. v.). St. Paul's expression eat rpirov
oiptwov (2 Cor. xii. 2) has led to much con-
jecture. Grotius said that the Jews divided the
heaven into three parts : viz. 1. Nubiferum, the
air or atmosphere, where clouds gather ; 2.
Astrifcrum, the firmament, in which the sun,
moon, and stars are fixed; 3. Empyreum, or
HEBER
Angeliferum, the upper heaven, the abode of
God and His Angels, i.e. 1. h&V cb\B (or ITpl) ;
2. JW'nn D^W (or DnSC); and 3. DTiO
JJ'^Wl (or " heaven of heavens," DTXf VX>y
This curiously explicit statement is entirely
unsupported by Rabbinic authority, but it is
hardly fair of Meyer to call it a fiction, for it
may be supposed to rest on some vague Biblical
evidence (cp. Dan. iv. 12, "the fowls of the
heaven ; " Gen. xxii. 17, " the stars of the
heaven;" Ps. ii. 4. "He that sitteth in the
heavens,'' &c). The Rabbis spoke of two
heavens (cp. Deut. x. 14, " the heaven and the
heaven of heavens "), or seven (iwra oupwobt
oCs rtns aptdfiovffi kcct' iwarAflaaiv, Clem. Alex.
Strom, iv. 7, 636). "Reach Lakisch dixit
septem esse coelos, quorum nomina sunt, 1.
velum ; 2. expansum ; 3. nubes ; 4. habita-
culum; 5. habitatio; 6. sedes fixa; 7. Ara-
both," or sometimes "the treasury." At the
sin of Adam, God ascended into the first ; at the
sin of Cain, into the second ; during the gene-
ration of Enoch, into the third, &c. ; afterwards
God descended downwards into the sixth at the
time of Abraham, into the fifth during the life of
Isaac, and so on down to the time of Moses,
when He redescended into the first (see many
passages quoted by Wetstein, ad 2 Cor. xii. 2).
Of all these definitions and deductions we may
remark simply with Origen, trra S< ovpavobt f)
ZXms wtpittpifffitvor ipiOfiby ainvy al tpfp6fxtyai
ir rats 'EnrATfoiais oix farayyiWovai ypaAal
(c. Cels. vi. 289).
If nothing has here been said on the secondary
senses attached to the word " heaven," the
omission is intentional. The object of this
article is not practical, but exegetical ; not
theological, but critical and explanatory. A
treatise on the nature and conditions of future
beatitude would here be wholly out of place.
We may however remark that as heaven was
used metaphorically to signify the abode of
Jehovah, it is constantly employed in the N. T.
to signify the abode of the spirits of the just,
and is described by symbols suggestive of light,
and love, and peace (see for example Matt. v.
12, vi. 20; Luke x. 20, xii. 33; 2 Cor. v. 1;
Col. i. 5). [F. W. F.j
HEAVE-OFFERING. [Sacrifice.]
HF/BER (nan, once 13PI ; Xifiop, Xa>p,
"A/Sop*; Haber, Heber), a name wholly distinct
from Ebeb (*I3J?; "E/3ep; Heber) and its cog-
nate Hebrew [Ebeb; Hebrew],
Heber occurs in the 0. T. as the name of the
following individuals and houses : —
1. A grandson of Asher, and founder of a
leading house or clan of that tribe (Gen. xlvi.
17 ; Num. xxvi. 45), whose line is perhaps
• So 1 Ch. vlU. IT, with a softer pronunciation of
the Initial guttural. In 1 Ch. Iv. 18, the name appears
ss 'A0«<ra (B.). but '\0tp (A.). In 1 Ch. v. 13, the
reading Is corrupt ; and In 1 Ch. vlU. », the LXX.
seems to have read TQJ;, Obed. The Vulgate tran-
scribes both Heber and Eber by Heber, except In Judg.
v. 11, U, 11; v. M, where It has Saber. Hence
the Heber of Luke 111. 35, A. V. ; corrected to Eber,
R. V.
Digitized by
Google
HEBERITES
carried down to the fifth or sixth generation in
1 Ch. vii. 32-39 (see notes on this passage in
Bp. Ellicott's Commentary').
2. A Judaean chief, son of Mered and his
Jewish as distinct from his Egyptian wife, grand-
son of an otherwise unknown Ezra, and " father "
or founder of Socho (1 Ch. iv. 18). [SOCHO.]
5. The head of a Gadite house or clan, settled
in the Bashan (1 Ch. v. 13).
4. An oft'shoot or subdivision of the Ben-
jaminite clan of Elpaal (1 Ch. ix. 17).
6. A subdivision of the Benjaminite clan of
Shashak (1 Ch. ix. 22).
6. The Kenite, the husband of Jael, the
heroine of the Song of Deborah (Judg. v. 24 sq.).
Heber was the head of a Kenite clan, belonging
to that branch of this interesting people which
claimed descent from Hobab, the brother-in-
law of Moses (Num. x. 29), and was settled in
the extreme south of Canaan (Judg. i. 16).
[Kenites.] He and his clan had migrated to
the north, and were encamped in the neighbour-
hood of Kedesh at the time of his wife's famous
exploit (Judg. iv. 11, 17). [Jael.] [C. J. B.]
HEBEBITE8, THE 0"Urjfl; B. SXofapil,
AF. -i (t>. 29) ; Hcberitae), descendants of Heber,
a branch of the tribe of Asher.
HEBREW, HEBREWS ('"OB, n»,"!3r,
linatf, D'^ay; 'EflpaToj, 'Etyolkos; ffebraeus,
Hebraei, Hebraicus). In modern usage, "He-
brews " is a synonym of " Jews " or " Israelites "
(cp. Shakespeare's " an Ebrewe Jew "), and He-
brew is the common designation of their ancient
language. In the O. T., the term is not used
at all in the latter sense. The sacred tongue is
either " the lip (= speech) of Canaan " (Is. xix.
18), a fact which indicates what is otherwise
known from Phoenician inscriptions — the close
dialectical affinity of the language of Israel
with that of Tyre and Sidon; or "Jewish," a
later appellation, dating from the time when
the southern kingdom had become the sole
surviving representative of the nation (2 K.
xviii. 26 ; Neh. xiii. 24). At a still later period,
when an Aramaic dialect had displaced the old
language of Judaea, the new vernacular was
called " Hebrew ; " so that we find Aramaic
forms like Bethesda, Gabbatha, Golgotha, styled
Hebrew in the N. T. (John v. 2 ; xix. 13, 17).'
In this connexion we may note that the
Greek 'Z0peuos, whence the Latin /{cbracu* and
our " Hebrew," was directly derived, not from
the old and strictly Hebrew term '^31?, 'Ibrl,
but from the Aramaic *N}3tf, 'Ibray; | »;«"**■.
'Ebriyi.
» The psalms which were tbe war-songs of Judas
Maccabeus were, doubtless, some of those comprised in
the canonical collection (2 Msec. xli. 37). And an
official revival of Hebrew Is attested by the coins of
the period. On tbe other band, the words reported to
have been spoken by our Lord on certain solemn
occasions, e.g. Talitha turn (Mark v. 41), are Aramaic ;
and It seems probable that the "Hebrew" In which
St. Paul addressed the Jews (Acts xxl. 40, xxil. 2) was
Palestinian Aramaic As distinguished from tbls
language, tbe true Hebrew came to be known as " the
•acred tongue "(tJHpn JlB^)-
HEBREW, HEBREWS 1307
As a national name, the term " Hebrew "
('itrf) first appears in a very ancient historical
fragment preserved in the Book of Genesis,
where we read of " Abram the Hebrew " (Gen.
xir. 13). b According to analogy, this expression
can only refer to Abram's tribal or national
extraction ; that is, to his descent from "DT/,
'Eber [Eber]. The Patriarch is called a He-
brew, or rather an Ibrite, to distinguish him
from his Amorite (Canaanite) allies. Whether
Eber was ever a strictly personal • or always a
tribal designation, is perhaps immaterial for
present purposes. It seems enough to note that
Shcm is called, in the older source of Genesis
(J), " the father of all the bene 'Eber" (Gen. x.
21), and that bene 'Eber is as evidently a
national designation as bene Lit (Ps. lxxxiii. 8),
or bene (Jedcm (Job i. 3), or bene i'isru'ei. But
if we ask what tribes or peoples were included
under this designation, we find that it is a name
of the widest reference, including, according to
the same source (the Jahvist), Joktan and his
numerous sons (that is, the tribes of W. and S.
Arabia, and probably the eastern shore of the
Red Sea; Gen. x. 25-30), as well as all the
peoples which, like Ishmael, Edoin, and Israel,
claimed descent from Abram the Ibrite. Fur-
ther, if Peleg (Gen. x. 25) denotes an Aramean
stock or country, as it appears to do from the
ethnographic genealogy given in what is pro-
bably a later source (the Priestly Legislation,
Gen. xi. 17 sqq., P), the bene 'Eber included
Aramean peoples beyond the Euphrates (Serug,
Nahor). With this may perhaps be compared
the obscure passage, Num. xxir. 24, where
Asshur and Eber stand side by side. Another
passage of the Jahvist so far agrees with it, in
that Qemuel tbe son of Nahor, Abraham's
brother, is there called " the father of Aram,"
i.e. of the Aramean peoples (Gen. xxii. 20 sq.).'
No positive results follow from the comparison
of "V3I7, 'Eber, the proper name (Gen. x. 21),
with its homophone "IJM?, which, as a noun,
means " the country on the other side," usually
of a river, rb -wipar. r) Tlepata, whether the
Euphrates pfWI 13», Is. vii. 20) or the Jor-
dan (pTn "Ol>, Gen. 1. 10, 11, and oaen). It
is obvious that the use of such an expression
must be relative to the position of the person
• The value of tbls narrative, as a whole, has of late
years received independent confirmation from cuneiform
research. See Scbrader, KAT.' 1 ad loc.
« Some may think it a personal name In 1 Ch. v. 13,
viii. 12, 22 ; Neb. xli. 20.
4 According to P, Aram is a son of Shem, and brother
of Arpbaxad tbe grandfather of Eber (Geo. x. 22-24).
In tbe same list Eber is grandson of Arpbaxad (to. 13,
14). Ewald Interpreted this to mean that tbe Hebrew
peoples had a tradition that tbelr original home was in
Arnpachltis (Ptolemy, vl. 1), N. of Assyria. Without
assuming tbe identity of this name with Ur-Casdlm (so
Kuenen, Religion qf Itrael, I. 114, note), which tbe
progress of cuneiform discovery has shown to be wrong,
we may still bold, with these great scholars, that other
names in the list, e.g. Serug, Nahor, Haran, mark stages
In the progress of the Hebrew migrations from the
north-east to the south and south-west. Ewald sees in
Abraham's departure from Ur of the Chaldces (Ua], and
In Jacob's from Cbarran, "only continuations of tho
migratory movements of this primitive people " (Hilt.
/«r., pp. 268 sq., 284-287, Eng. Tr.).
Digitized by
Google
1308 HEBREW LANGUAGE
who uses it. Accordingly, in the passages just
cited it denotes the country east of the rivers ;
but in Num. xxxii. 19, 1 K. iv. 24, it designates
their western sides. Vet many, following the
Jewish interpreters (Midrash Bereshith Sabba;
Rashi),* have supposed that Abram was ori-
ginally called "the Hebrew" (Ibrite) by the
Canaan it es, because he came as an immigrant
into their country from the other side ('«&«•) of
the Great River. They support their opinion
by the assertion that Hebrews continued to be
the name by which Abram's descendants the
Israelites were known to foreigners, while Israel
or bene Israel was the title they preferred
among themselves. But it does not appear that
Abraham's tribe was the first or the only one
that crossed the Euphrates and wandered into
Syria-Palestine (see note *). Similar movements
of nomadic tribes must have often occurred in
antiquity. Nor can the supposed distinction be
established from the usage of the 0. T., where
foreigners often speak of "Israel." Besides, if
throughout the 0. T. period the bene Israel were
known to foreigners as Hebrews, it would be
strange that no trace of this name should be
found in the contemporary records of Egypt and
Assyria. This, however, is actually the case/
The simple truth is that Israel or benS Israel
was the collective name of the people whose
gentilic designation was Hebrews or Ibrites.
The term Israelite O^OB", fem. JvfonC*) is
of late origin, and occurs only in a single
passage (Lev. xxiv. 10, 11).« [C. J. B.]
HEBBEW LANGUAGE [see Shemitio
Languages].
HEBKEWESS (n»-p» ; 'E^oid ; Hebraea).
A Hebrew woman (Jer. xxxiv. 9).
• The LXX. renders n3Bn by A ir.par.jv, as If the
word were to be pointed »13J?n ; cp. l Sam. xlli. J,
Sept. AquiU corrects Into 6 npoirgt, "the man from
the other side," a term used by Joaephus for a Peraean
(.Bell. Jwl. 11. 20, 4).
' The Aperiu, Apuriu, Apura, or Aper, of the
Egyptian monument*, a people famous for horse-breed-
ing and horsemanship, who were still settled in the
nome of Hellopolis long after the Exodus, are no longer
supposed to have anything to do with the Hebrews
(Ebers, Aegypten, i. 316; Brugsch, Egypt under the
Pharaohs, Eng. Tr. by M. Brodrick, pp. 318 sq.). Nor
has any trace of the name Hebrews been found In cunei-
form documents. The northern kingdom was the Land
or House of Cbumrt or Chumria, the southern the I-aod
of Yaodu or Yaudi, to ihe Assyrian Invaders of Israel
and Judah. Tlglath-Plleeer II. calls Ahai Yattd&l, a
Jew ; and so Hesekiah Is styled Sennacherib. It is very
doubtful whether Achabbu mat Slr'ilul, "Ahab the
Sir'lllte," mentioned by Shalmaneser II., Is to be Identi-
fied with Ahab of Israel. We might transcribe Su'ulai,
as well as Sir'ilM. On the other hand, Israel occurs
on the Moabite stone (9th cent. B.C.), as was only to
be expected. In the case of an inscription belonging to
a kindred people close at hand, and speaking the same
language.
« Crnden gives sixteen references for Itraetitc, /«-
raelita, and two for Jgraelitith, In the 0. T. In
2 Sam. xvll. 25 the true reading la Isbmaelite, as cor-
rected by the Chronicler (1 Cb. II. 17). In all the other
paiaages the Hebrew term is Israel, except Lev. J, c.
HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO
HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO. The
following points will be noticed in succession : —
PACK
I- Text iso 8
11. Title no*
III. Position 1309
IV. Original Language 1310
V. Destination 1310
VI. Date J312
VII. Place of Writing 1312
Vui. Style and Language 1312
IX. Plan ,313
(X. Characteristics 1314
XI. Use of Old Testament . . .1316
XII. History and Authorship .... 1318
I. Text. — The original authorities for deter-
mining the text of the Epistle are, as in the
case of the other Books of the New Testament,
numerous and varied. There are, however,
from the circumstances of the history of the
Epistle, comparatively few quotations from it,
and these within a narrow range, during the
first three centuries.
The Epistle is contained in whole or in part in
the following sources : —
i. Manuscripts.— The entire Epistle ia pre-
served in the Primary Uncials, N, A, D, ; in the
Secondary Uncials, K„ P, ; and in nearly three
hundred cursttw MSS., which are known more or
less completely. The Vatican MS. (B) is defec-
tive after ix. 14, Ka8a[puT] ; and L, after xiii.
10, iK {xoinriy. More or less considerable frag-
ments of the Epistle are found in C, H„ M„ N s ,
and in two MSS. described by Dr. C. R. Gregory,
if/ (nearly complete) and 2.
The Epistle is not contained in the Graeco-
Latin MSS. F„ G,. The Greek archetype of
these MSS. was mutilated before either of them
was written.
ii. Versions.— There are two distinct Latin
texts of the Epistle : the Old latin, represented
by d (the Latin version of D,), of which e is n
copy with a few corrections ; and the Vulgate
Latin. The Old Latin text is singularly cor-
rupt ; and the Vulgate seems not to have been
made by the author of the translation of the
Epistles of St. Paul. The Epistle is also con-
tained in the two Syriac Versions, the Peshitto
and the Harctean ; and the missing portion of the
latter Version, which is found in the Cambridge
MS., has recently been published by Prof.
Bensly (18«9). The Peshitto text is supposed
to be the work of a distinct translator (Wichel-
haus, De Vers. Simp. p. 86). Of the three
Egyptian Versions of the Epistle, the Mem-
phitic (Coptic) is complete ; of the Thebaic
(Sahidic) and the Bashmuric, which was derived
from the Thebaic, only fragments remain.
The Epistle is found entire in the later Ver-
sions, Armenian, Aethiopic, Slavonic; but it
appears not to have been included in the Gothic
(Bernhardt, Vulfila, &c, s. xxiv.).
The text of the Epistle is on the whole well
preserved, but there are some passages in which
it is not unlikely that primitive errors have
passed into all our existing copies: «.j. iv. 2;
*>• *. 37 ; xii. 11 ; xiii. 21 ; see also x. 1. Some
primitive errors have been corrected in later
MSS. : vii. 1 ; xi. 35.
The following passages offer variations of con-
siderable interest, and serve as instructive
exercises on the principles of textual criticism :
Digitized by
Google
HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO
i. 2, 8; ii. 9; iv. 2; vi. 2, 3; ix. 11; x. 34;
xi. 13 ; xii. 7.
The genera) contrast between the early and
later texts is well seen by an examination of the
readings in i. 2, 3, 12; ii. 1, 14; iii. 1, 9;
v. 4; vi.10; vii. 11, 16; viii.4,11; ix. 1, 9,
10 ; xi. 3, 13 ; xii. 15, 18, 20 ; xiii. 9.
II. Title.— In the oldest MSS. (BNA: C is
defective, but it has the subscription ("1POC
6BPAIOYC) the title of the Epistle, like that
of the other Epistles to Churches, is simply
nPOC €BPAIOYC, " to Hebrews." There is
no title or colophon to the Epistle in D s , but it
has a rnnning heading [1POC GBPAIOYC.
The Egyptian Versions have the same simple
title, To the Hebrews. This inscription was
gradually enlarged. Later Greek MSS. give
Hai\ov 4*urro\)i xpbt 'Efioalovs, as in the
Epistle to the Romans &c. (F,), and, at greater
length, rod itylov Kal TavtwpJipQV axoffriXov
TlavAov IwurroXii rpii 'Efyaiovr (L,). Sometimes
historical statements are inwoven in the title:
iypA<pV 4»o 'IraXias Sth Tifiotiov 4 »po j "E&paiovs
eNrioroAi) licrtOuaa is iv wlvtuci (Mj); TlavKot
ai-oVroAoi 'E/8pafou Tdt8« avyytviaiv (f. Scr.).
The title forms no part of the original document ;
but it must have been given to the Book at -a
very early date, when it first passed into public
use as part of a collection of apostolic letters.
And it was rightly given in regard to the per-
manent relation which the Book occupies to-
wards the whole message of the Gospel. For,
while the treatment of the subjects with which
it deals and the subjects themselves are of uni-
versal interest, the discussion is directed by
special circumstances. The arguments and
reflections in their whole form and spirit, even
more than in special details, are addressed to
" Hebrews," — men, that is, whose hearts were
filled with the thoughts, the hopes, the consola-
tions, of the Old Covenant, such perhaps as,
under another aspect, are described as ol tVc
Ttononris (Acts x. 45, xi. 21 ; Gal. ii. 12 ; Col.
iv. 11 ; Tit. i. 10).
Tertullian has preserved an interesting notice
of another name, which was given to the
Epistle in North Africa, and which apparently
dates from a time earlier than the formation of
the collection of Apostolic Epistles. He quotes
it definitely as Barnabae titulus ad Hebraeos (de
Pvdic. 20) ; and the number of arixoi assigned
to the Epistle of Barnabas which is included in
the African (Latin) Stichometry contained in
the Cod. Clarom. (D,) proves beyond reasonable
doubt that the Epistle to the Hebrews is there
described by that name. There is not, how-
ever, the least evidence that this Epistle was
ever called "the Epistle to the Laodicenes"
(not in Philastr. Haer. 29 or Cod. Boern. G,),
or "the Epistle to the Alexandrines" (Can.
Mxurat. : " fertur etiam ad Laudicenses [epistola],
alia ad Alexandrinos Pauli nomine finctae ad
haeresem Marcionis, et alia plura quae in
Catholicam ecclesiam recipi non potest "), al-
though it might be described as "directed to
meet (rtbs riiv etfpeow) the teaching of Mar-
«ion " (cp. Hist, of N. T. Canon, p. 537).
Wherever the nature of the Book is defined
by early writers it is called an " Epistle." The
description is substantially correct, though the
construction of the writing is irregular. It
opens without any address or salutation (cp.
HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO 1309
1 John L 1), but it closes with salutations (xiii.
24 sq.). There are indeed personal references
throughout, and in the course of the Book there
is a gradual transition from the form of an
"essay "to that of a "letter": ii. 1; iii. 1,
12; iv. 1, 14; v. 11; vi. 9 ; x. 19; xiii. 7,
22 sq.
The writer himself characterises his com-
position as \6yos vapaK\iiirteii (xiii. 22) ; and
the verb which he uses of his communication
(8«k fyaxiw «W«T«Aa, /. c.% while it does not
necessarily describe a letter, yet presupposes a
direct personal address, though personal re-
lationships are kept in the background till
the end.
III. Position.— The places occupied by the
Epistle in different authorities indicate the
variety of opinions which were entertained in
early times as to its authorship.
In the oldest Greek MSS. (XABC) it comes
immediately before the Pastoral Epistles follow-
ing 2 Thess. ; and this is the position which it
generally occupies in MSS. of the Metnphitic
Version (Woide, App. Cod. Alex. N. T. p. 19 ;
Lightfoot ap. Scrivener, Tntrod. pp. 386 sq.,
390). This order is followed also by many
later MSS. (H,P, 17, Sec), and by many Greek
Fathers.
In Cod. Vat. (B) there is important evidence
that it occupied a different position in an early
collection of Pauline Epistles. In this MS. there
is a marginal numeration which shows that the
whole collection of Pauline Epistles was divided,
either in its archetype or in some earlier copy,
into a series of sections numbered consecutively.
In this collection the Epistle to the Hebrews
came between the Epistles to the Galatians and
to the Ephesians.
This arrangement preserved by B approxi-
mates to that of the Thebaic and Bashmuric
Versions, in which the Epistle comes between
2 Corinthians and Galatians (Zoega, Cat. Codd.
in Has. Borg. pp. 186, 140 ; cp. Lightfoot ap.
Scrivener, /. c. pp. 339, 404). Cassiodorus
(Instit. 14) gives another arrangement of the
same type, placing the Epistle between Colos-
sians and 1 Thessalonians.
In the Syriac Versions the Epistle comes after
the Pastoral Epistles and Philemon ; and this
order, which was followed in the mass of later
Greek MSS. (K, L,, &c), probably under Syrian
influence, has passed into the " Received text."
Cp. Epiph. Haer. xiii. p. 373.
The same order is found in Latin MSS. For
in the West the Epistle did not originally form
part of the collection of the writings of St.
Paul ; and other clear traces remain of the
absence of the Book from the apostolic collection.
Thus in Cod. Clarom. D, the Epistle appears as
an appendix to the Pauline Epistles, being
separated from the Epistle to Philemon by the
Stichometry. The archetype of this MS., and
the original text from which the Gothic Version
was made, evidently contained only thirteen
Epistles of St. Paul.
Thus at the earliest date at which we find a
collection of St. Paul's Epistles in circulation in
the Church, the Epistle to the Hebrews was by
some definitely included in his writings, occupy-
ing a place either among or at the close of the
Epistles to Churches : by others it was- treated
as an appendix to them, being set after the
Digitized by
Google
1310 HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO
private letters : with others, again, it found no
place at all among the apostolic writings.
IV. Original Language. — The earliest di-
rect notice of the Epistle, quoted by Eusebius
(//. E. vi. 14) from Clement of Alexandria,
states that it " was written (by Paul) to
Hebrews in the Hebrew language (i.e. the Ara-
maic dialect current in Palestine at the time,
Acts xxii. 2) and translated (into Greek) by
Luke." This statement was repeated from
Eusebius (and Jerome who depended on him),
as it appears, and not from Clement himself, by
a series of later writers both in the East and
West (Theodoret, Euthalius, John of Damascus,
(Ecumenius, Theophylact, Primasius, Kabanus
Maurus, Thomas Aquinas : see Bleek, p. 8 sq. ;
Credner, EM. p. 533), but there is not the least
trace of any independent evidence in favour of
the tradition, nor is it said that any one had
ever seen the original Hebrew document. The
unsupported statement of Clement, which Origen
discredits by his silence, is thus the whole
historical foundation for the belief that the
Epistle was written in "Hebrew." The opinion
however, which was incorporated in the Glossa
Ordinaria, became universally current in the
West in the Middle Ages; and it was main-
tained by one or two scholars in the last century
(J. Hallet, J. D. Michaelis). Lately it has again
found a vigorous advocate in J. H. R. Biesen-
thal (Das Trostschreiben d. Ap. Paulus an d.
Jlcbr&er, 1878; cp. Panek, Coram, in Ep.
Prolegg. § 2, 1882), who thinks that the Epistle
was written in " the dialect of the Mishna, the
language of the schools " in the Apostolic age,
into which he has again rendered the Greek.
Not to dwell ou the insufficiency of the state-
ment of Clement, in the absence of all collateral
external testimony, to jnstify the belief that the
Epistle was written in Hebrew, internal evidence
appears to establish absolutely beyond question
that the Greek text is original and not a trans-
lation from any form of Aramaic. The vocabu-
lary, the style, the rhetorical characteristics of
the work, all lead to the same conclusion. It is
(tor example) impossible to imagine any Aramaic
phrase which could have suggested to a trans-
lator the opening clause of the Epistle, vo\v
Htpas koI xo\vrpiiras ; and similar difficulties
offer themselves throughout the Book in the
free and masterly use of compound words which
have no Aramaic equivalents (e.g. prrpunraitiV,
v. 2 ; tlnteplararos, xii. 1). The structure of
the periods is bold and complicated, and the
arrangement of the words is often singularly
expressive (e.g. ii. 9). Paronomasias (eg. i. 1 ;
ii. 10; v. 8; vii. 23 sq.; ix. 28; x. 34, 38 sq.)
are at leist more likely to have been due to the
writer than to have been introduced or imitated
by a translator. But on the other hand stress
must not be laid on a (falsely) assumed change
in the meaning of SiafrfiKt] in ix. 15 sq., or the
obviously fortuitous hexameter in the common
text of xii. 13.
A still more decisive proof that the Greek
text is original lies in the fact that the quota-
tions from the 0. T. are all (except x. 30
|| Deut. xxxii. 35) taken from the LXX., even
when the LXX. differs from the Hebrew (e-j.
ii. 7, rap' ayytkovs; x. 38, ical iay inroardXrirm ;
xii. 5 sq. fuurrtyot). And arguments are based
on peculiarities of the LXX., so that the quo-
HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO
tations cannot have been first introduced in the
translation from Aramaic to Greek (e.g. x. 5 sq.,
trifia KaTtiprlw ; xii. 26 sq., oVa{).
V. Destination. — The letter is described in
all existing copies as addressed " to Hebrews " ;
and Tertullian, who assigned the authorship to
Barnabns, gave it the same destination (de Pvdic.
20, " Barnabae titulus ad Hebraeos "). There
is, as has been already seen (§ III.), no evidence
that it ever bore any other address.
In itself the title " Hebrew " is not local but
national. It describes a quality of race and not
of dwelling. But the Book itself enables us to
define more exactly the circumstances and cha-
racter of those to whom it was written.
There is no trace of any admixture of heathen
converts among them ; nor does the letter tonch
on any of the topics of heathen controversy (not
xiii. 9). It is therefore scarcely possible that it
could have been written to a mixed Church gene-
rally, or to the Jewish section of a mixed Church.
In either case allusions to the relations of Jew
and Gentile could scarcely have been avoided.
They were a small body (v. 12), and they
were addressed separately from " their leaders "
(xiii. 24). At the same time they were in a
position to be generous, and for this trait the)"
were and had been distinguished (vi. 10).
Their special trials came through disappoint-
ment of their first expectations. They had
failed to grow under the discipline of experience,
and so had degenerated : r. 1 1 sq. (vaSpol yty6-
rart) ; vi. 1 ; x. 25.
The widening breach between the Church and
the Synagogue rendered it necessary at last to
make choice between them, and *' the Hebrews "
were in danger of apostasv : ii. 1, 3 ; iii. 6, 12 sq. ;
iv. 1, 3, 11; vi. 6; x.'25, 29, 39. They had
need therefore of effort and patience : iv. 14 ;
vi. 11 sq. ; x. 23, 36 ; xii. 1, 3 sq., 12 sq.
In earlier days they had borne reproach and
hardships: x. 32 sq. ; still they "had not yet
resisted unto blood " : xii. 3 sq. ; though some
nt least " in bonds " claimed their sympathy and
help: xiii. 3; and perhaps their former "leaders"
had suffered even to martyrdom (xiii. 7).
From these individual traits it is clear that
the letter is addressed to a definite Society and
not to " Hebrew " Christians generally. This
is proved yet more directly by the fact that the
writer hoped to visit them (xiii. 23), as he had
been with them before (xiii. 19). At the same
time, though he spoke of them as " brethren "
(iii. 1) and " beloved " (vi. 1), he does not speak
of them as " children " (riieva).
The living portraiture of the character and
position of this definite and marked Society will
repay careful study (v. 11 sq.; vi.9sq.; x.32sq.;
xii. 3 sq.) ; and whatever obscurity may hang
over its local position, its spiritual features
stand out with vivid clearness. We have in
the Epistle to the Hebrews a picture of early
Christian life such as is drawn in detail nowhere
else (cp. 3 John), and which still, as we must
see, represents a necessary phase in the growth
of the Church. The first enthusiasm and the
first hope had passed away. Believers began to
reckon loss and gain. Some were inclined to
overrate the loss ; and we learn elsewhere that
dark clouds hung over the close of the Apostolic
age. Cp. 2 Tim. i. 15 ; Apoc. ii., iii ; 2 Pet.
iii. 1 sq. ; 1 John ii. 18 sq.
Digitized by
Google
HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO
We might hare expected it to be otherwise,
and we do in fact unoonsciously clothe the first
centuries in light. But in this Letter the
reality of imperfection meets us; and in the
very sadness of the portraiture we feel with
fresh force that Christianity is historical, enter-
ing into life, and subject to the common influences
of life.
The phase of feeling traced in the Epistle has
been spoken of as a necessary one in the develop-
ment of Christian life. It is not difficult to see
how this was so. Those who suffered in the
trial were Jews ; and the narrative of the Acts
shows plainly with what loyal devotion the
first believers from among the Jews observed
the Law. Even at a later date St. Paul before
the Sanhedrin claimed to be a true Jew. For
a time this fellowship of the Church and Syna-
gogue was allowed on both sides (cp. Euseb.
H. E. ii. 23). Little by little the growth of
the Gentile element in the Church excited the
active hostility of the Jews against the whole
body of Christians, as it troubled the Jewish
converts themselves. This hostility could not
fail to be intensified in Palestine by the spread
of aggressive nationalism there shortly before
the outbreak of the Jewish war (cp. Jos. de B. J.
ii. 23,29 sq. ; iv. 11 sq.); and it is not unlikely
that the solemn cursing of the heretics (Jfthim)
in the Synagogues, which became an established
custom after the fall of Jerusalem (Weber,
Altsynag. Theol. 147 sq.), may have begun from
that time (cp. Just. M. Dial. 16, and Otto's
note ; Epiph. Jlacr. xxix. 9, i. p. 124).
Meanwhile the Jewish converts had had
ample time for realising the true relations of
Christianity and Judaism. Devotion to Levitical
ritual was no longer innocent, if it obscured the
characteristic teaching of the Gospel. The
position which rightly belonged to young and
immature Christians was unsuited to those who
ought to have reached the fulness of truth
(v. 11 sq.). Men who won praise for their faith
nnd constancy at the beginning of a generation,
which was emphatically a period of transition,
might well deserve blame and stand in peril of
apostasy, if at the end of it they simply remained
where they had been at first. While as yet the
national unbelief of the Jews was undeclared, it
was not possible to foresee that the coming of
Christ would bring the overthrow of the old
order. The approaching catastrophe is not
realised in the earlier Apostolic writings. In
the Epistle to the Hebrews it is shown to be
imminent. In the Gospel and Epistles of St.
John it is, as it were, lost in the fulness of the
life of the Church.
We can see then, generally, what was the
character of the body to whom the Letter was
addressed. Where can we look for such a body?
Some have found it in the "Hebrew " Christians
of Asia Minor generally, or in some special
congregation of Syria, Asia Minor, Greece, Italy,
or Africa, and more particularly at Antioch or
Rome or Alexandria. Lately the opinion that
the Letter was addressed to the Roman Church
has found considerable favour. But the domi-
nant conception of the Old Testament Institu-
tions as centering in sacrificial and priestly
ordinances seems to be fatal to all these theories,
which are not supported by any direct evidence,
for no conclusion can be fairly drawn as to the
HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO 1311
original destination of the Epistle from the fact
that Clement of Rome was acquainted with it.
Such a view, unlike that of the observance of
special days or meats, must be generally depen-
dent in a large measure upon local circumstances
of a narrow range. It is possible, indeed, that
special circumstances with which we are un-
acquainted may have influenced the feelings of a
small society, and there was in fact a " Syna-
gogue of Hebrews " at Rome (Schurer, Gesch. d.
Jiid. Yolkes, ii. 517) ; but we naturally look, if
there is nothing to determine our search other-
wise, to some place where Judaism would pre-
sent itself with practical force under this
aspect.
In this way our choice is limited to Egypt,
with the Temple at Leontopolis, and to Pale-
stine, with the Temple at Jerusalem. Nowhere
else would the images of sacrifice and inter-
cession be constantly before the eye of a Jew.
There is very little evidence to show that the
Temple at Leontopolis exercised the same power
over the Alexandrian Jews as that at Jerusalem
exercised over the Palestinian Jews and the
Jews generally. Even in Egypt the Temple at
Jerusalem was recognised as the true centre of
worship. Nor is there the least ground for
thinking that any of the divergences in the
Epistle from the details of the Temple cere-
monial coincide with peculiarities in the service
at Leontopolis. On the contrary the furniture
of the Temple at Jerusalem was more like that
of the Tabernacle, which is described in the
Epistle, than was that of the Egyptian Temple.
But on the other hand it is certain that the kind
of feeling which the Epistle is designed to meet
must have been powerful at Jerusalem, and in
its neighbourhood. The close connexion of the
early Church with the Temple, the splendour
and venerable majesty of the ritual, could not
fail to make the thought of severance from
Jndaism roost grievous to those who had hitherto
been able to share in its noblest services accord-
ing to the custom of their youth.
Nor is it a serious objection to this conclusion
that the Temple is nowhere mentioned in the
Epistle, and that the ritual details are those of
the Tabernacle and not those of the second
Temple. The readers were influenced by the
actual form in which the Mosaic ordinances
were embodied. The writer, perhaps from his
external circumstances, or more probably in
order to lay his reasoning on its deepest founda-
tion, goes back to the first institution of the
system. He shows how the original design of
the priestly ritual of the Law, and therefore, of
necessity, of all partial and specific embodi-
ments of it, was satisfied by Christ. The Temple
service, with all its peculiarities, finally drew
its sanction from the Law. The ritual of the
Tabernacle was the divine type of which the
ritual of the Temple was the authoritative
representation. And, according to the popular
tradition, it was believed that " the Tabernacle "
and its furniture, which had been removed by
Jeremiah from the first Temple before its de-
struction, wonld in due time be restored (2 Mace,
ii. 4 sq., and Grimm's notes).
And further it must be added that the Temple,
like the kingdom with which it was co-ordinate,
was spiritually a sign of retrogression. It was
an endeavour to give fixity to that which was
Digitized by
Google
1312 HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO
essentially provisional. And thus the writer of
the Epistle, by going back to the fundamental
legislation, significantly indicates that the
spirit of the Mosaic Law first found accomplish-
ment in Christ, and not in that outward Levitical
system in which it seemed superficially to receive
its perfect embodiment.
It is then most reasonable from general con-
siderations to find the Society to whom the Letter
was addressed in Jerusalem, or in the neigh-
bourhood of Jerusalem.
In accordance with this view, it may be added
that Eusebius speaks on written authority (e"{
iyypdipuy) of the Church of Jerusalem as having
"been wholly composed of Hebrews" (pvrt-
trrivai tV vacrav iKKKriaitw i( 'E0paluv wurruv,
II. E. iv. 5; cp. vi. 14) up to the time of the
revolt under Hadrian. Up to the same date all
the Bishops were " of the circumcision " (/. <\).
So also in the Clementine Homilies (xi. 3i>),
" James that is called brother of the Lord " is
said to be " entrusted with the administration of
the Church of the Hebrews in Jerusalem "
(irnrurrev/teVos «V 'Itpovaakyp. tV 'Effpalar
Sttrtw Ixickriortay) ; and " the letter of Clement "
prefixed to the same work, is addressed to
"James the lord and Bishop of Bishops, who
administers the holy Church of Hebrews in
Jerusalem " (Sitwam ryr iv 'ItpovaaK^ii ayiav
'EPpaior iKK\r)<riay).
It may therefore be fairly concluded that
when the title irpos 'ZSpaiovs was added to the
Epistle, it was an expression of the belief that
the letter was addressed to the Church of Jeru-
salem, or some sister Church in Palestine depen-
dent upon it.
The conclusion which has been reached is not
beyond doubt, but it satisfies the conditions of
the problem most simply. It is indeed possible
that exceptional circumstances which cannot
now be determined may have given occasion to
the Letter. It is, for example, quite conceivable,
as has been already admitted, that a society of
" Hebrews " at Home may have been led to
develop the sacrificial theory of Judaism and to
insist upon it, and so to call out " the word of
exhortation." Such conjectures, however, need
not detain us. It is well to recognise how little
we can determine by the help of the data at
present available. That which is beyond doubt,
that which indeed alone concerns us, is the
spiritual character of the readers of the Epistle.
This we can clearly grasp wherever it may have
been developed. And it is unquestionable that
it would be likely — most likely — to be developed
in Palestine.
W. Grimm has discussed in considerable detail
(Zeitschrift wissensch. Theol., 1870, 19 sq.) the
claims of Rome, Jerusalem, and Alexandria to
be considered as the place to which the Epistle
was directed. He decides against all, and sug-
gests Jamnia. It is better to acquiesce in simply
recognising the conditions which the place must
satisfy.
VI. Date.— The date of the Epistle is fixed
within narrow limits by its contents. A genera-
tion of Christians had already passed away
(xiii. 7 ; ii. 3). There had been space for great
changes in religious feeling (x. 32), and for reli-
gious growth (v. 11 sq.).
On the other hand, the Levitical service Is
spoken of as still continued (riii. 4 : ix. 6, 9 ;
HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO
x. 1 sq. ; xiii. 10 sq.); and, even if the references
to its present continuance could be explained
away (cp. Just. Dial. 1 17 ; Orig. c. Cels. v. 25),
it is inconceivable that such a national calamity
as the Jewish war should be unnoticed if it had
already broken out, and still more, if it had
been decided. Indeed, the prospect of exclusion
from the privileges of the old service is the very
essence of the trial of "the Hebrews;" and the
severity of the trial is in itself a decisive proof
of the influence which the Temple ritual exer-
cised at the time.
The letter may then be placed in the critical
interval between a.d. 64, the government of
Gessius Florus, and 67, the commencement of
the Jewish war, and most probably just before
the breaking of the storm in the latter year, as
the writer speaks of the visible signs of the
approach of " the day " (x. 25 ; cp. viii. 13, tyyiis
lupanianov) ; and indicates the likelihood of
severer trials for the Church (xii. 4, oftrw ; xiii.
13 sq.).
The theories which assign the Epistle to a
later date, after the persecution of Domitian, or
in the time of Trajan, seem to be utterly irre-
concilable with the conditions and scope of the
writing.
VII. Place op Writing. — Tradition is silent
as to the place from which the Epistle was
written. No independent authority can be given
to the subscription which is found in A, iypdfri
&»& 'Piinys. This, as in the case of similar sub-
scriptions to the other Epistles, appears to have
been a deduction from the Epistle itself (xiii.
23, 24). And so it is given in the words of the
text, and enlarged in later MSS. : e.g. P r iypA<pi)
<brb 'IroAlat. K„ typdufni axb 'ItoA.(oj Sia Ti/io-
Btov. H 3 , TlavAov i.wo<n6kov Ario-roAl> xpoi
'EBpaiovs typify Airb 'IraAiat 8i4 TipoOtov.
Nor again is there anything in the Epistle itself
which leads to a definite conclusion. No argu-
ment can be drawn from the mention of the
release of Timothy (xiii. 23), for nothing is
known of the event to which reference is made ;
and the phrase iunrd(oyrai ipas oi Airb rrjt
'iToAfcu (xiii. 24), which seems at first sight to
promise more, gives no certain result ; for the
words may be so rendered as to describe a body
of Christians in Italy ("those in Italy send
salutations from Italy, or more simply " those
who belong to Italy," " Italian Christians"), or
a body of Italian Christians who were with the
writer in a foreign land ("those here from
Italy "). The place of writing must therefore
be left in complete uncertainty.
VIII. Style and Language. — The language
of the Epistle is both in vocabulary and in style
purer and more vigorous than that of any other
Book of the N. T.
i. The vocabulary is singularly copious. It
includes a large number of words which are not
found elsewhere in the apostolic writings, very
many which occur in this Book only among the
Greek Scriptures, and some which are not quoted
from any other independent source. Even when
allowance is made for the requirements of the
peculiar topics with which the writer deals, the
number of peculiar words is still remarkable.
In the Pastoral Epistles, however, the propor-
tion is still greater.
Dr. Thayer {Lexicon to N. T.) reckons the
same number of peculiar words (168) in the
Digitized by
Google
HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO
Pastoral Epistles and the Epistle to the Hebrews,
but the latter is the longer in about the propor-
tion of 21 to 15.
The following words are not quoted from any
source independent of the Epistle: aytrea-
\iynrot (vii. 3) ; trffiartuxoota (ix. 22) ; fmpo-
pot (iti. 21, marg.); fbwtpitrraros (xii. 1);
6*aTpl{ta> (x. 33: Mtarrplfrut in Polyb.);
/ufffioioJorijj (xi. 6) and /iio-flcnrooWa (ii. 2 ;
x. 35 ; xi. 26) for the classical /uo-floSoVnt and
fLurOoSoa-ia ; irpiaxwris (xi. 28); avyKaxa»x*>'
(xi. 25) ; TtXtmrtis (xii. 2).
The list of classical words which are found in
the Epistle and in no other part of the Greek
Scriptures is large : 4jcAu>^s (x. 23) ; iKpoBtrior
(rii. 4); &Avo~it<a4> (xiii. 17) ; aju^rap, airdrop
(vii. 3) ; bt>aKoyi(fa0ai (xii. 3) ; iwcurravpoir
(vi. 6); ayTuy»rl(to-6ai (xii. 4); StopfrWis (ix.
10); USoxh (*■ 27); fcAay0dV<u> (xii. 5);
<Vv/9pfiftu> (x. 29); ^rci<ra7«r^ (vii. 19); «iaf>^-
ot«i (xii. 28) ; kot<U)jXos (vii. 15) ; xara-
o-Kui^eu' (ix. 5); JryKor (xii. 1); n-aparAno-fwj
(ii. 14) ; ttvixtaBthi (iv. 15 ; x. 34) ; arvrrwiftap-
rvptir (ii. 14) ; To/uinrtpos (ir. 1 2) ; fhr<{««u>
(xiii. 17).
Other words peculiar to the Epistle among
Biblical writings belong to the later stage of
Greek literature : —
aivrnoa (vii. 18; ix. 26} ; S0An<rir (x. 32);
aKirreEAvTOf (rii. 16); aprnukror (vi. 17 sq.);
irapifiaros (vii. 24) ; iipopay (xii. 2) ; tvtrcpn't)-
vcirror (v. 11); «wrofa (xiii. 16); Karayarl-
(ecr9ai (xi. 33); AsviTurot (vii. 11); fitvtrtvtw
(vi. 17); iiTTpiowaSttr (v. 2); woKvptp&s, wo\v
rp6**n (i. 1); oa$$ario-fi6s (iv. 9); rpaxvKl-
f«u> (iv. 13); Tvurarifav (xi. 35): wiwtoA^
(x. 39).
The absence of some words (e.g. irXnpoiv,
thayyiXtoy, omoSo/h?*, ixmrrfipmy) is remark-
able.
ii. The style is even more characteristic of a
practised scholar than the vocabulary. It would
be difficult to find anywhere passages more exact
and pregnant in expression than i. 1-4 ; ii. 14-
18; vii. 26-28; xii. 18-24. The language, the
order, the rhythm, the parenthetical involutions,
all contribute to the total effect. The writing
shows everywhere trices of effort and care. In
many respects it is not unlike that of the Book
of Wisdom, but it is nowhere marred by the
restless striving after effect which not unfre-
quently injures the beauty of that masterpiece
of Alexandrine Greek. The calculated force of
the periods is sharply distinguished from the
impetuous eloquence of St. Paul. The author
is never carried away by his thoughts. He has
seen and measured all that he desires to convey
to his readers before he begins to write. In
HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO 1313
writing he has, like an artist, simply to give life
to the model which he has already completely
fashioned. This is true even of the noblest
rhetorical passages, such as ch. xi. Each element,
which seems at first sight to offer itself sponta-
neously, will be found to have been carefullv
adjusted to its place, and to offer in subtle
details results of deep thought, so expressed as
to leave the simplicity and freshness of the
whole perfectly unimpaired. For this reason
there is perhaps no Book of Scripture in which
the student may hope more confidently to enter
into the mind of the author-if he yields himself
with absolute trust to his words. Xo Book le-
presents with equal clearness the mature con-
clusions of human reflection.
The contrast of the style of the Epistle with
that of St. Paul may be noticed in the passages
which are quoted as echoes of St. Paul's lan-
guage : ii. 10 : cp. Rom. xi. 36 ; iii. 6 : cp. Rom.
v. 2 ; xi. 12 : cp. Rom. iv. 19. The richer ful-
ness of expression is seen in corresponding
phrases: e.g. Col. iii. 1, compared with xii. 2.
The writer does not use St. Paul's rhetorical
forms rl otv; rt yip; iAA' tptt rtt . . ., /ij)
yeyono, ipa otr, ovk olSart (Credner, JEW.,
p. 547). On the other hand, we notice the
peculiar phrases us (wot tlwtiv, els to Sinyticfs,
I Aatfor (fvloayrts.
The close resemblance of the language of the
Epistle to that of St. Luke was noticed by
Clement of Alexandria {up. Euseb. //. E. vi. 14 :
. . . Aovkm [f J)ff (»•] . . . ntBepfinytio-ayra ixtoiyai
toii "EAAno~u> • S0ty rhr airrhy XP"T° f&pivnt-
ffflm koto H)r ippnytlay Tavrni T« Ti)j ArioroAijr
ical tin rtpi^tuv — the form of expression is re-
markable), and his criticism was repeated by
later writers. The significance of the coinci-
dences may have been overrated, but no impar-
tial student can fail to be struck by the frequent
use of words characteristic of St. Luke among
the writers of the N. T., e.g. tia/iapruofo-0«
(ii. 6), ipxvyit (ii- 10), SOey (ii. 17), iKiaKt-
irSiu (ii. 17% /leroxor (iii. 1), wtpim?<r0at accus.
(v. 2), ttetras (vi. 7), Kara<ptiytiv (vi. 18),
xarpiapxi* (vii. 4), tit t4 «-arr<A<> (vii. 25),
o"X<ooV (ix. 22), Iw&rtpor (x. 8% rapo{t«r/io's
(x. 24), Bnaptis (x. 34), avaario-tws rvyximv
(xi. 35), (yrpopos (xii. 21), lur&Ktvrot (xii. 28),
ol iiyoviMvoi (xiii. 7), uyaStetpt'ty (xiii. 7).
IX. Plan.— The general progress of thought
in the Epistle is clear ; but, at the same time,
in a writing so many-sided, where subjects are
naturally foreshadowed and recalled, differences
of opinion must arise as to the main divisions of
the argument. The following arrangement gives
at least an intelligible view of the main rela-
tions of the different parts of the Book.
Tax Theme or rax Epistle ; Tm Fikalitt or Christiakitt : 1. 1-4.
The SurEKioRrrr or the Sox, tub Mediator or the sew Revelatiok, to asoels: I. 5-11. 18.
\L Moses, Joshua, Jesus, the Focxdbrs or the Old Bconomt asd or the New: 111., Iv.
III. The High-priesthood or Christ, uetversal akd sovereigh (Melchizedie) : v.-vll.
IV. The FcLnxHrsT or Christ's priestly Work : vllL 1-x. 18.
V. The Appropriation asd vital Attlicatioic or the Tbcth laid down : x. 19-xll.
A FERSOHAL KPILOOCB: Xiii.
These chief divisions can be followed a little more in detail :
The Theme or the Epistle; The KiRALirr or CimisTiAHtrr : 1. 1-4.
I. TV contrast of the Old Revelation and the fTea in method, time, pertont (to. I, 2).
Ii. The nature and the work of the Son, in regard to Hit Divine Pertmality and to the Incarnation
(«• 3).
HI. Transition to the development of the argument (». 4).
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. 1. * 4 P
Digitized by
Google
1314
HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO
I. The Superiority of the Sox, the Mediator or the new Revelation, to Angeu : L 5-11. 18.
1. The testimony of Scripture (1. 5-14).
II. The peril of rejecting the new retelation through the Son (It. 1-4).
ill. The fulfilment of the divine destiny of man t'n We Son of man (Jesus) through suffering (it. 5-18).
II. Moses, Josuca, Jesus: the Founders op the Old Economy akd or the New: 111., It.
1. Motes and Jesus : the servant and the Son (lil. 1-6).
(1) A general view of the dignity of Jesus (rt>. 1, 2).
(2) Moses represents a house : Jesus tbe maker of il (to. 3, 4).
(3) Moses a servant : Jesus a Son (tm. 5, 6).
H. The promise and the people under the Old and the -Veto Dispensations (ill. 7-lv. 13).
(1) The condition of faith (HI. t-19).
(2) The promise remaining (iv. 1-13).
ill. jToim'tion to the doctrine of the High-priesthood, resuming II. IT, 18 (Iv. 14-16).
III. The High-priesthood or Christ, universal and sovereign (Melchizedek): v.-vtl.
i. The characteristics of a High-priest, sympathy and divine appointment, fulfilled t'n Christ
(v. 1-10).
it. Progress through patient effort the condition of the knowledge of Christian mysteries (v. 11-vt.).
111. The characteristics of Christ, as absolute High-priest, shadowed forth, by Mdchisedek {King-priest)
(vli.).
IV. Tns Fulfilment or Christ's priestly Work : rill. 1-x. 18.
I. A general view of the scheme and condition of Christ s High-priestly work (ch. vlll.).
(1) The scheme of Christ's work (vtil. 1-6).
(2) The new Covenant (to. T-13).
.11. The Old Service and the Sew: the Atonement of the Law, and the Atonement of Christ (ch. Ix.).
(1) The Sanctuary and Priests under the Old Covenant (lx. 1-10).
(2) The Hlgh-priestly Atonement under the New Covenant (r», 11-28).
111. The Old Sacrifices and the .Vets ; abiding efficacy of Christ's one Sacrifice (x. 1-18).
A summary of reassurance.
V. The Appropriation and vital Application or the Troth laid down : x. 19-xlL 29.
1. The privileges, perils, encouragements of the Hebrews (x. 19-39).
II. The past triumphs of Faith (xl.).
til. The general application of the lessons of the past to the present season of trial (xii.).
A personal Epilogue: xUi.
Detailed and specific instructions. Close.
One feature in this plan will strike the
student. The central portion of each of the
first three divisions is mainly occupied with
sole mn warnings ; while the last division is a
mo st grave and earnest exposition of the duties
which follow from the confession of Christ's
pri estly work. The writer is unwilling, even
in the development of truth, to allow the loftiest
conception of the Gospel to appear to be a theory
only. It is for him intensely practical ; and
the note of entire and reverential awe closes
his description of the privileges of Christians
(xii. 28 sq.).
X. Characteristics. — The Epistle to the
Hebrews is one of three Books in the N. T.
specially addressed to those who were Jews by
descent, the other two being the Gospel accord-
ing to St. Matthew and the Epistle of St. James
- (Jas. i. 1, rcur ScSSskci d>uAats). To these, how-
ever, 1 Peter, probably addressed to those who
had passed through Judaism to Christianity,
may be added (1 Pet. i. 1, ^k\«ktois waptwiot)-
/sots fiicurxopat noWov . . .).
Each of these Books is marked by a charac-
teristic view of the Faith. St. Matthew, according
to general consent, gives the lineaments of the
Davidic King. In St. James we have the power
•of " a perfect law " (Jas. i. 25 ; ii. 8) : in St. Peter
the accomplishment of prophecy (1 Pet. i. 10-
12) : in the Epistle to the Hebrews the efficacy
-of an eternal priesthood (Heb. vii. 23 sq.).
This general connexion indicates the true
position of tne Epistle, which is a final develop-
ment of the teaching of "the three," and not a
special application of the teaching of St. Paul.
It is, so to speak, most truly intelligible as the
last voice of the Apostles of the circumcision,
.and not as a peculiar utterance of the Apostle
of the Gentiles (Gal. ii. 9 sq.). The Apostles of
the circumcision regarded Judaism naturally
with sympathy and even with affection, as that
through which they had been led little by little
to see the meaning of the Gospel. The Apostle
of the Gentiles, with all his love for his country-
men and all his reverence for the work wrought
through the Old Covenant, no less naturally
regarded Judaism, as it was, as a system which
had made him a persecutor of the Faith. For
St. Paul the Law is a code of moral ordinances ;
for the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, it
is a scheme of typical provisions for atonement.
For the one it is a crushing burden ; for the
other it is a welcome if imperfect source of con-
solation. And it is in virtue of this general
interpretation of the spirit of the Levitical sys-
tem that the unknown Apostle to whom we owe
the Epistle to the Hebrews was fitted to fulfil
for the Church the part which was providentially
committed to him.
The difference between St. Paul and the
writer of the Epistle in their view of the Law
may be presented in another light. St. Paul
regards the Law mainly in relation to the re-
quirements of man's discipline; his fellow
Apostle in relation to the fulfilment of God's
counsel. For St. Paul the Law was an episode,
intercalated, as it were, in the course of revela-
tion (Rom. t. 20, *apti<ri)\6tv) ; for the writer
of the Epistle, it was a shadow of the realities
to which the promise pointed. It is closely con-
nected with this fundamental distinctness of the
point of vision of the two teachers that St. Paul
dwells with dominant interest on the individual
aspect of the Gospel, the writer of the Epistle
on its social aspect: for the one the supreme
contrast is between flesh and spirit, for the other
Digitized by
Google
HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO
between the image and the reality, the imperfect
and the perfect ; for the one Christ is the direct
object of peraonal faith, for the other the fultiller
of the destiny of man.
But thia difference, however real and intel-
ligible, does not issue in any opposition between
the two writers. Both views are completely
satisfied by the Incarnation ; and each writer
recognises the truth which the other develops.
In the Epistle to the Ephesians St. Paul gives
the widest possible expression to the social lessons
of the Faith ; and the writer to the Hebrews
emphasises with the most touching solemnity
the significance of personal responsibility (e.y.
ch. vi.). At the same time the writer to the
Hebrews suggests the unity, the harmonious
unfolding, of the Divine plan, in a way which is
foreign to the mode of thought of him who was
suddenly changed from a persecutor to an Apostle.
His eyes rest on one heavenly archetype made
known to men as they could bear the sight in
various degrees. He presupposes a divine ideal
of the phenomenal world and of outward wor-
ship. This, he argues, was shadowed forth in
the Mosaic system ; and found its perfect em-
bodiment under the conditions of earth in the
Christian Church. He looks therefore with
deep sympathy upon the devotion with which
the Hebrews had regarded the provisions made
by the Law for dealing with the power and guilt
of sin. He enters into their feelings and points
out how Christ satisfied them by His Person
and His work.
This being so, the circumstances in which
the Hebrews were placed led him naturally to
develop the conception of Christ's priestly office.
They had experienced a double disappointment.
The shame of the sufferings of the Messiah had
not been effaced, as many had hoped, by a
glorious Return. It became evident that the
Jews as a people would not receive Him. The
national unbelief of Israel, apart from all direct
persecution, brought with it a growing alienation
of the Synagogue from the Church. The right
of participation in the ministrations of the
Temple could not, it became more and more clear,
be retained by Christians who held their faith.
The Hebrew Christians therefore were con-
strained to ask, whether there was to be no
kingdom for Israel ? Whether Christians were
to be deprived of the manifold consolations of
sacrificial worship and priestly atonement?
The Epistle is an answer to the questions. The
writer shows that the difficulty which arose
from the sufferings of the Son of man (Jesus)
included the solution of the difficulty which was
felt in exclusion from the Temple : that he who
remained a Jew outwardly could not but miss
in the end the message and the inheritance
■of Christ, just as the Christian who under-
stands his position is essentially independent of
every support of the Old Covenant and heir of
all its promises : that which seemed to be the
weakness of the Gospel was revealed upon a
closer vision to be its strength. In proportion
as men can feel what Christ is (such is the
writer's argument) they can feel also how His
death and His advocacy more than supply the
place of all sacrifices and priestly intercessions,
how they lay open the victory of humanity in
the Son of man over sin and death. In other
words, under this light the Death of Christ
HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO 1315
becomes intelligible in itself without regard to
the thought of a Return. The sense of His
present priestly action gains a new force. The
paradox of a suffering Messiah is disclosed in its
own glory.
At the same time the writer goes beyond
Judaism. The Gospel, as he presents it, is the
fulfilment of the purpose of Creation and not
only of the Mosaic system. Melchizedek is a
more prominent figure in his treatment of the
O. T. than Abraham. Thus the work of Judaism
is mode to appear as a stage in the advance
towards a wider work which could not be
achieved without a preparatory discipline. So
regarded, the provisions of the Law can be seen
in their full meaning, and by the help of their
typical teaching a suffering Messiah can be
acknowledged by the true Jew in His Majesty.
Thus the immediate purpose of the writer was
fulfilled : and that which was an answer to the
difficulties of the Hebrew Christian has been
made the endowment of the whole Church. For
in this Epistle we have what is found in no
other Book of the N. T., that which may be
called a philosophy of religion, of worship, of
priesthood, centered in the Person of Christ.
The form of the doctrine is determined by the
0. T. foundations, but the doctrine itself is
essentially new. In the light of the Gospel the
whole teaching of the 0. T. is seen to be a
prophecy, unquestionable in the breadth and
fulness of its scope.
But while the thoughts of the absolute value
of Christ's sufferings and of the application of
their virtue to men are brought out with pre-
vailing force, it is not argued that all difficulty
is removed from the present prospect of Chris-
tianity. There are still, the writer implies,
difficulties in the state of things which we see.
We cannot escape from them. But enough can
be discerned to enable men to wait patiently for
the appointed end. There is a triumph to
come ; and, in looking forward to this, Christians
occupy the position which the Saints have always
occupied, the position of faith, of faith under
trials. - The heroic records of ch. xi. lead up to
the practical charge of xii. I sq.
Meanwhile the writer calls upon his readers
to make their choice boldly. Judaism was
becoming, if it had not already become, anti-
Christian. It must be given up (xiii. 19). It
was " near vanishing away " (viii. 13). It was
no longer debated whether a Gentile Church
could stand beside the Jewish Church, as in the
first period of conflict in the apostolic age ; or
whether a Jewish Church should stand beside
the Gentile Church, as in the next period. The
Christian Church must be one and independent.
And thus the Epistle is a monument of the last
crisis of conflict out of which the Catholic
Church rose.
This view of the relation of the Church to
the Temple is the more impressive from the
prominence which is assigned in the Epistle to
the 0. T., both to the writings and to the insti-
tutions which it hallows. There is not the least
tendency towards disparagement of the one or
the other. From first to last it is maintained
that God spoke to the fathers in the Prophets.
The message through the Son take* up and
crowns all that had gone before. In each
respect the New is the consummation of the
4 P 2
Digitized by
Google
1316 HEBEEWS, THE EPISTLE TO
Old. It offers a more perfect and absolute
Revelation, carrying with it a more perfect and
absolute Mediation, and establishing a more per-
fect and absolute Covenant, embodying finally
the connexion of God and man. There is nothing
in the Old which is not taken up and trans-
figured in the New.
For it is assumed throughout the Epistle that
all visible theocratic institutions answer to a Di-
vine antitype (archetype). They are (so to speak)
a translation into a particular dialect of eternal
truths : a representation under special conditions
of an absolute ideal. In some sense which we can
feel rather than define, the eternal is declared
to lie beneath the temporal (xii. 27). In virtue
of this truth, the work of Christ and the hope
of the Christian are both described under Jewish
imagery, without the least admixture of the
millenarian extravagances which gained currency
in the second century. There is for the believer a
priestly consecration (x. 22), an altar (xiii. 10),
a sabbath-rest (iv. 9).
It follows therefore that in studying the
Levitical ritual we must recognise that there is
a true correspondence of the seen with the
unseen, a correspondence which extends to the
fulness of life, and not simply a correspondence
of a world of ideas (xianot koijtoi), as Philo
supposed, to a world of phenomena.
The same principle holds still under the
Christian dispensation. We see the reality but
only in figures (c.</. Kev. xxi. 16). Judaism was
the shadow, and Christianity is the substance ;
yet both are regarded under the conditions of
earth.
But the figures have an abiding significance.
There is a heavenly city in the spiritual world,
an organised body of rational beings; "a con-
gregation " (^nicAjjfffo) which answers to the full
enjoyment of the privileges of social life : xi. 10
(4 Toiit 0i/i. ix- *oKis); xi. 16 ; xii. 22 sq. (cp.
viii. 11; xi. 10; xiii. 14). There is also a
heavenly sanctuary there, which was the pattern
of the earthly, to confirm the eternal duty and
joy of worship : viii. 2, 5.
Id this aspect the Epistle fulfils a universal
work. It is addressed to Hebrews, and meets,
as we have seen, their peculiar difficulties, but
at the same time it deals with the largest views
of the Faith. This it does not by digression or
contrast. It discloses the catholicity of the
Gospel by the simple interpretation of its scope.
It does not insist on the fact as anything new or
strange. It does not dwell on " the breaking
down of the middle wall of partition " (Ephes. ii.
14), or on "the mystery which in other ages
was not made known . . . that the Gentiles are
. . . fellow-partakers of the promise in Christ
Jesus " (Ephes. iii. 4 sq. ; Horn. xvi. 25 sq.). The
equality of men ns men in the sight of God is
implied in the declaration which is made of the
Person and the Work of Christ. Faith is the
condition of a divine fellowship, and that is
essentially universal. The truth that there is
no difference between Jew and Gentile has passed
beyond the stage of keen controversy. It is
acknowledged in the conception which has been
gained of the Incarnation.
Viewed in this light, the Epistle to the Hebrews
forms a complement to the Gospel of St. John.
Both Books assume the universality of Chris-
tianity as the one religion of humanity without
HEBBEWS, THE EPISTLE TO
' special argument (cp. John i. 12). Both regard
" the Jews" — the men who clung to that which
was transitory as if it were absolute and eternal
— as enemies of Christ. Both recognise com-
pletely the provisional office of the Old Dis-
pensation (John iv. 22). But they do this from
different sides. The Epistle to the Hebrews
enables us to see how Christianity is the absolute
fulfilment of the idea of the positive institutions
of the Law through which it was the good
pleasure of God to discipline men, while the
Fourth Gospel shows us in the Word become
flesh the absolute fulfilment of the idea of creation
which underlies the whole of the 0. T.
One further observation must still be made.
The style of the Book is characteristically
Hellenistic, — perhaps we may say, as far as our
scanty evidence goes, Alexandrine ; but the
teaching itself is, like that of St. John, charac-
teristically Palestinian. This is shown not only
by the teaching on details, on the heavenly
Jerusalem, and the heavenly Sanctuary, on
Satan as the king of death, on Angela, on the two
ages (cp. Riehm, Lehrbegriff, pp. 248, 652 sq.),
but still more by its whole form. The writer
holds firmly to the true historical sense of the
ancient history and the ancient legislation.
Jewish ordinances are not for him, as for Philo,
symbols of transcendental ideas, but elements in
a preparatory discipline for a Divine manifes-
tation upon earth. Christ is High-Priest not as
the eternal Word, but as the Incarnate Son Who
has lived and suffered and conquered as true man.
At the same time the Apostle teaches us to re-
cognise the Divine method in the education of
the world. He shows us how God has used (and,
as we are led to conclude, how He uses still)
transitory institutions to awaken, to develop, to
chasten, human thoughts of spiritual things. The
Epistle is, to sum up all most briefly, the seal of
the divine significance of nil life. The interpre-
tation, given in its salient points, of the record
of the 0. T., and of the training of Israel, is a
prophetic light for the interpretation of the
history of mankind.
XI. The Use of the Old Testament.— The
use which is made of the 0. T. in the Epistle
offers an interesting subject for study in regard
to (i.) the range of the quotations, (ii.) the mode
of citation, and (iii.) the principles of interpre-
tation which the writer assumes.
(i.) Of twenty-nine direct quotations, twenty-
three are taken from the Pentateuch and the
l's.ilms, the fundamental Liw and the Book of
common devotion. The absence of detailed
illustrations from the history of the kingdom,
and the fewness of the references to the teaching
of the Prophets, are both striking facts. It is
yet more remarkable that, with two exceptions
(2 Sam. vii. 14 ; Is. viii. 17 sq.). all the primary-
passages which are quoted to illustrate the true
nature of the Person and Work of Christ are
taken from the Psalms. No direct prophetic
word is quoted. Nor again is anything quoted
from the Prophets on the inefficiency of ritual
sacrifices. It is further to be noticed, as a mark
of the individuality of the writer, that of the
twenty-nine passages which are reckoned as
direct quotations, twenty-one are peculiar to
the Epistle. The text of the quotations agrees,
with three exceptions, with some form of the
LXX., and particularly with the text of Cod.
Digitized by
Google
HEBHEWS, THE EPISTLE TO
Alex. (A). In eight passages it agrees with the
LXX. against the present Hebrew text.
(ii.) The quotations are without exception made
anonymously. There is no mention anywhere
of the name of the writer (iv. 7 is no exception
to the rule). God is presented as the .speaker
through the person of the Prophet, except in
the one place where He is directly addressed (ii.
6 sq.) : e.17. i. 5, 7 Af'-y<i, 13 ; v. 5. in two places
the words are attributed to Christ (ii. 11, 13;
x. 5 sq.). in two other places the Holy Spirit
socially is named as the speaker (iii. 7 sq. ;
1. 1 5 : cp. ix. 8).
This assignment of the written word to God,
as the Inspirer of the message, is most remark-
able when the words spoken by the Prophet in
his own person are treated as divine words, as
words spoken by Moses (i. 6 ; iv. 4 : cp. rr. 5,
7, 8 ; x. 30) and by Isaiah (ii. 13 : cp. also
xiii. 5).
There is nothing really parallel to this general
mode of quotation in the other Books of the
N. T. Where the word Kiyti occurs elsewhere,
it is for the most part combined either with the
name of the Prophet or with " Scripture " (Rom.
ir. 3 ; x. 16, 19 ; xi. 9). And when God is the
subject, as is rarely the case, the reference is to
words directly spoken by God (2 Cor. vi. 2 ;
Rom. ix. 15, 25).
This " personal " character of citation is the
more significant when it is remembered how
frequent elsewhere (in St. Paul for example) arc
the forms (koO&i) ytypcnrrai (sixteen times in
the Epistle to the Romans), q ypaQh \tyfi, and
the like, which never occur in the Epistle to
the Hebrews ; and whereas St. Taul not unfre-
qnently quotes the words of God as " Scripture "
simply (ejj- Rom. ix. 17), it has been seen that
in this Epistle prophetic words recorded in
Scripture are treated as " words of God."
(iii.) It has been already observed that the
writer of the Epistle everywhere assumes that
there is a spiritual meaning in the whole record
of the 0. T. This deeper sense is recognised in
the history both personal (vii. 1 sq.)and national
(iv. 1 sq.): in the Mosaic ritual (ix. 8): in the
experience of typical characters (ii. 13); and in
the general teaching (ii. 6 sq.). Every detail in
the record is treated as significant; and even
t lie silence of the narrative suggests important
ihoughts (vii. 3).
Generally it may be said that Christ and the
Christian dispensation are regarded as the one
• n I to which the 0. T. points, and in which it
finds its complete accomplishment, not as though
the Gospel were the answer to the riddle of the
Law (as is taught in the Letter of Barnabas),
but as being the consummation in life of that
which was prepared in life. They therefore
who acknowledged Jesus as the Christ, when
Jhey realised His Nature, could not fail to see
that He had abrogated the outward system of
Judaism by fulfilling it.
The use which the author makes of Holy
Scripture is, in other words, not dialectic or
rhetorical, but interpretative. The Christian
faith is assumed, and the Hebrews are taught
by him to recognise in the 0. T. the foreshadow-
ings of that growing purpose which the Gospel
completes and crowns. This being so, his object
is not to show that Jesus fulfils the idea of the
Christ, and the Christian Church the idea of
HEBBEWS, THE EPISTLE TO 1317
Israel, but, taking this for granted, to mark the
relation in which the Gospel stands to the
Mosaic system, as part of one Divine whole.
Looking back therefore over the course of the
Divine discipline of humanity, outlined in the
0. T., he marks how Christ, Lawgiver and
Priest, fulfilled perfectly the offices which Moses
(ch. iii.),Aaron (ch. v.), and Melchizedek (ch. vii.)
held in typical and transitory forms. And yet
more than this, how as man He fulfilled the
destiny of fallen man through suffering (ch. ii.).
For he places the destiny of mau in connexion
with the record of Creation. Man, he implies,
was made in order to enter into the rest of God ;
and lest he should seem to have finally lost his
original inheritance by sin, he points out that
this was confirmed to him afterwards by a
promise.
The accomplishment of the Divine purpose
for man necessarily required a long preparation.
Even if he had not fallen, he would have needed
the discipline of life to reach the Divine likeness
through a free moral growth. The sinless Son
of man " learnt obedience " (v. 8). As it is,
the necessity of the discipline is twofold. Di-
vine gilts have to be exercised ; and human
failures hare to be repaired. The capacities and
needs of man hare to be revealed and satisfied.
Thus the purpose of God for man indicated in
creation is wrought out in two ways, by that
which we may sjieak of as a natural growth
through the unfolding of the life of the nations,
and by a special discipline. Both elements are
recognised in the Epistle. Melchizedek is set
forth as the representative of the natural
growth of man in fellowship with the divine
spirit. The revelation to Israel (the " Law ")
is interpreted as the special preparation and
foreshadowing of a fellowship of man with God,
in spite of sin and death.
In marking the course of this special revola-
tion the writer distinguishes the work of the
Messianic people (Ex. xix. 5 sq.) and the work
of the personal Messiah, typified on the one
side by the Davidic king, and on the other
side bv the afflicted and faithful Servant of the.
Lord. '
Both works are marked in the Epistle in
their main outlines. Especially it will be
observed that in dealing with the work of the
Messianic people the writer of the Epistle em-
phasises the three great stages in the deter-
mination of their privileges and their office:
i. The original promise to Abraham; ii. The
discipline of the Law ; iii. The new promise.
These three crises mark three special forms of
the Divine Covenant (Dispensation, Siotf^irq), by
which God is pleased to enter into a living
fellowship with His people, the Covenant of
grace, the Covenant of works, and the final
Covenant of Divine fellowship based on perfect
knowledge and sympathy.
The fulfilment of this last great promise (Jer.
xxxii.) leads up to the thought of the work of
the personal Messiah ; and in no other Book of
the N. T. is the Messiah presented with equal
fulness of delineation. Each trait in the por-
traiture is connected with some preparatory
sign in the 0. T. The Christ, revealed in the
Son of man, is shown to be all for whiih tne
people had looked, satisfying every hope and
claim, without change or loss.
Digitized by
Google
1318 HEBREWS, THE EPI8TLE TO
Thus we can read how the manifold teachings
of the past in life and in institutions were con-
centrated on the final revelation of the Gospel.
These had their fulfilment at the Coming of the
Christ; and no less the spiritual experiences of
those to whom they were first given have an
application to Christians still. What was
written of encouragement to Israel on the
entrance into Canaan (xiii. 5), on the approach
to the sanctuary (xiii. 6), in the prophetic
delineation of the Messianic age (xii. 12 sq.),
and in the wocls of the wise (xii. 5 sq.), was
of force for the Hebrews in their crisis of trial,
and is of force for the Church in all time.
Counsels of patience (x. 37 sq.) and warnings
of judgment (x. 27) from the Prophets and
the Law are still addressed to those who are
under a Divine discipline. In one sense the
revelation given through the Son is final and
unchanging (xii. 26), but its meaning is brought
home to believers by a living voice, and we
also must listen heedfully if haply the voice
may sound in our ears "To-day with a fresh
message for us (iii. 7, &c).
XII. History and Authorship. — In discuss-
ing the history of any one of the writings of the
N. T. it is necessary to bear in mind the narrow
range of the scanty remains of the earliest
Christian literature, and the little scope which
they offer for definite references to particular
Books. It might perhaps hare been expected
that the arguments of the Epistle to the
Hebrews would have given it prominence in the
first controversies of the Church, but this does
not appear to have been the case. Traces of its
use occur indeed in the oldest Christian writing
outside the Canon, the letter written by Cle-
ment of Rome to the Corinthians, but it is not
referred to by name till the second half of the
second century. There can be no doubt that
Clement was familiar with its contents. He
not only uses its language (ad Cor. 17, 36), but
imitates its form in such a way (ad Cor. 9, 12,
45) as to show that he had the text before him ;
but the adaptations of words and thoughts are
made silently, without any mark of quotation
or any indication of the author from whom they
are borrowed (cp. Euseb. H. E. iii. 38 ; Hier. efe
Vir. ill. 15). The fact that the Book was known
at Rome at this early date is of importance,
because it was at Rome that the Pauline author-
ship was most consistently denied, and for the
longest period. In this connexion it is of in-
terest that there are several coincidences of
expression with the Epistle in the Shepherd of
Hermas, which seem to be sufficient to show
that Hermas also was acquainted with it.
The other evidence which can be alleged to
show that the Epistle was known by the earliest
Christian writers is less clear. Polycarp gives
the Lord the title of " High-Priest " (ch. 12, pon-
ti/ex), a title which is peculiar to this Epistle
among the apostolic writings, but it is not
possible to conclude certainly that he derived it
directly from the Book. So again when Justin
Martyr speaks of Christ as " Apostle " (Apol. i.
12, 63 ; Heb. iii. 1), and applies Ps. ex. to Him
(Dial. 96, 113), he may be using thoughts which
had become current among Christians, though
these correspondences with characteristic fea-
tures of the Epistle are more worthy of con-
sideration because Justin has also several coin-
HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO
cidences with its language (viii. 7 sq., Dial. 34;
ix. 13 sq., Dial. 13 ; xii. 18 sq., Dial. 67).
On the other hand, the Epistle was not in-
cluded among the apostolic writings received
by Marcion ; nor does it find any place in the
Muratorian Canon, while by this catalogue it in
distinctly excluded from the Epistles of St. Paul
(" septcm scribit ecclesiis ").
Towards the close of the second century there
is evidence of a knowledge of the Epistle in
Alexandria, North Africa, Italy, and the West of
Europe. Prom the time of Pantaenns it was
held at Alexandria to be, at least indirectly, the
work of St. Paul and of canonical authority;
and this opinion, supported in different forms
by Clement and Origen, came to be generally
received among the Eastern Greek Churches in
the third century.
Meanwhile a Latin translation of the Epistle
found a limited public recognition in North
Africa, but not as a work of St. Paul. So
Tertullian speaks of it as being " more widely
received among the Churches than The Shepherd "
(de Pudic. 20, " utique receptior apud ecclesias
illo apocrypho Pastore moechorum "). Cyprian,
however, never quotes it, and, by repeating the
statement peculiar to Western writers that St.
Paul " wrote to seven churches " (de Exhort.
Mart. 1 IX he also implicitly denies its Pauline
authorship.
In Italy and Western Europe the Epistle was
not held to be St. Paul's, and by consequence, as
it seems, it was not held to be canonical. Hip-
polytus (Lagarde, pp. 64, 89, 118, 149) and
Ireuaeus (Euseb. H. E. v. 26) were acquainted
with it, but they held that it " was not Paul's "
(Steph. Gobar. ap. Phot. Cod. 232) ; and if Ire-
naeus had held it to be authoritative Scripture,
he could hardly have failed to use it freely
in his Book "against heresies." Caius also
reckoned only thirteen Epistles of St. Paul
(Euseb. H. E. vi. 20 ; Hier. de Vir. ill. 59); and
Eusebius, where he mentions the fact, adds that
the opinion was " still held by some Romans."
It is impossible to decide certainly whether
the Epistle formed a part of the earliest Syriac
Version. The position which it holds in the
Peshitto at present shows at least that it was
not regarded strictly as one of St. Paul's
Epistles, but as an appendix to the collection.
In accordance with this view it is called simply
the "Epistle to the Hebrews," and not, after
the usage in the other Epistles, " the Epistle of
Paul to the Hebrews."
This meagre account indicates all the inde-
pendent external evidence which has been
preserved by tradition as to the origin of the-
Epistle. Later writers simply combine and
repeat the views which it represents in various
ways. To speak summarily, when the Book
first appears in general circulation three distinct
opinions about it had already obtained local
currency. At Alexandria the Greek Epistle was
held to be not directly but mediately St. Paul's,
as either a free translation of his words or a
reproduction of his thoughts. In North Africa
it was known to some extent as the work of
Barnabas and acknowledged as a secondary
authority. At Rome and in Western Europe it
was not included in the collection of the
Epistles of St. Paul, and had no apostolic
weight.
Digitized by
Google
HEBEEWS, THE EPISTLE TO
In order to decide between these conflicting
judgments, and to account for their partial ac-
ceptance, it is necessary to examine the primary
evidence more in detail.
The testimony of Alexandria is the earliest
and the most explicit. It has been preserved by
Eusebius from lost writings of Clement and
Origen. Clement, he writes (ff. E. vi. 14), says
in his "Outlines" ("tworvw^aus), "that the
Epistle is Paul's, and that it was written to
Hebrews in the Hebrew language, and that Luke
translated it with zealous care and published it
to the Greeks ; whence it is that the same com-
plexion of style is found in the translation of this
Epistle and in the Acts. [Further] that the
[ordinary] phrase ' Paul an Apostle ' was not
placed at the head of the Epistle for good
reason ; for, he says, in writing to Hebrews who
had formed a prejudice against him and viewed
him with suspicion, he was wise not to repel
them at the beginning by setting his name
there." The last clause only is quoted in Cle-
ment's own words, but there can be no doubt
that Eusebius has given correctly the substance
of what he said, as far as it goes, but much is
left undetermined which it would be important
to know. There is nothing to indicate the
source of Clement's statement, or how far it
was the common opinion of the Alexandrine
Church at the time, or whether the hypothesis
of a Hebrew original was framed to explain the
peculiarities of the un-Pauline style. In part
this deficiency may be supplied by another quo-
tation from Clement, in regard to the Epistle,
which Eusebius makes in the same place : " The
blessed presbyter [Pantaenus] used to say:
since the Lord was sent to the Hebrews, as
being the Apostle of the Almighty, Paul through
modesty, as was natural since he had been sent
to the Gentiles, does not style himself Apostle
of the Hebrews, both for the sake of the honour
due to the Lord, and because it was a work of
supererogation for him to write to the Hebrews,
since he was herald and Apostle of the Gen-
tiles." It appears then that the exceptional
character of the Epistle had attracted attention
at Alexandria in the generation before Clement,
and that an explanation was offered of one at
least of its peculiarities. It is possible there-
fore, though not probable, that Clement may
have derived from his master the idea of a
Hebrew original. At any rate the idea was
compatible with what he had learnt from Pan-
taenus as to the authorship of the Greek text.
The judgment of Origen is quoted by Eusebius
(/f. E. vi. 25) in his own words. Every one
competent to judge of language must admit, he
remarks, that the style of the Epistle to the
Hebrews is not that of St. Paul, and he adds
that every one conversant with the Apostle's
teaching must agree that the thoughts are
marvellous and in no way inferior to his ac-
knowledged writings, and then after a while
he continues: "If I were to express my own
opinion, I should say that the thoughts are
the thoughts of the Apostle, but the language
and the composition that of one who recalled
from memory and, as it were, made notes of
what was said by his master. If therefore any
Church holds this Epistle as Paul's, let it be
approved for this also [as for holding unquestioned
truths], for it was not without reason that the
HEBEEWS, THE EPISTLE TO 1319
men of old time have handed it down as
Paul's [that is, as substantially expressing his
thoughts]. But who wrote the Epistle God only
knows certainly. The account that has reached
us is twofold: some say that Clement, who
became Bishop of the Romans, wrote the Epistle,,
others that Luke wrote it, who wrote the Gospel
and the Acts. But on this I will say no more."
The testimony is of the highest value as
supplementary to and in part explaining that
of Clement. Origen does not refer to any
" Hebrew " original. It is not possible then
that this hypothesis formed part of the aucient
tradition of Alexandria. It was a suggestion
which Origen did not think it worth while to
discuss. He was aware that some Churches did
not receive the Epistle as St. Paul's. In the
strictest sense of authorship he agreed with
them. At the same time he held that in a true
sense it could be regarded as St. Paul's, as em-
bodying thoughts in every way worthy of him.
Thus Clement and Origen, both familiar with
the details of the tradition of " the men of old
time" to whom they refer, agree in regarding
the Greek Epistle as St. Paul's only in a
secondary sense. Clement regards it as a free
translation of an original, so made by St. Luke
as to show the characteristics of his style :
Origen regards it as a scholar's eloquent re-
production of his master's teaching. Each view
must have been consistent with what was
generally received ; and this can only have
been that the Epistle rightly had a place among
the apostolic letters, though its immediate
authorship was uncertain. The practice of
Clement and Origen is an application of this
judgment. Both use the Epistle as St. Paul's
without any qualification, because it was na-
turally placed in connexion with his writings ;
and Origen once went so far as to say that he
was prepared to show that " the Epistle was
Paul's " in reply to those " who rejected it as
not written by Paul " (Ep. ad Afric. 9) ; and in
another passage, preserved indeed only in a Latin
translation, he speaks of " fourteen Epistles of
St. Paul " {Horn, in Jos. vii.).
Looking back over the records of the first
three centuries, Eusebius expressed the judgment
to which the facts pointed plainly with all their
apparent discrepancies. In different places he
ranks the Epistle among "the acknowledged"
(iii. 25) and the " controverted " Books (vi. 13).
He held himself that it was originally written
in " Hebrew," and that Clement of Rome (rather
than St. Luke) had translated it, on the ground
of its likeness to Clement's own Letter both in
style and subject-matter (iii. 38). He used
the Greek text as St. Paul's habitually ; and
reckoned his Epistles as fourteen (//. E. iii. 3),
though he noticed that "some rejected the
Epistle to the Hebrews on the ground that it
was controverted (imt\4ytv$cu) by the Roman
Church as not being Paul's." At the same time
this judgment was justified on the plea that it
was reasonable " on the ground of its antiquity
that it should be reckoned with the other
writings of the Apostle " (H. E. iii. 38). Such
a statement would be inconsistent with the idea
that he held it to be St. Paul's in the same sense
as the other Epistles. He held it to be canonical
Scripture and Pauline, so to speak, for eccle-
siastical use. Eusebius in other words, like
Digitized by
Google
1320 HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO
Origen, was chiefly concerned to maintain the
canonicity of the Epistle, and he upheld its
ultimate Pauline authorship as connected with
its apostolic authority.
It will be evident from the facts which have
been given how slender is the historical evidence
for the Pauline authorship of the Epistle when
it is traced to the source. The unqualified
statements of later writers simply reproduce
the testimony of Clement or Origen as inter-
preted by their practice. But it is not clear
that any one among the earliest witnesses
attributed the Greek text to St. Paul. It is
certain that neither Clement nor Origen did so,
though they used the Epistle as his without
reserve. What they were concerned to affirm
for the Book was Pauline, or, we may say mote
correctly, apostolic authority.
Viewed in this light, the testimony of Alex-
andria is not irreconcilable with the testimony
of the West. The difference between the two
springs from the different estimate which they
made of the two elements of the problem,
canonicity and authorship. The Alexandrines
emphasised the thought of canonicity, and,
assured of this, placed the Epistle in connexion
with St. Paul. The Western Fathers emphasised
the thought of authorship, and, believing that
the Epistle was not properly St. Paul's, denied
its canonical authority. The former were wrong
in requiring Pauline authorship as the condition
of canonicity : the latter were wrong in denying
the canonicity of a Book of which St. Paul was
not recognised as the author. Experience has
shown us how to unite the positive conclusions
on both sides. We hare been enabled to ac-
knowledge that the canonical authority of the
Epistle is independent of its Pauline authorship.
The spiritual insight of the East can be joined
with the historical witness of the West. And
if we hold that the judgment of the Spirit
makes itself felt through the consciousness of
the Christian Society, no Book of the Bible is
more completely recognised by universal consent
as giving a Divine view of the facts of the
(iospel, full of lessons for all time, than the
Epistle to the Hebrews.
The practical judgment of Alexandria found
formal expression in a Festal Epistle of At hannsius
(A.D. 367). Among the Books of the Old and
New Testaments which he reckons as "held
canonical and divine," he enumerates " fourteen
Epistles of the Apostle Paul " in the order of
the oldest MSS. (" . . . 2 Thess., Hebrews, 1 Tim-
othy ..."). And from his time this reckoning of
the " fourteen Epistles " became universal among
Greek writers ; but there is no reason to sup-
pose that either he or the other Fathers who
followed him wished to go beyond the testimony
of Clement and Origen and Eusebius.
From the 4th century the canonical authority
of the Epistle came to be recognised in the
West, and in part, as a consequence, its Pauline
authorship. Fathers like Hilary, who were
familiar with Greek writers, naturally adopted
little by little their mode of speaking of it.
Still the influence of the old belief remained ;
and Jerome shows that the judgment which
Eusebius notes in his time still survived un-
changed. "The custom of the Latins," he
says, "does not receive it among the canonical
Scriptures as St. Paul's " (£>. ad Dard. 129).
HEBREWS, THE EPISTLE TO
And while he himself rightly maintained its
canonical authority and used it freely, he was
even scrupulously careful to indicate in his
quotations that he did not by so doing decide
the question of its authorship. Augustine
adopted the same general view as Jerome, and
under his influence lists of Books for use in
Church were authorised at three African Councils
— at Hippo in 39;'», and at Carthage in 397 and
419. In these the Epistle to the Hebrews was
included ; and henceforward, while the doubts
as to the authorship of the Epistle were noticed
from time to time, the canonical authority of
the Book was not again called in question in
the West till the time of the Reformation. The
Catalogue of the second Council of Carthage was
transcribed in a letter of Innocent I. to Exsupe-
rius, and became part of the Law of the Roman
Church.
It is needless to follow in detail the statements
of later writers. A few interesting traces of
old doubts survive. Some commentators deal
only with thirteen Epistles of St. Paul (Hilary
of Rome, Migne, P. L. xrii. pp. 45 sq. ; Pelagius,
P. L. xxx. pp. 645 sq. ; cp. Cassiod. tic Inst. dir.
litt. iv. 8), though Hilary and Pelagius speak of
the Epistle to the Hebrews elsewhere as a Book
of the Apostle. But the notices as to the
authorship of the Book are for the most part
simple rejwtitions of sentences of Jerome. Here
and there a writer of exceptional power uses his
materials with independence, but without real
knowledge. Thomas Aquinas, for example,
marshals the objections to the Pauline author-
ship and the answers to them in a true scholastic
form, and decides in favour of the Pauline
authorship on the ground of ancient authority,
and because "Jerome receives it among the
Epistles of Paul."
At the revival of Greek learning in Europe,
when " the Grammarians " ventured to re-open
questions of Biblical criticism, the authorship
and, in part, the authority of the Epistle was
called in question. On this, as on other similar
subjects, Card. Cajetan spoke freely. Erasmus,
with fuller knowledge, expressed his doubts
" not as to the authority, but as to the author
of the Epistle; doubts," he added characteris-
tically, " which would remain till he saw a
distinct judgment of the Church upon the
point." Luther denied the Pauline authorship
of the Book without hesitation, and, referring
to the earlier traditions, conjectured that it
was more likely to have been written by Apollos
(cp. Bleek, p. 249 n.). Calvin, while maintaining
the full apostolical authority of the Epistle, pro-
fessed that he " could not be brought to think
that it was St. Paul's." He thought that it
might be a work of St. Luke or of Clement.
Beza also held that it was written by a disciple
of St. Paul. At first he inclined to adopt
Luther's conjecture as to the authorship, but
this opinion he afterwards withdrew silently.
The review of the historical evidence as to
the authorship of the Epistle will have shown
sufficiently that there was no clear or uniform
tradition on the subject in the early Church.
Obvious circumstances are adequate to explain
why the names of St. Paul and St. I.uke, Barna-
bas and Clement, were connected with it ; and
in no case is the external testimony of such a
character as to justify the belief that it was
Digitized by
Google
HEBBEWS, THE EPISTLE TO
derived from a tradition contemporary in origin
with the Book. It remains therefore to consider
how far internal testimony helps towards the
solution of the question. The direct evidence
furnished by the Epistle is slight, though there
is not the least indication that the writer wished
to conceal his personality. He was intimately
acquainted with those whom he addressed : ri.
9 sq. ; x. 34 (rots 8(071(011 awdtaB^aart) ; xiii.
7 ; xiii. 19 (Tva rdx'O* iiroKorooTafioS biiiv), but
the last clause does not necessarily imply that
he belonged to thoir society, or that he was
in confinement. He s]>#aks of Timothy as a
common friend : xiii. 23 (yiv&tnurt rhr &Xtk(pbv
Tt/twv T. lnro\t\vp4rov), and there is no reason
to question the identity of this Timothy with
the companion of St. Paul. He places himself
in the second generation of believers, as one who
had received the Gospel from those who- heard
the Lord (ii. 3).
This last statement has been justly held to be
a most grave (or indeed fatal) objection to the
Pauline authorship. It is not [wssible to recon-
cile it without uunatural violence with St. Paul's
jealous assertion of his immediate discipleship to
Christ (contrast Gal. i. 1, 11 sq.). On the other
hand, these few notices might all apply equally
well to St. Luke or Barnabas or Clement.
The indirect evidence supplied by the Epistle
is important at least negatively. The language
and teaching offer materials for comparison with
writings of the four authors suggested by tra-
dition. With St. Luke the comparison is
practically confined to the language: with
Barnabas, if we assume that his letter is
authentic, Clement, and St. Paul, it embraces
both language and teaching.
It has been already seen that the earliest
scholars who speak of the Epistle notice its
likeness in style to the writings of St. Luke ;
and when every allowance has been made for
coincidences which consist in forms of expression
which are found also in the LXX. or in other
writers of the N. T., or in late Greek generally,
the likeness is unquestionably remarkable. No
one can work independently at the Epistle with-
out observing it (cp. p. 13 13). but it is not
possible to establish any sure conclusion on such
a resemblance. The author of the Epistle may
have been familiar with the writings of St.
Luke themselves, or he may have been in close
connexion with the Evangelist or with those
whose language was moulded by his influence.
In any case the likeness of vocabulary and
expression is not greater than that which exists
between 1 Peter and the Epistles of St. Paul.
If indeed it were credible that the Epistle was
originally written in " Hebrew," then the
external and internal evidence combined would
justify the belief that the Greek text is due to
St. Luke. If that opinion is out of the question,
the historical evidence for St. Luke's connexion
with the Epistle is either destroyed or greatly
weakened, and the internal evidence gives no
valid result.
The superficial resemblances between the
Epistle and the Letter of Clement, both in
vocabulary and form, are very striking. It
would be easy to draw up a list of parallelisms
in words and manner sufficient to justify the
judgment of Eusebius. But these parallelisms
are more than counterbalanced by differences in
HEBBEWS, THE EPISTLE TO 1321
both respects. Clement has an unusually large
number of peculiar words; and his heaping
together of co-ordinate clauses (as 1, 3, 20, 35,
36, 45, 55), his frequent doxologics (20, 38, 43,
45, 50, 58, 59), and to a certain extent his
method of quotation, sharply distinguish his
writing from the Epistle to the Hebrews.
Moreover a closer examination of the parallel-
isms with the Epistle makes it clear that tliey
are due to a use of it, like the use which is
made of the Epistles of St. Paul (<?.</. c. 49). And,
what is of far greater moment, the wide differ-
ence between the two works in range of thought,
in dogmatic depth, in prophetic insight, makes
it impossible to suppose that the Epistle to the
Corinthians could have been written after the
Epistle to the Hebrews by the same writer.
Clement is essentially receptive and imitative.
He combines, but he does not create. Even if
the external evidence for connecting him with
the Epistle were greater than it is, the internal
evidence would be incompatible with any other
connexion than that of a simple translator.
Some differences in style between the Epistle
and the writings of St. Paul have been already
noticed. A more detailed inquiry shows that
these cannot be adequately explained by differ-
ences of subject or of circumstances. They
characterise two men, and not only two moods
or two discussions. The student will feel the
subtle force of the contrast if he compares
the Epistle to the Hebrews with the Epistle
to the Ephesians, to which it has the closest
affinity. But it is as difficult to represent the
contrast by an enumeration of details as it is to
analyse an effect. It must be felt for a right
appreciation of its force. So it is also with the
dogmatic differences between the writer and
St. Paul.
There is unquestionably a sense in which
Origen is right in saying that " the thoughts "
of the Epistle are the thoughts of St. Paul.
The writer shows the same broad conception of
the universality of the Gospel as the Apostle
of the Gentiles, the same grasp of the age-long
purpose of God wrought out through Israel,
the same trust in the atoning work of Christ
and in His present sovereignty. He speaks
with the same conscious mastery of the Divine
Counsel. But he approaches each topic from a
different side. He looks at all as from within
Israel, and not as from without. He speaks as
one who step by step had read the fulfilment of
the Old Covenant in the New without any rude
crisis of awakening or any sharp struggle with
traditional errors. His Judaism has been all
along the Judaism of the prophets and not that
of the Pharisees, of the 0. T. and not of the
schools (cp. p. 1314 sq.).
The differences between the Epistle and the
Epistle which bears the name of Barnabas
involve a contrnst of principles and not simply
of details, both in the treatment of the 0. T.
Scriptures and in the treatment of the Levitical
system. The spiritual interpretation of the
historical records in the Epistle of Barnabas is
arbitrary and trivial (e.j. cc. ix., xv.). The
Levitical legislation had, according to this writ-
ing, no historical, no disciplinary value what-
ever. The outward embodiment of the enigmatic
ordinances was a pernicious delusion. Chris-
tians alone had the key to their meaning.
Digitized by
Google
1322 HEBBEWS, THE EPISTLE TO
We arc left then with a negative conclusion.
The Epistle cannot be the work of St. Paul, and
still less the work of Clement. It may hare
been written by St. Luke. It may have been
written by Barnabas, if the Epistle of Barna-
bas is apocryphal. The scanty evidence which
is accessible to us supports no more definite
judgment.
One conjecture, however, remains to be
noticed, not indeed for its own intrinsic worth,
but because it has found favour with many
scholars. Luther, as we hare seen, with
characteristic originality conjectured that it
was the work of Apollos. The sole ground for
the conjecture is the brief description of Apollos
which is found in the N. T. (Acts xriii. 24 sq. ;
1 Cor. i. 12, iii. 4 sq.). But the utmost which
can be deduced from these notices is that
Apollos, so far as we know, might have written
the Epistle ; just as what we know of Silas is
consistent with the opinion that he wrote it, and
has even suggested it. But on the other hand it
is to be remembered that there is not the least
evidence that Apollos wrote anything, or that he
was the only man or the only Alexandriau in
the Apostolic age who was " learned . . . and
mighty in the Scriptures," or that he possessed
these qualifications more than others among his
contemporaries, or that, in the connexion in
which they are noticed, they suggest the
presence of the peculiar power which is shown
in the Epistle. The wide acceptance of the
conjecture as a fact is only explicable by our
natural unwillingness to frankly confess our
ignorance on a matter which excites our
interest.
And yet in this case the confession of ignor-
ance is really the confirmation of an inspiriting
faith. We acknowledge the Divine authority of
the Epistle, self-attested and ratified by the
illuminated consciousness of the Christian
Society : we measure what would have been
our loss if it had not been included in our
Bible; and we confess that the wealth of
spiritual power was so great in the early
Church that he who was enabled to commit
to writing this view of the fulness of the
Truth has not by that conspicuous service
even left his name for the grateful reverence of
later ages. It was enough that the faith and
the love were there to render ministry to the
Lord (Matt. xxvi. 13).
In the course of this century the authorship
of the Epistle has been debated with exhaustive
thoroughness. Bleek's Introduction to his Com-
mentary is a treasury of materials, arranged
and used with scrupulous fairness. It would be
difficult to make any importnnt additions to his
view of the external facts. All the recent
Commentaries discuss the question more or less
fully. It will be enough to refer to some
representative writers who advocate the claims
of particular men to the authorship. The case
for St. Paul is maintained, with various modifi-
cations, by Ebrard, Hofmonn, Biesenthal, Kay :
for St. Luke, by Dciitzsch : for Apollos, by
Alford, Kurtz, Farrar : for Barnabas, by Grau,
Kenan, Zahn (cp. Holtzmann, Einl. p. 318 sq.).
Commentaries. — The most important early
Commentaries are those of C11RYSO6TOM (xxxir.
Homilies; Migne, P. Gr. lxiii.), Oeccmenius
(Migne, P. Gr. cxix.), Tueopuylact (Migne,
HEBB.ON
P. Gr. cxxv.), Ecthymius (ed. Calogeras, 1887),
among the Greeks ; and of Primasjus (Migne,
P. Lot. lxviii., also under the name of H aymo,
id. cxvii.), Herveus Buroidalensis (Migne,
P. Lat. clxxxi.), Thomas Aquinas, among the
Latins.
Of later commentators the following may be
named out of many as having a representative
value : —
16th cent. : Erasmus (1510), Calvin (1539),
Beza (1565).
17th cent.: Lud. Tona (1611), Corn, a
Lapide (1614), EsriU8 (1614), Gbotics (1632),
Szlichtinq (1634), Hammond (1653).
18th cent. : Wbitbv (1700), Ben-gel (1742).
19th cent.: Bleek (1828-40), Tholuck
(1836-1850), Ebrard (1850), Delitzsch (1857),
Kurtz (1869), Ewald (1870), Hofmann (1873),
Moll (1877, ed. 3), I.unemann (1878, ed. 4),
Keil (1885) (Germany).
In England many separate Commentaries have
been published in late years in addition to those
contained in Commentaries on the whole N. T. :
e.i). by Davidson (A. B., 1879), Edwards (T. C,
1892«X Farrar (F. W., 1883), Kendal (F., 188S),
Vaughan (C. J., 1890), Westcott (B. F., 1889).
The work of Riehm (E. K. A.) on the teaching
of the Epistle (Der Le/irbegriff d. Hcbraerbriefs
dtargesUUt, 1858, 1867) is of the highest value.
[B. F. W.]
HEB-BON (Jinan = union: Xtfydv; in
1 Ch. xr. 9, B. XtPpi/t : Hebron). 1. The third
son of Kohath, who was the second son of Levi ;
the younger brother of Amram, father of Moses
and Aaron (Ex. vi. 18 ; Num. iii. 19 ; 1 Ch. vi.
2, 18, xxiii. 12). The immediate children of
Hebron are not mentioned by name (cp. Ex. vi.
21, 22), but he was the founder of a " family"
(Mis/ipachdh) of Hebronites (Num. iii. 27, xxvi.
58; 1 Ch. xxvi. 23, 30, 31) or Bene-Hebron
(1 Ch. xv. 9, xxiii. 19), who are often mentioned
in the enumerations of the Levites in the
passages above cited. Jeriah was the head of
the family in the time of David (1 Ch. xxiii. 19,
xxvi. 31, xxiv. 23 : in the last of these passages
the name of Hebron does not now exist in the
Hebrew, but has been supplied in the A. V. and
K. V. from the other lists). In the last year of
David's reign we find them settled at Jazer in
Gilead (a place not elsewhere named as a Leviti-
cal city), "mighty men of valour " (7VI \)3),
2,700 in number, who were superintendents for
the king over the two and a half tribes in
regard to all matters sacred and secular (1 Ch.
xxvi. 31, 32). At the same time 1700 of the
family under Hashabiah held the same office on
the west * of Jordan (t>. 30).
8. This name appears in the genealogical
lists of the tribe of Judah (1 Ch. ii. 42, 43),
where Mareshah is said to have been the
" father of Hebron," who again had four sons,
• The expression here is (R. V.) " had theoversight of
Israel beyond ("ODD) Jordan westward (miBD),"
&c. " Beyond Jordan " generally means '* on the east ; "
but here, induced probably by the word following, " west-
ward," our translators have rendered it "on this side"
(cp. Deut. LI, 1: Josh. ix. 1, arc. See Dillmann* II.
«.). Were llasbabloh and his brethren settled on the
western side of the Transjordanlc country 1
Digitized by
Google
HEBRON
one of whom was Tappuach. The three names
just mentioned are those of places, as are also
many others in the subsequent branches of this
genealogy — Ziph, Maon, Bethzur, &c. But it
seems impossible to say whether these names
are those of the places themselves or of persons
who founded them. [G.] |W.]
HEB-BON (fnan ; Xe/Sp&p and Xtfipiv;
Hebron, 1 Mace. v. 65 Cliebron ; Arab. AjAjcl
= " the friend "). 1. A city of Judah (Josh. it.
54), situated among the mountains (Josh. xx.
7, xxj. 11), 22 Koman miles south of Jerusalem
(Enseb. s. v. 'Ap$ii, OS* p. 2;)3, 65), and 20 miles
north of Beersheba (OS* p. 248, 100). Hebron
is one of the oldest existing Bible towns ; and
in this respect it is the rival of Damascus. It
was built " seven years before Zoan in Egypt "
(Num. xiii. 22), or according to Josephus (B. J.
iv. 9, § 7), who says that it was in his day
2,300 years old, before Memphis ; and it was a
well-known town when Abram pitched his tent
" by the oaks of Mature," alter separating from
Lot on the heights of Bethel (Geu. xiii. 18).
Its original name was Kirjath-Arba, R. V.
Kiriath-A. (B3"Ttrn»T|5 ; LXX., Kipia0-ap0oK-
ntplp, Gen. xxiii. 2, xxxt. 27 ; Josh. xr. 54,
xx. 7; Jndg. i. 10), "the city of Arba;" so
called from Arba, " the greatest man among the
Anakim" (Josh. liv. 15) and the father of
Anak (xv. 13, xxi. 11). [Anakim.] By later
writers it was interpreted as the " city of four,"
which Jerome explains (OS.* p. 120, 9; Ep.
Paul. § 1 1) as referring to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob,
and Adam, who were buried there. [Kirjath-
abba.] Hebron was also sometimes called
Mamre (Gen. xxiii. 19, xxxv. 27), probably from
Abram's friend and ally Mamre, the Amorite
(xiv. 13, 24), under the shadow of whose oaks
the Patriarch dwelt (xiii. 18, xiv. 13, xviii. 1).
[UAXBK.] Its modern name, el-KhalU, "the
Friend," i.e. of God, is that by which Muham-
madana call Abraham (cp. Is. xli. 8; Jas.
B. 23).
The chief interest of Hebron arises from its
having been the home and the burial-place of
the Patriarchs, and the scene of some of the
most remarkable events in their lives. Abram
dwelt there during the interval between his
sojourn at Bethel and Beersheba (Gen. xiii. 18),
and there his name was changed to Abraham
(xvii. 5). It was "by the oaks of Mamre," at
Hebron, that Abraham entertained the Angels
unawares (xviii.) ; there Isaac was born ; and
there Sarah died (xxiii. 2), and was buried in
the " cave of the field of MachpeUh," which the
Patriarch bought from Ephron the Hittite as a
burial-place for his family (xxiii. 3-20). The
city then apparently belonged to the children of
Heth, who ratified by their presence (re. 17, 18)
the contract between Abraham and Ephron.
[HrrnTEs.] It was also the home, for a portion
of their lives, of Isaac and Jacob (xxxv. 27 ;
xxxrii. 14) ; thence Jacob and his sons probably
went down to Egypt (xxxvii. 14; cp. xlvi. 1);
and there the three Patriarchs and their wives, ex-
cepting Rebecca, were buried (xlix. 30, 31 ; 1. 13).
Hebron was visited by the twelve spies (Num.
xiii. 22) ; and after Joshua had killed the king
Hoharn, destroyed the town, and put the in-
habitants to the sword (Josh. x. 3, 5, 23, 26,
HEBBON
1323
36-39 ; xi. 21 ; xii. 10), it was given to Caleb,
who drove out the Anakim (xiv. 13, xv. 13, 14 ;
Judg. i. 20 ; cp. 1 Ch. ii. 42, 43). It was one
of the six cities of refuge (Josh. xx. 7), and
was given to the Kohathite Levites (Josh. xxi.
11, 13; 1 Ch. vi. 2, 55, 57). During the time
of the Judges it is mentioned in connexion with
one of Samson's exploits (Judg. xvi. 3). Hebron
acquired new importance when David, who,
whilst living in Philistia, maintained friendly
relations with its chiefs (1 Sam. xxx. 31), made
it the seat of government, and his place of
residence during the 7J years that he reigned
over Judah (2 Sam. ii. 1, S, 11, 32 ; cp. 1 Kings
ii. 11 ; 1 Ch. xxix. 27). There six sons were
born to David (2 Sam. iii. 5 ; 1 Ch. iii. 1-4) ;
there he was joined by the " men-of-war " ; and
there he was anointed king over all the tribes
of Israel (2 Sam. v. 1, 3 ; 1 Ch. xi. 1-3, xii.
23, 38). Hebron was the scene of the cruel
murder of Abner by Joab (2 Sam. iii. 27) and
the place of his burial (iii. 32, iv. 12); and
beside the pool the murderers of Ishbosheth
were hanged (iv. 12). At this time it contained
a sanctuary of Jehovah, to which pilgrimages
were made and offerings vowed (2 Sam. xv. 7),
possibly the ancient sepulchres of the founders
of the nation within the enclosure at Machpelah
(see Jerome, Quaest. Hcb. on 2 Sam. xv. 7) ; or
perhaps the site of the altar erected by Abram
(Gen. xiii. 18). Josephus, indeed (Ant. viii. 2,
§ 1), makes Hebron, and not Gibeon, the site of
the " high place " where Solomon prayed for
wisdom and knowledge (2 Ch. i. 3-13). Ab-
salom raised the standard of revolt at Hebron
(2 Sam. xv. 7-10) ; and at a later date it was
fortified by Rehoboam (2 Ch. xi. 10). It was
re-occupied after the Captivity (Neh. xi. 25), but
afterwards fell into the hands of the Edomites,
from whom it was captured by Judas Maccabaeus
(1 Mace. v. 65 ; Joseph. Ant. xii. 8, § 6).
During the interval between the conquest of
Galilee by the Romans, and the final siege of
Jerusalem, it was seized by Simon Bar-Gioras,
but was shortly afterwards captured and burnt
by Cerealis, one of the commanders of Vespasian
(B. J. iv. 9, §§ 7, 9). Early in the 4th century
Eusebius describes it (OS.* p. 233, 65) as a large
town, kcd|U) peylvni ; and it is mentioned in
connexion with the tombs of the Patriarchs by
all the earlier pilgrims. In the 6th century it
was taken by the Arabs, when they conquered
Palestine, and during their occupation it was
visited by Arculf, who describes the city as
having been long destroyed (ii. 8), and bv
Willibald, who calls it Aframia (E. T. p. 20).
In a.d. 1 100, after the capture of Jerusalem, it
was occupied by the Crusaders; it had then
been destroyed by the Saracens, and lay for a
time in ruins, being known as caitellwn or
praesidium ad sanctum Abraham (Saewulf, E. T.
p. 45; Albert Aq. vi. 15, 41, 43, x. 32, xii. 22).
In 1187 it was made the seat of a Latin bishop-
ric (Will. Tyr. xx. 3), but twenty years later it
reverted to the Moslems, in whose hands it has
ever since remained. It is now one of the four
sacred towns of Palestine, and has a population
of about 17,000 Moslems and 1200 Jews.
Modern Hebron is, for the most part, situated
on the left bank of a valley running from K.W.
to S.E., and is built partly on the hill slope and
partly in the valley. It has no walls, but the
Digitized by
Google
1324
HEBRON
ends of the main streets are closed by gntes.
The town is divided into four quarters, and the
houses are built of stone, with Hat roofs having
domes in the middle. It is well supplied with
water; there are six springs in its immediate
vicinity, and ten wells of large size. Amongst
HEBBON
these are '-4m Keshkaleh, which perhaps retains
a trace of the name Eshool ; 'Ain d-Jiulcitkh, a
fine spring in a vault where, according to a
mediaeval tradition, Adam and Eve mourned for
Abel ; Bir Ibrahim, said to be as old as the time
of Abraham, and Bir l'akib. lu the valley
amidst the olive-trees and gardens is a " pool,"
85 ft. long and 55 ft. broad, and lower down a
larger one, 133 ft. square and 21 ft. deep, which
is of ancient construction, and traditionally
supposed to be that by which the murderers of
Ishbosheth were hanged (2 Sam. iv. 12). The
most conspicuous object in the town is the
flaram, or " sacred area," 197 ft. long and 111ft.
broad, within which are the tombs of the
Patriarchs [Machpelah]. The masonry of the
enclosing walls is identical in character with
that of the Wailing Place at Jerusalem,
Digitized by
Google
HEBBON
and is therefore almost certainly Herodian. The
Haram at Hebron would almost seem to have
been a copy in miniature of that at Jerusalem.
In both a level platform is obtained by massive
walls of large stones with marginal drafts. At
Hebron the wall above the platform rises to a
height of 25 ft., and is ornamented with pilas-
ters ; and this appears to hare been the case at
Jerusalem. At the N.W. ami S.E. corners of
the Haram there are lofty minarets ; and within
the enclosure are a mosque, originally a 12th-
century church, and the shrines of the Patriarchs
HEDGE
1325
Plan of tha afoaqna at Hebron.
a. Shrine of Abraham ; h. of Sarah ; e. of Iaaac : d. of Rebecca ;
e. of Jacob ; f. of Leah ; h. of Joteph. ra, m. BUnarata.
and their wives. (For the Haram, see Conder in
PEF. Mem. iii. 333 sq. ; and, for the cave itself,
Cte. Riant, Arc/fives de I' Orient Latin, ii. 411 sq.).
On the N.W. side of the Haram is a ruined
fortress.
The sides of the valley in which Hebron lies
are clothed with luxuriant vineyards, whilst
groves of grey olive and other fruit trees give
variety to the scene. Above 'Ain el-Judcideh,
westward of the Haram, rise the terraced sides
of Jebet er-Rumeidy, on which are the Deir el-
Arba in, containing the traditional tombs of
Jesse and Ruth, and the Kahr Hebrin, held by
the Jews of Hebron to be the tomb of Abner.
At the foot of the hill is the Agcr Damascenus,
from the red earth of which, according to
tradition, Adam was made; Theodoricus (xxxiv.)
and John of Wiirzburg (xxi.) state that the
earth was eaten by the inhabitants and exported
to Egypt. About 2 miles west of the Haram
is a tine Sindidn, called " Abraham's oak," which
from the 12th century has been pointed out to
Christians as the tree beneath which Abraham
pitched his tent.
The Jews following ancient tradition place
the oak of Mamre at Haram liamet cl-KUulU,
a remarkable ruin 2 miles north of Hebron,
which was formerly called Drys, Apus, or Tere-
binthus (Euseb. and Jerome, OS.* p. 257, 27 ;
p. 148, 16 ; Jtin. Hierosol.). Some of the earlier
pilgrims distinguished Hebron the old city from
the later town that had gathered round the
spetunca duplex in which the Patriarchs were
buried. Thus Theodosius(xxi.) makes Terebinthus
4 miles from the spetunca duplex, and the latter
2 miles from Hebron. Arculf (ii. 9) places the
cave 1 furlong E. of Hebron nnd the oak of
Mamre 1 mile to the north ; Abbot Daniel
(li.-liii.) makes the cave 2 versts from the
oak, which was on a high mountain, and half a
verst from Hebron; Benjamin of Tudela says
(E. T. p. 86) that tbe ancient city was situated
on the hill, and in ruins, whilst the modern town
was in the valley. Guerin suggests (Judee, iii.
243) that the ancient city of Hebron was on
Jebel er-Rumeidy. It may perhaps be inferred
from Gen. xxiii. 19 that the cave of Hachpelah
was to the east of Hebron ; but it seems un-
necessary to suppose that the town was on a
hill. Caleb's portion, " the fields of the city "
(Josh. xxi. 12), probably included Wddy Tuguh,
the traditionary Eshco), and the whole network
of valleys near the town ; and the " vale of
Hebron " (Gen. xxxvii. 14), the valley that runs
down from " Abraham's oak " (PEF. Mem. iii.
305-308, 316, 322, 332 sq. ; Rob. ii. 75 sq.;
Hbk. S. and P. ; Sepp, Jerusalem und H. L. i. 594
sq. ; Rosen, ZDMG. iii. 477 ; Guerin, Judee, iii.
214«q). [W.]
2. R. V. Ebron (i"13» and ji"Oy ; B. 'EAjSaV,
A. 'Axpd* i Achran, later editions Abran). One
of the towns in the territory of Asher (Josh. xix.
28), on the boundary of the tribe. It is named
next to Rehob, and is apparently in the neigh-
bourhood of Sidon. By Eusebius and Jerome it
is merely mentioned (s. v. Achran, OS.* p. 242,
73; p. 130, 8), and no one in modern times
has discovered its site (see some conjectures in
Dillmann * in loco). It will be observed that
the name in the original is quite different from
that of Hebron, the well-known city of Judah
(No. 1), although in the A. V. they are the
same, our translators having represented the
Ain by H, instead of by G,or by the vowel only,
as is their usual custom. But, in addition, it is
not certain whether the name should not rather
be Ebdon or Abdon (|n3i?), since that form is
found in many MSS. (Davidson, Hehr. Text;
Ges. Thes. p. 980), and since an Abdon is named
amongst the Levitical cities of Asher in other
lists, which otherwise would be unmentioned
here. On the other hand, the old Versions
(excepting only the Vat. LXX., which is
obviously corrupt) unanimously retain Ebron.
[Abdos.1 [G.] [W.]
HEBBONITES, THE Q^TOT}; Hebroni,
Hebronitae). A family of Kohathite Levite*,
descendants of Hebron, the son of Levi (Num.
iii. 47 [BA. Xtfiptmit, F. om.], xxvi. 58 [B.
Xt0p*rtl, A. -w, F. -*»»■(]; 1 Ch. xxvi. 23,
Xi&pvv). In the time of David, the chief ef
the family west of Jordan was Hashabiah ; whilo
on the east, in the land of Gilead, were Jerijah
and his brethren, "men of valour," over the
Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half tribe of
Manasseh (1 Ch. xxvi. 30-32). [W. A. W.]
HEDGE (*n»iTI3> nYM; J1MDD, nai'CD;
<ppayfi6$). The first three words thus rendered
Digitized by
Google
1326
HEDGEHOG
in the A. V., ns well as their Greek equivalent,
denote simply that which surroimds or encloses,
whether it be a atone wall (TJJ, gider, Prov.
xiiv. 31 ; Ezek. xlii. 10), or a fence of other
materials. "HJ, gader, and flTU, g'derah, are
used of the hedge of a vineyard (Num. ixii. 24;
Ps. Ixxxix. 40 ; 1 Oh. iv. 23), and the latter is
employed to describe the wide walls of stone, or
fences of thorn, which served as a shelter for
sheep in winter and summer (Num. xxxii. 16).
The stone walls which surround the sheepfolds
of modern Palestine are frequently crowned with
sharp thorns (Thomson, Land and the Boot, i.
299), a custom at least as ancient as the time of
Homer (Od. xiv. 10), when a kind of prickly
pear (&x<ptot) was used for that purpose, as
well as for the fences of corn-fields at a later
period (Arist. Eccl. 355). In order to protect
the vineyards from the ravages of wild beasts
(Ps. lxxx. 12), it was customary to surround
them with a wall of loose stones or mud (Matt,
xxi. 33; Mark xii. 1), which was a favourite
haunt of serpents (Eccles. x. 8), and a retreat for
locusts from the cold (Nah. iii. 17). Such walls
are described by Maundrell as surrounding the
gardens of Damascus. "They are built of
great pieces of earth, made in the fashion of
brick and hardened in the sun. In their
dimensions they are each two yards long and
somewhat more than one broad, and half a yard
thick. Two rows of these, placed one upon
another, make a cheap, expeditious, and, in this
dry country, a durable wall " (Early Trav. in
Pal. p. 487). A wall or fence of this kind is
clearly distinguished in Is. v. 5 from the tangled
hedge, rD-lt^D, m'sucWi (il3?DD, Mic. vii. 4),
which was planted as an additional safeguard to
the vineyard (cp. Keel us. xxviii. 24), and was
composed of the thorny shrubs with which
Palestine abounds. The prickly pear, a species
of cactus, so frequently employed for this
purpose in the East at present, is believed to be
of comparatively modern introduction. The
aptness of the comparison of a tangled hedge
of thorn to the difficulties which a slothful man
conjures up as an excuse for his inactivity, will
be at once recognised (Prov. xv. 19 ; cp. Hos. ii.
<J). The narrow paths between the hedges of
the vineyards and gardens, with a fence on either
side (Num. xxii. 24), are distinguished from the
■" highways," or more frequented tracks, in
Luke xiv. 23. [W. A. W.]
HEDGEHOG. The rendering in Is. xxxiv.
12 in Coverdale's translation of "IBp, kipped;
<?X"">* »*Af««lr, Aq. ; kvkyos, Theod. in Zeph. ii.
14 ; ericius. In R. V. " porcupine," in this and
the other two passages where it occurs, viz. Is.
xiv. 23, Zeph. ii. 14. But A. V. has in all " bit-
tern." [Bittern.] [H. B. T.]
HE'GAI 03n, Pers. name, Ges.; Tol; Egeut),
■one of the eunuchs (A. V. " chamberlains ") of
the court of Ahasuerus, who had special charge
of the women of the harem (Esth. ii. 8, 15).
According to the Hebrew text, he was a distinct
person from the " keeper of the concubines " —
Shaashgaz (v. 14), but the LXX. have the same
name in r. 14 as in v. 8, while in v. 15 they omit
it altogether. In t>. 3 the name is given under
the different form of
HEIB
HE'GE, R. V. HEGAI (WH; Egem, pro-
bably a Persian name). Aja signifies eunuch ia
Sanscrit, in accordance with which the LXX.
have t«7 tvvavxf. Hegias, 'Hytas, is mentioned
by Ctesias as one of the people about Xeries
(Gesenius, Thes. Addenda, p. 83 b).
HEIFER (iT?J», rnB ; Sdfta\is ; row). The
Hebrew language has no expression that exactly
corresponds to our heifer; for both 'eglik ami
fmrah are applied to cows that have calved
(1 Sam. vi. 7-12; Job xii. 10; Is. vii. 21):
indeed eglah means a young animal of say
species, the full expression being k cglath baqir,
"heifer of kine " (Deut. xxi. 3; 1 Sam. xvi.2;
Is. vii. 21). The heifer or young cow was not
commonly used for ploughing, but only for
treading out the corn (Hos. x. 11; but see
Judg. xiv. 18), when it ran about without say
"muzzle" (Deut. xxv. 4); hence the expression
an "unbroken heifer" (Hos. iv. 16; A. V.
"backsliding," R. V. "stubborn"), to which
Israel is compared. A similar sense has been
attached to the expression " calf of three yean
old," i.e. unsubdued, in Is. xv. 5, Jer. xlviii. 34;
but it is much more probably to be taken, with
R. V., as a proper name, 'Eglath SaetSshiyah, such
names being not uncommon. The sense of
"dissolute " is conveyed undoubtedly in Amos
iv. 1. The comparison of Egypt to a "fur
heifer" (Jer. xlvi. 20) may be an allusion to
the well-known form under which Apis wai
worshipped (to which we may also refer the
words in t>. 15, as understood in the LXX..
"Why is the bullock (jioVxor eVAsrro'f] swept
away ? ") ; the " destruction " threatened being
the bite of the gad-fly (R. V. marg.), to which
the word aires would fitly apply. " To plough
with another man's heifer" (Judg. iir. 18)
implies that an advantage has been gained by
unfair means. The proper names Eglah, En-
eglaim, and Parah are derived from the Hebrew
terms at the head of this article. [W. L B.]
HEIR. The Hebrew institutions relative to
inheritance were of a very simple character (see
Bloch, Das Mos.-Talm. Krbreckt, Budapest,
1890). Under the Patriarchal system the pro-
perty was divided among the sons of the legiti-
mate wives (Gen. xxi. 10, xxiv. 36, xxv. 5), »
larger portion being assigned to one, generally
the eldest, on whom devolved the duty of
maintaining the females of the family. [BreTH-
RIOHT.1 The sons of concubines were portioned
off with presents (Gen. xxv. 6): occasionally
they were placed on a par with the legitimate
sons (Gen. xlix. 1 sq.), but this may have been
restricted to cases where the children had been
adopted by the legitimate wife (Gen. xxi. 3).
At a later period the exclusion of the sons of
concubines was rigidly enforced (Judg. xi. 1
sq.). Daughters had no share in the patrimony
(Gen. xxxi. 14), but received a marriage portion,
consisting of a maid-servant (Gen. xxix. 24, 29),
or some other property. As a matter of special
favour they sometimes took part with the sons
(Job xlii. 15). The Mosaic Law regulated the
succession to real property thus: it was to be
divided among the sons, the eldest receiving a
double portion (Deut. xxi. 17), the others equal
shares : if there were no sons, it went to the
daughters (Num. xrvii. 8), on the condition that
Digitized by
Google
HEIR
they did not marry out of their own tribe (Num.
xxxvi. 6 »q. ; Tob. vi. 12, vii. 13), otherwise the
patrimony was forfeited (Joseph. Ant. iv. 7, § 5).
If there were no daughters, it went to the
brother of the deceased ; if no brother, to the
paternal nncle ; and, failing these, to the next
of kin (Num. xxvii. 9-11). In the case of a
widow being left without children, the nearest
of kin on her husband's side had the right of
marrying her, and in the event of his refusal
the next of kin (Ruth iii. 12, 13): with him
rested the obligation of redeeming the property
of the widow (Ruth iv. 1 sq.), if it had been
either sold or mortgaged : this obligation was
termed rt^KJPI DBK>D (" the right of redemp-
tion"), and was exercised In other cases besides
that of marriage (Jer. xxxii. 7 sq.). If none
stepped forward to marry the widow, the in-
heritance remained with her until her death,
and then reverted to the next of kin. The
object of these regulations evidently was to
prevent the alienation of the land, and to retain
it in the same family : the Mosaic Law en-
forced, in short, a strict entail. Even the as-
signment of the double portion, which under the
patriarchal regime had been at the disposal of
the father (Gen. xlviii. 22), was by the Mosaic
Law limited to the eldest son (Deut. xxi. 15-17).
The case of Achsah, to whom Caleb presented
a field (Josh. xv. 18, 19; Judg. i. 15), is an
exception: but perhaps even in that instance
the land reverted to Caleb's descendants either
at the death of Achsah or in the year of Jubilee.
The land being thus so strictly tied up, the
notion of heirship, as we understand it, was
hardly known to the Jews : succession was a
matter of right, and not of favour — a state of
things which is embodied in the Hebrew language
itself, for the word EH* (A. V. " to inherit")
implies jjossession, and very often forcible posses-
sion (Deut. ii. 12 ; Judg. i. 29, xi. 24), and a
similar idea lies at the root of the words H-TIIK
and rPTO, generally translated "inheritance."
Testamentary dispositions were in a sense
superfluous (Bloch, § 63) : the nearest approach
to the idea is the blessing, which in early times
conveyed temporal as well as spiritual benefits
(Gen. xxvii. 19, 37; Josh. xv. 19). The re-
ferences to wills in St. Paul's writings are
borrowed from the usages of Greece and Rome
{Heb. ix. 17), whence the custom was intro-
duced into Judaea : several wills are noticed by
Josephus in connexion with the Herods (Ant.
xiii. 16, § 1, xvii. 3, § 2 ; B.J. ii. 2, § 3).
With regard to personal property, it may be
presumed that the owner had some authority
over it, at all events during his lifetime. The
admission of a slave to a portion of the inherit-
ance with the sons (Prov. xvii. 2) probably
applies only to the personalty. A presentation
of half the personalty formed the marriage
portion of Tobit's wife (Tob. viii. 21). A dis-
tribution of goods during the father's lifetime
is implied in Luke xv. 11-13 : a distinction may
be noted between ovata, a general term appli-
cable to personalty, and K\r}poyoftta, the landed
property, which could only be divided after the
father's death (Luke xii. 13).
There is a striking resemblance between the
Hebrew and Athenian customs of heirship,
HELBOH
1327
particularly as regards heiresses ({rUXripot),
who were, in both nations, bound to marry
their nearest relation : the property did not
Test in the husband even for his lifetime, but
devolved upon the son of the heiress as soon as
he was of age, who also bore the name, not of
his father, but of his maternal grandfather.
The object in both countries was the same,
viz. to preserve the name and property of
every family {Diet, of Gk. and Rom. Ant., art.
Epikleros). [W. L. B.] [F.]
HEL-AH (nqbn=rust ; B. 'Auti, A. 'AW ;
Halaa), one of the two wives of Ashur, father of
Tekoa (1 Ch. iv. 5). Her three children are
enumerated in v. 7. In the LXX. the passage
is very much confused, the sons being ascribed to
wives different from those named in the Hebrew
text.
HE'LAM (O^fJ; AiXdV; Helam), a plnce
east of the Jordan, but west of the Euphrates
(" the river "), at which the Syrians were col-
lected by Hadarezer, and at which David met
and defeated them (2 Sam. x. 16, 17). In the
latter verse the name appears as Chelamah
(DDtOn), but the final syllable is probably only
the particle of motion. This longer form, Xo-
Xa/utir, is inserted by the B. text * of the LXX. in
r. 16 as if the name of the river, but A. omits ;
while in the two other places it has Al\dfi,
corresponding to the Hebrew text (see Well-
hausen in loco). By Josephus {Ant. vii. 6, § 3)
the name is given as XaKafid, and as being that
of the king of the Syrians beyond Euphrates
— irpos Xa\a/itu> rov ray Wow EiQpdrov ivpuy
fkurikia.
In the Vulgate no name is inserted after
fluzium ; but in r. 16, for " came to Helam," we
find adduxit exercitum eorum, reading D/'H,
"their army." This too is the rendering of
the old translator Aquila — iv Swd/m airrwv —
of whose version v. 16 has survived. In v. 17
the Vulgate agrees with the A. V.
Many conjectures have been made as to the
locality of Helam ; but to none of them does any
certainty attach. The most feasible perhaps is
that it is identical with Alamatha, a town,
named by Ptolemy, on the west of the Euphrates
near Nicephorium. [G.] [W.]
HEL'BAH (naSn,/or, and so frvitful; B.
XejSSd, A. Zx*oW; Helba), a town of Ashcr,
probably on the plain of Phoenicia, near Sidon
(Judg. i. 31). [W.]
HEL'BON flia^l ; V. XfX/3<&-, A. Xtfipir),
a place only mentioned once in Scripture. Ezekiel
(xxvii. 18), in describing the wealth and com-
merce of Tyre, says, " Damascus was thy mer-
chant in the wine of Helbon." The Vulgate
translates these words »'n vino pingni ; and somo
other ancient Versions also make the word de-
scriptive of the quality of the wine. There can
be no doubt, however, that Helbon is a proper
name. Strabo speaks of the wine of Chaly-
• This is probably a late addition, since In the LXX.
text, as It stood in Origen's Bexapla, XoAapax was
omitted after mrofiov (see Bardht, ad he.).
Digitized by
Google
1328
HELCHIAH
bon {alvov Ik ivplas rhr Xa\v$iivioy) from
Syria as among the luxuries iu which the kings
of Persia indulged (xv. 735); and Athenaeus
assigns it to Damascus (i. 22). Geographers
formerly represented Helbon as identical with
the city of Aleppo, called JIaleb (
) V
the Arabs ; but there are strong reasons against
this. The whole force and beauty of the descrip-
tion in Kzekiel consists in this, that in the great
market of Tyre every kingdom and city found
ample demand for its own staple products.
Why, therefore, should the Damascenes supply
wine of Aleppo, conveying it a long and difficult
journey overland ? If strange merchants had
engaged in this trade, we should naturally ex-
pect them to be some maritime people who could
carry it cheaply along the coast from the port of
Aleppo.
In 1853 the writer directed attention to a
village and district within a few miles of
Damascus, still bearing the ancient name Helbon
>o ^
(the Arabic ,^_ corresponds exactly to
the Hebrew |i3pPI), and still celebrated as pro-
ducing the finest grape* in the country (see
Journal of Sac. Lit. July 1853, p. 260 ; Five
rears in Damascus, ii. 330 sq.). There cannot
be a doubt that this village, and not Aleppo, is
the Helbon of Ezckicl and Strabo. The village
is situated in a wild glen, high up in Antilebanon.
The remains of some large and beautiful struc-
tures are strewn around it. The bottom and
sides of the glen are covered with terraced
vineyards ; and the whole surrounding country
is rich in vines and fig-trees {Handbk. for Syr.
and Pal. pp. 495-6 ; Wetzstein, ZDMQ. xi. 490 ;
Rob. iii. 472). The wine of Helbon is men-
tioned in inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar and
Assurbanipal (Schrader, KAT* p. 425). The
Chalybon of Ptolemy (v. 15) is probably Aleppo,
HaUb. [J. L.P.] [W.]
HELCHI'AH {XtXxlas, B. -mi-; Hekias),
1 Esd. viii. 1. [HlLKIAH.]
HELCHI'AS {Helcias), the same person as
the preceding, 2 Esd. i. 1. [Hilkiah.]
HEL'DAI Chn, (?) = worldly ; B.XoXoW,
A. XoAjof ; HoUm). 1. The twelfth captain
of the monthly courses for the Temple service
(1 Ch. xxvii. 15). He is specified as " the Neto-
phathite," and as a descendant of Othniel.
2. An Israelite who seems to have returned
from the Captivity ; for whom, with others,
Zechariah was commanded to make certain
crowns as memorials (Zech. vi. 10). In t>. 14
the name appears to be changed to Hklem.
The LXX. translate rtxpa ray ipxivrcty.
HE'LEB (3^rj = mitt; B. omits, A. 'AXd>;
Ifeled), son of Baanah, the Necophathite, one of
the heroes of king David's guard (2 Sam. xxiii.
29). In the parallel list the name is given as
HEXED obn ; B. XSait, A. 'E\<SS ; Heled),
1 Ch. xi. 30.
HEXEK (p^ri=<» portion; in Num. [t>. 34],
B. XiXty, A. XfAlit, F. XcA«xi in Josh-i B.
HELI
K4\({, A. *c\4k: Hclec), one of the descend-
ants of Manasseh ; the second son of Gilead
(Num. xxvi. 30), and founder of the family of
the Helekites. The Bene-Chelek, " children of
Helek," are mentioned in Josh. xvii. 2 as of much
importance in their tribe. The name has not
however survived ; at least it has not yet been
met with.
HE'LEKITES, THE 0i?Srin, i.e. "the
Chelkite ; " B. o XtXtycl, AF. i Xtktitl ; familit
llelecitarum), the family descended from the
foregoing (Num. xxvi. 30; LXX. r. 34).
HE'LEM (D$>n=a Woir; B. BaXaiu, A.
'E\ifi ; Helem). 1. A man named among the
descendants of Asher, in a passage evidently
much disordered (1 Ch. vii. 35). If it be in-
tended that he was the brother of Shamer, then
he may be identical with Hotham, in t>. 32, the
name having been altered in copying ; but this
is mere conjecture. Burrington (i. 265) quotes
two Hebrew MSS., in which the name is written
D^PI, Cheles.
2. (LXX roit inroixtvovai.) A man mentioned
only in Zech. vi. 14. Apparently the same who
is given as Hejldai in v. 10.
HE-LEPH(«^rj; B MooXjtp, A. M«Ac'«v—
both include the preposition prefixed ; HelepK),
the place from which the boundary of the tribe
of Naphtali started (Josh. xix. 33), but where
situated, or on which quarter, cannot be ascer-
tained from the text. Van de Velde {Memoir,
p. 320) proposes to identify it with Beit Lif, a
village situated on a hill-top nearly mid-way
between Rib Abyad and Kades ; and on the edge
of a very marked ravine, which probably formed
part of the boundary between Naphtali and Asher
(Van de Velde, Syria, i. 233). The identifica-
tion, however, is uncertain. [G.] [W.]
HE'LEZ (fan, (?)=activity ; in Sam. B. SeX-
Kfo — the initial 2 is probably from the end of the
preceding word — A. 'EXX^s ; 1 Ch. xxvii. 10,
B. X(a\ns, A. XtWip ; Heles, Helles). 1. One
of "the thirty" of David's guard (2 Sam. xxiii.
26; 1 Ch. xi. 27: in the latter, f^n), an
Ephraimite, and captain of the seventh monthly
course (1 Ch. xxvii. 10). In both these passages
of Chronicles he is called "the Pelonite," of
which Kennicott decides that " the Paltite " of
Samuel is a corruption {Dissertation, AVc, pp.
183-4; see, however, Driver on Sam. /. c).
[Paltite.]
2. (XlXX^s ; Helles.') A man of Jndah, son
of Azariah (1 Ch. ii. 39); a descendant of Jerah-
meel, of the great family of Hezron.
HE'LI {'H\t, 'HXef; Helt), the father of
Joseph, the husband of the Virgin Mary (Luke
iii. 23); maintained by Lord A. Hervey, the
investigator of the genealogy of Christ, to
have been the real brother of Jacob, the
father of the Virgin herself (Hervey, Genealo-
gies, pp. 130, 138). The name, as we possess it,
is the same as that employed by the LXX. in
the O. T. to render the Hebrew '7ff, Eli the
high-priest.
2. The third of three names inserted between
Digitized by
Google
HELIAS
Achitob and Amabias in the genealogy of Ezra,
in 2 Esd. i. 2 (cp. Ezra Tii. 2, 3).
HELI'AS, 2 Esd. vii. 39. [Elijah.]
HELIODCBUS ('HXuiSupos), the treasurer
(i M r&r xpayiidray) of Seleucus Philopator,
who was commissioned by the king, at the
instigation of Apollonius [Apollonius], to carry
away the private treasures deposited in the
Temple at Jerusalem. According to the narra-
tive in 2 Mace. iii. 9 sq., he was stayed from
the execution of his design by a " great appari-
tion " (iTtupdvua), in consequence of which he
fell down " compassed with great darkness,"
and speechless. He was afterwards restored at
the intercession of the high-priest Onias, and
bore witness to the king of the inviolable
majesty of the Temple (2 Mace. iii.). The full
details of the narrative are not supported by
any other evidence. Josephus, who was unac-
quainted with 2 Mace, takes no notice of it;
and the author of the so-called 4 Mace, attri-
butes the attempt to plunder the Temple to
Apollonius, and differs in his account of the
miraculous interposition, though he distinctly
recognises it (de Mace. 4, obpayAOtv ttpiinroi
xpowpdrtioay &yyt\ot .... Karrare<r&>v 8> i)fu-
Oturht o 'A*oW6nu>s ....). Heliodorus after-
wards murdered Seleucus, and made an unsuc-
cessful attempt to seize the Syrian crown
B.c. 175 (App. Syr. 45). Cp. Wernsdorf, De
fide Libr. Mace. § li v. ; Speaker's Comm. in loco ;
Stanley's Lectt. on the Jewish Church, Lect.
xlviii. Raffaelle's grand picture of "Helio-
dorus " will be known to many by copies and
engravings, if not by the original. [B. F. W.]
HEL'EAI OjJ^n, ? = n^>n = the Lord's por-
tion ; BA! omit ; Held), a priest of the family of
Meraioth (or Meremoth, see v. 3), who was
living in the days of Joiakim the high-priest,
i.e. in the generation following the return from
Babylon under Jeshna and Zerubbabel (Nch.
iii. 15 ; cp. CD. 10, 12).
HEL'KATH (Tl^ll: in Josh. iix.,B. 'EA«t«,
A. Xekiede ; in Josh, xxi., B. XcXKdV, A. ScXxde :
Alcath and Elcath), the town named as the
starting-point for the boundary of the tribe of
Asher (Josh. xix. 25), and allotted with its
" suburbs " to the Gershonite Levites (xxi. 31).
The enumeration of the boundary seems to pro-
ceed from south to north; but nothing abso-
lutely certain can be said thereon, nor has any
traveller recovered the site of Helkath. Eusebius
and Jerome report the name much corrupted
(s. v. 'EM, OS* p. 261,81; Elcath, p. 153, 30),
but evidently knew nothing of the place.
Schwarz (p. 191) suggests the village Yerka,
which lies about 8} miles east of 'Akka (see
PEF. Map of Western Palestine, Sheet III.) ; but
this is uncertain.
In the list of Levitical cities in 1 Ch. vi.
Hukok is substituted for Helkath. [G.] [W.]
HEL'KATH HAZ'ZUBIM (Dn^H nj^n;
ptpU ray hri0oi\ar — perhaps reading DH-VH ;
Aquila, KATjpos rm> artptur ; Ager robustorum),
a smooth piece of ground, apparently close to
the pool of Gibeon, where the combat took
place between the two parties of Joab's men
BIBLE DICI. — VOL. I.
HELL
1329
and Abner's men, which ended in the death of
the whole of the combatants, and brought on a
general battle (2 Sam. ii. 16). [Gibeon ; Joab.]
Various interpretations are given of the name
(see Driver in loco). In addition to those given
above, Gesenius (Thes. p. 485 o) renders it " the
field of swords. The margin of the A. V. has
the field of strong men, agreeing with Aquila and
the Vulgate. The margin of R. V. has the field
of the sharp knives. Ewald (Oesch. iii. 147),
" das Feld der Tfickischen." [G.] [W.]
HELEI'AS (B. X.Wat, B"A. X<A X («;
Vulg. omits). A fourth variation of the name
of Hilkiah the high-priest, 1 Esd. i. 8. [HlL-
KIAH.]
HELL. This is the word generally and unfor-
tunately used by the translators of 1611 to render
the Hebrew SUM fr\KV, or &B>; AtJ>jt, and
once Bdvaros, 2 Sam. xxii. 6 ; Inferi or Inferna,
or sometimes Mors). We say unfortunately, be-
cause — although, as St. Augustine truly asserts,
Sheol, with its equivalents Inferi and Hades, are
never used in an absolutely good sense (De Gen.
ad Lit. xii. 33), yet — the English word Hell is
mixed up with numberless associations entirely
foreign to the minds of the ancient Hebrews,
It would perhaps have been better to retain the
Hebrew word Sheol, or else render it always by
" the grave " or " the pit " (see the practice
adopted in the R. V., Preface). Ewald accepts
Luther's word Utile ; even Untencelt, which is
suggested by De Wette, involves conceptions too
human for the purpose.
Passing over the derivations suggested by
older writers, it is now generally agreed that
the word comes from the root ?Xtef, " to make
hollow" (cp. Germ. HSlle, "hell," with Hshle,
"a hollow"), and therefore means the vast
hollow subterranean resting-place which is the
common receptacle of the dead (Gesen. Thes.
p. 1348 ; BSttcher, de Inferis, c iv. p. 137 sq. ;
Ewald, ad Ps. p. 42). It is deep (Job xi. 8) and
dark (Job xi. 21, 22), in the centre of the earth
(Num. xvi. 30 ; Deut. xxxii. 22), having within
it depths on depths (Prov. ix. 18), and fastened
with gates (Is. xxxviii. 10) and bars (Job xvii.
16). Some have fancied (as Jahn, Arch. Bibl.
§ 203, Eng. ed.) that the Jews, like the Greeks,
believed in infernal rivers : thus Clemens Alex,
defines Gehenna as " a river of fire " (Fragm.
38), and expressly compares it to the fiery
rivers of Tartarus {Strom, v. 14, 92) ; and
Tertullian says that it was supposed to resemble
Pyriphlegethon (Apolog. cap. xlvii.). The
notion, however, is not found in Scripture, for
Ps. xviii. 4 (" torrents of wickedness ") is a mere
metaphor. In this cavernous realm are the
souls of dead men, the Rephaim and ill-spirits
(Ps. lxxxvi. 13, lxxxix. 48 ; Prov. xxiii. 14 ; Ezek.
xxxi. 17, xxxii. 21). It is all-devouring (Prov.
i. 12, xxx. 16), insatiable (Is. v. 14), and re-
morseless (Cant. viii. 6). The shadows, not of
men only, but even of trees and kingdoms, are
placed in Sheol (Is. xiv. 9-20 ; Ezek. xxxi. 14-
18, xxxii. passim).
It is clear that in many passages of the 0. T.
Sheol can only mean " the grave," and it is so ren-
dered in the A. V. (see, for example, Gen. xxxvii.
35, zlii. 38; 1 Sam. ii. 6; Job xiv. 13). la
4 Q
Digitized by
Google
1330
HELL
HELLENIST
other passages, however, it seems to involve a
notion of punishment, and is therefore rendered
in the A. V. by the word " Hell." But in many
cases this translation misleads the reader. It is
obvious, for instance, that Job xi. 8, Ps. cxxxix.
8, and Amos ix. 2 (where " hell " is used as the
antithesis of "heaven"), merely illustrate the
Jewish notions of the locality of Sheol in the
bowels of the earth. Even Ps. ix. 17, Prov. xv.
24, v. 5, ix. 18, seem to refer rather to the
danger of terrible and precipitate death than
to a place of infernal anguish. An attentive
examination of all the passages in which the
word occurs will show that the Hebrew notions
respecting Sheol were of a vague description.
The rewards and punishments of the Mosaic Law
were temporal, and it was only gradually and
slowly that God revealed to His chosen people a
knowledge of future rewards and punishments.
Generally speaking, the Hebrews regarded the
grave as the final end of all sentient and in-
telligent existence, " the land where all things
are forgotten " (Ps. vi. 5 ; Ps. Ixxxviii. 10-22 ;
Is. xxxviii. 9-20 ; Eccles. ix. 10 ; Ecclus. xvii. 27,
28). Even the righteous Hezekiah trembled
lest, " when his eyes closed upon the cherubim
and the mercy-seat," he should no longer
" see the Lord, even the Lord in the land of the
living."
In the N. T. the word Hades (like Sheol)
sometimes means merely " the grave " (Rev. xx.
13 ; Acts ii. 31 ; 1 Cor. xv. 55), or in general
" the unseen world." It is in this sense that
the creeds say of our Lord Karri\Stv iv ifSii or
•It ifSov, deicendit ad inferos, or inferna, meaning
" the state of the dead in general, without any
restriction of happiness or misery " (Beveridge
on Art. iii.), a doctrine certainly, though only
virtually, expressed in Scripture (Ephes. iv. 9 ;
Acts ii. 25-31). Similarly Josephus uses Hades
as the name of the place whence the soul of
Samuel was evoked {Ant. vi. 14, '§ 2). Else-
where in the N. T. Hades is used of a place of
retribution (Luke xvi. 23; 2 Pet. ii. 4; Matt,
xi. 23, &c). Consequently it has been the pre-
valent, almost the universal, notion that Hades
is an intermediate state between death and resur-
rection, divided into two parts, one the abode of
the blessed and the other of the lost. This was
the belief of the Jews after the Exile, who gave
to the places the names of Paradise and Gehenna
(Joseph. Ant. xviii. 1, § 3 ; op. Otho, Lex. Habb.
s. vv.), of the Fathers generally (Tert. de Animd,
c. Iv. ; Jerome in Eccl. iii. ; Just. Mart. Dial. c.
Tryph. § 105, &c. ; see Pearson on Creed, Art.
v.), and of many moderns (Trench on the Parables,
p. 467 ; Alford on Lnke xvi. 23). In holding
this view, main reliance is placed on the parable
of Dives and Lazarus ; but it is impossible to
ground the proof of an important theological
doctrine on a passage which confessedly abounds
in Jewish metaphors. "Theologia parabolica
non est demonstrative " is a rule too valuable
to be forgotten ; and if we are to turn rhetoric
into logic, and build a dogma on every metaphor,
our belief will be of a vague and contradictory
character. " Abraham's bosom," says Archbishop
Trench, " is not heaven, though it will issue in
heaven, so neither is Hades hell though to issue
in it, when death and Hades shall be cast into
the lake of fire which is the proper hell. It is
the place of painful restraint {ipvXaK-fi, 1 Pet. iii.
19 ; ifiuaaos, Luke viii. 31), where the souls of
the wicked are reserved to the judgment of the
great day." But respecting the condition of the
dead whether before or after the resurrection
we know very little indeed ; nor shall we know
anything certain until the awful curtains of
mortality are drawn aside. Dogmatism on this
topic appears to be peculiarly misplaced. [See
Paradise.]
The word most frequently used in the N. T.
for the place of future punishment is Gehenna
(•yitrva), or Qehenna of fire (Ji y. rovwvpis), and
this word we must notice only so far as our
purpose requires; for further information see
Gehenna and Hinnom. The valley of Hinnom,
for which Gehenna is the Greek representative,
once pleasant with the waters of Siloa (" irrigua
et nemorosa, plenaque deliciis," Hieron. ad Jer.
vii. 19, 31 ; Matt. v. 22), and which afterwards
regained its old appearance (" hodieque hortorum
praebens delicias, id.), was with its horrible
associations of Moloch-worship (Jer. vii. 31, xix.
2-6; 2 K. xxiii. 10) so abhorrent to Jewish
feeling that they adopted the word as a symbol
of disgust and torment. The feeling was kept
up by the pollution which the valley underwent
at the hands of Josiah, after which it was made
the common sink of all the filth and corruption
in the city, ghastly fires being kept burning
(ace. to K. Kimchi) to preserve it from absolute
putrefaction (see authorities quoted in Otho, Lex.
Rabb. s. v. Hinnom, tic.). The fire and the
worm were fit emblems of anguish, and as such
had seized hold of the Jewish imagination (Is.
lxvi.24; Judith xvi. 17; Ecclus. vii. 17); hence
the application of the word Qehenna and its
accessories in Matt. v. 22, 29, 30 ; Luke iii. 5.
A part of the valley of Hinnom was named
Tophet (2 K. xxiii. 10; for its history and
derivation see Tophet), a word used for what is
defiled and abominable (Jer. vii. 31, 32 ; xix.
6-13). It was applied by the Rabbis to a place
of future torment (Targ. on Is. xxx. 33 ; Talm.
Erubin, f. 19, 1 ; BOttcher, pp. 80, 85), but does
not occur in the N. T. In the vivid picture of
Isaiah (xxx. 33), which is full of fine irony
against the enemy, the name is applied to
purposes of threatening (with a probable allusion
to the recent acts of Hezekiah ; see Rosenmuller
ad loc). Besides the authorities quoted, see
Bochart (Phaleg, p. 528), Ewald (Prop*- «• 55),
Selden (cfc Dis Syris, p. 172 sq.), Wilson {Lands
of the Bible, i. 499), &c. The subject of the
punishment of the wicked and of Hell as a place
of torment belongs to a Theological rather than
to a Biblical Dictionary. [F. W. F.]
HELLENIST ('EWnyiirris ; Oraecus; cp.
'EWnyurnis, 2 Mace. iv. 13). In one of the
earliest notices of the first Christian Church at
Jerusalem (Acts vi. 1), two distinct parties are
recognised among its members, " Hebrews " and
" Hellenists " (Grecians), who appear to stand
towards one another in some degree in a rela-
tion of jealous rivalry. So again when St. Paul
first visited Jerusalem after his conversion, he
" spake and disputed with the Hellenists " (Acts
ix. 29), as if expecting to find more sympathy
among them than with the rulers of the Jews.
The term Hellenist occurs once again in the
N. T. according to the common text (retained by
Westcott and Hort), in the account of the
Digitized by
Google
HELLENIST
foundation of the Church at Antioch (Acts it.
20), bnt there the context, as well as the form
of the sentence, seems to require the other
reading " Greeks " CeaAtjvsj ; Gebhardt), which
is supported by great external evidence, as the
true antithesis to " Jews " QlovScdois, not
'Epptdots, v. 19 ; see Speaker's Comm. in loco).
The name, according to its derivation, whether
the original verb ('EXATivifw) be taken, accord-
ing to the common analogy of similar forms
(jii)8l(a> t irrucffw, *iAHrrff»), in the general
sense of adopting the spirit and character of
Greeks, or, in the more limited sense of using
the Greek language (Xen. Anab. vii. 3, § 25),
marks a class distinguished by peculiar habits,
and not by descent. Thus the Hellenists as a
body included not only the proselytes of Greek
(or foreign) parentage (of <rt$6p»voi "EXAijkcs,
Acts xvii. 4; ol <rt$4pt*oi xpooSjAtn-oi, Acts
xiii. 43 ; of trtfiiiitvoi, Acts xvii. 17), but also
those Jews who, by settling in foreign countries,
had adopted the prevalent form of the current
Greek civilisation, and with it the use of the
common Greek dialect, to the exclusion of the
Aramaic, which was the national representative
of the ancient Hebrew. Hellenism was thus a
type of life, and not an indication of origin.
Hellenists might be Greeks, but when the latter
term is used ("EXXi)«j, John xii. 20), the point
of race and not of creed is that which is fore-
most in the mind of the writer.
The general influence of the Greek conquests
in the East, the rise and spread of the Jewish
Dispersion, and the essential antagonism of Jew
and Greek, have been noticed in other articles
[Alexander the Great; Alexandria; Dis-
persion ; ANTTOCHU8 IV. Epiphanes], and it
remains only to characterise briefly the elements
which the Hellenists contributed to the lan-
guage of the N. T., and the immediate effects
which they produced upon the Apostolic teach-
ing:—
1. The flexibility of the Greek language
gained for it in ancient times a general currency
similar to that which French enjoys in modern
Europe ; but with this important difference,
that Greek was not only the language of edu-
cated men, but also the language of the
masses in the great centres of commerce.
The colonies of Alexander and his successors
originally established what has been called the
Macedonian dialect throughout the East; but
even in this the prevailing power of Attic
literature made itself distinctly felt. Peculiar
words and forms adopted at Alexandria were
undoubtedly of Macedonian origin, but the later
Attic may be justly regarded as the real basis of
Oriental Greek. This first type was, however,
soon modified, at least in common use, by contact
with other languages. The vocabulary was en-
riched by the addition of foreign words, and the
syntax was modified by new constructions. In
this way a variety of local dialects must have
arisen, the specific characters of which were
determined in the first instance by the condi-
tions under which they were formed, and which
afterwards passed away with the circumstances
which had produced them. But one of these
dialects has been preserved after the ruin of the
people among whom it arose, by being conse-
crated to the noblest service which language
has yet fulfilled. In other cases the dialects
HELLENIST
1331
perished together with the communities who
used them in the common intercourse of life,
but in that of the Jews the Alexandrine Ver-
sion of the 0. T., acting in this respect like the
great vernacular Versions of England and Ger-
many, gave a definiteness and fixity to the
popular language which could not have been
gained without the existence of some recognised
standard. The style of the LXX. itself is,
indeed, different in different parts, but the same
general character runs through the whole, and
the variations which it presents are not greater
than those which exist in the different Books of
the N. T.
The functions which this Jewish-Greek had
to discharge were of the widest application, and
the language itself combined the most opposite
features, ft was essentially a fusion of Eastern
and Western thought. For disregarding pecu-
liarities of inflexion and novel words, the cha-
racteristic of the Hellenistic dialect is the com-
bination of a Hebrew spirit with a Greek body,
of a Hebrew form with Greek words. The
conception belongs to one race, and the expres-
sion to another. Nor is it too much to say that
this combination was one of the most important
preparations for the reception of Christianity,
and one of the most important aids for the
adequate expression of its teaching. On the
one hand, by the spread of the Hellenistic
Greek, the deep, theocratic aspect of the world
and life which distinguishes Jewish thought
was placed before men at large; and on the
other, the subtle truths which philosophy had
gained from the analysis of mind and action, and
enshrined in words, were transferred to the
service of Revelation. In the fulness of time,
when the great message came, a language was
prepared to convey it ; and thus the very dialect
of the N. T. forms a great lesson in the true
philosophy of history, and becomes in itself a
monument of the providential government of
mankind.
This view of the Hellenistic dialect will at
once remove one of the commonest misconcep-
tions relating to it. For it will follow that its
deviations from the ordinary laws of classic
Greek are themselves bound by some common
law, and that irregularities of construction and
altered usages of words are to be traced to their
i first source, and interpreted strictly according
to the original conception out of which they
sprang. A popular, and even a corrupt, dialect
is not less precise — or, in other words, is not less
human — than a polished one, though its inter-
pretation may often be more difficult from the
want of materials for analysis. But in the case
of the N. T., the Books themselves furnish an
ample store for the critic, and the Septuagint,
when compared with the Hebrew text, provides
him with the history of the language which he
has to study.
2. The adoption of a strange language was
essentially characteristic of the true nature of
Hellenism. The purely outward elements of
the national life were laid aside with a facility
of which history offers few examples, while the
inner character of the people remained un-
changed. In every respect the thought, so to
speak, was clothed in a new dress. Hellenism
was, as it were, a fresh incorporation of Judaism
according to altered laws of life and worship.
4 Q 2
Digitized by
Google
1332
HELLENIST
But as the Hebrew spirit made itself distinctly
visible in the new dialect, so it remained uu-
destroyed by the new conditions which regulated
its action. While the Hellenistic Jews followed
their natural instinct for trade, which was
originally curbed by the Mosaic Law, and gained
a deeper insight into foreign character, and with
this a truer sympathy, or at least a wider
tolerance towards foreign opinions, they found
means at the same time to extend the know-
ledge of the principles of their divine faith, and
to gain respect and attention even from those
who did not openly embrace their religion.
Hellenism accomplished for the outer world
what the Return [Cybus] accomplished for the
Palestinian Jews: it was the necessary step
between a religion of form and a religion of
spirit : it witnessed against Judaism as final and
universal, and it witnessed for it as the founda-
tion of a spiritual religion which should be
bound by no local restrictions. Under the in-
fluence of this wider instruction a Greek body
grew up around the Synagogue, not admitted
into the Jewish Church, and yet holding a
recognised position with regard to it, which was
able to apprehend the Apostolic teaching, and
ready to receive it. The Hellenists themselves
were at once missionaries to the heathen, and
prophets to their own countrymen. Their lives
were an abiding protest against polytheism and
pantheism, and they retained with unshaken
zeal the sum of their ancient creed, when the
preacher had popularly occupied the place of
the priest, and a service of prayer and praise
and exhortation had succeeded in daily life to
the elaborate ritual of the Temple. Yet this
new development of Judaism was obtained
without the sacrifice of national ties. The con-
nexion of the Hellenists with the Temple was
not broken, except in the case of some of the
Egyptian Jews. [The Dispersion.] Unity
coexisted with dispersion ; and the organisation
of a Catholie Church was foreshadowed, not only
in the widening breadth of doctrine, but even
externally iu the scattered communities which
looked to Jerusalem as their common centre.
In another aspect Hellenism served us the
preparation for a Catholic creed. As it fur-
nished the language of Christianity, it supplied
also that literary instinct which counteracted
the traditional reserve of the Palestinian Jews.
The writings of the N. T., and all the writings
of the Apostolic age, with the exception of the
original Gospel of St. Matthew, were, as far as
we know, Greek; and Greek seems to have
remained the sole vehicle of Christian litera-
ture, and the principal medium of Christian
worship, till the Church of North Africa rose
into importance in the time of Tertullian. The
Canon of the Christian Scriptures, the early
Creeds, and the Liturgies are the memorials of
this Hellenistic predominance in the Church,
and the types of its working; and if iu later
times the Greek spirit descended to the investi-
gation of painful subtleties, it may be questioned
whether the fulness of Christian truth could
have been developed without the power of Greek
thought tempered by Hebrew discipline.
The general relations of Hellenism to Judaism
aro well treated in the histories of Ewald and
Jost (cp. also Richm. HWB. ; Herzog, RE* s. n. ;
Farrar, St. Paul, ch. viu; Schiirer, OcschicMe
HEM OP GABMENT
d. jid. Volkes im Zeitalter d. Jesus Christi, Index,
s.n. Hellenismus; but the Hellenistic language
has still, critically speaking, to be explored.
Winer's Treatise on the Qrammarof N. T. Greek,*
ed. Moulton, has done great service in estab-
lishing the idea of law in N. T. language, which
was obliterated by earlier interpreters, but even
Winer does not investigate the origin of the
peculiarities of the Hellenistic dialect. Hatch's
Essays on Biblical Greek are a great step to-
wards this investigation, and much help may
be gathered from materials scattered through
the works of Field, Lagarde, Cornill, Hollenberg,
Vollers, Wellhausen, Kamphausen, be. The
idioms of the N. T. cannot be discussed apart
from those of the LXX. (cp. Grinfield, N. T.
Graec., ed. Hellenistica, and Scholia ffellenistica
in N. T.) ; and no explanation can be considered
perfect which does not take into account the
origin of the corresponding Hebrew idioms.
For this work the materials are gradually accu-
mulating. A good text of the LXX. is within
reach of all (cp. Swete's edition), the photo-
graphing of the great MSS. B. A. K. Q. having
at last rendered exact knowledge of forms
possible. Bruder's Concordance leaves nothing
to be desired for the vocabulary of the N. T.,
and the Oxford edition of Trommius' Concordance
to the LXX. is proving itself both admirable in
method and trustworthy for critical purposes.
[B. F. W.] [F.]
HELMET. [Arms, p. 241.]
HE'LON (jfyl = strong; XatKir; Melon),
father of Eliab, who was the chief man of the
tribe of Zebulun, when the census was taken in
the wilderness of Sinai (Num. i. 9 ; ii. 7 ; vii. 24,
29; x. 16).
HEM OB' GABMENT (JIV? ; itpdo-nSor ;
fimbria'). The importance which the later Jews,
especially the Pharisees (Matt, xxiii. 5), attached
to the hem or fringe of their garments, was
founded upon the regulation in Num. xv. 38, 39,
which attached a symbolical meaning to it.
We must not, however, conclude that the fringe
owes its origin to that passage, it was in the
first instance the ordinary mode of finishing
the robe, the ends of the threads composing the
woof being left in order to prevent the cloth
from unravelling, just as in the Egyptian calasiris
(Her. ii. 81 ; Wilkinson's Anc. Egypt, ii. 91, 322
[1878]), and in the Assyrian robes as represented
in the bas-reliefs of Nineveh : the blue riband
being added to strengthen the border. The
Hebrew word sisith is eipressive of this fretted
edge: the Greek KpdunrtSa (the etymology of
which is uncertain) applies to the edge of a
river or mountain (Xcn. Hist. Or. iii. 2, § 16 ;
iv. 6, § 8), and is explained by Hesychius as ri
«V Ty &np<? rov iparlov KfKKwaiiiva pdpiMTa
KaX to aKpov ainov. The beged or outer robe
was a simple quadrangular piece of cloth, and
generally so worn that two of the corners hung
down in front : these corners were ornamented
with a " riband of blue," the riband itself being,
as we may conclude from the word used, 7'riB
(R. V. " cord "), as narrow as a thread or piece of
string. The Jews attached great sanctity to this
fringe (Matt. ii. 20, xiv. 36 ; Luke viii. 44), and
the Pharisees made it more prominent than it
Digitized by
Google
HEMAM
was originally designed to be, enlarging both the
fringe and the riband to an andne width (Matt,
xxiii. 5). Directions were given as to the num-
ber of threads of which it ought to be composed,
and other particulars, to each of which a sym-
bolical meaning was attached (Carpzor, Apparat.
p. 128). It was appended in later times to the
tatlth more especially, as being the robe usually
worn at devotions : whence the proverbial saying
quoted by Ligbtfoot (Exercit. on Matt. v. 40),
" He that takes care of his fringes deserves a
good coat." [W. L. B.]
HK'MAM (DOST = extermination; Alyulr;
Heman). Hori (i.e. Horite) and Hemam were
sons (A. V. '• children," but the word is Sent)
of Lotan, the eldest son of Seir (Gen. xxxvi. 22).
In the list in 1 Ch. i. 39 the name appears as
Homah, which is probably the correct form.
HE'MAN (Jirn = JO'TO = true, reliable).
1. Son of Zerah, l'tii. ii. 6 (B. kluovav, A. 'AjidV) ;
1 K. iv. 31 (LXX. iv. 27, B. Alvir, A. 'H/tdV)-
See following article.
2. Son of Joel, and grandson of Samnel the
prophet, a Kohathite. He is called " the singer "
OltetepX rather the musician (1 Ch. vi. 33,
Heb. t. 18), and was the first of the three chief
Levites to whom was committed the vocal and
instrumental music of the Temple-service in the
reign of David, as we read 1 Ch. xv. 16-22;
Asaph and Ethan, or rather, according to xxv.
1, 3, Jeduthun,* being his colleagues. [Jedu-
thud.] The genealogy of Heman is given in
1 Ch. vi. 33-38 (A. V.), but the generations
between Assir the son of Korah and Samuel
are somewhat confused, owing to two collateral
lines having got mixed. A rectification of this
genealogy will be found at p. 214 of The Oenea-
togics of our Lord, where it is shown that Heman
is fourteenth in descent from Levi. A further
account of Heman is given in 1 Ch. xxv., where
he is called (e. 5) " the king's seer in the matters
of God," the word nth, "seer," which in 2 Ch.
xxxv. 15 is applied to Jeduthun, and in xxix. 30
to Asaph, being probably used in the same sense
as is K33, " prophesied," of Asaph and Jednthnn
in xxv. T l-3. We, there learn that Heman had
fourteen sons and three daughters [Hananiah, 1].
The sons all assisted in the music under their
father, and each of them was head of one of the
twenty-four wards of Levites, who "were in-
structed in the songs of the Lord," or rather in
sacred music. Whether or no this Heman is the
person to whom the 88th Psalm is ascribed is
still a disputed question (see Delitzsch* in loco
and Schnltz in Strack u. Zockler's Kgf. Komm.
z. A. 71, ' Einl. z. Pss.' p. 12). The chief reason
for supposing him to be the same is, that as
other Psalms are ascribed to Asaph and Jeduthun,
so it is likely that this one should be to Heman
the singer. But on the other hand he is there
called "the Ezrahite;" and the 89th Psalm is
ascribed to "Ethan the Ezrahite." 11 But since
• JIYt* and prill* are but two names of the same
person. See also 2 Ch. xxix. 13, U.
* St. Augustine's copy read, with the LXX. (ed.
Swete), ItradiU, for Ezrahitt, In the titles to the
88th and sttb Psalms. Bis explanation of the title of
Ps. lxxxvlll. Is a curious specimen of spiritualizing
Interpretation.
HEMDAN
1333
Heman and Ethan are described in 1 Ch. ii. 6
as "sons of Zerah," it is in the highest degree
probable that Ezrahite means " of the family of
Zerah," and consequently that Heman of the
88th Psalm is different from Heman the singer,
the Kohathite. In 1 K. iv. 31 again (Heb. v.
11), we have mention, as of the wisest of man-
kind, of Ethan the Ezrahite, Heman, Chalcol
and Darda, the sons of Mahol, a list correspond-
ing with the names of the sons of Zerah in 1 Ch.
ii. 6. The inference from which is that there
was a Heman, different from Heman the singer,
of the family of Zerah the son of Judah, and that
he is distinguished from Heman the singer, the
Levite, by being called the Ezrahite. As re-
gards the age when Heman the Ezrahite lived,
the only thing that can be asserted is that he
lived before Solomon, who was said to be " wiser
than Heman," and after Zerah the son of Judah.
His being called " son of Zerah " in 1 Ch. ii. 6,
indicates nothing as to the precise age when he
and his brother lived. They are probably men-
tioned in this abridged genealogy, only as having
been illustrious persons of their family. Nor is
anything known of Mahol their father. It is of
course uncertain whether the tradition which
ascribed the 88th Psalm to Heman's authorship
is trustworthy. Nor is there anything in the
Psalm itself which clearly marks the time of its
composition.
If Heman the Kohathite, or his father, had
married an heiress of the house of Zerah, as the
sons of Hakkoz did of the house of Barzillai, and
was so reckoned in the genealogy of Zerah, then
all the notices of Heman might point to the
same person, and the musical skill of David's
chief musician, and the wisdom of David's seer,
and the genius of the author of the 88th Psalm,
concurring in the same individual, wonld make
him fit to be joined with those other worthies
whose wisdom was only exceeded by that of
Solomon. But it is impossible to assert that
this was the case.
Rosenm. Proleg. in Psalm, p. xvii. ; J. Ols-
hausen, on Psalms; Einleit. p. 22 ; Kursgef.
Exeg. Handb. [A. C. H.]
HEMATH, K. V. HAMATH (Don ; Alpae,
BA. "E/mW ; Emath). Another form — not war-
ranted by the Hebrew— of the well-known name
Hamath (Amos vi. 14).
HEMATH (man, i.e. as in R. V. Hammath ;
A. Ai/iAS, B. M«oi)>u£; Vulg. translates <k
colore), a person, or a place, named in the
genealogical lists of Judah, as the origin of the
Kenites, and the " father " of the house of
Rechab (1 Ch. ii. 55).
HETIDAN (ymn=pUasant ; 'Afiati; Am-
dam, or Hamdam, some copies Hamdan), the
eldest son of Dishon, son of Anah the Horite
(Gen. xxxvi. 26). In the parallel list of 1 Ch.
(i. 41) the name is changed to Hamran (JTOnX
which in the A. V. is given as Amrau, probably
following the Vnlgate Hamram, in the earliest
MSS. Amaran; but correctly in R. V.
The name Hemdan is by Knobel (Genesis,
p. 256) compared with those of Hwneidy and
Hatnady, two of the five families of the tribe of
Omran or Amran, who are located to the E.
and S.E. of 'Akabah: also with the Bene-
Digitized by
Google
1334
HEMLOCK
Hamyde, who are found a short distance S. of
Kerak (S.E. corner of the Dead Sea) ; and from
thence to el-Busaireh, probably the ancient
Bozeah, on the road to Petra (see Bnrck-
hardt, Syria, &c, pp. 695, 407).
HEMLOCK. [Gall.]
HEX (|PI ; Hem). According to the render-
ing of the passage (Zech. vi. 14) adopted in the
A. V. and R. V. (text), Hen (or accurately
Chen) is the name of a son of Zephaniah. But
by the LXX. {x<Lp"\ Ewald (Gunst), and many
interpreters (see MV." ; Orel I i in Strack u.
Zockler's Kgf. Kotnm. z. A. T., in loco), the
words are taken to mean " for the favour of
(K. V. marg. for the kindness of) the son of
Zephaniah." [F.]
HEN. The hen is nowhere noticed in the
O. T. (see Riehm, HWB. s. n. ' Hiihner '). and in
the N. T. only in the passages (Matt, xxiii. 37 ;
l.uke xiii. 34) where our Saviour touchingly
compares His anxiety to save Jerusalem to the
tender care of a hen " gathering her chickens
under her wings." The word employed is tpris,
which is used in the same specific sense in
classical Greek (Aristoph. As. 102; Vesp. 811).
That a bird, so intimately connected with the
household, and so common in Palestine, as we
know from Rabbinical sources, should receive
such slight notice, is certainly singular; it is
almost equally singular that it is nowhere
represented in the paintings of ancient Egypt
(Wilkinson, i. 234 [1878]). On Babylonian
cylinders und seals the cock would seem to
symbolise some deity. [W. L. BJ [P.]
HETNA (IUn; 'Ami; Ana) seems to have
been one of the cities of a monarchical state
which the Assyrian kings had conquered some
time before the siege of Jerusalem by Sen-
nacherib (2 K. xix. 13; Is. xxxvii. 13). Its
being mentioned immediately after Sepharvaim
without the intervention of the words " and the
king of," would lead one to suppose that it lay
in the same province. As, however, Halevy has
shown {Zeiischrift fiir Assyriologie, vol. ii.,
p. 401) that the site of Sepharvaim is uncertain,
the position of Hena must likewise be regarded
as doubtful. Fried. Delitzsch {Wo lag das
Parodies 1 p. 279) points out that Hena cannot,
for etymological reasons, be identified with
«j\p QAaah or 'Inat) on the Euphrates, and
suggests that it may be the city mentioned by
the Assyrian king Asiur-nasir-apli under the
name of An-at (Great Standard Inscription,
col. iii. 11. 15, 16). This city, which was
situated on an island in the A Euphrates, has been
already identified with <Anah or 'Anat (Fox
Talbot's Assyrian Texts, p. 21 ; Layard's Xineveh
and Babylon, p. 355). Further uncertainty is
introduced by the fact that the modern Anat is
on the right bank of the stream, and that the
name is also attached to some ruins a little
lower down on the left bank, but between them
is "a string of islands" (Chesney's Euphrates
Expedition, i. 53), on one of which the ancient
city may have been situated. It appears as
Anatho {'Aya$u) in Isidore of Charax {Mans.
Forth, p. 4). [Q. R.] [T. Q. P.]
HEPHZIBAH
HEN-AD AD (*nj0. = favour of Hadad;
B. 'HvaiS, A. 'HraUtJ Ilenadad, Enadad), the
head of a family of Levites who took a promi-
nent part in the rebuilding of the Temple under
Jeshua (Ezra iii. 9). Bavai and Binnni (Neh.
iii. 18, 24), who assisted in the repair of the wall
of the city, probably belonged to the same family.
The latter also represented his family at the
signing of the covenant (Neh. x. 9).
HE'NOCHOltonj'ErcSx; Henoch). l.The
form in which the well-known name Enoch is
given in the A. V. of 1 Ch. i. 3. The Hebrew
word is the same both here and in Genesis, viz.
Chanoc. Perhaps in the present case our trans-
lators followed the Vulgate. 2. So they appear
also to have done in 1 Ch. i. 33 with a name
which in Gen. xxv. 4 is more accurately given
as Hanoch.
HETHEB ("l^n = a veil; BAF. 'CXptp;
Heplier). 1. A descendant of Hanasseh. The
youngest of the sons of Gilead (Num. xxvi. 32 ;
LXX. v. 36), and head of the family of the
Hephebxtes. Hepher was father of Zelo-
phehad (xxvi. 33 ; xxvii. 1 ; Josh. xvii. 2, 3),
whose daughters first raised the question of the
right of a woman, having no brother, to hold
the property of her father.
2. {'Htpd\ ; Hepher.) The second son of Naa-
rah, one of the two wives of Ashur, the " father
of Tekoa " (1 Ch. iv. 6), in the genealogy of
Judah.
3. (B. "Opap.) The Hecherathite, one of the
heroes of David's guard, according to the list of
1 Ch. xi. 36. In the catalogue of 2 Samuel this
name does not exist (see xxiii. 34).
HETHEB ("l^n ; "Oenp ; Opher), a place
in ancient Canaan, which, though not mentioned
in the history of the conquest, occurs in the list
of conquered kings (Josh. xii. 17). It was on
the west of Jordan (cp. t>. 7). So was also the
"land of Hepher" CO HS' terra E P her )>
which is named with Socoh as one of Solomon's
commissariat districts (1 K. iv. 10). To judge
from this catalogue it lay towards the south of
Central Palestine, at any rate below Dor : so
that there cannot be any connexion between it
and Gath-hepheb, which was in Zebulun near
Sepphoris. [G.] [W.]
HETHEBITES, THE 01900. »'•«• " the
Hepherite ;" AF. 6 '0<p*pl, B. 6 '6<ptpel ; familia
Hepheritarum), the family of Hepher the son of
Gilead (Num. xxvi. 32; LXX. t>. 36).
heph'ZI-bah (aa-'vsO; ei\ V ua tuiw,
voluntas mea in ea). 1. A name signifying
" My delight in her," and actually the name of
a queen (see No. 2), which is to be borne by
the restored Jerusalem (Is. lxii. 4. Cp. De-
litzsch ' and Dillmann * in loco). The succeeding
sentence contains a play on the word — "for
Jehovah delighteth Q*Bn, chaphes) in thee."
2. (B. 'Oi^i/W, B*. 'A— , A. '6i>ai$i; Joseph.
'Ax'&d ; Haphsiba.) The name of the queen of
king Hezekiah, and the mother of Manasseh
(2 K. xxi. 1). In the parallel account (2 Ch.
xxxiii. 1) her name is omitted. No clue is given
as to the character of this queen. But if sho
Digitized by
Google
HEBALD
was an adherent of Jehovah — and this the wife
of Hezekiah could not fail to be — it is not im-
possible that the words of Is. Ixii. 4 may contain
a complimentary allusion to her.
TneitAT.T) (Mri"l3). The only notice of this
officer in the 0. T. occurs in Dan. iii. 4;
the term there used being connected etymologi-
cally with the Greek Knpiaau (on the Greek
words in Daniel, see s. n., p. 710) and with our
"cry." There is an evident allusion to the
office of the herald in the expressions laipicrau,
r%>u(, and idtpvy/m, which are frequent in the
N. T., and which are but inadequately rendered
by "preach," &c The term "herald" might
be substituted in 1 Tim. ii. 7; 2 Tim. i. 11;
2 Pet. ii. 5. [W. L. B.]
HER'CULES ('Hptuttft), the name com-
monly applied by the Western nations to the
tutelary deity of Tyre, whose national title was
Melkart (JlTp^D. i.e. mp "^>D, the king of
the city = roXumxot, MeAfaapot,' Phil. Bybl. ap.
Euseb. Praep. Ev. i. 10). The identification was
based upon a similarity of the legends and attri-
butes referred to the two deities, but Herodotus
(ii. 44) recognised their distinctness, and dwells
on the extreme antiquity of the Tyrian rite
(Herod. I. c. : cp. Strabo, xvi. 757 ; Arr. Alex.
ii. 16 ; Joseph. Ant. viii. 5, § 3; c. Apian, i. 18).
The worship of Melkart was spread throughout
the Tyrian colonies, and was especially established
at Carthage (cp. Hamtfcar), where it was cele-
brated with human sacrifices (Plin. H. R.
xxxvi 4 [5]; cp. Jer. xix. 5). Mention is
made of public embassies sent from the colonies
to the mother state to honour the national god
(Arr. Alex. ii. 24; Q. Curt. iv. 2; Polyb. xxxi.
20), and this fact places in a clearer light the
offence of Jason in sending envoys (fl«»poiij) to
his festival (2 Mace. iv. 19 sq.).
There, can be little doubt but that Melkart is
the proper name of the Baal — the Lord (7B3H)
— whose worship was introduced from Tyre by
Jezebel, Ahab's queen (1 K. xvi. 31 ; cp. 2 K. xii.
18), after the earlier Canaanitish idolatry had
been put down (1 Sam. vii. 4 ; cp. 1 K. xi. 5-8).
Melkart (Hercules) and Astarte appear in the
same close relation (Joseph. Ant. 1. c.) as Baal
and Astarte. See BaudUsin in Herzog, HE.*
s. n. Baal ; Bathgen, Beitr. z. Semit. Seligione-
ge**ichte,.pp. 20 sq., 234. [B. F. W.] [F.]
HERD, HEBDSMAN. The herd was
greatly regarded both in the patriarchal and
Mosaic periods. Its multiplying was considered
as a blessing, and its decrease as a curse (Gen.
xiii. 2; Deut. vii. 14, xxviii. 4; Ps. cvii. 38,
cxliv. 14 ; Jer. Ii. 23). The ox was the most
precious stock next to horse and mule, and
(since those were rare) the thing of greatest
value which was commonly possessed (1 K. xviii.
5). Hence we see the force of Saul's threat
(1 Sam. xi. 7). The herd yielded the most
esteemed sacrifice (Num. vii. 3 ; Ps. lxix. 31 ;
Is. Ixvi. 3); also flesh-meat and milk, chiefly
converted, probably, into butter and cheese
(Deut. xxxii. 14; 2 Sam. xvii. 29), which such
milk yields more copiously than that of small
cattle* (Arist. Hist. Anim. iii. 20). The full-
* These were common, and are frequently alluded to.
The expression ")B3-rtBE>. 2 Sam. xvii. 29, means
*T T I
HERD, HEBDSMAN
1335
grown ox is hardly ever slaughtered in Syria;
but, both for sacrificial and convivial purposes,
the young animal was preferred (Ex. xxix. 1) —
perhaps three years might be the age up to which
it was so regarded (Gen. xv. 9) — and is spoken
of as a special dainty (Gen. xviii. 8 ; Amos vi. 4 ;
Luke xv. 23). The case of Gideon's sacrifice
was one of exigency (Judg. vi. 25) and ex-
ceptional ; and that of the people (1 Sam. xiv.
32) was an act of wanton excess. The agri-
cultural and general usefulness of the ox, in
ploughing, threshing [Agriculture], and as a
beast of burden (1 Ch. xii: 40 ; Is. xlvi. 1),
made such a slaughtering seem wasteful ; nor,
owing to difficulties of grazing, fattening, &c,
is beef the product of an Eastern climate. The
animal was broken to service probably in his
third year (Is. xv. 5 b ; Jer. xlviii. 34; cp. Plin.
N. H. viii. 70, ed. Par.). Id the moist season,
when grass abounded in the waste lands,
especially in the " south " region, herds grazed
there; e.g. in Camel on the W. side of the
Dead Sea (1 Sam. xxv. 2; 2 Ch. xxvi. 10).
Dothan also, Mishor, and Sharon (Gen. xxxvii. 17:
cp. Robinson, iii. 122 ; Stanley, S. Sf P. pp. 247,
260, 484-5 ; 1 Ch. xxvii. 29 ; Is. lxv. 10) were
favourite pastures. For such purposes Uzziah
built towers in the wilderness (2 Ch. xxvi. 10).
Not only grass,' but foliage, is acceptable to the
ox, and the hills and woods of Bashan and
Gilead afforded both abundantly ; on such up-
land (Ps. 1. 10, lxv. 12) pastures cattle might
graze, as also, of course, by river-sides, when
driven by the heat from the regions of the
" wilderness." Especially was the Eastern table-
land (Ezek. xxxix. 18 ; Num. xxxii. 4) " a place
for cattle," aud the pastoral tribes of Reuben,
Gad, and half Manasseh, who settled there, re-
tained something of the nomadic character and
handed down some image of the patriarchal life
(Stanley, S. $ P. pp. 324-5). Herdsmen, &c,
in Egypt were a low, perhaps the lowest, caste ;
hence as Joseph's kindred, through his position,
were brought into contact with the highest
castes, they are described as " an abomination ; "
but of the abundance of cattle in Egypt,
and of the care there bestowed on them, there
is no doubt (Gen. xlvii. 6, 17 ; Ex. ix. 4, 20).
Brands were used to distinguish the owner's
herds (Wilkinson, i. 217, 218 [1878]> So the
plague of hail was sent to smite especially the
cattle (Ps. Ixxriii. 48), which also suffered
severely in the murrain and shared the boil,
and the firstborn of which also were smitten
che«e of cows' milk ; riNDn. Arab. L^,, Geo. xviii.
8, Is. vii. 15, 2 8am. xvii. 29, Job xx. 17, Jndg. v. 25,
Prov. xxx. 33, is properly rendered " butter " (which
Gesenlus, t. v., to mistaken In declaring to be "hardly
known to the Orientals, except as a medicine ") ; and in
Prov. I. c. the process Itself Is referred to. The word
rU33. Job x. 10, is the same as the Arab. i»..
i- : (jjrv '
applied by the Bedouins to their goats' milk cheese.
» In B. V. here and at Jer. I. c. note that this expres-
sions" abeifer of three years " is made a proper name —
needlessly ; but, if so taken, the name has none the less
its meaning, and that meaning supports the above view.
• In Num. xxil. 4, the word py, in A. V. "grass,"
really "verdure," includes all vegetation: cp. Ex. x.
15; Is. xxvii. 10; Cato, At R. It. c. 30 ; Van.de R. R.
I.. 15 and 11. 5. 'VYn, Job viii. 12, xl. 15, seems used
in a signification equally wide.
Digitized by
Google
1336 HERD, HEBDSMAN
(Ex. xii. 29; Ps. cxxrv. 8, cxix. 3-9). The i
Israelites departing stipulated for (Ex. x. 26)
and took "much cattle" with them (xii. 38;
Num. xi. 22). [Wilderness op Wahdebino.J
HEBES
Cattle formed thai one of the traditions of the
Israelitish nation in its greatest period, and be-
came almost a part of that greatness. They are
the subject of providential care and legislative
Lgypliau fum-ymnL (Wilkinson.)
ordinance (Ex. xx. 10, 17, xxi. 28 sq.,* xxxiv.
19; Lev. xix. 19, xxv. 7; Dent. xi. 15, xxii. 1,
4, 10, xxv. 4; Ps. civ. 14; Is. xxx. 23, 24;
Jon. iv. 11), and even the Levites, though not
holding land, were allowed cattle (Num. xxxv.
2, 3). When pasture failed, a mixture of
various grains (called, Job vi. 5, 7v3, rendered
« fodder " in the A. V. and R. V., and, is. xxx. 24,
" provender ; " • cp. the Roman farrago and ocy-
mum, Plin. xviii. 10 and 42) was used, as also \3Bt*
" chopped straw" (Gen. xxiv. 25 ; Is. xi. 7, lxv.
A derormttd oxherd, k> repraeuled to mark contempt. (Wilkinson.)
25), which was torn in pieces by the threshing-
machine and used probably for feeding in stalls.
These last formed an important adjunct to
cattle-keeping, being indispensable for shelter at
certain seasons (Exod. ix. 19-21). The herd,
after its harvest-duty was done, which probably
caused it to be in high condition, was specially
worth caring for ; at the same time most open
pastures would have failed because of the heat.
It was then probably stalled, and would continue
so until vegetation returned. Hence the failure
of " the herd " from " the stalls " is mentioned
as a feature of scarcity (Hab. iii. 17). "Calves
of the stall " (Mai. iv. 2; Prov. xv. 17) are the
objects of watchful care. The Reubenites, &c,
' Rabbis differ on the question whether the owner of
the animal was under this enactment liable or not liable.
See dt B. K. Ytttrum Ilebraairum, c. II.; Ugolinl,
xxlx.
• The word seems to be derived from ??3, to mix ;
used Jndg. xix. 21 for "to give fodder" to an animal.
The passage in Isaiah probably means that in the
abundant yield of the crops the cattle should eat of the
best, such as was usually consumed by man.
f With this is often found, as if a complementary or
Inclusive term, tMBDO. A. V. and K. V. ■■ provender,"
which also occurs alone, Gen. xlil. 27, xlill. 24.
bestowed their cattle " in cities " when they
passed the Jordan to share the toils of conquest
(Dent. iii. 19), i.e. probably in some pastures
closely adjoining, like the "suburbs" appointed
for the cattle of the Levites (Num. xxxv. 2, 3 ;
Josh. xxi. 2). Cattle were ordinarily allowed
as a prey in war to the captor (Deut. xx. 14;
Josh. viii. 2), and the case of Amalek is ex-
ceptional, probably to mark the extreme curse
to which that people was devoted (Ex. x vii. 14 ;
1 Sam. xv. 3). The occupation of herdsman
was honourable in early times. Saul himself
resumed it in the interval of
his cares as king; also Doeg was
certainly high in his confidence.
Pharaoh made some of Joseph's
brethren "rulers over his cattle."
David's herd-masters were among
his chief officers of state (Gen. xl vii.
6; 1 Sam. xi. 5, xxi. 7; 1 Ch.
xxvii. 29, xxviii. 1). Cattle-keep-
ing must have greatly suffered
from the inroads of the enemies
to which the country under the
later kings of Judah and Israel
was exposed. Uzziah, however
(2 Ch. xxvi. 10), and Hezekiah
(xxxii. 28, 29), resuming command
of the open country, revived it. Josiah also
seems to have been rich in herds (xxxv. 7-9).
The prophet Amos at first followed this occupa-
tion (Amos i. 1, vii. 14). A goad was used
(Judg. iii. 31 ; 1 Sam. xiii. 21, TdVd. J3TJ),
being, as mostly, a staff armed with a 'spike. For
the word Herd as applied to camels, asses, and
swine, see Camel, Mb, Swine (these, however,
were all " unclean " by law, whereas the ox, &c
were not so) ; and on the general subject, Ugo-
lini, xxix., de S. R. vett. Hebr. c. ii., which will
be found nearly exhaustive of it. [H. H.]
HE'RES, MOUNT. One of the places in
the territory of Dan, which, like Aijalon and
Shaalbim, was occupied by the Amorites, and
tributary to Ephrnim (Judg. i. 34, 35). It was
probably in the district lieni Bdrith, N.E. of
Yalo, Aijalon, which appears to retain a trace of
the name. Seven miles E. of Jimzu, Gimzo,
there is a village called Khurbetha 9m Harith,
which may be connected with it. Riehm (». v.)
suggests that instead of " in Mount Heres "
we should read "in Har Heres," and that this
town may perhaps be Ir-Shemesh or Beth-
shemesh. [W.]
HE'BES (Is. xix. 18). [Ik-ha-bebes.]
Digitized by
Google
HEEE8H
HETtESHCChn = artificer; B. 'Popoi^X, A.
'Kpis ; carpentarius), a Levite ; one of the staff
attached to the Tabernacle (1 Ch. ix. 15).
HEB'MAS CEpMai, from *E»jh}», the "Greek
god of gain," or Mercury), the name of a person
to whom St. Paul sends greeting in his Epistle
to the Romans (xvi. 14), and consequently then
resident in Home, and a Christian : and yet the
origin of the name, like that of the other four
mentioned in the same verse, is Greek. How-
ever, in those days, even a Jew, like St. Paul
himself, might acquire Roman citizenship.
Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen agree in at-
tributing to him the work called the Shepherd:
which, from the name of Clement occurring in
it, is supposed to have been written in the
pontificate of Clement 1., or quite early in the
second century ; while others affirm it to have
been the work of a namesake in the following
age, and brother to Pius I. (or about the middle
of the second century); others, again, hare ar-
gued against its genuineness (Care, Hist. Lit.
s. v.; Bull, Defens. Fid. Nic. i. 2, 3-6;
Dindorf, Praef. ad Hermac Past. See Diet, of
Christ. Biography, s. n. ; Salmon, Introd. to the
N. T* p. 579 sq. ; Zahn, Der Hist. d. Hernias
[1868]; and for text, &c, Gebhardt and Har-
nack's Patres Apostolici [1877]. Consult also
C. Taylor, The Witness of Hennas to the Four
Gospels [1892]). From internal evidence, its
author, whoever he was, appears to have been
a married man and father of a family : a deep
mystic, but without ecclesiastical rank. Further,
the work in question is supposed to hare been
originally written in Greek — in which language
it is frequently cited by the Greek Fathers —
though it now only exists entire in a Latin
Version. It was never received into the Canon ;
but yet was generally cited with respect, only
second to that which was paid to the autho-
ritative Books of the N. T., and was held to be
in some sense inspired (Caillau's Patres, torn. i.
p. 17). It may be styled the Pilgrim's Progress
of ante-Nicene times ; and is divided into three
parts : the first containing four visions, the second
twelve moral and spiritual precepts, and the
third ten similitudes, each intended to shadow
forth some verity (Caillau, ibid.). Every man, ac-
cording to this writer, is attended by a good and
bad angel, who are continually endeavouring to
affect his course through life ; a doctrine which
forcibly recalls the fable of Prodicus respecting
the choice of Hercules (Xenoph. Mem. ii. 1).
The Hennas of the Epistle to the Komans is
celebrated as a saint in the Roman calendar on
May 9 (Butler's Lives of the Saints, May 9).
[E.S. Ff.] [F.]
HER'MES CEpf">0> the name of a man
mentioned in the same Epistle with the pre-
ceding (Rom. xri. 14). "According to the
Greeks," says Calmet {Diet. s. v.), " he was one
of the Seventy disciples, and afterwards Bishop
of Dalmatia." His festival occurs in their
calendar upon April 8 (Neale, Eastern Church,
ii. 774). [E. S. Ff.]
HEBMES, Acts xiv. 12, R. V. marg.
[Mercukt.]
HERMOG'ENES fEp/urrfVip), a person
mentioned by St. Paul in 2 Tim. i. 15 (see
HEEMON
1337
Alford's Prokg. c. vii. §35), when "all in
Asia" (i.e. those whom he had left there)
" had turned away from him," and among their
number " Phygellns and Hermogenes." It does
not appear whether they had merely forsaken
his cause, now that he was in bonds, through
fear, like those of whom St. Cyprian treats in
his celebrated work De Lapsis ; or whether, like
Hymenaeus and Philetus (2 Tim. ii 18), they
had embraced false doctrine. It is just pos-
sible that there may be a contrast intended
between these two sets of deserters. According
to the legendary history, bearing the name of
Abdias (Fabricii Coo'. Apocryph. N. T. p. 517),
Hermogenes had been a magician, and was, with
Philetus, converted by St. James the Great, who
destroyed the charm of his spells. Neither the
Hermogenes who suffered in the reign of
Domitian (Hoffinan, Lex. Univ. s. v. ; Alford on
2 Tim. i. 15), nor the Hermogenes against whom
Tertullian wrote — still less the martyrs of the
Greek calendar (Neale, Eastern Church, ii.
p. 770, Jan. 24, and p. 781, Sept. 1) — are to
be confounded with the person now under notice,
of whom nothing more is known. [E. S. Ff.]
HE'BMONfltoTQ ; 'Acp/uiv), a remarkable
mountain, forming the north boundary of the
land of Israel. Gesenius compares the word
a o^
with the Arabic ^, which means a " promi-
nent peak of a mountain." In the first passage
in which the mountain is mentioned, a geo-
graphical note in Deuteronomy (iii. 9), we are
informed that the Sidonians called it Sirion
(pni?) and that the Amorites called it Shenir
(*V]t?), both of which names have been rendered
"breastplate." The first Gesenius compares
with the name 64oa(, "breastplate," for a
mountain in Magnesia (cp. 1 Sam. zvii. 5, 38) ;
sti *
the second he, compares with the Arabic .;... .
" a coat of mail." It may be legitimate to
doubt if the Canaanite names are of necessity
Semitic words. In Mongol speech Sir means
" snow," and Sirion might mean " snowy," the
modern name of Hermon being " the snowy top."
It appears that the name Shenir still survived as
Sinir (-jjuw) in the 14th century A.D. ; for ac-
cording to Abu-el-feda it then applied to a
mountain ridge north of Damascus (p. 164, ed.
Kohler, as quoted by Gesenius, Lex.). Another
name of Hermon was Sion ([N't?), as noted in
Deuteronomy (iv. 48), meaning " elevated,"— a
word having no connexion with Zion, though
seeming in the English form to be the same. It
would appear that Hermon is included in the
land of Israel in the Book of Joshua, for the
limit is placed (xi. 17, xii. 1, xiii. 5) at " Baal-
gad, in the valley of Lebanon under Mount
Hermon:" this definition of the situation of
Baal-gad does not agree with the position of
that town at Banias, as proposed by Robinson,
since the latter is not in the valley of Lebanon,
but in the valley of Jordan. Baal-gad is evi-
dently to be sought on the north slopes of
Hermon, and the name probably survives at the
spring and plain called Jedeideh (SjJui*-).
Digitized by
Google
1338
HEEMON
HEBMON
on the road from Damascus to Beirut, and at
the foot of the northern spurs of Hermon, at
the south end of the valley between Lebanon
and Anti -Lebanon.
From this point northwards the country be-
longed to the Phoenician Giblitis and to the
Hivites. In later passages Hermon is called Baal-
hermon (Judg. iii. 3 ; cp. 1 Ch. v. 23), and in the
second of these notices a distinction is apparently
made between Baal-hermon, Shenir, and Hermon.
As, however, the Hebrew particle often means
" even " instead of " and," we may perhaps
read " Baal-hermon, even Shenir, even Hermon."
The term Baal is sometimes applied to mountains,
as in the case of Baal-hazor, a very prominent
summit, and in these cases perhaps means " the
top "or "chief," unless indeed it refer to the
sacred character of the mountains. From two
passages in the Psalms (xlii. 6, lxxxix. 12) we
may suppose that Hermon was a place of wor-
ship of Jehovah, like Carmel, Gerizim, and other
high places. The Psalmist speaks of " remember-
Digitized by
Google
HEBMON
ing " Jehovah on the mountains of " the Her-
monites" or "Hermons" (D^Cin); and the
Hebrew verb "to remember" means radically
to "make a memorial" or "monument." In
the second passage we read that "Tabor and
Hermon " are to rejoice in the name of Jehovah,
which may also signify that they were considered
sacred places. There is at least no doubt that,
in Jeroboam's time, one of the two chief sanctu-
aries of Israel was at Dan at the foot of Hermon,
and that the mountain was a sacred place in
later Roman times, and is still to some extent
considered sacred by the Druzes.
Another curious passage in the Psalms (cxxziii.
3) speaks of the " dew of Hermon " as felling on
the hill of Zion (fi'V), and it is apparent that
Jerusalem is here intended from the termination
of the verse. There was a Zion (Sahyun) in
the Lebanon, but neither this nor the Zion at
Jerusalem has any connexion with the name
Sion, which applied to Hermon itself. Hermon
is remarkable for the mists which cover its
summit, and the passage may simply mean that
the clouds came from Hermon to Jerusalem ;
but the distance between the two sites has
given rise to curious speculations among Rab-
binical writers. In the Song of Solomon (iv. 8)
Shenir and Hermon are again distinguished,
unless we read "Shenir, even Hermon." In
Ezekiel Senir is noted for its fir-trees (xxvii. 5),
and in Ecclesiasticus (xxiv. 13) for its cypresses.
If we follow the description of Abu-el-feda,
which makes Senir to have been a ridge north of
Damascus, this must be distinguished from
Hermon, which is an outlier of the Anti-Lebanon,
and Shenir would be the name of the Anti-
Lebanon ridge ; but the pine grows on Hermon
itself, whereas the main ridge of the north is
very barren, and the geological formation renders
it probable that it never had many trees upon
it. The name of Shenir had perhaps a wider
application than that of Hermon, but, as above
stated, Shenir was the Hivite name of Hermon,
according to the Book of Deuteronomy.
In theTalmudic writings (see Neubauer, Geog.
Tal., pp. 10, 39) Hermon is called " the Snowy
Mountain" (K3?n TlD); and this is one of its
modern names, Jj3\ A*»> Md «** Thelj,
" Mountain of Snow ;" but the old name is still
known to some of the natives of the Lebanon.
It is also called Jcbel esh Sheikh, j,t*.U ,\ju>--
which means "Mountain of the Chief," this
name being of Druze origin, and arising from
the fact that it has always been the centre of
the Druze religion from the 10th century A.D.,
and the place where their Sheikh or "Chief"
had his abode. The common explanation, " chief
of mountains " or " chief mountain," is gram-
matically incorrect.
The exact position and height of Mount
Hermon were determined both trigonometrically
and astronomically, and by observations of the
mercurial barometer, by Sergt. Black, R.E., in
1873, by true bearing from Carmel, and by the
triangulation of the PEF. Survey. The height
is 9,200 feet above the Mediterranean, and the
mountain thus rises more than 5,000 feet above
the highest tops of Upper Galilee. It is conse-
quently a very conspicuous object in all views
HEBMON
1339
in the north of Palestine. It is seen in the
Jordan valley from near Jericho, and is also
visible from Tell Asflr in the confines of Benja-
min. It is not necessary therefore that Hebrew
writers, who introduce Hermon into their pictures
of scenery, should have written in the north of
the country, though it is clear that the Song of
Songs refers to Hermon, with Lebanon and
Amanus, as a summer resort.
The lower part of the mountain consists of
Nubian sandstone, which appears also in the
Lebanon. This is found high up on the western
pass which leads by Rashaiya to Damascus. The
upper part is a very rugged and barren dome of
hard grey fossiliferous dolomitic limestone, such
as underlies the chalk in Palestine. The action
of snow and frost has formed a sort of shingle,
which covers the higher slopes between the
rocks and pinnacles of the mountain side. The
snow covers the whole of the summit in winter,
and feeds the Jordan and the Abana in spring ;
but in autumn it sometimes quite disappears,
and in 1873 the whole mountain was free from
any snow. The Syrian bears, who live on the
summit and descend to eat grapes in the vine-
yards on the slopes, have been seen by some
travellers rolling in the snow in the early
summer. The panther is also mentioned in
Canticles as dwelling in caves on Hermon. The
vineyards on the north and west slopes still
produce wine which is considered excellent, and
the wine of Helbon (Helljin, north of Damascus)
is noticed by Ezekiel (xxvii. 18). Hermon is
daily covered with clouds in summer, and the
mists are excellent for vine culture. In this
connexion it is interesting to notice that the
"high mountain" was apparently, according
to the First Gospel, somewhere near Caesarea
Philippi (Matt. xvi. 18), and that the Trans-
figuration would thus seem to be localised on
some part of Hermon. The very sudden for-
mation of cloud on the mountain (and on the
Lebanon also) thus perhaps illustrates the words
"a cloud overshadowed them." The Gospel of
the Hebrews, indeed, identified Tabor as the
mountain in question, and this tradition has
been followed ever since by Oriental Christians ;
but it is hardly reconcilable with the notice of
Caesarea Philippi (Banids) as above mentioned,
which lies at the foot of Hermon. The moun-
tain is still a place of retreat for the Druze
recluses, who inhabit a cave-dwelling on the
upper part of the slope towards the west.
The view from the summit is very remark-
able, extending over the gardens of Damascus to
the deserts near the Euphrates on the east, and
on the north-west across the Lebanon to the sea.
On the south, Palestine as far as Mount Tabor is
spread out like a map ; the lakes of Merom and
Galilee, the ridges of Upper Galilee, and the
coasts near Tyre, Accho, and the Carmel bay,
being well seen. At sunrise the shadow of the
great dome is projected far west to the
Mediterranean, and at sunset (which occurs
long after the whole of Palestine is in dusky
shadow) it stretches over the eastern desert,
and stands up against the haze. The appearance
of the JaulAn craters, as seen from this point
some 7,000 feet above them, is very remarkable,
and the plains of Bashan are visible throughout,
with the northern part of Gilead. For a detailed
description of this very magnificent view see,
Digitized by
Google
1340
HEBMON
Tent Work in Palatine (chap. viii.). On the
slopes of the mountain, in 1873, wild rose, haw-
thorn, oak, and honeysuckle were observed, and
the fauna and flora alike present a very remark-
able contrast to those of the semi-tropical Jordan
valley, close at the foot of the mountain. On
the south, at about 1,000 feet above the sea, the
main stream of the Jordan bursts suddenly from
its cavern, and pours the snow waters from the
mountain in foaming cascades past the walls of
Caesarea Philippi. The oak and poplar are here
the main features of tree scenery, while higher
up is found the Aleppo pine, where the pictu-
resque glens of the sandstone formation are
strewn in places with basaltic boulders.
The mountain was covered in the 2nd cen-
tury a.d. with small Roman temples, facing the
rising sun. The more important of these have
been carefully planned by Sir C. Warren. At
Kukhleh on the north a church was built, in a
later century, ont of the fragments of one of
these temples, and a large medallion represents
the face of the sun-god; but this is not older
than Roman times, and the Roman eagle formed
part of the adornment of this shrine, which, as
we learn from a Greek text on the spot, found
in 1873, had doors plated with silver.
The top of the mountain consists of a small
plateau with three limestone crags. The highest,
to the east, was surrounded in Roman times
with a circular wall of wrought stones, and it
would seem as if an altar had been placed on
the crag; while close by on the plateau is a
curious underground chamber, hewn in rock,
perhaps at one time a Mithraeum, for the sun-
god Mithra, whom the Romans worshipped as
well as the Persians, was adored by mysteries
in such vaults. The whole system of worship
in the Hennon temples seems to have been
connected with the remarkable views of the
rising son obtained from the summit. The
shrine was still venerated in the 4th century
of our era; for Jerome, though he had apparently
never ascended Hermon, says, " diciturque esse
in vertice ejus insigne templum, quod ab ethnicis
cultui habetur, e regione Paneadis et Libani "
(».». Aermon, OS.* p. 126, 19). The same is
also stated by Hilarius (on Psalm cxxxiii., as
quoted by Reland, Pal. i. 323), the mountain
itself being sacred according to his view. An
early tradition made it the place where the sons
of God came down to visit the daughters of men.
That the region was sacred much earlier is
evident from the history of Jeroboam, as already
noticed ; and the curious dolmen tables found in
1882, at Baniis, may perhaps indicate a pre-
historic sanctuary at the foot of the mountain.
On the death of Hakem, the Druze chiefs
sought refuge in the Hermon valleys, and the
mountain is still hallowed by the memory of the
teachings here first proclaimed to them. They
lave numerous Khalwehs or chapels on its slopes,
outside the thriving mountain villages, of which
the largest and most important is Rashaiya on
the north-west, about 4,000 feet above the sea
the seat of government of the district. It was
on Hermon in 1860 that the French discovered
the Sacred Books of the Druses, which contain
a complete account of the Moslem heresies which
form their religion, the highest initiation in
"which is a complete scepticism.
Medieval travellers as a rule when describing
HEBOD
Hermon do not allude to the real mountain, but
to the conical hill of A'eby Duhy, just south of
Tabor, which, for some unknown reason, was
pointed out to pilgrims as the true Hermon — a
view quite irreconcilable with the O.T. accounts
of its position. Good descriptions of Hermon
will be found in Robinson's Later Biblical Se-
tearches, and in the PEF. Mem. (volume of
Special Papers and Jerusalem volume, Appendix,
with Sir C. Warren's plans of the Temples).
The present writer visited all the principal
points of interest in 1873 and 1882. [C. R. C]
HEBMONITES, THE (tntoTTl; BNAT.
'Zpiiuyulli [xli. 7]; Hermoniim), Ps. xlii. 6,
changed by R. V. into "the Hermons," the allu-
sion being to the summits of Mount Hermon.
I7J
HEBOD CH/xSoni, i>. Herodes). The He-
bodiajj Family. The history of the Herodian
family presents one side of the last development
of the Jewish nation. The evils which had ex-
isted in the hierarchy which grew up after the
Return, found an unexpected embodiment in
the tyranny of a foreign usurper. Religion
was adopted as a policy ; and the hellenizing
designs of Antiochus Epiphanes were carried
out, at least in their spirit, by men who pro-
fessed to observe the Law. Side by side with
the spiritual "kingdom of God," proclaimed by
John the Baptist, and founded by the Lord, a
kingdom of the world was established, which in
its external splendour recalled the traditional
magnificence of Solomon. The simultaneous
realization of the two principles, national and
spiritual, which had long variously influenced
the Jews, in the establishment of a dynasty and
a church, is a fact pregnant with instruction.
In the fulness of time a descendant of Esau
established a false counterpart of the promised
glories of Messiah.
Various accounts are given of the ancestry of
the Herods; but neglecting the exaggerated
statements of friends and enemies,* it seems
certain that they were of Idumaean descent
(Joseph. Ant. xiv. 1, § 3), a fact which is indi-
cated by the forms of some of the names which
were retained in the family (Ewald, Qeschichte,
rv. 477, note). But though aliens by race, the
Herods were Jews in faith. The Idumaeans had
been conquered and brought over to Judaism
by John Hyrcanus (B.C. 130, Joseph. Ant. xiii. 9,
§ 1) ; and from the time of their conversion
they remained constant to their new religion,
looking upon Jerusalem as their mother city
» The Jewish partisans of Herod (Nicolas Damascenus,
op. Joseph. Ant. xlv. 1, { 3) sought to raise him to the
dignity of a descent from one of the noble families
which returned from Babylon ; and, on the other hand,
early Christian writers n-presented his origin ss utterly
mean and servile. Africanns baa preserved a tradition
(Booth, Hell. Sacr. 11. 235), on the authority of " the
natural kinsmen of the Saviour," which makes Antl-
pater, the lather of Herod, the son of one Herod, a slave
attached to the service of a temple of Apollo at Ascalon,
who was taken prisoner by Idumaean robbers, and kept
by them as his lather could not pay his ransom. The
locality (cp. Philo, Leg. ad Caitan, < 30) no less than
the office was calculated to fix a heavy reproach upon
the name (cp. Routh, ad loc). This story is repeated
with great inaccuracy by Eplphanius (Boer. xx.).
Digitized by
Google
HEROD
and claiming for themselves the name of Jews
(Joseph. Ant. xx. 7, § 7; B. J. i. 10, §4, iv.
The general policy of the whole Herodian
family, tboogh modified by the personal cha-
racteristics of the successive rulers, was the
same. It centred in the endeavour to found a
great and independent kingdom, in which the
power of Judaism should subserve the con-
solidation of a state. The protection of Rome
was in the first instance a necessity, but the
designs of Herod I. and Agrippa I. point to an
independent Eastern empire as their end, and
not to a mere subject monarchy. Such a
consummation of the Jewish hopes seems to
have found some measure of acceptance at first
[Hebodians]; and by a natural reaction the
temporal dominion of the Herods opened the
way to the destruction of the Jewish nation-
ality. The religion which was degraded into
the instrument of unscrupulous ambition lost
its power to quicken a united people. The
high-priests were appointed and deposed by
Herod I. and bis successors with such a reckless
disregard for the character of their office (Jost,
Oesch. d. Judenthums, pp. 322, 325, 421), that
the office itself was deprived of Its sacred dig-
nity (cp. Acts xxiii. 2 sq. ; Jost, p. 430, &c.).
The nation was divided, and amidst the conflict
of sects a universal faith arose, which more than
fulfilled the nobler hopes that found no satis-
faction in the treacherous grandeur of a court.
The family relations of the Herods are singu-
larly complicated from the frequent recurrence
of the same names, and the several accounts of
Joeephus are not consistent in every detail.
The following table, however, seems to offer a
satisfactory summary of his statements. The
members of the Herodian family who are men-
tioned in the N. T. are distinguished by capitals
(see p. 1342).
Josephus is the one great authority for the
history of the Herodian family. The scanty
notices which occur in Hebrew and classic
writers throw very little additional light upon
the events which he narrates. Ewald has
treated the whole subject with the widest and
clearest view. Jost in his several works has
added to the records of Josephus gleanings from
later Jewish writers. Where the original
sources are so accessible, monographs are of
little use. [Some are quoted by Winer in his
-S WB., and a complete list of authorities and
histories dealing with the period is given by
SchSrer, Gesch. d. jud. Votkes im Zeitalter Jesu
Christi, Index s. nn. Consult also Riehra, HWB.
s. n. ; Herzog, BE.* s. n. ; Hilman, Hist, of the
Jews,* ii. 52 sq. ; Stanley, Lectures on the Jewish
Church [1883], Lecture 1. ; Edersheim, The Life
and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Index s. n. — F.J
I. Herod the Great ('Ho^Stii) was the
second son of Antipater, who was appointed
procurator of Judaea by Julius Caesar, B.C. 47,
and Cypros, an Arabian of noble descent (Joseph.
Ant. xiv. 7, § 3). At the time of his father's
elevation, though only fifteen years old, he
received the government of Galilee (Joseph. Ant.
xiv. 9, § 2), and shortly afterwards that of
Code-Syria. When Antony came to Syria, B.C.
41, he appointed Herod and his elder brother
Phasael tetrarchs of Judaea (Joseph. Ant. xiv. 13,
§ 1). Herod was forced to abandon Judaea next
HEROD
1341
year by an invasion of the Parthians, who sup-
ported the claims of Antigonus, the representa-
tive of the Hasmonaean dynasty, and fled to
Rome (b.c. 40). At Rome he was well received
by Antony and Octavian, and was appointed by
the senate king of Judaea to the exclusion of the
Hasmonaean line (Joseph. Ant. xiv. 14, § 4 ;
App. Bell. C. 39). In the course of a few years,
by the help of the Romans, he took Jerusalem
(b.c. 37), and completely established his author-
ity throughout his dominions. An expedition
which he was forced to make against Arabia
saved him from taking an active part in the
civil war, though he was devoted to the cause
of Antony. After the battle of Actium he
visited Octavian at Rhodes, and his noble bear-
ing won for him the favour of the conqueror,
who confirmed him in the possession of the
kingdom, B.O. 31, and in the next year increased
it by the addition of several important cities
(Jos. Ant. xv. 10, § 1 sq.), and afterwards gave
him the province of Trachonitis and the district
of Paneas (Joseph. Ant. 1. c). The remainder of
the reign of Herod was undisturbed by external
troubles, but his domestic life was embittered
by an almost uninterrupted series of injuries
and cruel acts of vengeance. Hyrcanus, the
grandfather of his wife Mariamne, was put to
death shortly before his visit to Augustus. Ma-
riamne herself, to whom he was passionately
devoted, was next sacrificed to his jealousy.
One execution followed another, till at last in
B.c. 6 he was persuaded to put to death the
two sons of Mariamne, Alexander and Aristo-
bulus, in whom the chief hope of the people lay.
Two years afterwards he condemned to death
Antipater, his eldest son, who had been their
most active accuser, and the order for his
execution was among the last acts of Herod's
life, for he himself died five days after the
death of his son, B.c. 4, in the same year which
marks the true date of the Nativity. [Jesus
Christ.]
These terrible acts of bloodshed which Herod
perpetrated in his own family were accompanied
by others among his subjects equally terrible,
from the numbers who fell victims to them.
The infirmities of his later years exasperated
him to yet greater cruelty ; and, according to
the well-known story, he ordered the nobles-
whom he had called to him in his last moments
to be executed immediately after his decease,
that so at least his death might be attended by
universal mourning (Joseph. Ant. xvii. 7, § 5).
It was at the time of this fatal illness that he
must have caused the slaughter of the infants
at Bethlehem (Matt. ii. 16-18); and from the
comparative insignificance of the murder of a
few young children in an unimportant village
when coutrasted with the deeds which he carried
out or designed, it is not surprising that Jo-
sephus has passed it over in silence. The
number of children in Bethlehem and " all the
borders thereof" (cV taaiv rois opfois) may be
estimated at about ten or twelve ; b and the
*> The language of St. Matthew offers an Instructive
contrast to tbut of Justin M. (WaJ. c. Trypk. 78): i
'HpwStjv . . . wdvras an-A»« rove iraioas tow* iv
Bi}0Ac«p iiciXtwrtv waiptBijvai. Cp. Orig. C. Cds. i.
p. 47, ed. Spenc : 6 ii 'Hpu&it ayetAc vavra tA iv
Bij6A«?p teat rocc opiocf avrfr vtu&ia . . .
Digitized by
Google
1342
HEEOD
4
ii
-f
-S +
II
til
10
II
a ?.
I I
9 I
■4 I*
if-sgir
-*i-
4— s l
t a
11
0. a
11
-r«l
11
-ill
-I— »
-A
5
-£|a
<
■«?3
J* A*
lr <i II
"£~
-2
oil
4U
all*
-5 8*1
-lis-
5 11
-1
-§Slfi
11 3
-if 43*
J"
11*
fl
! 8
-II
-1!
-a l
-ll
ai
J
-ills-
fills-
< 11
-ftp
11
|j||§
5
1
*3
aeB.|
Ilil
ft
*
1
Digitized by
Google
HEBOD
language of the Evangelist leaves in complete
uncertainty the method in which the deed was
effected (ixixrrtiXas bvtTKtv). The scene of
open and undisguised violence which has been
consecrated by Christian art is wholly at vari-
ance with what may be supposed to have been
the historic reality. At a later time the murder
of the children seems to have been connected
with the death of Antipater. Thus, according
to the anecdote preserved by Macrobiua (c. A.D.
410), " Augustus, cum audisset inter pueros quos
in Syria Herodes, Sex Judaeorum, intra bimatum
(Hatt. ii. 16 ; ib. Vulg. a bimatu et infra) jussit
interfid, filium quoque ejus occisum, ait : Melius
est Herodis porcum esse quatn filium " (Macrob.
Sat. ii. 4). But Josephus has preserved two
very remarkable references to a massacre which
Herod caused to be made shortly before his
death, which may throw an additional light
upon the history. In this it is said that Herod
did not spare " those who seemed most dear to
him" (Ant. xvi. 11, § 7), but "slew all those
of his own family who sided with the Pharisees "
(6 #ap«r<ubs) in refusing to take the oath of
allegiance to the Roman emperor, while they
looked forward to a change in the royal line
(Joseph. Ant. xvii. 2, § 6 ; cp. Lardner, Credibility,
Ac., i. pp. 278 sq., 332 sq., 349 sq.). How far
this event may have been directly connected
with the murder at Bethlehem it is impossible
to say, from the obscurity of the details, but its
occasion and character throw a great light upon
St. Matthew's narrative.
In dealing with the religious feelings or pre-
judices of the Jews, Herod showed as great
contempt for public opinion as in the execution
of his personal vengeance. He signalised his
elevation to the throne by offerings to the
Capitoline Jupiter (Jost, Gesch. d. Judenthums,
p. 318), and surrounded his person by foreign
mercenaries, some of whom had been formerly
in the service of Cleopatra (Joseph. Ant. xv. 7,
§ 3 ; xvii. 1, § 1 ; 8, § 3). His coins and those of
his successors bore only Greek legends ; and he
introduced heathen games within the walls of
Jerusalem (Joseph. Ant. xv. 8, § 1). He displayed
ostentatiously his favour towards foreigners
(Joseph. Ant. xvi. 5, § 3), and oppressed the old
Jewish aristocracy (Joseph. Ant. xv. 1, § 1). The
later Jewish traditions describe him as suc-
cessively the servant of the Hasmonaeans and
the Romans, and relate that one Rabbi only
survived the persecution which he directed
against them, purchasing his life by the loss of
sight (Jost, p. 319, &c).
While Herod alienated in this manner the
affections of the Jews by his cruelty and disre-
gard for the Law, he adorned Jerusalem with
many splendid monuments of his taste and
magnificence. The Temple, which he rebuilt
with scrupulous care, so that it might seem to
be a restoration of the old building rather than
a new one (Joseph. Ant. xv. § 11), was the great-
est of these works. The restoration was begun
B.C. 20, and the Temple itself was completed in a
year and a half (Joseph. Ant, xv. 11, § 6). The
surrounding buildings occupied eight years more
(Joseph. Ant. xv. 11, § 5). But fresh additions
were constantly made in succeeding years, so
that at the time of the Lord's visit to Jerusalem
at the beginning of His ministry, it was said
that the Temple was "built («WSo/4#)>) in
HEBOD
1343
forty and six years" (John ii. 20), a phrase
which expresses the whole period from the
commencement of Herod's work to the com-
pletion of the latest addition then made, for the
final completion of the whole building is placed
by Josephus 'Ant. xx. 8, § 7, Ijtn 8« rim vol to
Itpbr cYrre'AcoTo) in the time of Herod Agrippa
H. (c. A.D. 50).
Tet even this splendid work was not likely to
mislead the Jews as to the real spirit of the king.
While he rebuilt the Temple at Jerusalem, he
rebuilt also the temple at Samaria (Joseph.
Ant. xv. 8, § 5), and made provision in his new
city Caesarea for the celebration of heathen wor-
ship (Joseph. Ant. xv. 9, § 5) ; and it has been
supposed (Jost, Oesch. d. Judenth. p. 323) that
the rebuilding of the Temple furnished him with
the opportunity of destroying the authentic
collection of genealogies which was of the
highest importance to the priestly families.
Herod, as appears from his public designs,
affected the dignity of a second Solomon, but he
joined the licence of that monarch to his mag-
nificence; and it was said that the monument
which he raised over the royal tombs was due
to the fear which seized him after a sacrilegious
attempt to rob them of secret treasures (Joseph.
Ant. xvi. 7, § 1).
It is, perhaps, difficult to see in the character
of Herod any of the true elements of greatness.
Some have even supposed that the title — the
great — is a mistranslation for the elder (K31,
Jost, p. 319, note ; 6 /ityas, Ewald, Oesch. iv.
473, &c.) ; and yet on the other hand he seems
to have possessed the good qualities of our own
Henry VIII. with his vices. He maintained
peace at home during a long reign by the
vigour and timely generosity of his administra-
tion. Abroad he conciliated the goodwill of the
Romans under circumstances of unusual diffi-
culty. His ostentatious display and even his
arbitrary tyranny were .calculated to inspire
Orientals with awe. Bold and yet prudent,
oppressive and yet profuse, he had many of the
characteristics which make a popular hero ; and
the title which may have been first given in
admiration of successful depotism now serves to
bring out in clearer contrast the terrible price
at which the success was purchased.
Copper Coin or Berod the Great.
Obr. HPOIAQY. Bunch of grapes. Bar. fftNAPXO.
Macedonian helmet: in the field, cedncem.
II. HEROD ANTIPA8 Qhrrhrarpos, 'Ktnlitas)
was the son of Herod the Great by Malthace, a
Samaritan (Joseph. Ant. xvii. 1, § 3). His father
had originally destined him as his successor in
the kingdom (cp. Matt. ii. 22 ; Abchelatjs), but
by the last change of his will appointed him
" tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea " (Joseph. Ant.
xvii. 8, § 1, 'Hp. i Tfrpipxvh Matt. xiv. 1 ; Luke
iii. 19, ix. 7 ; Acts xiii. 1. Cp. Luke iii. 1, rt-
Tpapxovrros rrjs ra\i\atas 'Up.'), which brought
him a yearly revenue of two hundred talents
(Joseph. Ant. xvii. 13, § 4; cp. Luke viii. 3, Xoufo
Digitized by
Google
1344
HEBOD
iiurpiirov 4 Hp.). He fir»t married a daughter
of Aretas, " king of Arabia Petraea," bat after
gome time (Joseph. Ant. xviii. 5, § 1) he made
overtures of marriage to Herodias, the wife of
hii half-brother Herod-Philip, which she re-
ceived favourably. Aretas, indignant at the
insult offered to his daughter, found a pretext
for invading the territory of Herod, and defeated
him with great loss (Joseph. /. c). This defeat,
according to the famous passage in Josephus
(Ant. xviii. 5, § 2), was attributed by many to
the murder of John the Baptist, which had been
committed by Antipas shortly before, under the
influence of Herodias (Matt. xiv. 4 sq. ; Mark vi.
17 sq. ; Luke iii. 19). At a later time the
ambition of Herodias proved the cause of her
husband's ruin. She urged him to go to Rome
to gain the title of king (cp. Mark vi. 14, i
fiaatXtbs "Up. by courtesy), which had been
granted to his nephew Agrippa ; but he was
opposed at the court of Caligula by the emis-
saries of Agrippa [Herod Agrippa], and con-
demned to perpetual banishment at Lugdunum,
A.D. 39 (Joseph. Ant. xviii. 7, § 2), whence he
appears to have retired afterwards to Spain
(B. J. ii. 9, § 6; but see note on p. 1347). He-
rodias voluntarily shared his punishment, and
he died in exile. [Herodias.]
Pilate took occasion from our Lord's residence
in Galilee to send Him for examination (Luke
xxiii. 6 sq.) to Herod Antipas, who came up to
Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover (cp. Joseph.
Ant. xviii. 6, § 3), and thus heal the feud which
had existed between the tetrarch and himself
(Luke xxiii. 12 ; cp. Luke xiii. 1, wtpl r&v
roAiAoW, my to cilia TllAaros tfu^ty pera r&v
Suatiy airray). The share which Antipas thus
took in the Passion is specially noticed in the
Acts (iv. 27) in connexion with Ps. ii. 1, 2.
His character, as it appears in the Gospels,
answers to the general tenor of his life. He
was unscrupulous (Luke iii. 19, mpl irdVrov ay
twoinaty itornpuv), tyrannical (Luke xiii. 31),
and weak (Matt. xiv. 9). Yet his cruelty was
marked by cunning (Luke xiii. 32, rp &A«x«i
tovtij), and followed by remorse (Mark vi. 14).
In contrast with Pilate he presents the type of
an Eastern despot, capricious, sensual, and super-
stitious. This last element of superstition is
both natural and clearly marked. For a time
"he heard John gladly " (Mark ri. 20), and was
anxious to see Jesus (Luke ix. 9, xxiii. 8), in the
expectation, as it is said, of witnessing some
miracle wrought by Him (Luke xiii. 31, xxiii. 8).
The city of Tiberias, which Antipas founded
and named in honour of the emperor, was the
most conspicuous monument of his long reign ;
but, like the rest of the Herodian family, he
showed his passion for building cities in several
places, restoring Sepphoris, near Tabor, which
had been destroyed in the wars after the death
of Herod the Great (Joseph. Ant. xvii. 12, § 9 ;
xviii. 2, § 1), and Betharamphtha (Beth-haram)
in Peraea, which he named Julias, " from the
wife of the emperor" (Jos. Ant. xviii. 2, §1;
Hieron. Euseb. Chron. A.D. 29, Liviat).
III. Arcuelaus ('Apx«\aot) was i I'ke Herod
Antipas, the son of Herod the Great and Mal-
thace. He was brought up with his brother at
Rome (Joseph. Ant. xvii. 1, §3), and in con-
sequence of the accusations of his eldest brother
Antipater, the son of Doris, he was excluded by
HEBOD
' his father's will from any share in his dominions.
Afterwards, however, by a second change, the
| " kingdom " was left to him, which had been de-
signed for his brother Antipas (Joseph. Ant. xvii.
, 8, § 1), and it was this unexpected arrangement
which led to the retreat of Joseph to Galilee
I (Matt. ii. 22). Archelaus did not enter on bis
power without strong opposition and bloodshed
(Joseph. -<4nr. xvii. 9); but Augustus confirmed the
will of Herod in its essential provisions, and gave
Archelaus the government of " Idumaea, Judaea,
and Samaria, with the cities of Caesarea, Sebaste,
1 Joppa, and Jerusalem " (Joseph. Ant. xvii. 13,
§ 5), which produced a revenue of 400 (Joseph.
| B. J. ii. 6, § 3) or 600 talents (Ant. xvii. 13, § 5).
1 For the time be received the title of Ethnarch,
j with the promise of that of king, if he proved
worthy of it (Joseph. /. c). His conduct justi-
fied the fears which his character inspired.
After violating the Mosaic Law by the marriage
with Glaphyra, his brother's widow (Joseph.
Ant. xvii. 13, § 1), he roused his subjects by
his tyranny and cruelty to appeal to Rome for
redress. Augustus at once summoned him to his
presence, and alter his cause was heard he was
banished to Vienne in Gaul (a.i>. 7), where pro-
bably he died (Joseph. /. c. ; cp. Strab. xri.
p. 765 ; Dio Cass. Iv. 27); though in the time of
Jerome his tomb was shown near Bethlehem
(OS* p. 135, 12).
IV. Herod Philip L (*t\nrros, Mark vi.
17) was the son of Herod the Great and Ma-
riamne the daughter of a high-priest Simon
(Joseph. Ant. xviii. 6, § 4), and must be carefully
distinguished from the tetrarch Philip. [Herod
PaiUP U.] He married Herodias, the sister of
Agrippa I., by whom he had a daughter Salome.
Herodias, however, left him, and made an in-
famous marriage with his half-brother Herod
Antipas (Matt. xiv. 3; Mark vi. 17; Luke iii.
19). He is called only Herod by Josephus, but
the repetition of the name Philip is fully justi-
fied by the frequent recurrence of names in the
Herodian family (e.g. Antipater). The two
Philips were confounded by Jerome (ad Matt.
1. c.) ; and the confusion was the more easy,
because the son of Mariamne was excluded from
all share in his father's possessions (rjjs SiatHi-
icr)t i(^\ti<fityy in consequence of his mother's
treachery (Joseph. B. J. i. 30, § 7), and lived
afterwards in a private station.
V. Herod Philip II. (*l\nrros) was the son
of Herod the Great and Cleopatra ('Itpotro-
kv/iiris). Like his half-brothers * Antipas and
Archelaus, be was brought up at home (Joseph.
Ant. xvii. 1, § 3), and on the death of his father
advocated the claims of Archelaus before Au-
gustus (Joseph. B. J. ii. 6, § 1). He received as
his own government " Batanaea, Trachonitis,
Auranitis (Gaulonitis), and some parts about
Jamnia " (Joseph. B. J. ii. 6, § 3), with the
title of tetrarch (Luke iii. 1, viAis-rov ....
rcrpapxouyros rijs 'Irovpalas vol TpaxoWriSot
Xtipas). His rule was distinguished by justice
and moderation (Joseph. Ant. xvii. 2, § 4), and
he appears to have devoted himself entirely to
the duties of his office without sharing in the
intrigues which disgraced his family (Joseph.
• Joseph. Ant. xvii. 8, } 1. Josephus calls Philip
'ApxtAaov a*>A*« yinj<noc; but elsewhere he states
their distinct descent.
Digitized by
Google
HEROD
HEKOD
1345
Ant. xviii. 5, § 6). He built a new city on the
site of Paneas, near the sources of the Jordan,
which he called Caesarea (Kai<rap«(a ri *i\'mrov,
Matt. xvi. 13; Mark viii. 27), and raised Beth-
saida (in Lower Gaulonitis) to the rank of a city
under the title of Julias (Joseph. Ant. ii. 9, § 1 ;
xviii. 2, § 1), and died there a.d. 34 (xviii. 5,
§ 6). He married Salome, the daughter of
Philip (I.) and Herodias (jlnt. xviii. 6, § 4), but
as he left no children at his death his dominions
were added to the Roman province of Syria
(xviii. 5, § 6).
VI. Herod Aorippa I. ('HpwSjjs, Acts;
'A7p/inroj, Joseph.) was the son of Aristobnlus
and Berenice, and grandson of Herod the Great.
He was brought up at Rome with Claudius and
Drusus, and after a life of various vicissitudes
(Joseph. Ant. xviii. 7) was thrown into prison
by Tiberius for an unguarded speech, where he
remained till the accession of Caius (Caligula)
a.d. 37. The new emperor gave him the govern-
ments formerly held by the tetrarchs Philip and
Ly*anias, and bestowed on him the ensigns of
loyalty and other marks of favour (Acts xii. 1,
"Hp. t f)a<rt\tis). The jealousy of Herod Anti-
pas and his wife Herodias was excited by these
distinctions, and they sailed to Rome in the
hope of supplanting Agrippa in the Emperor's
favour. Agrippa was aware of their design,
and anticipated it by a counter-charge against
Antipas of treasonous correspondence with the
Partnians. Antipas failed to answer the accusa-
tion, and was banished to Ganl (a.d. 39), and
his dominions were added to those already held
by Agrippa (Joseph. Ant. xviii. 7, § 2). After-
wards Agrippa rendered important services to
Claudius (Joseph. B. J. ii. 11, §§2, 3), and re-
ceived from him in return (a.d. 41) the govern-
ment of Judaea and Samaria ; so that his entire
dominions equalled in extent the kingdom of
Herod the Great. Unlike his predecessors,
Agrippa waa a strict observer of the Law
(Joseph. Ant. xix. 7, § 3), and he sought with
success the favour of the Jews." It is probable
that it was with this view • he put to death
James the son of Zebedee, and further imprisoned
Peter (Acts xii. 1 sq.). But his sudden death,
which followed immediately afterwards, inter-
rupted his ambitions projects.
In the fourth year of his reign over the whole
of Judaea (a.d. 44), Agrippa attended some
games at Caesarea, held in honour of the Em-
peror. When he appeared in the theatre (Joseph.
Ant. xix. 8, §2, Sevrcp? r&v Stupiuv ypilpq;
Acts xii. 21, Tturrp V'P?) in " a r0De °f silver
stuff" (i{ ipyupov morn^ivni> iraaay, Joseph.;
•VSJjra /9«r(AwV> Acts xii. 21), which shone in
the morning light, his flatterers saluted him as
a god ; and suddenly he was seized with terrible
pains, and being carried from the theatre to the
palace died after five days' agony W iipipta
nimt t$> rrjt ycurrpbt i\yfifiari SwpyturStU
rbv $to» KartOTptifitv, Joseph. Ant. xix. 8;
* J out (Gesch. d. Judentkuvu, p. 430) quotes a legend
that Agrippa burst into tears on reading In a public
service Deut. xvii. 15 ; whereupon the people cried out,
•■ Be not distressed, Agrippa, thou art our brother; " In
virtue, that Is, of his half-descent from the Hasmonae&nB.
* Jost (p. 421, &c.) f who objects that these acts are
inconsistent with tbc known humanity of Agrippa,
entirely neglects the reason suggested by St. Luke
(Acts xii. 3).
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
yty6fitvos o p Ko»\nic<S/8pcuTos ittyv^v, Acts xii.
23 ; cp. 2 Mace. ix. 5-9).
By a singular but now explained confusion
Eusebius (H. E. ii. 10; cp. n. 7 in loco, edd.
Wace and Schaff) reads for the owl, which,
according to Josephus, appeared to Herod as
a messenger of evil (4 y y e A o s Ktucwv), " the
Angel " of the Acts, who was the unseen minister
of the Divine Will (Acts xii. 23, l-ni-rat,tv airrbv
HyytKos Kvptov ; cp. 2 K. xix. 35, LXX.).
Various conjectures have been made as to the
occasion of the festival at which the event took
place. Josephus (/. c.) says that it was " in
behalf of the Emperor's safety," and it has been
supposed that it might have been in connexion
with his return from Britain ; but this is at least
very uncertain (cp. Wieseler, Chron. d. Apost. Zeit.
p. 131 sq.). Josephus mentions also the concourse
" of the chief men throughout the province "
who were present on the occasion ; and thongh
he does not notice the embassy of the Tyrians
and Agrippa's speech, yet his narrative is per-
fectly consistent with both facts.
VII. Herod Agrippa II. ('A7piinroj, N. T. ;
Joseph.) was the son of Herod Agrippa I. and
Cypros, a grand-niece of Herod the Great. At
the time of the death of his father in a.d. 44 he
was at Rome, and his youth (he was 17 years
old) prevented Claudius from carrying out his
first intention of appointing him his father's
successor (Joseph. Ant. xix. 9, §§ 1, 2). Not long
afterwards, however, the Emperor gave him (c.
A.D. 50) the kingdom of Chalcis, which had
belonged to his uncle (who died A. D. 48 ; Joseph.
Ant. xx. 4, § 2 ; B.J. ii. 12, § 1) ; and then
transferred him (a.d. 52) to the tetrarchies
formerly held by Philip and Lysanias (Joseph.
Ant. xx. 6, § 1 ; B. J. ii. 12, § 8), with the title
of king (Acts xxv. 13, 'Ayplrras 6 fiaoiKeis,
xxvi. 2, 7, &c).
Nero afterwards increased the dominions of
Agrippa by the addition of several cities ( Ant.
xx. 6, §4); and he displayed the lavish magni-
ficence which marked his family by costly
buildings at Jerusalem and Berytus, in both
cases doing violence to the feelings of the Jews
{Ant. xx. 7, § 1 1 ; 8, § 4). The relation in which
he stood to his sister Berenice (Acts xxv. 13)
was the cause of grave suspicion (Joseph. Ant.
xx. 6, § 3), which was noticed by Juvenal (Sat.
vi. 155 sq.). In the last Roman war Agrippa
took part with the Romans, and after the fall of
Jerusalem retired with Berenice to Rome, where
he died in the third year of Trajan (a.d. 100),
being the last prince of the house of Herod
(Phot. Cod. 33).
Copper Coin of Herod Airrfppa II. with Tltna,
Obr. AYTOKPTITOC KAICAPCCBA. Head laureate to the
right. Rer. ETO KS BA ArPIIinA deer »). Victory
adTaocinlE to the right : In the field, a Mar.
The appearance of St. Paul before Agrippa
(A.D. 60) offers several characteristic traits.
4 R
Digitized by VjOOQIC
1346
HERODIANS
Agrippa seems to have been intimate with Fes t as
(Joseph. Ant. xx. 7, §11); and it was natural
that the Roman governor should avail himself
of his judgment on a question of what seemed
to be Jewish law (Acts xxv. 18 sq., 26; cp.
Joseph. .A)!*, xx. 8, § 7). The " pomp " (»o\A.i>
ipavraaia) with which the king came into the
audience chamber (Acts xxv. 23) was accordant
with his general bearing ; and the cold irony
with which he met the impassioned words of
the Apostle (Acts xxvi. 27, 28) suits the temper
of one who was contented to take part in the
destruction of his nation. [B. F. W.]
VIII. Berenice. [Berenice.]
IX. Drusilla. [Drusilla.]
HEBO'DIANS (•Hpaotwof). In the account
which is given by St. Matthew (xxii. 15 sq.)
and St. Mark (xii. 13 sq.) of the last efforts
made by different sections of the Jews to obtain
from our Lord Himself the materials for His
accusation, a party under the name of Herodians
is represented as acting in concert with the
Pharisees ' (Matt. xxii. 16 ; Mark xii. 13). St.
Mark mentions the combination of the two
parties for a similar object at an earlier period
(Mark iii. 6) ; and, in another place (viii. 15 ; cp.
Luke xii. 1), he preserves a saying of onr Lord,
in which " the leaven of Herod " is placed in
close connexion with '' the leaven of the Phari-
sees." In the Gospel of St. Luke, on the other
hand, the Herodians are not brought forward at
all by name.
These very scanty notices of the Evangelists
as to the position of the Herodians are not com-
pensated by other testimonies; yet it is not
difficult to fix their characteristics by a reference
to the condition of Jewish feeling in the Apo-
stolic age. There were probably many who saw
in the power of the Herodian family the pledge
of the preservation of their national existence
in the face of Roman ambition. In proportion
as they regarded the independent nationality of
the Jewish people as the first condition of the
fulfilment of its future destiny, they would be
willing to acquiesce in the dominion of men who
were themselves of foreign descent [Herod],
and not rigid in the observance of the Mosaic
ritual. Two distinct classes might thus unite
in supporting what was a domestic tyranny as
contrasted with absolute dependence on Rome :
those who saw in the Herods a protection against
direct heathen rule, which was the one object of
their fear (cp. Juchns, f. 19, ap. Lightfoot, Harm.
Ex. p. 470, ed. Leusd. : " Herodes etiam senem
Hillel magno in honore habuit ; namque hi
homines regem ilium esse non aegre ferebant "),
• Origen (Comm. in Matt. torn. xvil. y 26) regards tbls
combination of the Herodians and Pharisees as a com-
bination of antagonistic parties, the one favourable to
the Roman government (rtxbf yap on iy ry Aay rArt
ot piv 6t0a<TKOtT<? rcAeif iby $6pof Kaurapt tKaXovyro
'HfnaBtavOL irtrh Tvy fir) QtKayrutv towto ■yiytotitu . . .),
and the other opposed to It ; but this view, which Is
only conjectural (tix&), does not offer a complete
eolation of the various relations of the Herodians to the
other parties of the times. Jerome, following Chigeu,
limits tbe meaning of the term yet more : " Cum Btro-
dianit, id cut, militibus Berodit, teu quot UludenUs
Pharitaei, quia liomanit tributa totvebant, Berodianot
vocabant et non divino cultuidcditoi" (Hieron. Comm.
in Matt. xxii. 16).
HEBODLAS,
and those who were inclined to look with satis-
faction upon such a compromise between the
ancient faith and heathen civilisation, as Herod
the Great and his successors had endeavoured to
realise, as the true and highest consummation
of Jewish hopes. b On the one side the Herodians
— partisans of Herod in the widest sense of the
term — were thus brought into union with the
Pharisees ; on the other, with the Sadducees.
Yet there is no reason to suppose that they
endeavoured to form any very systematic har-
mony of the conflicting doctrines of the two
sects, but rather the conflicting doctrines them-
selves were thrown into the background by
what appeared to be a paramount political
necessity. Such coalitions have been frequent
in every age ; and the rarity of the allusions to
the Herodians, as a marked body, seems to show
that this, like similar coalitions, had no enduring
influence as the foundation of party. The
feelings which led to the coalition remained, but
they were incapable of animating the common
action of a united body for any length of time.
[B. F.W.]
HEROD IAS fHpuSW, a female patronymic
from 'HpiiSvs; on patronymics and gentilic
names in ua, see Matthiae, Ok. Gr. §§ 101, 103),
the name of a woman of notoriety in the N. T.,
daughter of Aristobulus, one of the sons of
Marinmne and Herod the Great, and consequently
sister of Agrippa I.
She first married Herod, surnamed Philip,
another of the sons of Mariamne and the first
Herod (Joseph. Ant. xviii. 5, § 4; cp. B. J.
i. 29, § 4), and therefore her full uncle ; then
she eloped from him, during his lifetime (Ant.
ibid.), to marry Herod Antipas, her step-uncle,
who had been long married to, and was still
living with, the daughter of Aeneas or Aretas —
his assumed name — king of Arabia (16. xvii. 9,
§ 4). Thus she left her husband, who was still
alive, to connect herself with a man whose wife
was still alive. Her paramour was indeed less
of a blood relation than her original husband ;
but being likewise the half-brother of that hus-
band, he was already connected with her by
affinity— so close that there was only one case
contemplated in the Law of Moses where it
could be set aside ; namely, when the married
brother had died childless (Lev. xviii. 16 and
xx. 21. See for the exception Deut. xxv. 5 sq.).
Now Herodias had already had one child — Salome
b In this way tbe Herodians were said to regard
Herod (Antipas) as "the Messiah": 'HpwoWot ««■'
cftetPOvf rove \p6vovs ^oav oi ny 'Hpu&jr Xpttrror ctroi
Myoyres w? urroptira* (Vict. Ant. ap. Cram. Cat. in
Man. p. 400). Phllastiius (Boer, xxvlil.) applies the
same belief to Herod Agrippa ; Epipbanlus (Boer, xlx.)
to Herod the Great. Jerome In one place (ad Matt. xxll.
16) calls the Idea " a ridiculous notion of some Latin
writers, which rests on no authority (quod nutquam
ltgimut) ; " and again (Dial. c. Lucifer, xxlll.) mentions
It In a general summary of heretical notions without
hesitation. The belief was. In fact, one of general
sentiment, and not of distinct and pronounced con-
fession.
Others prefer to see In the Herodians " a semi-
Roman and semi-Nationalist party ; " differing, that
is. from the extreme section of the Pharisees who hated
Herod, on the one hand, and from the Nationalists pure,
on the other (cp. Edersheim, IV Lift and Timet of
Jena the Mestiah, II. 384 ; cp. I. 237-240).— [F.]
Digitized by
Google
HERODIAS
— by Philip (Ant. xviii. 5, § 4), and, as he was
still alive, might have had more. Well, there-
fore, may she be charged by Josephus with the
intention of confounding her country's institu-
tions (t"6. xviii. 5, § 4) ; and well may St. John
the Baptist have remonstrated against the enor-
mity of such a connexion with the tetrarch,
whose conscience would certainly seem to have
been a less hardened one (Matt. xiv. 9 says he
" was sorry ;" Mark vi. 20 that he " feared " St.
John, and " heard him gladly ").
The consequences both of the crime, and of
the reproof which it incurred, are well known.
Aretas made war upon Herod for the injury
done to his daughter, and routed him. with the
loss of his whole army (Ant. xviii. 5, § 1). The
head of St. John the Baptist was granted to the
request of Herodias (Matt. xiv. 8-1 1 ; Mark
vi. 24-28). According to Josephus, the execu-
tion took place in a fortress called Machaerus,
on the frontier between the dominions of Aretas
and Herod ; according to Pliny (v. 15), looking
down upon I the Dead Sea from the south (cp.
Robinson, i. 570, note). And it was to the
iniquity of this act, rather than to the immo-
rality of that illicit connexion, that, the his-
torian says, some of the Jews attributed the
defeat of Herod. In the closing scene of her
career, indeed, Herodias exhibited considerable
magnanimity: as she preferred going with
Antipas to Lugdunum,* and there sharing his
exile and reverses, till death ended them, to the
remaining with her brother Agrippa I., and
partaking of his elevation (Ant. xviii. 7, § 2).
There are few episodes in the whole range of
the N. T. more suggestive to the commentator
than this one scene in the life of Herodias.
1. It exhibits one of the most remarkable of
the undesigned coincidences between the N. T.
and Josephus ; that there are some discrepancies
in the two accounts, only enhances their value.
More than this, it has led the historian into a
brief digression upon the life, death, and cha-
racter of the Baptist, which speaks volumes in
favour of the genuineness of that still more
celebrated passage, in which he speaks of
" Jesus," that " wise man, if man He may be
called " (Ant. xviii. 3, § 3 ; cp. xx. 9, § 1, un-
hesitatingly quoted as genuine bv Euseb. H. E.
i. 11).
2. It has been warmly debated whether it
was the adultery, or the incestuous connexion,
that drew down the reproof of the Baptist. It
has been already shown that, either way, the
offence merited condemnation upon more grounds
than one.
3. The birthday feast is another undesigned
coincidence between Scripture and profane his-
tory. The Jews abhorred keeping birthdays as
a pagan custom (Bland on Matt. xiv. 6). On the
other hand, it was usual with the Egyptians
HERON
1347
» This town is probably Lugdunum Convenarom, a
town of Gaul, situated on the right bank of the Garonne,
at the foot of the Pyrenees, now St. Btrtrand de Com-
mingti (Murray, Handb. of France, s. n.) ; Euseblus,
B. B. i. 11, says Vitnne, confounding Antipas with
ArcheUus (see Eu»eb. I.e., edd. Waco and Schaff).
Burton on Matt. xiv. 3, Alford, and modems in general,
prefer Lyont. In Josephos (B. J. 11. 9, } 6), Antipas
Is said to have died in Spain — apparently, from the
context, the land of his exile. A town on the frontiers,
therefore, like the above, would satisfy both passages.
(Gen. xl. 20 ; cp. Joseph. Ant. xii. 4, § 7), with
the Persians (Herod, i. 133), with the Greeks —
even in the case of the dead, whence the Chris-
tian custom of keeping anniversaries of the
martyrs (Bahr ad Herod, iv. 26) — and with the
Romans (Pers. Sat. U. 1-3). Now the Herods
may be said to have gone beyond Rome in the
observance of all that was Roman. Herod the
Great kept the day of his accession ; Antipas —
as we read here — and Agrippa I., as Josephus
tells us (Ant. xix. 7, § 1), their birthdays, with
such magnificence, that the "birthdays of
Herod " ( Herodis dies) had passed into a pro-
verb when Persius wrote (Sat. v. 180).
4. And yet dancing, on these festive occasions,
was common to both Jew and Gentile ; and was
practised in the same way — youths and virgins,
singly, or separated into two bands, but never
intermingled, danced to do honour to their deity,
their hero, or to the day of their solemnity.
Miriam (Ex. xv. 20), the daughter of Jephthah
(Judg. xi. 34), and David (2 Sam. vi. 14) are
familiar instances in Holy Writ: the Carmen
Saeculare of Horace, to quote no more, points
to the same custom amongst Greeks and Romans.
It is plainly owing to the elevation of woman
in the social scale, that dancing in pairs (still
unknown to the East) has come into fashion.
5. The rash oath of Herod, like that of Jeph-
thah in the O. T., has afforded ample discussion
to casuists. It is now ruled that all such oaths,
where there is no reservation, expressed or im-
plied, in favour of the laws of God or man, are
illicit and without force. Solomon had long since
decided thus (IK. ii. 20-24 ; see Sanderson, De
Juram. Wig. Praelect. iii. 16). [E. S. Ff.]
HERO'DION ('HfwoW; Hcrodion), a rela-
tive of St. Paul (top avyytvri fiov ; cognatus), to
whom he sends his salutation amongst the
Christians of the Roman Church (Rom. xvi. 11).
Nothing appears to be certainly known of him.
By Hippolytus, however, he is said to have been
Bishop of Tarsus ; and by Pseudodorothe of
Patra (Winer, s. n.). [G.]
HERON. The rendering in A. T. and R. V.
(but R. V. margin, "ibis") of flB3t$, 'anophah;
Xaptiopiis ; charadrius, in Lev. xi. 19, Deut. xiv
18, where alone it occurs. It would appear to
have been well known, and also to include
various species, from the addition of the words
" after her kind." The translators of the LXX.
do" not seem to have recognised the bird in-
tended as the heron, or they would have used its
familiar name, IpojSios ; but they at least took
it to be an inhabitant of the marshes, for XV"
Spibs is applicable to all birds frequenting
swampy ground (iv xapctopcus), though modern
naturalists apply it to the plover tribe only.
From a fancied derivation of the Greek amxcua,
a species of eagle (6pvis 8' &s avowata Steirraro,
Od. i. 320), from ilBJK, Bochart and others have
supposed that some species of bird of prey was
intended. The guesses of the Talmudists are
equally vague. Gesenius, deriving the name
from C|3K, suggests some irascible bird, and
other commentators weuld make it the goose or
the parrot ; both impossible, as neither of these
classes are found in those countries. Probably
the local or archaic name was unknown to the
dwellers in the city of Alexandria, though they
4 R 8
Digitized by
Google
1348
HESED
had a general idea that a marsh bird was
intended. Weighing all that has been written
on the subject, the rendering of our Versions seems
to have more to recommend it than any other
(see Knobel-Dillmann on Lev. 1. c. MV." com-
pares Assyr. anpatu, which Friedr. Delitzsch
translates " the bird of light "). The heron tribe
is very abundant in Egypt and Palestine , there
are many different species, and they all affect
marshy situations. They are so numerous and
conspicuous that it is unlikely they should
not be mentioned in the list ; while the plover
tribe there are neither numerous, varied, nor
conspicuous. There are no less than seven
species of heron all common in Egypt, and the
same are also found throughout Palestine in
suitable localities. They are the Common Heron
(Ardea cinerea, L.), the Purple Heron (Ardea
purpurea, L»), the Great White Heron {Ardea
alba, I..), found about the Lake of Gennesareth ;
the little Egret (Ardea garzetta, L.), the Buff-
backed Heron (Ardea bubulcus. And.), very com-
mon in pastures with cattle; the Squacco (Ardea
raUoides, Scop.), and the Night Heron (Nycticorax
griseus, L.). Vast flocks of the buff-backed and
squacco herons live and breed in the swamps of
Hnleh, the ancient Herom. The marginal
rendering of R. V., ibis, is fully justified, as
the Purple Ibis always consorts with the last-
named species, but in small numbers, reminding
one of the black members of a flock of sheep in
England. The food of all these birds is the
same, principally fish, frogs, and reptiles. The
smaller species also devour caterpillars and
beetles. [H. B. T.]
HESED ("lpn = grace; B. 'E<r<W, A."Eo-S;
Benesed). The son of Hesed, or Ben-Chesed, was
commissary for Solomon in the district of " the
Arnbboth, Socoh, and all the land of Hepher "
(1 K. iv. 10).
HESH'BON (JISBTI, ? = prudence, al.,
reckoning : B. 'Eofkiv, A. 'Eat$<&r, Josh. xii. 39 ;
Joseph. "£.<rottitav : Hcscb,ri), the capital of the
independent kingdom which Sihon, king of the
Amorites, established north of the Arnon after
he had driven out the Hoabites (Num. xxi.
25-34; Deut. iv. 46; Josh. xii. 2, 5, xiii. 27).
The town passed into the hands of the Israelites
after the battle of Jahnz (Deut. ii. 32), in which
Sihon, who was the first to resist the invaders,
was defeated and killed (Num. xxi. 25 ; Deut. i.
4, ii. 24, 30, iii. 2, 6, xxix. 7; Josh. ix. 10;
Judg. xi. 19, 26 ; Neh. ix. 22 ; Judith v. 15).
It was situated, with its dependent cities, on the
level downs, rmshor, east of the Dead Sea (Josh,
xiii. 17), — the " place for cattle " which the
pastoral tribes, Reuben and Gad, asked Moses to
give them for a possession (Num. xxxii. 3). It
was given to Reuben (Josh. xiii. 10, 17, 21), and
rebuilt by the tribe (Num. xxxii. 37); but was
so near the boundary between Reuben and Gad
(Josh. xiii. 26) that, in the list of towns
assigned to the Merarite Levites, it is said to
have belonged to the latter tribe (Josh. xxi. 39 ;
1 Ch. vi. 81). In the time of Isaiah it was
apparently in the hands of the Moabites, to
whom it originally belonged (Num. xxi. 26) ;
and hence it is mentioned in the prophetic
denunciations against Hoab (Is. xv. 4, xvi.
8, 9; Jer. xlviii. 2, 34, 45, xlix. 3). It is
HESEONITES
usually taken to be the same place as the
Casphor (Xaaipap) or Casphon (XaaQbv) of
1 Mace. v. 26, 36, and the Chasphoma
(Xdarifmna.) of Josephus (Ant. xii. 8, § 3), which
was captured by Judas Maccabaeus (Reland,
Pal. p. 719; Riehm, HWB. s. v.); but the'
operations of Judas, east of Jordan, were appa-
rently confined to the northern districts, and
did not extend southwards as far as Heshbon.
During the reign of Alexander Jannaeus it
was in the possession of the Jews (Joseph.
Ant. xiii. 15, § 4); and under Herod it was
restored, and garrisoned by cavalry (Ant. xv. 8,
§ 5). At the commencement of the Jewish
War it was laid waste by the Jews (B. J. ii. 18,
§ 1), but soon recovered. Ptolemy (v. 17)
mentions it under the name Esbuta ('Eafiovra •,
and the "Arabes Esbonitae" of Pliny (v. 12)
must be referred to this place. Eusebius says
(OS. 3 p. 259, 24) that it was in his day called
Esbus ("Eo-floCs), and was a famous city of
Arabia, situated in the mountains opposite
Jericho, and 20 M.P. from the Jordan. It is
mentioned in the list of the Eparchies of Arabia
under the name "Ea$out (Reland, Pal. p. J 17),
and in the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon
as rioAtt 'E<r0oimuir. According to Abu-I
Feda, it was in the 14th century a small town
and the capital of the Jielka province (Le Strange,
Pal. under the Moslems, p. 456). There are coins
of Nero and Caracalla ; those of the latter
emperor have a temple of Astarte, or a " Deus
I.unus " with a Phrygian cap, and the epigraph
EC BOY.
The ruins of Heshbon (see Tristram, Land of
Israel,* p. 544), now called Hcsban, lie on a
plateau quite bare of trees, about 16 miles
E. of the Pilgrims' Bathing Place in the
Jordan. The nearest water is 'Am Hesban, in
a valley to the W., whence an ancient road
winds up to the plateau. The remains are
those of an important town, but none of them,
excepting the caves, cisterns, and rock cuttings,
tppear to be more ancient than the 2nd cen-
tury a.d. Heaps of fallen masonry cover the
sides of a high Tell, on the top of which there
was a large building ; and on the ground to the
S.W. of this are numerous remains of houses,
some of which appear to have had considerable
architectural pretensions. There are many
caves and rock-hewn cisterns, and, on the S.
side of the Tell, a large ancient reservoir, which
calls to mind the passage in Cant. vii. 4,
" Thine eyes are like the fishpools (R. V. pools)
of Heshbon by the gate of Bath-rabbim." See
Burckhardt, Trav. in Syr. p. 365; Irby and
Mangles, p. 472 ; PEF. Mem. E. Pat. i. 104 sq. ;
Riehm, HWB. s. v. [Bath-rabbim.] [W.]
HE8HMON (ftOt?l}=thriving, fruii/tUness ;
both MSS. of LXX. omit ; Hassemon), a place
named, with others, as lying between Moladab
and Beershcba (Josh. xv. 27), and therefore in
the extreme south of Judah. Nothing further
is known of it ; but may it not be another form
of the name Azmon, given in Num. xxxiv. 4 as
one of the landmarks of the southern boundary
of Judah? [G.] [W.]
HES'BON. [Hezbon.]
HESEONITES. [Hbzronites.]
Digitized by
Google
HETH
HETH (nn, «'.«. Cheth, terror, giant; X*V;
Heth), the forefather of the nation of the
HlTTCTES. In the genealogical tables of Gen. x.
and 1 Ch. i., Heth is stated to be a son of Canaan,
younger than Zidon the firstborn, but preceding
the Jebusite, the Amorite, and the other
Canaanite families. Heth and Zidon alone are
named as persons ; all the rest figure as tribes
(Gen. x. 15 ; 1 Oh. i. 13 ; LXX. rbr Xerrtuoy ;
and so Josephus, Ant. i. 6, § 2 : Vulg. Be-
thaeum).
The Hittites were therefore a Hamite race,
neither of the " country " nor of the " kindred "
of Abraham and Isaac (Gen. xxiv. 3, 4; xxviii.
1, 2)' In the earliest historical mention of the
nation — the beautiful narrative of Abraham's
purchase of the cave of Machpelah — they are
styled, not Hittites, but BenS-Cheth (A. V.
" sons, and children of Heth," Gen. xxiii. 3, 5,
7, 10, 16, 18,20; xxv. 10; xlix. 32). Once we
hear of " daughters of Heth " (xxvii. 46), the
" daughters of the land ; " at that early period
still called, after their less immediate progenitor,
"daughters of Canaan " (xxviii. 1, 8, compared
with xxvii. 46 and xxvi. 34, 35). [G.] [W.]
HETH'LON (j^nn 1|TJ, " the way of Heth-
lon " ; LXX. translates the name ; Hethalon),
the name of a place on the northern border of
the " promised land." It is mentioned only
twice in Scripture (Ezek. xlvii. 15, xlviii. 1).
In all probability the " way of Hethlon " is the
pass at the northern end of Lebanon, from the
sea-coast of the Mediterranean to the great
plain of Hamath, and is thus identical with
" the entrance of Hamath " in Num. xxxiv.
8, &c. See Porter's Five Tears in Damascus,
ii. 356. [J. L.P.] [W.]
HE'ZEKI 0pm, i.e. Hizki, a short form
of Hizkiah, = Hezekiah, strength of Jah;
B. 'A£<ur<f, A. -k<; Hezea), a man in the
genealogies of Benjamin, one of the Bene-Elpaal,
a descendant of Shaaraim (1 Ch. viii. 17).
HEZEKI'AH (njpin, generally Wj?jn, Biz-
kiyahu, and also with initial \ 4n*j5tn* ; LXX.
and Joseph. 'Efcxfat ; Ezechias ; = strength of
Jah, cp. Germ. Gvtthard, Gesen.). 1. Twelfth
king of Judah, son of the apostate Ahaz and
Abi (or Abijah), ascended the throne at the age
of twenty-five, B.C. 726. Since, however, Ahaz
died at the age of thirty-six, some prefer to
make Hezekiah only twenty years old at his
accession (reading 3 for D3), as otherwise he
must have been born when Ahaz was a boy of
eleven years old. This indeed is not impossible
(Hieron. Ep. ad Vitalem. 132, quoted by Bochart,
Geof/r. Sacr. p. 920 : see Keil on 2 K. xviii. 1 ;
Knobel, Jes. p. 22, &c.) ; but, if any change be
desirable, it is better to suppose that Ahaz was
twenty-five and not twenty years old at his
accession (LXX., Syr., Arab., 2 Ch. xxviii. 1),
reading 113 for 3 in 2 K. xvi. 2. That some
change must be made is obvious, since 2 K. xviii.
10, 13 and 2 Ch. xxviii. 1 are not reconcilable
(as they stand) either with each other or with
Assyrian chronology. Ussher's chronology gives
B.C. 726 as the date of Hezekiah's accession.
Wellhausen and Kamphausen fix that date at
B.C. 715. Duncker, who is followed by many
HEZEKIAH
1349
English authorities, selects the date B.C. 728.
From the Assyrian cuneiform inscriptions we
arrive at the dates of three events in this
period : — (1.) Dethronement of Pekah by Tiglath-
pileser, and accession of Hoshea and of Ahaz in
Judah B.C. 734. (2.) Fall of Samaria, B.O. 722.
(3.) Campaign against Hezekiah, B.C. 701. If
these dates be adopted, Ahaz succeeded at the
age of twenty-five, and Hezekiah perhaps at
fifteen. (On these difficult questions, see W. R.
Smith, Prophets of Israel, pp. 416-419 ; Kamp-
hausen, Die Chronologie d. Hebr. KBnige;
Duncker, Hist, of Antiquity, E. T. iii. 16-18 ;
Schrader, The Cuneiform Inscriptions [E. T.],
and the inscriptions quoted and translated in
Secords of the Past [Bagsters].)
Hezekiah was one of the three most perfect
kings of Judah (2 K. xviii. 5 ; Ecclus. xlix. 4).
His first act was to purge, and repair, and
re-open with splendid sacrifices and perfect cere-
monial, the Temple which had been despoiled
and neglected during the careless and idolatrous
reign of his father. This consecration was
accompanied by a revival of the theocratic spirit,
so strict as not even to spare " the high places,"
which, although tolerated by many well-inten-
tioned kings, had naturally been profaned by the
worship of images and Asherahs (2 K. xviii. 4).
On the extreme importance and probable con-
sequences of this measure, see IIion Places.
A still more decisive act was the destruction of a
brazen serpent, said to have been the one used by
Moses in the miraculous healing of the Israelites
(Num. xxi. 9), which had been removed to Je-
rusalem, and had become, " down to those days,"
an object of adoration, partly in consequence, of
its venerable character as a relic, and partly per-
haps from some dim tendencies to the ophiolatry
common in ancient times (Ewald, Qcsch. iii. 622).
To break up a figure so curious and so highly
honoured snowed a strong mind, as well as a
clear-sighted zeal, and Hezekiah briefly justified
his procedure by calling the image JRB'nj, "a
brazen thing," possibly with a contemptuous
play on the word 55TI3, "a serpent." How
necessary this was in such times may be inferred
from the fact that " the brazen serpent " is, or
was, still reverenced in the Church of St. Am-
brose at Milan (Prideaux, Connexion, i. 19, Oxf.
ed.).* Hezekiah abandoned altogether the weak
and faithless policy of his father Ahaz, and re-
verted to the ideas of his great-grandfather,
Uzziah. He strengthened the city, and enabled
it to stand a siege bv improving the water-
supply (2 K. xx. 20 ; 2 Ch. xxxii. 30) ; and of
these patriotic labours we have, probably, a
most interesting confirmation in the engineer's
inscription, discovered in 1880, on the wall of
the rocky tunnel between the spring of Gihon
and the Pool of Siloam. The early part of his
reign was very prosperous. He encouraged
agriculture, the storage of produce, and proper
care for flocks and herds, so that he amassed
treasures which almost recall the days of Solomon
(2 Ch. xxxii. 27-30) ; and men saw in his wealth
and success a Divine reward for his pious deeds
{id. 32). His success was the more remarkable
• " Un serpent de bronze qui selon une croyance
populslre sertit celol que leva MoTse, et qui doit tiffier
a la Jin da nonde." (JKn. de Vltalie, p. 117.)
Digitized by
Google
1350
HEZEKIAH
because at his accession Judah had only been
evacuated six years by the forces of Rezin and
Pekah, and he found " an empty treasury (2 K.
xvi. 8), a ruined peasantry, an unprotected fron-
tier, and a shattered army" (Driver's Isaiah,
p. 48). When the kingdom of Israel had fallen
(B.C. 722), Hezekiah extended his pious endeavours
to Ephraira and Manasseh, and by inviting the
scattered inhabitants to a peculiar Passover
kindled their indignation also against the idola-
trous practices which still continued among
them. This Passover was, from the necessities
of the case, celebrated at an unusual, though not
illegal (Num. ix. 10, 11) time ; and by an excess
of Levitical zeal, it was continued for the un-
precedented period of fourteen days. For these
latter facts the Chronicler (2 Ch. xxix., xxx.,
xxxi.) is our sole authority, and he charac-
teristically narrates them at great length. It
would appear at first sight that this Passover
was celebrated immediately after the purification
of the Temple (see Prideaux, /. c.% but careful
consideration makes it almost certain that it
could not have taken place before the sixth year
of Hezekiah's reign, when the fall of Samaria
had stricken remorseful terror into the heart of
Israel (2 Ch. xxxi. 1 ; xxx. 6, 9, and Keil on
2 K. xviii. 3). The Reformation wrought by
Hezekiah was less thorough and effectual than
that in the days of Josiah, but it pointed in the
right direction, and paved the way for later
efforts. From Is. xxx. 22, xxxi. 7 (which
belong to B.C. 702), some have inferred that this
re-establishment of the pure worship of Jehovah
was not fully oarried out till later in his reign,
when he had triumphed over Assyria.
By a rare and happy providence the most
pious of kings was confirmed in his faithfulness,
and seconded in his endeavours, by the powerful
assistance of the noblest and most eloquent of
prophets. The influence of Isaiah was, however,
not gained without a struggle with the " scorn-
ful " remnant of the former royal counsellors
(Is. xxviii. 14), who in all probability recom-
mended to the king such alliances and com-
promises as would be in unison rather with the
dictates of political expediency, than with that
sole unhesitating trust in the arm of Jehovah
which the Prophets inculcated. The leading
man of this cabinet was Shebna, who, from the
omission of his father's name and the expression
in Is. xxii. 16 (see Blunt, Vndes. Coincidences),
was probably a foreigner, perhaps a Syrian
(Hitzig). At the instance of Isaiah, he seems
to have been subsequently degraded from the
high post of prefect of the palace (which office
was given to Eliakim, Is. xxii. 21), to the in-
ferior, though still honourable, station of state-
secretary (TBD, 2 K. xviii. 18); the further
punishment of exile with which Isaiah had
threatened him (xxii. 18) being possibly forgiven
on his amendment, of which we have some traces
in Is. xxxvii. 2 sq. (Ewald, Qesch. iii. 617).
At the head of a repentant and united people,
Hezekiah ventured to assume the aggressive
against the Philistines, and in a series of victories
not only won back the cities which his father
had lost (2 Ch. xxviii. 18), but even dispossessed
them of their own cities except Gaza (2 K. xviii.
8) and Gath (Joseph. Ant. ix. 13, § 3). This
was his only military enterprise. It was perhaps
to the purposes of this war that he applied the
HEZEKIAH
money which would otherwise have been used
to pay the tribute exacted by Shalmaneser,
according to the agreement of Ahaz with his
predecessor, Tiglath-pileser. When, after the
capture of Samaria, the king of Assyria applied
for this impost, Hezekiah refused it, and in open
rebellion omitted to send even the usual presents
(2 K. xviii. 7), a line of conduct to which he
was doubtless encouraged by the splendid ei-
hortations of his prophetic guide.
We must here pause for a moment to say a
word about Assyria and her kings. According
to Mr. G. Smith's Assyrian Discoveries, the
dates of the formidable conquerors of this epoch
were as follows : —
Tlglath-plleser H.
Shalmaneser IV.
Sargon .
Sennacherib .
B.C.
ro-H?
7M-TO
123-705
704-681
To the first of these four monarchs belongs the
cruel policy of deportation of conquered peoples
and the use of subordinate generals (Tartans).
He took Arpad, received tribute from Menahem,
and was bribed by Ahaz to attack Rezin and
Pekah. He put Pekah to death, elevated Hothea,
deported many Israelites, took Damascus, and
reduced Merodach-baladan to submission. When
Hoshea revolted against his successor, Shal-
maneser IV., that king began the siege of
Samaria, which was completed in 722 by Sargon,
who had perhaps been a rebel general. Sargon
was murdered by an unknown assassin in 705.
In one inscription he calls himself "a subjector
of the land of Judah," but this can only be
an idle boast (Schrader, p. 188). Sennacherib,
whom Nahum calls "the breaker in pieces"
(Nah. ii. 1), was the first of the Sargonidae, and
reigned for twenty-five years.
When Hezekiah refused tribute to Shal-
maneser, instant war was averted by the heroic
and long-continued resistance of the Tyrians
under their king Elulaeus (Joseph. Ant. ix. 14).
against a siege, which was abandoned only in
the fifth year (Grote, Greece, iii. 359 ; 4th ii.),
when it was found to be impracticable. This
must have been a critical and intensely anxious
period for Jerusalem, and Hezekiah used every
available means to strengthen his position and
render his capital impregnable (2 K. xx. 20;
2 Ch. xxxii. 3-5, 30; Is. xxii. 8-11, xxxiii IS;
and to these events Ewald also refers Ps. xlviii.
13). But while all Judaea trembled with antici-
pation of Assyrian invasion, and while Shebna
and others were relying " in the shadow of
Egypt," Isaiah's brave heart did not fail, and he
even denounced the wrath of God against the
proud and sinful merchant-city (Is. xxiii.), which
now seemed to be the main bulwark of Judaea
against immediate attack.
It was probably during the siege of Samaria
that Shalmaneser died, and was succeeded by
Sargon, who, jealous of Egyptian in6uence in
Judaea, sent an army under a Tartan or general
(Is. xx. 1), which penetrated Egypt (Nah. iii.
8-10) and destroyed No-Amon ; although it is
clear from Hezekiah's rebellion (2 K. xviii. 7)
that it can have produced bat little permanent
impression. Sargon's capture of Hamath, and
the defeat of Egypt at Raphia (B.c. 720), were
practically forgotten in the course of six or seven
years during which he was engaged in other
Digitized by
Google
HEZEKIAH
directions. Sargon, in the tenth year of his
reign (which is the fourteenth year of the reign
of Hezekiah), made an expedition to Palestine ;
bat his annals make no mention of any conquests
from Hezekiah on this occasion, and he seems to
have occupied himself in the siege of Ashdod
(Is. xi. 1) and in the inspection of mines (Rosen-
miiller, BiU. Qeogr. ix.). This must therefore
be the expedition alluded to in 2 K. xviii. 13,
Is. xxxvi. 1 ; an expedition which is merely
alluded to, as it led to no result. But if the
Scripture narrative is to be reconciled with the
records of Assyrian history, it seems necessary
to make a transposition in the text of Isaiah
(and therefore of the Book of Kings). That
some such expedient must be resorted to, if the
Assyrian history is trustworthy, is maintained
by Dr. Hincks in a paper On the rectification of
Chronology, which the newly-discovered Apis-steles
render necessary. "The text," he says, "as it
originally stood, was probably to this effect:
2 K. xviii. 13, ' Now in the fourteenth year of
king Hezekiah the king of Assyria came up'
[alluding to the attack mentioned in Sargon's
Annals] ; then followed xx. 1-19, ' In those days
was king Hezekiah sick unto death,' &c. After
which came, ' And Sennacherib, king of Assyria,
came up against all the fenced cities of Judah,
and took them,' &c., xviii. 13-xix. 37" (Dr.
Hincks, in Journ. of Sacr. Lit., Oct. 1858). Per-
haps some later transcriber, unaware of the
earlier and unimportant invasion, confused the
allusion to Sargon in 2 K. xviii. 13 with the
detailed story of Sennacherib's attack (2 K.
xviii. 14 — xix. 37) ; and, considering that the
account of Hezekiah's illness broke the con-
tinuity of the narrative, removed it to the end.
According to this scheme, Hezekiah's dangerous
illness (2 K. xx. ; Is. xxxviii. ; 2 Ch. xxxii. 24)
nearly synchronised with Sargon's futile In-
vasion, in the fourteenth year of Hezekiah's
reign, eleven years before Sennacherib's invasion.
That it must have preceded the attack of Senna-
cherib is nearly obvious from the promise in
2 K. xx. 6, as well as from modern discoveries
(Layard, A*m. ^ Bab. i. 145) ; and such is the
view adopted by the Rabbis (Seder Olam, cap.
cxiii.), Ussher, and by most commentators,
except Vitringa and Gesenius (Keil, ad loc. ;
Prideaux, i. 22). There seems to be no ground
whatever for the vague conjecture so confidently
advanced (Winer, s. v. Hiskias; Jahn, Hebr.
Common. § xli.) that the king's illness was the
same plague which had destroyed the Assyrian
army. The word } , riE> is not elsewhere applied
to the plague, but to carbuncles and inflam-
matory ulcers (Ex. ix. 9 ; Job ii. 1, &c). Heze-
kiah, whose kingdom was in a dangerous crisis,
who had at that time no heir (for Manasseh was
not born till long afterwards, 2 K. xxi. 1), and
who regarded death as the end of existence
(Is. xxxviii.), " turned his face to the wall and
wept sore " at the threatened approach of dis-
solution. God had compassion on his anguish,
and heard his prayer. Isaiah had hardly left
the palace when he was ordered to promise the
king immediate recovery, and a fresh lease of
life, ratifying the promise by a sign, and curing
the boil by a plaster of figs, which were often
used medicinally in similar cases (Gesen. Thes.
i. 311 ; Celsius, Hierobot. ii. 377 ; Bartholinus,
De Morbis Biblicis, x. 47> What was the exact
HEZEKIAH
1351
nature of the disease we cannot say ; according
to Meade, it was fever terminating in abscess.
For some account of the retrogression of the
shadow on the sundial of Ahaz, see Dial. On
this remarkable passage we must be content to
refer the reader to Carpzov, App. Crit. p. 351 sq. ;
Winer, s. w. Hiskias and Uhren ; Rawlinson,
Herod, ii. 332 sq. ; the elaborate notes of Keil
on 2 K. xx. ; Rosenmiiller and Gesenius on Is.
xxxviii., and especially Ewald, Gesch. iii. 638.
Various ambassadors came with letters and
gifts to congratulate Hezekiah on his recovery
(2 Ch. xxxii. 23), and among them (perhaps
about B.C. 713) an embassy from Merodach-
baladan (or Berodach, 2 K. xx. 12 ; i BiXaSas,
Joseph. /. c), the viceroy of Babylon, the Mardo-
kempados of Ptolemy's canon. The ostensible
object of this mission was to compliment Hezekiah
on his convalescence (2 K. xx. 12 ; Is. xxxix. 1),
and " to inquire of the wonder that was done in
the land " (2 Ch. xxxii. 31), a rumour of which
could not fail to interest a people devoted to
astrology. But its real purpose was to discover
how far an alliance between the two powers
was possible or desirable, for Mardokempados,
no less than Hezekiah, was in apprehension of
the Assyrians. In fact Sargon expelled this
bold patriot from the throne of Babylon (Records
of the Past, vii. 41, 46), although after the
assassination of Sargon he seems to have re-
turned and re-established himself for six months,
at the end of which he was murdered by
Belibos (Dr. Hincks, I. c. ; Rosenmiiller, BiU.
Qeogr. ch. viii. ; Layard, Nin. $ Bab. i. 141).
Community of interest made Hezekiah receive
the overtures of Babylon with unconcealed
gratification ; and, perhaps, to enhance the
opinion of his own importance as an ally, he dis-
played to the messengers the princely treasures
which he and his predecessors had accumulated.
The mention of such rich stores is an additional
argument for supposing these events to have
happened before Sennacherib's invasion (see 2 K.
xviii. 14-16), although they are related after
them in the Scripture historians. If ostentation
were his motive, it received a terrible rebuke,
for he was informed by Isaiah that from the
then tottering and subordinate province of
Babylon, and not from the mighty Assyria,
would come the ruin and captivity of Judah
(Is. xxxix. 5). This prophecy and the one of
Micah (Mic. iv. 10) are the earliest definition
of the locality of that hostile power, where the
clouds of exile so long threatened (Lev. xxvi. 33 ;
Deut. iv. 27, xix. 3) were beginning to gather.
It is an impressive and fearful circumstance that
the moment of exultation was chosen as the
opportunity for warning, and that the prophecies
of the Assyrian deliverance are set side by side
with those of the Babylonish Captivity (Davi-
son On Prophecy, p. 256). The weak friend was
to accomplish that which was impossible to the
powerful foe. But, although pride was the sin
thus vehemently checked by the Prophet, Isaiah
was certainly not blind to the political motives
(Joseph. Ant. x. 2, § 2) which made Heze-
kiah so complaisant to the Babylonian ambas-
sadors. Into those motives he had inquired
in' vain, for the king met that portion of his
question ("What said these men?") by emphatic
silence. Hezekiah's meek answer to the stern
.denunciation of future woe has been most
Digitized by
Google
1352
HEZEKIAH
unjustly censored as " a false resignation which
combines selfishness with silliness " (Newman,
Hebr. Hon. p. 274). On the contrary it merely
implies a conviction that God's decree could not
be otherwise than just and right, and a natural
thankfulness for even a temporary suspension of
its inevitable fulfilment.
Sargon was succeeded (B.O. 705) by his son
Sennacherib, whose two invasions occupy the
greater part of the Scripture records concern-
ing the reign of Hezekiah. The first of these
took place in the third year of Sennacherib
(B.C. 702), and occupies only four verses (2 K.
xriii. 13-16), though the route of the advancing
Assyrians may be traced in Is. x. 5, xi. The
rumour of the invasion redoubled Hezekiah's
exertions, and he prepared for a siege by pro-
viding offensive and defensive armour, stopping
up the wells, and (perhaps at this time) divert-
ing the watercourses, conducting the water of
Gihou into the city by a subterranean canal
(Ecclus. xlviii. 17. For a similar precaution
taken by the Mohammedans, see Will. Tyr.
viii. 7, Keil). But the main hope of the political
faction was the alliance with Egypt, and they
seem to have sought it by presents and private
entreaties (Is. xxx. 6), especially with a view to
obtaining chariots and cavalry (Is. xxxi. 1-3),
which was the weakest arm of the Jewish ser-
vice, as we see from the derision which it excited
(2 K. xviii. 23). Such overtures kindled Isaiah's
indignation, and Shebna may have lost his high
office by recommending them. The Prophet
clearly saw that Egypt was too weak and faith-
less to be serviceable, and the applications to
Pharaoh (who is compared by Rabshakeh to one
of the weak reeds of his own river) implied a
want of trust in the help of God. He says with
bitter scorn :
" Egypt belpeth Id vain, and to no purpose :
Therefore have I called her Bahab that titUtk stm."
(Is. xxx. 1, R. V.)
But Isaiah did not disapprove of the sponta-
neously proffered assistance of the tall and
warlike Ethiopians (Is. xviii. 2, 7, ace. to
Ewald's tiansl.) ; because he may have regarded
it as a providential aid.
The account given of this first invasion in the
Annuls of Scnnaclierib is that he attacked Heze-
kiah because the Ekronites had sent their king
PaJiya (or " Haddiya " ace. to Sir H. Rawlinson)
as a prisoner to Jerusalem (cp. 2 K. xviii. 8);
that he took forty-six cities ("all the fenced
cities " in 2 K. xviii. 13 is apparently a general
expression, cp. xix. 8) and 200,000 prisoners:
that he besieged Jerusalem with mounds (cp.
2 K. xix. 32) ; and although Hezekiah promised
to pay 800 talents of silver (of which perhaps
30u only were ever paid) and 30 of gold (2 K.
xviii. 14 ; Is. xxxvi. 1 ; but see Layard, Sin. <$■
Bah. p. 145), yet not content with this he
mulcted bim of a part of his dominions, and
gave them to the kings of Ekron, Ashdod, and
Gaza (Kawlinson, Herod, i. 475 sq.). So im-
portant was this expedition that Demetrius, the
Jewish historian, even attributes to Sennacherib
the Great Captivity (Clem. Alex. Strom, p. 146,
I'd. Sylb.). In the inscription on Bellino's Cylin-
der in the British Museum and in the Bull-
inscription of Kouyunjik, Sennacherib boasts
that he first attacked and reduced the cities of
HEZEKIAH
Phoenicia, and those in the Shephelah ; that he
reduced Ekron, which had gent to Hezekiah its
king Padi, who remained loyal to Assyria ; that
he hewed and trampled down forty-six of Heze-
kiah's cities, took a vast amount of spoil, deported
200,150 of his people, and shut him up in Jeru-
salem " like a bird in a cage ;" and finally, on his
submission, carried off to Nineveh his daughters,
his harem, and his eunuchs. In almost every
particular this account agrees with the notice
in Scripture, and we may see a reason for so
great a sacrifice on the part of Hezekiah in the
glimpse which Isaiah gives us of his capital
city driven by desperation into licentious and
impious mirth (xxii. 12-14). This campaign
must at least have had the one good result of
proving the worth lessness of the Egyptian
alliance ; for at a place called Altagu (( the
Eltekon of Josh. xv. 59) Sennacherib (B.C. 701)
inflicted an overwhelming defeat on the com-
bined forces of Egypt and Ethiopia, which had
come to the assistance of Ekron. But Isaiah
regarded the purchased treaty as a cowardly
defection, and the sight of his fellow-citizens
gazing peacefully from the house-tops on the
bright array of the car-borne and quivered Assy-
rians, filled him with indignation and despair
(Is. xxii. 1-7, if the latest explanations of this
chapter be correct).
Hezekiah's bribe (or fine) brought a temporary
release, for the Assyrians marched into Egypt,
where, if Herodotus (ii. 141) and Josephus (Ant.
x. 1-3) are to be trusted, they advanced without
resistance to Pelusium, owing to the hatred of
the warrior-caste against Sethos the king-priest
of Pthah, who had, in his priestly predilections,
interfered with their prerogatives. In spite of
this advantage, Sennacherib was forced to raise
the siege of Pelusium, by the advance of Tirhakah
or Tarakes, the ally of Sethos and Hezekiah,
who afterwards united the crowns of Egypt and
Ethiopia. This famous Ethiopian hero, who
had extended his conquests to the Pillars of Her-
cules (Strab. xv. 472), was indeed a formidable
antagonist. His deeds are recorded in a temple
at Medinet Haboo, but the jealousy of the Mem-
phites (Wilkinson, Anc. Egypt, i. 141 [1st ed.])
concealed his assistance, and attributed the de-
liverance of Sethos to the miraculous interposi-
tion of an army of mice (Herod, ii. 141). This
story may have had its source, however, not in
jealousy, but in the nse of a mouse as the
emblem of destruction (Horapoll. Hierogl. i. 50;
Rawlinson, Ihirod. ad loc), and of some sort of
disease or plague (? 1 Sam. vi. 18 ; Jahn, Arch.
Bibl. § 185). The legend doubtless gained ground
from the extraordinary circumstances which
afterwards ruined the army of Sennacherib. We
say afterwards, because, however much the
details of the two occurrences may have been
confused, we cannot agree with the majority of
writers (Prideaux, Bochart, Michaelis, Jahn,
Keil, Newman, &c.) in identifying the flight of
Sennacherib from Pelusium with the event de-
scribed in 2 K. xix. We prefer to follow Josephus
in making them allude to distinct events.
Returning from his futile expedition (Sxpeuc-
tos lwfx6pv<r*, Joseph. Ant. x. 1, § 4) Senna-
cherib " dealt treacherously " with Hezekiah
(Is. xxxiii. 1) by attacking the stronghold of
Lachish. The siege of Lachish ( Um-Lakis) and
its submission are represented on the famous
Digitized by
Google
HEZEKIAH
bas-relief in the British Museum (Schroder,
p. 287; Stade, Geschichte, i. 620; Layard,
Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 148-152). This was
the commencement of that second invasion, re-
specting which we have such full details in
2 K. xriii. 17 sq. ; 2 Ch. xxxii. 9 sq. ; Is. xxxvi.
That there mere two invasions (contrary to the
opinion of Layard, Bosanquet, Vance Smith, &c.)
is clearly proved by the details of the first given
in the Assyrian annals (see Rawlinson, Herod.
i. p. 477 ; 'Schrader, pp. 208, 301 ; Records of
the Past, i. 35, vii. 59). Although the Annals
of Sennacherib, on the great cylinder in the
British Museum, reach to the end of his eighth
year, and this second invasion belongs to his
fifth year (B.C. 898, th& twenty-eighth year of
Hezekiah), yet no allusion to it has been found.
So shameful a disaster as that in which it
ended was naturally concealed by national vanity.
From Lachish he had sent against Jerusalem an
army under his general (Tartan), his chamberlain
(Rab-Saris), and his cup-bearer the orator Rab-
shakeh, with a blasphemous and insulting sum-
mons to surrender, deriding Uezekiah's hopes
of Egyptian succour, and apparently endeavour-
ing to inspire the people with distrust of his
religious innovations (2 K. xviii. 22, 25, 30).
The reiteration and peculiarity of the latter
argument, together with the Rabshakeh's fluent
mastery of Hebrew (which he used to tempt the
people from their allegiance by a glowing pro-
mise, w. 31, 32), give countenance to the supposi-
tion that he was an apostate Jew. Hezekiah's
ministers were thrown into anguish and dismay ;
but the undaunted Isaiah hurled back threaten-
ing for threatening with unrivalled eloquence
and force. He even prophesied that the fires of
Tophet were already burning in expectancy of
the Assyrian corpses which were destined to
feed their flame. Meanwhile Sennacherib, hav-
ing taken Lachish (Um-Lakis\ was besieging
Libnah (Tell es-Safiah, 12 miles nearer Jeru-
salem), when, alarmed by a " rumour " of Tirha-
kah's advance in person (to avenge the defeat at
Altaqu ?), he was forced to relinquish once more
his immediate designs, and content himself with
a defiant letter to Hezekiah. Whether on the
occasion he encountered and defeated the Ethio-
pians (as Prideaux precariously infers from
Is. xx. : Connex. i. p. 26), or not, we cannot tell.
The next event of the campaign, about which
we are informed, is that the Jewish king with
simple piety prayed to God with Sennacherib's
letter outspread before him (cp. I Mace. iii. 48),
and received a prophecy of immediate deliver-
ance. Accordingly " that night the Angel of
the Lord went out and smote in the camp of the
Assyrians 185,000 men." "The Biblical and
Assyrian accounts of Sennacherib's campaign,"
says Prof. Driver, " while in substantial agree-
ment, are both imperfect, and may be combined
in different ways. The essential difference be-
tween them is that while one narrates the entire
campaign [viz. (1) the subjection of the Phoeni-
cian cities ; (2) the successes against Ekron and
the Egyptian forces ; (3) the hostilities against
Judah], the other deals only with the stage
affecting Judah, and dwells principally upon
two episodes (2 K. xviii. 17 — xix. 7 ; xix. 8-3G),
belonging in fact to a fifth and subsequent stage
upon which the Assyrian account is silent "
(Isaiah, p. 82).
HEZEKIAH
1353
There is no doubt that some secondary cause
was employed in the accomplishment of this
event. We are certainly " not to suppose," as
Dr. Johnson observed, "that the Angel went
about with a sword in his hand stabbing them
one by one, but that some powerful natural
agent was employed." The Babylonish Talmud
and some of the Targuins attribute it to storms
of lightning (Vitringa, Vogel, &c); Prideaux,
Heine (de causa Strag. Assyr.^, and Faber to the
simoom ; R. Jose, Ussher, Preiss (de causa
clad. Assyr.\ be., to a nocturnal attack by
Tirhakah ; Paulas to a poisoning of the waters ;
and finally Josephus, followed by an immense
majority of ancient and modern commentators,
including even Keil, to the pestilence (cp. 2 Sam.
xxiv. 15, 16). This would be a cause not only
adequate (Justin, xix. 11; Diodor. xix. p. 434:
see the other instances quoted by Rosenmuller,
Winer, Keil, Jahn, &c), but most probable in
itself from the crowded and terrified state of the
camp. There is therefore no necessity to adopt
the ingenious conjectures by which Dbderlein,
Koppe, and Wessler endeavour to get rid of the
large number 185,000.
After this reverse Sennacherib fled precipi-
tately to Nineveh, where he revenged himself on
as many Jews as were in his power (Tob. i. 18),
and after twenty years (not fifty-five days, as
Tobit says, i. 21) was murdered by two of his sons
as he went to pray before his idol Dagon (Tob.) or
Nisroch (Assarac?) his god (B.C. 681). He cer-
tainly lived till B.C. 680, for his 22nd year is
mentioned on a clay tablet (Rawlinson, I.e.) ; he
must therefore have survived Hezekiah by some
seventeen years. It is possible that several of
the Psalms (e.g. xlvi.-xlviii., lxxvi.) allude to his
discomfiture.
Hezekiah only lived to enjoy for about one
year more his well-earned peace and glory. He
slept with his fathers after a reign of twenty-
nine years, in the 56th year of his age (B.C. 697),
and was buried with great honour and universal
mourning "in the chiefest of the sepulchres (or
" the road leading up to the sepulchres," {»
iraffdaet rdfwv, I.XX., because, asThenius con-
jectures, the actual sepulchres were full) of the
sons of David " (2 Ch. xxxii. 33). He had found
time for many works of peace in the noble and
almost blameless course of his troubled life, and
to his pious labours we are indebted for at least
one portion of the present canon (Prov. xxv. 1 ;
Ecclus. xlviii. 17 sq.). He can have no finer
panegyric than the words of the son of Sirach,
" Even the kings of Judah failed, for they for-
sook the law of the Most High ; alt except
David, and Ezekias, and Josias failed." In addi-
tion to his many merits, as a king faithful to
the covenant of Jehovah, and as one who followed
in the main the guidance of the great Prophet
Isaiah, Hezekiah did much for his kingdom in
every way. He was a poet, and one famous
song is preserved in Isaiah (xxxviii. 9-20), and
by his employment of scribes to copy fragments
of early literature he helped to preserve the
precious wisdom of earlier days.
Besides the many authors and commentators
who have written on this period of Jewish his-
tory (on which much light has been thrown
by Sir H. Layard, Sir G. Wilkinson, Sir H.
Rawlinson, Dr. Hincks, Prof. Sayce, Schrader,
and other scholars who have studied the Nineveh
Digitized by
Google
1354
HEZION
remains), see for continuous lives of Hezekiah,
Josephus (Ant. ix. 13 — ix. 2), Prideaux (Con-
nexiun, &c. i. 16-30), Jahn (Hebr. Com. § xli.),
Winer (s. v. Miskias), Ewald (Qesch. iii. 614-644,
2nd ed.), and Stanley (History of the Jcuish
Church, Lecture xxxviii.).
2. Son of Neariah, one of the descendant! of
the royal family of Judah (1 Ch. iii. 23).
3. The same name, though rendered in the
A. V. HizglAH, is fonnd in Zeph. i. 1.
4. Ater-of-Hez. [Ateb,] [F. W. F.]
HEZ-ION(|Wn = sight; B. 'A(*lr, A. and
Luc. 'A(ah\ ; Hezion), a king of Aram (Syria),
father of Tabrimon, and grandfather of Ben-
hadad I. He and his father are mentioned only
in 1 ,K. xt. 18, and their names are omitted
by Josephus. In the absence of all informa-
tion, the natural suggestion is that he is iden-
tical with Rezon, the contemporary of Solomon,
in 1 K. xi. 23 ; the two names being not dis-
similar in Hebrew, and still more so in other
Versions (cp. Arab, and Peshitto on the
latter passage) ; and indeed this conclusion has
been adopted by some translators and commen-
tators (Junius, Kiihler, Dathe, Ewald, Kloster-
mann, &c). Against it are : (a.) That the number
of generations of the Syrian kings would then be
one less than those of the contemporary kings
of Judah. But then the reign of Abijam was
only three years, and in fact Jeroboam outlived
both Rehoboam and his son. (6.) The statement
of Nicolaus of Damascus (Joseph. Ant. vii. 5,
§ 2), that from the time of David for ten
generations the kings of Syria were one dynasty,
each king taking the name of Hadad, " as did
the Ptolemies in Egypt." But this would
exclude, not only Hezion and Tabrimon, but
Rezon, unless we may interpret the last
sentence to mean that the official title Of Hadad
was held in addition to the ordinary name of
the king. [Rezon; Tabrimon.] [G.] [W.]
HE'ZIRO , jn=»t«'n«; A. U(tip,B.' Attain
Hezir). 1. A priest in the time of David,
leader of the 17th monthly course in the service
(1 Ch. xxiv. 15).
2. ('HS>(p; Hazir.) One of the heads of
the people (laymen) who sealed the solemn
covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x. 20).
HEZ'RAI (TlVn, i.e. according to the Keri
of the Masorets, bnt the original reading of the
text, Ketib, has nVfl = Hezro ; BA. 'Aaapoi ;
Esrai), a native of Carmel, perhaps of the
southern one, and in that case possibly once
a slave or adherent of Nabal ; one of the thirty
heroes of David's guard (2 Sam. xxiii. 35). In
the parallel list the name appears as
HEZ'BO( - mn; B. 'HoV, K. 'Hatpal, A.
'Aaapal; Asro), in 1 Ch. xi. 37. Kennicott
however (Dissertation, pp. 207-8) decides, on
the almost unanimous authority of the ancient
Versions, that Hezrai is the original form of the
name.
HEZItON (PVPI; B. 'Aap&v, in Num. A.
'Aapdfi ; Besrori). 1. A son of Reuben (Gen.
xlvi. 9 ; Ex. vi. 14), who founded the family of
the Hezronites (Num. xxvi. 6).
2. A son of Pharez, and one of the direct
HIDDKKKL
ancestors of David (Gen. xlvi. 12, 'Aapdv ; Ruth
iv. 18, B. 'Eipuv, A. -p, and so in Matt. i. 18.
In 1 Ch. ii. 9, 18, 21, 25, B. 'Z<rtfxiv,\. 'Zoota/i;
ii. 5, iv. 1, B. 'Apauv : Vulg. Hesron, in Ruth
Esron). [T. E. B.] [W.]
HEZ'RON (ji"lSP! = enclosed; B. 'Aamp&v,
A. 'KiTpiip ; Chetzron), a place on the south border
of Judah between Kadesh-barnea and Addar
(Josh. xv. 3). in Num. xxxiv. 4, the name is given
as Hazar-addar. Riehm suggests (s. t>.) that
Hazar, or Hezron, and Addar were so near each
other that they could be called one place, Hazar-
addar. In the list of towns in the Negeb (Josh,
xv. 25), A. V. has " Kerioth, and Hezron, which is
Hazor;" bnt the Hebrew text, which is followed
by R. V., has only one name, Kerioth-Hezron :
whether this be the same place as the Hezron
of v. 3, is uncertain. Conder has suggested
(Hbk. p. 257), as a possible identification, Jebel
Bad/tird, near 'Abdeh, Eboda, at the southern
extremity of the northern and highest terrace
of the Negeb, which he would make the
southern limit of Judah. But this is too far,
quite 50 miles, from Mount Hor ; and it seems
more probable that the Promised Land extended
to the edge of the mountain plateau of Jebel
Magrdh, which rises abruptly from the desert
of et-Tih, and forms a natural boundary south-
ward (Palmer, Desert of the Exodus, map).
In this direction, then, a search should be made
for Hezron. Riehm (s. t>.) identifies Kerioth-
Hezron with Kh. ei-Kureitein, N. of Tell 'Arid,
but the boundary of Judah must have been a
long way to the south of this place. [ W.j
HEZRONITES, THE Origin ; i 'Aapu-
rtt; Hesronitae). A branch of the tribe of
Reuben (Num. xxvi. 21). The ed. of 161 1 spelt
Hesronites.
HXD'DAI (n7); A. 'AWo/, B. omiU:
Heddai), one of the thirty-seven heroes of
David's guard (2 Sam. xxiii. 30), described as
" of the torrents of Gaash." In the parallel
list of 1 Ch. (xi. 32) the name is given as
HCRAI. Kennicott (Dissert, p. 194) decides in
favour of " Hurai " on grounds for which the
reader must be referred to his work.
HTDDEKEL (S?f1 ; Tlypis, Ttypis-'tSoc
K(\ ; Tygris, Tigris'), one of the rivers of Eden,
the river which " goeth eastward to Assyria "
(Gen. ii. 14), and which Daniel calls "the great
river" (Dan. x. 4), is rightly identified by the
LXX. with the Tigris. As the Akkadian and
Assyro-Babylonian forms are Idigna and Jdiklat
or Diktat respectively, it is difficult to account
for the initial l"l, except by supposing that these
two forms are weakened from Hidigna and
Hidiklat. The form Digtath (the first syllable
having disappeared) occurs in the Targums of
Onkelos and Jonathan, in Josephus (Ant. Jud. i.
1), in the Armenian Ensebius (Chron. Can. Pars,
i. c. 2), in Zonaras (Ann. i. 2), and in the Arme-
nian Version of the Scriptures. It is hardened
to DiglU (Diglito) in Pliny (H. N. vi. 27). The
form now used by the inhabitants of Mesopotamia
is Dijlah.
Strabo (xi. 14, § 8), Pliny (loc. cit.), and other
writers tell us that the river received its
designation from its rapidity, the word Tigris
Digitized by
Google
HIEL
(Tigra) meaning, in the Medo-Persic language,
'• an arrow." As far as the reference to its
rapidity goes, this is not improbably correct, one
of the ideographs for the stream being (id)
halhala, "the swiftly-running stream." There
is hardly any doubt that the first component
part of the name Idigna or Miklat is the Ak-
kadian word for " river " (hidi, hid, or id, also
abbreviated to I). On one of the tablets there
is a reference to the properties and names of the
various rivers, that referring to the Tigris being,
" Let him explain the Tigris as the bringer of
fertility " (babilat nuhii). Another Semitic
name of the river, when expressed by the ideo-
graph id Halhala, was Ammu. The star of the
river Tigris or Hiddekel was identified with
Anunitu", the goddess of one of the Sipparas
(Sipar or Sippara of Anunitu). For its course
see under Tigms. [G. R.] [T. G. P.]
HI'EL (VtCIT, perhaps for $>N'IT = Qod lives,
[Ges.], or for ta'ntt= brother of Qod [cp. Bath-
gen, Beitr. z. Sem. Religionsgeschichte, p. 156];
B. 'Ax«i^A, A. -i- ; Hief), a native of Bethel,
who rebuilt Jericho in the reign of Ahab
(1 K. xvi. 34); and in whom was fulfilled
the curse pronounced by Joshua (Josh. vi. 26).
Strabo speaks of this cursing of a destroyed
city as an ancient custom, and instances the
curses imprecated by Agamemnon and Croesus
(Grot. Annot. ad Josh. vi. 26) ; Masius compares
the cursing of Carthage by the Romans (Pol.
Syn.). To rebuild was an impiety (cp. Dill-
mann* in loco). The term Bethelite f ?$n JV3)
is here rendered house or place of cursing (Ar.>
Syr., and Chald. Verss.), nfon 1V3 (Jon.) ; but
there seems no reason for questioning the accu-
racy of the LXX. i Bai9r)\elrr)5, which is ap-
proved by most commentators and sanctioned by
Gesen. {Lex. s. v.). The rebuilding of Jericho
was perhaps an intrusion upon the kingdom of
Jehoshaphat, but more emphatically a mark of
the irreligiousness of the time (Speaker's Comm.
»n 1 K. /. c). [T. E. B.] [F.]
HIBRAPOLIS ('WpdVoAti = sacred city).
This place is mentioned only once in Scripture,
and that incidentally, viz. in Col. iv. 13, where
its church is associated with those of C'OLOSflAE
and Laodicea. Such association is just what
we should expect ; for the three towns were all
in the valley of the Lycus, and within a few
miles of one another. It is probable that
Hierapolis was one of the " inlustres Asiae
urbes (Tac. Ann. xiv. 27) which, with
Laodicea, were simultaneously desolated by an
earthquake about the time when Christianity
was established in this district. There is little
doubt that the Church of Hierapolis was
founded at the same time as that of Colossae,
and that its characteristics in the Apostolic
period were the same. Ramsay identifies Sibila
as the native name of Hierapolis (Histor. Geo-
graphy of Asia Minor, p. 450). Its modern name
is Pambuk-Kalesi. The most remarkable feature
of the neighbourhood consists of the hot cal-
careous springs, which have deposited the vast
and singular incrustations noticed by travellers.
See, for instance, Chandler. Irav. in Asia Minor
(1817), i. 264-272 ; Hamilton, Res. in A. M.
HIGGAION
1355
(1842), i. 507-522 ; Lewin, Life and Epistles
of St. Paul, i. 204 sq. The situation of Hiera-
polis is extremely beautiful ; and its ruins are
considerable, the theatre and gymnasium being
the most conspicuous. [J. S. H.] [W.j
HIER'E-EL ('I«p«<A ; Jeelech), 1 Esd. ix. 21.
[Jehieu]
HLER'EMOTH ('Uptiu&B; Erimoth). 1. 1
Esd. ix. 27. [Jeremoth.] 2. (Jerimoth.)
1 Esd. ix. 30. [Ramoth.]
HIERLE'LUS (A. 'UfrriXot, i.e. Iezrielos ;
B. 'U(6piie\or : Jezrelus), 1 Esd. ix. 27. This
answers to Jehiel in the list of Ezra x. ; but
whence the A. V. obtained the form of the name
does not appear
HIER'MAS (A. 'Upiuls, B. 'Upiii; Hernias).
1 Esd. ix. 26. [Ramiah.]
HIEBON'YMTJS CltpArv/ua ; ffieronymus),
a Syrian general in the time of Antiochus V.
Eupator (2 Mace. xii. 2). The name was made
distinguished among the Asiatic Greeks by
Hieronymus of Cardia, the historian of Alex-
ander's successors. [B. F. W.]
HIERUSALEM, an early form (1611) for
Jerusalem.
HIGGAION, or, more accurately, HiggdySn,
occurs in the Hebrew text of the Psalms twice
(ix. 17 ; xcii. 4). It, and the words akin to
it, have various significations, all of which
however can be reduced to the common root
Hagth (Din), — to think, to think aloud, to
speculate, to speculate philosophically, to sepa-
rate, to pronounce, to play fantasias. Most of
these significations are to be met with in the
Bible itself; others are found either in the
canonical or non-canonical Mishnah (Mathnlthd
BaraitS), and others again in the writers of the
Middle Ages.
The word Higgayon is also found in com-
position, i>. with the word Shir ("If) preceding
it. In that case, by combination and assimila-
tion, it stands as Shiggayin QVi&,' Ps. vii., in
the superscription), and signifies a song express-
ing deep thought, i.e. a philosophico-religious
argument embodied in a Psalm. Inasmuch,
however, as one or more of the various singing
or music bands, which consisted of thousands of
persons [Hasp], excelled in one kind of song
and music more than in another, that band or
those bands which executed best the Shire Hig-
gaydn, was 6r were called, by further contraction,
* That Shiggayon Is a compound of Shir and Hig-
gayon is too patent, one would have thought, to be
questioned, u the verse Itself shows Cljjj . . fl'SB?).
T • T *
Yet It has been actually questioned, chiefly on account
of three elisions that would necessarily have taken
place. But of these three elisions, the » and the n bring
well known to be the weakest letters in the alphabet,
only one — that of the "| — presents a difficulty. But
this even can only be a momentary one. See [TDPB'i
which stands for HD^> "1E>K. pt?D1. which, of course,
stands for pBt3"fl.
Digitized by
Google
1356
H1GGAI0N
SMgytnSth (nU^B*)." It is to the director of
that band or those bands (Habakkuk himself)
that Habakkuk's sublime prayer was given, to
be recited to the accompaniment of the pro-
phet's own instrument Jfegindth (DU'33), as is
HIOOAION
shown by the phrase 'Al ShigySn/Sth (nto'JB* W)
at the beginning, and Zamenaiseach Binegini-
thdi 0rtr?33 n-lfJO^) at the end.
Explanations differing from this are to be
fonnd in the Targnmist and in Rashi, both of
whom, however much they may differ in the
application of the word, render SMgySnSth by
* Shiggayon and ShigySntth are placed In close con-
nexion by David (Jlmchi (on Hab. 111. 1).
« sins " or " errors." Ibn Ezra, of course, takes
ShigyOndth to be the commencement of a poem,
the tune of which in ancient times was well
known. Qimchi says that this prayer was com-
posed in the style of one of the old hymns of the
Psalter, and that SMgySnOth resembled Shigg&yi*
Digitized by
Google
HIGH PLACES
HIGH PLACES
1357
(see above). Others say that Shigyonith was a
musical instrument. All these explanations, how-
ever, must be rejected on grounds sufficiently
explained in Aueleth Shahar, Alamoth,
Ajl-Taschith, and GrrrrrH. [S. M. S.-S.]
HIGH PLACES (J11D3 ; in the historical
books, rtk inln)\a, ra Bi^ij ; in the Prophets,
$a>nol; in the Pentateuch, arrj\ai, Lev. xxvi.
30, &c. ; and once <fSa>Aa, Ezek. ivi. 16 ; Excelta,
/ana). Other Hebrew words occasionally thus
rendered are D1TO (Prov. viii. 2); n ,- l¥ (1 Sam.
xiii. 6) ; TOT (Ezek. xvi. 24), and" 'DS? (Num.
xxiii. 3) ; but these words are never used in the
technical sense of Bamdth. From the earliest
times it was the custom among all nations to
erect altars and places of worship on lofty and
conspicuous spots. We find that the Trojans
sacrificed to Zeus on Mount Ida (//. x. 171), and
we are repeatedly told that such was the
custom of the Persians, Greeks, Germans, &c,
because they fancied that the hill-tops were
nearer heaven, and therefore the most favourable
places for prayer and incense (Herod, i. 131 ;
Xen. Cyrop. viii. 7 ; Mem. iii. 8, § 10 ; Strab. xv.
732 ; Luc. de Stcrif. i. 4 ; Creuzer, Symb. i. 159 ;
Andrian, Dcr Hdhencultus asiat. u. europ. Velke,
1891). To this general custom we find constant
allusion in the Bible (Is. lxv. 7 ; Jer. iii. 6 ; Ezek.
vi. 13, xviii. 6 ; Hos. iv. 13), and it is especially
attributed to the Moabites (Is. xv. 2, xvi. 12 ; Jer.
xlviii. 35). Even Abraham built an altar to the
Lord on a mountain near Bethel (xii. 7, 8 ; cp.
xxii. 2-4, xxxi. 54), which shows that the prac-
tice was then as innocent as it was natural ;
and although it afterwards became mingled with
idolatrous observances (Num. xxiii. 3), it was in
itself far less likely to be abused than the conse-
cration of groves (Hos. iv. 13). The external
religion of the Patriarchs was in some outward
observances different from that subsequently es-
tablished by the Mosaic Law, and therefore they
should not be condemned for actions which after-
wards became sinful only because they were
forbidden (Heidegger, Hist. Patr. n. iii. § 53).
It is, however, quite obvious that if every
grove and eminence had been suffered to become
a place for legitimate worship, especially in a
country where they had already been defiled
with the sins of polytheism, the utmost danger
would have resulted to the pure worship of
the one true God (Havernick, Eml. i. 592). It
would infallibly have led to the adoption of
nature-goddesses, and " gods of the hills " (1 K.
xx. 23). It was therefore implicitly forbidden
by the Law of Moses (Dent. xii. 11-14), which
also gave the strictest injunction to destroy
these monuments of Canaanitish idolatry (Lev.
xxvi. 30; Num. xxxiii. 52; Deut. xxxiii. 29;
obi LXX. rpaxfiKw), without stating any
general reason for this command, beyond the
fact that they had been connected with such
associations. It seems, however, to be assumed
that every Israelite would perfectly understand
why groves and high places were prohibited,
and therefore they are only condemned by virtue
of the injunction to use but one altar for the
purposes of sacrifice (Lev. xvii. 3, 4; Deut. xii.
passim, xvi. 21 ; John iv. 20).
The command was a prospective one, and was
not to come into force until such time as the
tribes were settled in the Promised Land, and
" had rest from all their enemies round about."
Thus we find that both Gideon and Manoah
built altars on high places by Divine command
(Judg. vi. 25, 26; xiii. 16-23), and it is quite
clear from the tone of the Book of Judges that
the law on the subject was either totally for-
gotten or practically obsolete. Nor could the
unsettled state of the country have been pleaded
as an excuse, since it seems to have been most
fully understood, even during the life of Joshua,
that burnt-offerings could be legally offered on
one altar only (Josh. xxii. 29). It is more sur-
prising to find this Law absolutely ignored ai a
much later period, when there was no intelligible
reason for its violation — as by Samuel at Mizpeh
(1 Sam. vii. 10) and at Bethlehem (xvi. 5) ; by
Saul at Gilgal (xiii. 9) and at Ajalon (? xiv. 35) ;
by David (1 Ch. xxi. 26); by Elijah on Mount
Carmel (1 K. xviii. 30) ; and by other prophets
(1 Sam. x. 5). To suppose that in alt these
cases the rule was superseded by a Divine intima-
tion appears to us an unwarrantable expedient,
the more so as the actors in the transactions do
not appear to be aware of anything extraordinary
in their conduct. The Rabbis have invented
elaborate methods to account for the anomaly :
thus they say that high places were allowed
nntil the building of the Tabernacle ; that they
were then illegal until the arrival at Gilgal,
and then during the period while the Tabernacle
was at Shiloh ; that tbey were once more per*
mitted whilst it was at Nob and Gideon (cp.
2 Ch. i. 3), until the building of the Temple at
Jerusalem rendered them finally unlawful (R. Sol.
Jarchi, Abarbanel, &c, quoted in Carpzov. App.
Crit. p. 333 sq. ; Reland, Ant. Hebr. i. 8 sq.).
Others content themselves with saying that
until Solomon's time all Palestine was con-
sidered holy ground, or that there existed a
recognised exemption in favour of high places
for private and spontaneous, though not for the
stated and public, sacrifices.
Such explanations are sufficiently unsatisfac-
tory ; but it is at any rate certain that, whether
from the obvious temptations to the disobedience,
or from the example of other nations, or from
ignorance of any definite law against it, the
worship in high places was organised and all
but universal throughout Judea, not only dnring
(1 K. iii. 2-4), but even after the time of
Solomon. The convenience of them was obvious,
because, as local centres of religious worship,
they obviated the unpleasant and dangerous
necessity of visiting Jerusalem for the celebra-
tion of the yearly Feasts (2 K. xxiii. 9). The
tendency was engrained in the national mind ;
and although it was severely reprehended by
the later historians, we have no proof that it
was known to be sinful during the earlier
periods of the monarchy, except of course where
it was directly connected with idolatrous abomina-
tions (1 K. xi. 7 ; 2 K. xxiii. 13). In fact the
high places seem to have supplied the need of
synagogues (Ps. lxxiv. 8), and to have obviated
the extreme self-denial involved in having but
one legalised locality for the highest forms of
worship. Thus we find that Rehoboam estab-
lished a definite worship at the high places,
with its own peculiar and separated priesthood
(2 Ch. xi. 15; 2 K. xxiii. 9), the members of
which were still considered to be priests of
Digitized by
Google
1358
HIGH PLACES
Jehovah (although in 2 K. zxiii. 5 they are
called by the opprobrious term O^IDS). It
was therefore no wonder that Jeroboam found
it so easy to seduce the people into his symbolic
worship at the high places of Dan and Bethel,
at each of which he built a chapel for his golden
calves. Such chapels were of course frequently
added to the mere altars on the hills, as appears
from the expressions in 1 K. ri. 7, 2 K. xvii. 9,
&c. Indeed the word J11D3 became so common
that it was used for any idolatrous shrine even
in a valley (Jer. vii. 31), or in the streets of
cities (2 K. xvii. 9; Ezek. xvi. 31). These
chapels were probably not structures of stone,
but mere tabernacles hung with coloured tapes-
try (Ezek. xvi. 16 ; Ip&iKiOfia, Aqu., Theod. ;
Jer. ad loc. ; ttSw\ov pawr6v, LXX.), like the
o-ktjkJ) Itpk of the Carthaginians (Diod. Sic. xx.
65 ; Gesen. Thes. i. 188), and like those mentioned
in 2 K. xxiii. 7, Amos v. 26 (cp. Piepenbring,
' Hist. d. lieux d. culte en Israel ' in Jievue de
Vhut. d. Religions, 1891, pp. 1-60, 133-186).
Many of the pious kings of Judah were either
too weak or too ill-informed to repress the worship
of Jehovah at these local sanctuaries, while they
of course endeavoured to prevent it from being
contaminated with polytheism. It is therefore
appended as n matter of blame or a (perhaps
venial) drawback to the character of some of
the most pious princes, that they tolerated this
disobedience to the provision of Deuteronomy
and Leviticus. On the other hand it is men-
tioned as an aggravation of the sinfulness of
other kings that they built or raised high places
(2 Ch. xxi. 11 ; xxviii. 25), which are generally
said to have been dedicated to idolatrous pur-
poses. It is almost inconceivable that so direct a
violation of the theocratic principle as the per-
mitted existence of idol-worship at high places
should have been tolerated by kings of even
ordinary piety, much less by the highest sacer-
dotal authorities (2 K. xii. 3). When therefore
we find the recurring phrase, " only the high
places were not taken away ; as yet the people
did sacrifice and burn incense on the high
places " (2 K. xiv. 4, xv. 5, 35; 2 Ch. xv. 17,
&c), we are forced to limit it (as above) to
places dedicated to Jehovah only. The subject,
however, is made more difficult by a double
discrepancy, for the assertion that Asa "took
away the high places " (2 Ch. xiv. 3) is opposed
to what is stated in the First Book of Kings
(xv. 14), and a similar discrepancy is found in
the case of Jehoshaphat (2 Ch. xvii. 6 ; xx. 33).
Moreover in both instances the chronicler is
apparently at issue with himself (xiv. 3; xv. 17 ;
xvii. 6 ; xx. 33). It is incredible that this should
have been the result of carelessness or oversight,
and we must therefore suppose, either that the
earlier notices expressed the will and endeavour
of these monarchs to remove the high places,
and that the later ones recorded their failure in
the attempt (Ewald, Gesch. iii. 468; Keil, Apohg.
Versuch. p. 290 ; Winer, s. vv. Assa, Josaphaf) ;
or that the statements refer respectively to
Bamoth, dedicated to Jehovah and to idols
(Mlchaelis, Schulz, Bertheau on 2 Ch. xvii. 6,
&c). "Those devoted to false gods were re-
moved, those misdevoted to the true God were
suffered to remain. The kings opposed impiety,
but winked at error " (Bishop Hall).
HIGH-PRIEST, THE
At last Hezekiah set himself in good earnest
to the suppression of this prevalent corruption
(2 K. xviii. 4, 22), both in Judah and Israel
(2 Ch. xxxi. 1), although so rapid was the
growth of the evil, that even his sweeping
reformation required to be finally consummated
by Josiah (2 K. xxiii.), and that too in Jerusalem
and its immediate neighbourhood (2 Ch. xxxiv.
3). The measure must have caused a very vio-
lent shock to the religious prejudices of a large
number of people, and we have a curious and
almost unnoticed trace of this resentment in
the fact that the Rabshakeh sent by Senna-
cherib appeals to the discontented faction, and
represents Hezekiah as a dangerous innovator
who had provoked God's anger by his arbitrary
impiety (2 K. xviii. 22 ; 2 Ch. xxxii. 12). After
the time of Josiah we find no further mention
of these Jehovistic high places. [F. W. F.]
HIGH-PRIEST, THE. . The rendering in
A. V. and R. V. of the title TO frfcn, "The
great priest," in Lev. xxi. 10, Num. xxxv.
25, 28, Josh. xx. 6 ; the only places in the
Hexateuch where the Hebrew phrase is found.
It occurs also in 2 K. xii. 10, xxii. 4, 8, xxiii.
4; 2 Ch. xxxiv. 9; Neb., iii. 1, 20, xiii. 28;
Hag. i. 1, 12, 14, ii. 2, 4 ; Zech. iii. 1, 8, vi. 11,
and on Maccabean coins: but is not found in
Judges and Samuel, nor in the great pre-exilic
Prophets. The LXX. renders it i Uptbs i ptyas.
A synonymous expression is C^iOn Jdj), 2 K.
xxv. 18; 2 Ch. xix. 11, xxiv. 11, xxvi. 20; Jer.
Iii. 24: or EtO \Spl\, 1 Ch. xxvii. 5, or
twin jnbri, 2 Ch. xxxi. 10, Ezra vii. 5, "The
head priest," A. V. "The chief priest." But
usually both in the Priestly Legislation and
elsewhere the principal or representative priest
is simply tn3PI, "the priest," rendered i
&PX'*t*<>* only in Lev. iv. 3, LXX., though this
Greek term is frequent in Apocr. and N. T. (In
the last period ex-high-priests, and even mem-
bers of high-priestly families, are often so de-
signated.) Vulg. Sacerdos magnus, or primus
pontifex, princeps saccrdotum.
In treating of the office of high-priest among
the Israelites, it will be convenient to consider
it— I. Legally. IL Theologically. III. His-
torically.
I. The legal view of the high-priest's office
comprises all that the Levitical Code ordains
respecting it. The first distinct separation of
Aaron to the office of the priesthood is described
in Ex. xxviii. A partial anticipation of this
call occurs at the gathering of the manna (ch.
xvi. 33), when Moses bids Aaron take a pot of
manna, and lay it up before the Lord, and Aaron
lays it up " before the Testimony," i.e. the Ark
(the construction of which, however, is not pre-
scribed till ch. xxv.). The taking up of Nadab
and Abihu with their father Aaron to the Mount,
where they beheld the glory of the God of
Israel, may also have been intended as a pre-
paratory intimation of Aaron's hereditary
priesthood (see also xxvii. 21). But it is not
till the completion of the directions for making
the Tabernacle and its furniture that the
distinct order is given to Moses, " Take thou
unto thee Aaron thy brother, and his sons with
him, from among the children of Israel, that he
may minister unto Me in the priest's office,
Digitized by
Google
HIGH-PBIEST. THE
even Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and
lthamar, Aaron's sons" (Ex. xxviii. 1). And
after the order for the priestly garments to be
made " for Aaron and his sons," it is added,
"and the priest's office shall be theirs for a
perpetual statute ; and thou shalt consecrate
Aaron and his sons," and " I will sanctify both
Aaron and his sons to minister to Me in the
priest's office ".(xxix. 9, 44).
Aaron and his successors are distinguished
from the other priests in the following respects :
(1.) Aaron alone is anointed. "He poured
of the anointing oil upon Aaron's head, and
anointed him to sanctify him " (Lev. viii. 12) :
whence one of the . distinctive epithets of the
high-priest is PIH?&ri Jil3n, "the anointed
priest " (only in Lev.'iv. 3, 5, 16 ; vi. 22 [Heb.
15] : cp. Num. xxxv. 25).* So also in Ex. xxix.
29, 30, it is ordered that the one of the sons of
Aaron who succeeds him in the priest's office
shall wear the holy garments that were Aaron's
for seven days, to be anointed therein, and to be
installed in them. Hence Eusebius {Hist. Secies.
i. 6; Dem. Evang. viii.) understands by the
"anointing" (xpiir/ia) of Dan. ix. 26, LXX.,
that of the Jewish high-priests : " It means
nothing else than the succession of high-priests,
whom the Scripture commonly calls xpioTous,
anointed ; " and so too Tertullian and Theodore t
(Rosenm. ad I. c). The anointing of the sons
of Aaron, i.e. the common priests, seems to have
been confined to sprinkling their garments with
the anointing oil (Ex. xxix. 21, xxviii. 41, &c),
though according to Kalisch on Ex. xxix. 8, and
Lightfoot, following the Rabbinical interpre-
tation, the difference consists in the abundant
pouring of oil (pX*) on the head of the high-
priest, from whence it was drawn with the
finger into two streams, in the shape of a Greek
X, while the priests were merely marked with
the finger dipped in oil on the forehead (nCT3).
But this is probably a late invention of the
Rabbins. The anointing of the high-priest is
alluded to in Ps. exxxiii. 2: "It is like the
precious ointment [oil ; Ex. xxix. 7] upon the
head, that ran down upon the beard, even
Aaron's beard, that went down to the skirts of
his garments." The composition of this anoint-
ing oil, consisting of myrrh, cinnamon, calamus,
cassia and oil olive, is prescribed Ex. xxx.
22-25; and its use for any other purpose but
that of anointing the priests, the Tabernacle and
the vessels, is strictly prohibited (t>. 33) on pain
of being " cut off from one's fellow-tribesmen."
The manufacture of it was entrusted to certain
priests, called " apothecaries " (Neh. iii. 8). But
this oil is said to have been wanting under the
Second Temple (Prideaux, i. 151 ; Selden,
cap. ix.).
(2.) The high-priest has a peculiar dress,
which, as we have seen, passes to his successor
at his death. This dress consisted of eight
parts, as the Rabbins constantly note : the breast-
plate, the ephod with its "curious girdle," the
robe of the ephod, the mitre, the broidered coat
or diaper tunic, and the girdle, the materials
being gold, blue, red, crimson, and fine (white)
linen (Ex. xxviii. 4). To the above are added,
HIGH-PBIEST, THE
1359
* Lev. iv. may be of more recent origin than Ex. xxix.
See Driver, LOT., p. to.
o. 42, the breeches or drawers (Lev. xvi. 4) of
linen ; and to make up the number eight, some
reckon the high-priest's mitre, or the plate
(J"V) separately from the bonnet ; while others
reckon the curions girdle of the ephod separ-
ately from the ephod."
Of these eight articles of attire, four — viz., the
coat or tunic, the girdle, the breeches, and the
bonnet or turban, fW33D, instead of the mitre,
npjVD * — belonged also to the common priests.
It is well known how, in the Assyrian sculp-
tures, the king is in like manner distinguished
by the shape of his head-dress ; and how in
Persia none but the king wore the cidaris or
erect tiara.' 1 On some Babylonian seals also
the priest wears a high conical hat or mitre,
surmounting a sort of turban. Taking the
articles of the high-priest's dress in the order in
which they are enumerated above, we have (a)
the breastplate, or, as it is further named, vv. 15,
29, 30, the breastplate of judgment, or rather
decision, CBE'O JET], rbkAytov (or \oyt?ov) riv
Kpiatuy (or ttjs Kptaeus), " the Oracle of Deci-
sion," in the LXX., and only in v. 4, to irepi-
trrlflim. It was, like the inner curtains of the
Tabernacle, the vail, and the ephod, of " cunning
work," 3B»n flEWD (strictly, "a work of a
weaver in colours ") ; " opus plumarium," and
"arte plumaria," Vulg. [See Embroiderer.]
The breastplate was originally 2 spans long and
1 span broad, but when doubled it was square,
the shape in which it was worn. It was
fastened at the top by rings and chains of
wreatben gold to the two onyx stones on the
shoulders, and beneath with two other rings
and a lace of blue to two corresponding rings in
the ephod, to keep it fixed in its place, above the
curious girdle. But the most remarkable and
most important part of this breastplate were
the 12 precious stones, set in 4 rows, 3 in a row,
thus corresponding to the 12 tribes, and divided
in the same manner as their camps were ; each
stone perhaps having the name of one of the
children of Israel engraved upon it. Whether
the order followed the ages of the sons of Israel,
or, as seems most probable, the order of the
encampment, may be doubted ; but unless any
appropriate distinct symbolism of the different
tribes be found in the names of the precious
stones, the question can scarcely be decided.
According to Josephus, it was these stones which
constituted the Urim and Thummim ; but Jose-
phus merely guesses, probably from the literal
meaning of the term Urim, the nature of things
which had ceased to exist centuries before his
time. His opinion, improved upon by the Rab-
bins, as to the manner in which the stones gave
out the oracular answer, by preternatural illumi-
nation, is, besides, intrinsically destitute of pro-
bability. That the Urim and Thummim were
» In Lev. viii. 7-12 there Is a complete account of
the patting on of these garments by Aaron, and the
whole ceremony of his consecration and that of bis sons.
It there appears distinctly that, besides the girdle
common to all the priests, the high-priest also wore
the curious girdle of the ephod.
c Josephus, however, whom Bfthr follows, calls the
bonnets of the priests by the name of J1B3 XD- See
below.
d Baur compares also the apices of the flamen Mails.
Digitized by
Google
1360 HIGH-PBIEST, THE
material objects is evident from the fact that
they were put into the Breastplate of Decision
(Ex. xxviii. 30 ; Lev. viii. 8). The Heb. names
On?]?} D'T-IK, " Light and Conclusion "^De-
cision),* rather describe their use or purpose than
their precise nature. It is, however, clear from
the context of various passages in the Historical
Books that the Urim and Thummim were
means of divining the Will of Jnhvah, and
probably a species of sacred lot. The passage
which seems decisive is 1 Sam. xiv. 41, 42.
The former verse in the Heb. text is evidently
mutilated, but in the LXX. (and Vulgate) runs
as follows : " Lord, the God of Israel, where-
fore hast Thou not answered Thy servant this
day ? If the iniquity be in me, or in Jonathan
my son, give Urim ; and if it be in Thy people
Israel, give Thummim." After this prayer
Saul bids the priest (cp. r>. 36) cast the sacred
lots between him and his son. Other passages
which should be compared with this are 1 Sam.
ii. 18, 28; xiv. 3, 18 [LXX.]; xxi. 9; xxii. 18;
xxiii. 6, 9 ; xxi. 7 ; 2 Sam. vi. 14; 1 Ch. xv. 27 ;
Deut. xxxiii. 8 (see Kuenen, Set. of Isr., i. 96-
100)/
Apart from its ornamental purpose (Ex.
xxviii. 2, " for glory and for beauty " ; cp. Ecclus.
xiv. 7 sq., 1.), the chief use of the breastplate
seems to have been to serve as a receptacle
for the Urim and Thummim. Its Heb. name
DBK"On Jtpn, according to the opinion of
Gesanius, who connects JKT1 with ,, » «■ II.
ornavit, covers both uses. The passage Ex.
xxviii. 30 b, which belongs to the Priestly
Legislation, may be paraphrased : " And Aaron
shall bear the oracle (strictly means of decision)
of the bene Israel upon his heart before Jahvah
continually."
(o.) The Ephod ("rtDK). This consisted of
two parts, of which one covered the back, and
the other the front, i.e. the breast and upper
part of the body. These were clasped together
on the shoulder with two large onyx stones,
each having engraved on it six of the names
of the tribes of Israel. It was further united
by a " curious girdle " (R. V. " cunningly woven
band ") of blue, purple, scarlet, and fine twined
old linen round the waist. Upon it was
placed the breastplate of judgment, which in
fact was a part of the ephod, and included in the
term in such passages as 1 Sam. ii. 28, xiv. 3,
xxiii. 9, and was fastened to it just above the
" curious girdle " of the ephod. Linen ephods
• The root DDfl denotes finishing and ending ; to
that DVSn* a* the name of a sacred oracle, Is practically
equivalent to tJQCDi Judgment or Decision. The
LXX. rendering, 6ijAi»9if tat aAijfeta, Is somewhat
paraphrnstlc.
1 Kuenen argues, mainly from 1 Sam. 11. 28, Deal,
xxxiii. 8, that in the earlier period the consultation of
Jahvah by Ephod and Urim and Thummim belonged
to the priests In general; giving oracles being the
priest's proper task, as his name >!"|b (= &\£,
kSKin, "soothsayer ") implied. On the question of the
form of the Urim and Thummim, be refers to Kell, ffli.,
I. 169, and Knobel, Exodus und levit. p. 288. It Is a
probable Inference from Hos. ill. 4, Judg. xvil. 5
(cp. xvili. s), that they were little images like the
Teraphlm.
HIGH-PBIEST, THE
were also worn by other priests (1 Sam. xxii. 18),
by Samuel, who was a temple servant (1 Sam. ii.
18), and by David when bringing up the Ark
(2 Sam. vi. 14). The expression for wearing an
ephod is " girded with a linen ephod." The
ephod was also frequently used in the local and
family worship of the Israelites. See Judg. viii.
27, xvii. 5, xviii. 17-20; Hos. iii. 4. [Ephod;
Giedle.] (The inference which many have drawn
from these passages, that ephod alio denoted a
plated image, is neither necessary nor probable.
Cp. Kuenen, SI. i. 99, 100.) ,
(c.) The Robe of the ephod frVD). This was
of inferior material to the ephod itself, being all
of blue (v. 31), which implied its being only of
" woven work " (JTfc TK?VD, xxxix. 22). It was
worn immediately under the ephod, and was
longer than it, though not so long as the
"broidered_ coat," or rather chequered tunic
(fSESTI Djh3), according to some statements
(Bohr, Winer, Kalisch, &c). The Greek render-
ing, however, of 7'PO, woJijoijj, and Josephus's
description of it (B. J. v. 5, § 7), seem to ont-
weigh the reasons given by Bahr for thinking
the robe only came down to the knees, and to
make it improbable that the tunic should ban
been seen below the robe. It seems likely
therefore that the sleeves of the tunic, of white
diaper linen, were the only parts of it which
were visible, in the case of the high-priest, when
he wore the blue robe over it. For the bine
robe had no sleeves, but only slits in the does
for the arms to come through. It had a hole
for the head to pass through, with a border
round it of woven work, to prevent its being
rent. The skirt of this robe had a remarkable
trimming of pomegranates in blue, red, and
crimson, with a bell of gold between each pome-
granate alternately. The bells were to give a
sound when the high-priest went in and came
out of the Holy Place. Josephus in the Anti-
quities gives no explanation of the use of the bells,
but merely speaks of the studied beauty of their
appearance. In his Jewish War, however, he
tells us that the bells signified thunder, and
the pomegranates lightning. For Philo's verr
curious observations, see Lightfoot's Works, ii.
p. 25.
Neither does the son of Sirach very distinctly
explain it (Ecclus. xiv. 9), who in his description
of the high-priest's attire seems chiefly impressed
with its beauty and magnificence, and says of
this trimming, " He compassed him with pome-
granates and with many golden bells round
about, that as be went there might be a sound,
and a noise made that might be heard in the
temple, for a memorial (or reminder) to the
children of his people." It is his gloss nponEi-
xxviii. 35. Perhaps he means to intimate that
the use of the bells was to give notice to the
people outside, when the high-priest went in
and came out of the sanctuary, as Whiston,
Vatablus, and many others hare supposed. Bnt
it would be quite consistent with the other
strong anthropomorphisms of the Pentateuch U>
suppose that the object was to give due warning
to the Divine Occupant of the inner shrine.
(d.) The fourth article peculiar to the high-
priest is the mitre or upper turban, with its
gold plate, engraved with Hounkss to thk
LORD, fastened to it by a ribbon of blue. Jose-
Digitized by
Google
HIGH-PRIEST, THE
phus applies the term JIBjJXO (jjLama*pQ8i\i)
to the turbans of the commoa priests as well,
but says that in addition to this, and sewn on to
the top of it, the high-priest had another turban
of blue ; that besides this he had outside the
turban a triple crown of gold, consisting, that
is, of three rims one above the other, and ter-
minating at top in a kind of conical calyx, like
the inverted calyx of the herb hyoscyamus.
Josephus doubtless gives a true account of the
high-priest's turban as worn in his day. It
may be fairly conjectured that the crown was
appended when the Hasmoneans united the tem-
poral monarchy with the priesthood, and that
this was continued, though in a modified shape, 1
after the sovereignty was taken from them.
Josephus also describes the wtraKov, the lamina
or gold plate, which he says covered the fore-
head of the high-priest. In Ant. viii. 3, § 8, he
says that the identical gold plate made in the
days of Moses existed in his time ; and Whiston
adds in a note that it was still preserved in the
time of Origen, and that the inscription on it
was engraved in " Samaritan " characters (Ant.
iii. 7, § 6). But this would be far indeed from
proving that the plate was as old as " the days
of Moses." It may have been a relic of the
Maccabean revival. B. Eliezer, who flourished
in Hadrian's reign, saw it at Rome. It was
doubtless placed, with other spoils of the Temple,
in the temple of Peace, which was burnt down
in the reign of Commodus. These spoils, how-
ever, are expressly mentioned as part of Alaric's
plunder when he took Rome. They were carried
by Genseric into Africa, and brought by Beli-
sarius to Byzantium, where they adorned his
triumph. On the warning of a Jew the emperor
ordered them back to Jerusalem, but what
became of them is not known (Reland, de Spoliis
Tempi!).
(e.) The brpidered coat (R. V. " coat of chequer
work "), flltrFI njD3, was a tunic or long shirt
of linen with a tesselated or diaper pattern,
like the setting of a stone. The girdle, B33K,
also of linen, was wound round the body several
times from the breast downwards, and the ends
hung down to the ankles. The linen (or cotton ?)
breeches or drawers, la^D^O (= 'DjnD
D'PB'B, Ezek. xliv. 18), covered the loins and
thighs ; and the bonnet or ny^lt? was a turban
of linen, partially covering the head, but not in
the form of a cone like that of the high-priest
when the mitre was added to it. These four
last were common to all priests. Josephus
speaks of the robes (IrSiSpara) of the chief
priests, and the tunics and girdles of the priests,
as forming part of the spoil of the Temple
(B. J. vi. 8, § 3). According to the Priestly
Code, Aaron, and at his death Eleazar (Num.
xx. 22-29 P.), and their successors in the high-
priesthood, were solemnly inaugurated into
their office by being clad in these eight articles
of dress on seven successive days. From the
time of the Second Temple, when the sacred oil
(said to have been hid by Josiah, and lost) was
wanting, this putting on of the garments was
i Josephus (Ant. xx. 10) says that Pompey would
not allow Hyrcanus to wear the diadem, when be
restored him to the high-priesthood.
BIBLE DICT.— VOL. I.
HIGH-PRIEST, THE
1361
deemed the official investiture of the office.
Hence the robes, which had always been kept in
one of the chambers of the Temple, and were by
Hyrcanus deposited in the Baris, which he built
on purpose, were kept by Herod in the same
tower, which he called Antonia, so that they
might be at his absolute disposal. The Romans
did the same till the government of Vitellius in
the reign of Tiberius,. when the custody of the
robes was restored to the Jews (Ant. xv. 11,
§ 4 ; xviii. 4, § 3).
(3.) Aaron has peculiar functions assigned to
him in the Priestly Legislation. To him alone
it appertains, and he alone is permitted, to enter
the Holy of Holies, which he does once a year,
on the great Day of Atonement, when he
sprinkles the blood of the sin-offering on the
mercy-seat, and burns incense within the vail
(Lev. xvi.). He is said by the Talmudists, with
whom agree Light foot, Selden, Grotius, Winer,
Bahr, and many others, not to have worn his
full pontifical robes on this occasion, but to
have been clad entirely in white linen (Lev. xvi.
4, 32). It is singular, however, that on the
other hand Josephus says that the great fast
day was the chief, if not the only day in the
year, when the high-priest wore all his robes
(B. J. v. 5, § 7) ; and in spite of tho alleged
impropriety of his wearing bis splendid apparel
on a day of humiliation, it seems far more
probable that on the one occasion when he
performed functions peculiar to the high-priest,
he should have worn his full dress. Josephus
too could not have been mistaken as to the fact,
which he repeats (ami. Ap. lib. ii. § 8), where
he says the nigh-priests alone might enter into
the Holy of Holies, "propria 1 stolt circuma-
micti." For although Selden,* who strenuously
supports the Rabbinical statement that the
high-priest wore only the four linen garments
when he entered the Holy of Holies, endeavours
to make Josephus say the same thing, it is im-
possible to twist his words into this meaning.
It is true, on the other hand, that Lev. xvi.
distinctly prescribes that Aaron should wear the
four priestly garments of linen when he entered
into the Holy of Holies, and put them off im-
mediately he came out, and leave them in the
Temple ; no one being present in the Temple
while Aaron made the atonement (v. 17). Either
therefore in the time of Josephus this law was
not kept in practice, or else we must reconcile
the manifest contradiction by supposing that in
consequence of the great jealousy with which
the high-priest's robes were kept by the civil
power at this time, the custom had arisen for
him to wear them, not even always on the three
great Festivals (Ant. xviii. 4, § 3), but only on
the great day of expiation. Clad in this
gorgeous attire, he would enter the Temple in
presence of all the people : and after having
performed in secret, as the Law required, the
rites of expiation in the linen dress, he would
resume his pontifical robes and so appear again in
public. Thus his wearing the robes would easily
come to be identified chiefly with the Day of
Atonement ; and this is perhaps the most prob-
» Selden himself remsrks (cap. vll. in Jin.) Out
Josephus and others always describe the pontifical
robes by the name of rnf tnroAqs apxuparuriif .
4 S
Digitized by
Google
1362 HIGH-PBIEST, THE
able explanation. 1 In other respects the high-
priest performed the functions of a priest on
new moons and sabbaths and annual festivals
(Jos. B. J. v. 5, § 7), and on such solemn occasions
as the dedication of the Temple under Zerubbabel.
[Atonemext, Day of.] He was legally bound
to officiate only on the Day of Atonement ;
though later usage required him also to offer the
daily sacrifice throughout the previous week
(Joma, i. 2). Otherwise he was free to sacrifice
or not as he pleased (ibid. ; Tamid, vii. 3). See
Schiirer, II. L p. 255.
(4.) The high-priest has a peculiar place in
the law of the manslayer, and his taking sanc-
tuary in the cities of refuge. The manslayer
might not leave the city of refnge during the
lifetime of the existing high-priest who was
anointed with the holy oil (Num. xxxv. 25, 28 ;
Josh. xx. 6). It was also forbidden to the high-
priest to follow a funeral, or rend his clothes
for the dead, according to the precedent in
Lev. x. 6.
The other respects in which the high-priest
exercised superior functions to the other priests
arose rather from his position and opportunities,
than from the legally defined duties of his
office, and they consequently varied with the
|>ersonal character and abilities of the high-
priest. Such were reforms in religion, restora-
tions of the Temple and its service (which, how-
ever, really depended on the royal will during the
period of the monarchy), the preservation of the
Temple from intrusion or profanation, taking
the lead in ecclesiastical or civil affairs, judging
the people, presiding in the Sanhedrin (which,
however, he is said by Lightfoot rarely to have
done), and other similar transactions, in which
we find the high-priest sometimes prominent,
sometimes not even mentioned (see the historical
part of this article). Even that portion of
power which most naturally and usually fell to
his share, the rule of the Temple, and the
government of the priests and Levites who
ministered there, did not invariably fall to the
share of the high-priest. For the title " Ruler
of the House of God," DT^KfTWa TM,
which usually denotes the high-priest, is some-
times given to those who were not high-.priests,
as e.g. to Pashur the son of Immer in Jer. xx. 1
(cp. 1 Ch. xii. 27). The Rabbins speak very
frequently of one second in dignity to the high-
priest, whom they call the Sagan or Segen (a
term of Babylonian origin), and who often
acted in the high-priest's room.* He is identified
1 •• Only at that part of the service on the great Day of
Atonement at which he entered the Holy of Holies, be
wore a Bimple white drees, which however was made of
the most expensive Peluslan and Indian linen (or
cotton ?)." Schurer (a. 1. p. 256, Eng. Tr.), who refers
to Mlshna, Jama, Ui. 4, 6 ; vii. 1, 3, 4.
* There is a controversy as to whether the deputy
high-priest was the same as the Sagan. Lightfoot
thinks not. So also Schurer, who points out that the
term, which in the 0. T. occurs only In the plural, Is
mostly rendered irrpanryot by the LXX., and Identifies
the Sagan with the orparrrrof tou itpov, or " Captain of
the Temple." Acts Iv. 1 ; v. 24, 2$ (see Schurer, n. L
257 sq.). The word appears ito be Identical with the
Auyrto-Babylonlan loinu, iakan, "one appointed,",
••officer," " deputy ," or the like. See Is. zlL 25, and
Schrader, KAT.t ad loc.
HIGH-PRIEST, THE
(see Buxtorf, ». t.) with u the second priest "
(2 K. xxiii. 4, xxv. 18). They say that Moses
was Sagan to Aaron ; a summary mode of getting
rid of the difficulties inherent in the traditional
view of their official relations. Thus too it is
explained of Annas and Caiaphas (Luke Ui. 2),
that Annas was Sagan. Ananias is also thought
by some to hare been Sagan, acting for the
high-priest (Acts xxiii. 2). In like manner
they say (nnhistorically) that Zadok and Abi-
athar were high-priest and Sagan in the time of
David. The Sagan is also very frequently called
Ifemunneh, or Prefect of the Temple ; and upon
him chiefly lay the care and charge of the
Temple services (Lightfoot, passim). If the
high-priest was incapacitated from officiating by
any accidental uncleanness, the Sagan took
his place. Thus, e.g., the Jerusalem Talmud
tells a story of Simon son of Kamith, that " on
the eve of the day of expiation [Atonement],
he went out to speak with the king, and some
spittle fell upon his garments and defiled him :
therefore Judah his brother went in on the day
of expiation, and served in his stead; and so
their mother Kamith saw two of her sons high-
priests in one day. She had seven sons, and
they all served in the high-priesthood " (Light-
foot, ix. 35). It does not appear by whose
authority the high-priests were appointed to
their office before there were kings of Israel [see
under III. infra]. It was invariably done by
the civil power in later times; the principal
priest of the Temple of Jerusalem being, in
fact, the servant of the sovereign, whose palace
adjoined the sanctuary, and who appointed and
deposed him at pleasure (cp. 1 Sam. ii. 35,
"mine Anointed " = the king; 1 K. ii. 27;
Ezek. xliii. 8). The installation and anointing
of the high-priest or clothing him with the
eight garments, which was the formal investi-
ture, is naturally enough ascribed by Maimonides
to the Sanhedrin at all times (Lightfoot, ix. 22).
It should be added, that the usual age for
entering upon the functions of the priesthood,
according to 2 Ch. xxxi. 17, is considered to
have been twenty years, though a priest or
high-priest was not actually incapacitated if he
had attained to puberty, as appears by the
example of Aristobulus, who was high-priest at
seventeen. Onias, the son of Simon the Just,
could not be high-priest, because he was but a
child at his father's death. Again, according to
Lev. xxi. 18-20, no one that had a blemish could
officiate at the altar. The twelve blemishes
there enumerated are expanded by the Talmud
into one hundred and forty-two. Josephus
relates how Antigonns mutilated Hyrcanns's
ears, to incapacitate him for being restored to the
high-priesthood. Illegitimate birth was also a
bar to the high-priesthood, and the subtlety of
Jewish distinctions extended this illegitimacy to
being born of a mother who had been taken captive
by heathen conquerors (Joseph, c. Apion. i. § 7).
Thus Eleazar said to John Hyrcanus (though,
Josephus says, falsely) that if he was a just
man, he ought to resign the pontificate, because
his mother had been a captive, and he was
therefore incapacitated. Lev. xxi. 13, 14 was
taken as the ground of this and similar dis-
qualifications. For a full account of this branch
of the subject, the reader is referred to Selden's
learned treatises De Successionibus, &c, and Dc
Digitized by
Google
HIGH-PRIEST, THE
Success, in Pontif. Ebraeor. ; and to Prideaux,
ii. 306. It was the universal opinion of the
Jews that the deposition of a high-priest, which
became so common, was unlawful. Josephus
(Ant. it. 3) says that Antiochus Epiphanes was
the first who did so, when he deposed Jesus or
Jason; Aristobulua, who deposed his brother
Hyrcanus, the second; and Herod, who took
away the high-priesthood from Ananelus to
give it to Aristobulus, the third. See the
story of Jonathan son of Ananus in Ant. xix. 6,
II. Theologically. The theological view of
the high-priesthood does not fall within the
scope of this Dictionary. It may, however,
be stated that such a view would embrace
the consideration of the office, dress, functions,
and ministrations of the high-priest, considered
as typical of the priesthood of our Lord Jesus
Christ, and as setting forth under shadows the
truths which are openly taught under the
Gospel. This has been done to a great extent
in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and is occasionally
done in other parts of Scripture, as, e.g., Rev. i.
13, where the iroi^pjjj, and the girdle about the
paps, are distinctly the robe, and the curious
girdle of the ephod, characteristic of the high-
priest. It would also embrace all the moral
and spiritual teaching supposed to be intended
by such symbols. Philo (de vita Mosis), Origen
(Homil. in Levit.), Eusebius (Demonat. Etxmg.
lib. iii.) ; Epiphanius (cont. Melchized. iv. &c),
Gregory Kazianzen (Orat. i., Eliae Crctens., and
Comment, p. 195), Augustine (Qnaest. in Exod.)
may be cited among many others of the ancients
who have more or less thus treated the subject.
Of moderns, Bahr (Symbolih des Mosaischen
Cultus), Fairbairn (Typology of Script), Kalisch
(Comment, on Exod.) have entered fully into this
subject, both from the Jewish and Christian
point of view.
III. To pass to the historical view of the
subject. The history of the high-priests em-
braces a period of about fourteen centuries, and
a succession of about eighty high -priests, be-
ginning with Aaron and ending with Phannias,
according to the traditional view, which rests
ultimately upon the statements of the Priestly
Code. "The number of all the high-priests,"
says Josephus, " from Aaron . . . nntil Phanas
. . . was eighty-three " (Ant. xx. 10, where he
gives a comprehensive account of them). They
naturally arrange themselves into three groups
— (a.) those before David ; (b.) those from David
to the Captivity ; (c.) those from the return
from the Babylonish Captivity till the cessation
of the office at the destruction of Jerusalem.
The former two have come down to us in the
canonical Books of Scripture, and so have a few
of the earliest and the latest names of the third
group ; but for by far the larger portion of the
latter group we have only the authority of
Josephus, the Talmud, and some other profane
writers.
(a.) The high-priests of the first group (or
those who are commonly regarded as such) are
— 1. Aaron; 2. Eleazar; 3. Phinebas; 4. Eli;
5. Ahitub (1 Ch. ix. 11 ; Neh. xi. 11; 1 Sam.
xiv. 3) ; 6. Abiah ; 7. Ahimelech (on the as-
sumption that he was not identical with Ahiah
or rather Ahijah, which Ewald regards as
certain ; cp. 1 Sam. xiv. 3, 18, xzi. 1, xzii. 9.
HIGH-1'BIEST, THE
1363
See Ewald, HI. ii. 415, n. 3). Phinehas the son
of Eli, and father of Ahitub, died before his
father, and so was not high-priest. Of the
above the first three succeeded in regular order ;
Xadab and Abihu, Aaron's eldest sons, having
died in the wilderness (Lev. x.). But Eli, the
fourth, was of the line of Ithamar according to
Josephus (Ant. v. 11, § 5 ; cp. 1 Ch. xxiv. 2, 3).
What was the exact interval between the death
of Phinehas and the accession of Eli, what led to
the transference of the chief priesthood from
the line of Eleazar to that of Ithamar, and
whether any, or which, of the descendants of
Eleazar between Phinehas and Zadok (seven in
number, according to 1 Ch. vi. 4-8, viz. Abishua,
Bukki, Uzzi, Zerahiah, Meraioth, Amariah, Ahi-
tub) were high-priests, we have no means of
determining from Scripture. In Judg. xx. 28,
we see Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, priest at
Beth-el (cp. v. 26) ; and 1 Sam. i. 3, 9, finds Eli
high-priest at Shiloh, with two grown-up sons
priests under him. The only clue is to be found
in the genealogies, by which it appears that
Phinehas was sixth in succession from Levi, while
Eli, supposing him to be the same generation as
Samuel's grandfather, would be tenth. If how-
ever Phinehas lived, as is possible, to a great
old age, and Eli, as his age admits, be placed
about half a generation backwarder, a very
small interval will remain. Josephus asserts
(Ant. viii. 1, § 3) that the father of Bukki—
whom he calls Joseph', and (Ant. v. 11, § 5)
Abiezer, instead of Abishua — was the last high-
priest of Phinehas's line, before Zadok. This is
perhaps a true tradition, though Josephus, with
characteristic levity,' does not adhere to it in
the above passage of his 5th book, where he
makes Bukki and Uzzi to have been both high-
priests, and Eli to have succeeded Uzzi ; or in
bk. xx. 10, where he reckons the high-priests
before Zadok and Solomon to hare been thirteen
(a reckoning which includes apparently all
Eleazar's descendants down to Ahitub), and adds
Eli and his son Phinehas, and Abiathar, whom
he calls Eli's grandson. If Abishua died, leaving
a son or grandson under age, Eli, as head of the
line of Ithamar, might have become high-priest
as a matter of course, or he might have been
appointed by the elders.™ His having judged
Israel forty years (1 Sam. iv. 18) marks him as
a man of ability. If Ahiah and Ahimelech are
not variations of the name of the same person,
they must have been brothers, since both were
sons of Ahitub. The high-priests then before
1 It is impossible to reconcile Josephus either with
himself or with the Chronicler. In Ant. viii. 1, } 3, be
states that Bukki " son of Abishua the high-priest,"
Joatham son of Bukki, Meraioth son of Joatham.
14 Arophaeus " son of Meraioth, and Ahitub, lived In a
private station, while the house of Ithamar held tbn
bigh-prlcsthooil. Ewald remarks, "Thus carelessly
did Josephus quote his authorities " (SI. 11. 409, n. 2).
"» No Instance of such a mode of appointment can bo
cited from the Historical Books. But the grand dif-
ficulty Is that while ou the one hand no trace is to be
found of the priesthood of Abishua, Bukki, &c, nor
even of their existence, In the Books of Judges anil
Samuel, on the other hand the immediate predecessors
of Eli, and Eli himself and his successors In the priest-
hood, are omitted from the Chronicler's apparently
complete list or hereditary high-priests from Aarou
to the Exile (1 Ch. vi. *-lo>
4 S 2
Digitized by
Google
1364 HIGH-PKIEST, THE
David's reign may be set down as eight (bat vid.
auprj) in number, of whom seven are inferred
from Scripture to bare been high-priests, and
one is said to have been such by Josephus alone.
The bearing of this on the chronology of the times
from the Exodus to David, tallying as it does with
the number of the ancestors of David, is too im-
portant to be passed over in silence. It must
also be noted that the Tabernacle, during the
high-priesthood of Aaron's successors of this
first group, was pitched at Shiloh in the tribe
of Ephraim; a fact which marks the strong
influence which the temporal power already had
in ecclesiastical affairs, since Ephraim was
Joshua's tribe, as Judah was David's (Josh. xxiv.
30, 33 ; Judg. xx. 27, 28, xxi. 21 ; 1 Sam. i. 3,
9, 24, iv. 3, 4, xiv. 3, &c. ; Ps. lxxviii. 60).
This strong influence and interference of the
secular power is manifest throughout the sub-
sequent history. This first period was also
marked by the calamity which befell the high-
priests as the guardians of the Ark, in its
capture by the Philistines. This probably sus-
pended all inquiries by Urim and Thummim,
which were made before the Ark (1 Ch. xiii. 3 :
cp. Judg. xx. 27 , 1 Sam. vii. 2, xiv. 18)," and
must bare greatly diminished the influence of
the high-priests, on whom the largest share of
the humiliation which was popularly seen in
the name Ichabod • would naturally fall. The
rise of Samuel as a prophet at this very time,
and his paramount influence and importance in
the State, to the entire eclipsing of Ahiah the
priest, coincides remarkably with the absence of
the Ark and the means of inquiring by Urim
and Thummim.
(6.) Passing to the second group, we begin
with the unexplained circumstance of there
being two priests in the reign of David, ap-
parently of nearly equal authority, viz. Zadok
and Abiatbar (1 Ch. xv. 11; 2 Sam. viii. 17).
Indeed it is only from the deposition of Abia-
thar, and the placing of Zadok in his room, by
Solomon (1 K. ii. 35), that we are able to infer
that Abiatbar was the high-priest, and Zadok
the second. Zadok was son of Ahitub,* of the
line of Eleazar (1 Ch. vi. 8), and the first
mention of him is in 1 Ch. xii. 28 as " a young
man, mighty in valour," who joined David in
Hebron after Saul's death, with twenty-two
captains of his father's house. It is therefore
not unlikely that after the death of Ahimelech
and the secession of Abiathar to David, Saul
may have made Zadok priest, so far as it was
possible for him to do it in the absence of the
Ark and the high-priest's robes, and that David
• But the true reading of 1 Sam. xiv. 18 is preserved
by the Sept. : " And Saul said unto Ahijah, Bring hither
the ephod; for be (Ahijah) wore the ephod at that
time before the bene Israel." It does not appear that
the Ark was necessary to the consultation of Jahvah
by Urim and Thummim (1 Sam. xxili. t, 9; xxx.
7, 8; xiv. 36-42. Vid. tupr.). See Driver's Scmud
adloc
• Ichabod Is a name formed like Ithamar, and
probably means "man of glory" (Ueb. ish k&bod).
See Ewald, Lckrb. $ 273.
p But Abitub appears In 1 Sam. xiv. 3, xxll. 9, 20, as
father of Ahljuh-Ahtmelech and grandfather of Abia-
tbar, Zadok's rival, of the house of Eli and line of
Ithamar.
HIGH-PRIEST, THE
may have avoided the difficulty of deciding
between the claims of his faithful friend Abi-
athar and his new and important ally Zadok
(who perhaps was the means of attaching to
David's cause the 4,600 Levites and the 3,700
priests who are said to have come under Jehoiada
their captain, rt>. 26, 27), q by appointing them
to a joint priesthood : the 6rst place, with the
ephod, and Urim and Thummim, remaining
with Abiathar, who was in actual possession of
them. Certain it is that from this time Zadok
and Abiathar are constantly named together,
and singularly Zadok always Krst, both in the
Book of Samuel and that of Kings. We can,
however, trace very clearly up to a certain
point the division of the priestly offices and
dignities between them, coinciding as it did with
the divided state of the Levitical worship in
David's time. For we learn from 1 Ch. xvi.
1-7, 37 compared with ct>. 39, 40, and yet more
distinctly from 2 Ch. i. 3, 4, 5, that the Taber-
nacle and the Brazen Altar made by Moses and
Bezaleel in the wilderness were at this time at
Gibeon, while the Ark was at Jerusalem, in the
separate tent made for it by David. [Gibbon,
p. 1181.] Now Zadok the priest and his brethren
the priests were left " before the Tabernacle . . .
at Gibeon ; to offer burnt-offerings unto the Lord
. . . morning and evening, and to do according to
all that is written in the law of the Lord " (1 Ch.
xvi. 39, 40). It is therefore obvious to conclude
that Abiathar had special charge of the Ark and
the services connected with it, which agrees
exactly with the possession of the ephod' by
Abiathar, and his previous position with David
before he became king of Israel, as well as with
what we are told in 1 Ch. xxvii. 34, that
Jehoiada and Abiathar were the king's counsel-
lors next to Ahithophel. Residence at Jerusalem
with the Ark, and the privilege of inquiring of
the Lord before the Ark, both well suit his
office of counsellor. Abiathar, however, for-
feited his place by taking part with Adonijah
against Solomon, and Zadok was made high-
priest in his room. The pontificate was thus
again consolidated, and transferred permanently
from the line of Ithamar to that of Eleazar.
This is the only instance recorded of the de-
position of a high-priest (which became common
in later times, especially under Herod and the
Romans) during this second period. It was the
fulfilment of the prophetic denunciations of the
sin of Eli's sons (1 Sam. ii., iii.).
The first considerable difficulty that meets
us in the historical survey of the high-priests
of the second group is to ascertain who was
high-priest at the dedication of Solomon's
Temple. Josephus (Ant. x. 8, § 6) asserts that
Zadok was, and the Seder Ohm makes him the
high-priest in the reign of Solomon. But first
it is very improbable that Zadok, who must
1 The numbers are very surprising. In view of the
comparative paucity of priests In the preceding history
(Judges, Samuel). See Wellhausen, HI. p. 17*. The
Chronicler and his principal source In all good faith
antedate many things, owing to the very natural desire
of finding an Indefeasible sanction for present Institu-
tions in the venerable past.
' But " Zadok and his brethren " at Gibeon must, as
priests, have worn the ephod (1 Sam. It. 28, xxil. 18).
See Kuenen, RI. 1. 97.
Digitized by
Google
HIGH-PEIE8T, THE
have been very old at Solomon's accession
(being David's contemporary), should have lived
to the eleventh year of his reign; and next,
1 K. iv. 2 distinctly asserts that Azariah the
son of Zadok was priest under Solomon, and
1 Ch. vi. 10 tells us of Azariah,' " he it is that
executed the priest's office in the Temple that
Solomon built in Jerusalem," obviously meaning
at its first completion. We can hardly there-
fore be wrong in saying that Azariah the son
(so 1 Ch. vi. 9; but brother, according to
2 Sam. xviii. 19, 1 K. iv. 2) of Ahimaaz was
the first high-priest of Solomon's Temple. The
non-mention of him in the account of the dedi-
cation of the Temple, even where one would
most have expected it (as 1 K. viii. 3, 6, 10, 11,
14, 55, 62; 2 Ch. v. 7, 11, &c), and the
prominence given to Solomon — the civil power
— are certainly remarkable. Cp. also 2 Ch. viii.
14, 15. The probable inference is that Azariah
had no great personal qualities or energy.' In
constructing the list of the succession of priests
of this group, our method must be to compare
the genealogical list in 1 Ch. vi. 8-15 (A. V.)
with the notices of high-priests in the sacred
history, and with the list given by Josephus,
who, it must be remembered, had access to the
lists preserved in the archives at Jerusalem :
testing the whole by the application of the
ordinary rules of genealogical succession. Now
as regards the genealogy, it is seen at once that
there is something defective ; for whereas from
David to Jeconiah there are twenty kings, from
Zadok to Jehozadak there are but thirteen priests.
Moreover the passage in question was perhaps
not intended for a list of the actual high-priests,
but to give the pedigree of Jehozadak. Then
again, while the pedigree in its first six genera-
tions from Zadok, inclusive, exactly suits the
history — for it makes Amariah the sixth priest,
while the history (2 Ch. xix. 11) tells us he
lived in Jehoshaphat's reign, who was the sixth
king from David, inclusive ; and while the same
pedigree in its last five generations also suits
the history — inasmuch as it places Hilkiah the
son of Shallum fourth from the end, and the
history tells us he lived in the reign of Josiah,
the fourth king from the end — yet is there a
great gap in the middle. For between Amariah,
the high-priest in Jehoshaphat's reign, and
Shallum the father of Hilkiah, the high-priest
in Josiah's reign — an interval of over two cen-
turies — there are but two names, Ahitub and
Zadok, and these liable to the utmost suspicion
from their reproducing the same sequence which
occurs in the earlier part of the same genealogy
— Amariah, Ahitub, Zadok. Besides which they
are not mentioned by Josephus. This part
therefore of the pedigree is useless for our
purpose. But the narrative of Kings and
Chronicles supplies us with four or five names
for this interval, viz. Jehoiada in the reigns of
Athaliah and Joash, and probably still earlier ;
Zechariah his son; Azariah in the reign of
Uzziah ; Urijah in the reign of Ahaz ; and
" Tbe notice In 1 Co. vi. 10 seems to belong to
Azariah ben Zadok, and not to tbe son of Johanan.
1 Yet this defect of character would hardly account
for the omission of his name on sucb an occasion,
especially as "the priests" are repeatedly mentioned
(1 K. vUi. 3, «, loV.
HIGH-PRIEST, THE
1365
Azariah in the reign of Hezekiah. If, however,
in the genealogy of 1 Ch. vi. 13, 14, Azariah
and Hilkiah have been accidentally transposed,
as is not unlikely, then the Azariah who was
high-priest in Hezekiah's reign (2 Ch. xxxi. 10)
may possibly be that Azariah. Putting the
additional historical names at four, and de-
ducting the two suspicious names from the
genealogy, we have fifteen high-priests indicated
in Scripture as contemporary with the twenty
kings, with room, however, for one or two more
in the history.* Turning to Josephus, we find
his list of seventeen high-priests (whom he
reckons as eighteen [Ant. xx. 10], as do also the
Rabbins) in places exceedingly corrupt ; a cor-
ruption sometimes caused by the end of one
name sticking on to the beginning of the fol-
lowing (as in Aiioramus), sometimes apparently
by substituting the name of the contemporary
king or prophet for that of the high-priest, as
Joel and Jotham. Perhaps, however, Sudeaa,
who corresponds to Zedekiah in the reign of
Amaziah in the Safer Olam Zutta, pp. 137, 139
(ed. G. Genebrardus, Basileae, 1580), and Odeas,
who corresponds to Hoshaiah in the reign of
Manasseb, according to the same Jewish
chronicle, may really represent high-priests
whose names have not been preserved in Scrip-
ture. This would bring up the number to
seventeen; or, if we retained Azariah as the
father of Seraiah (1 Ch. vi. 13, 14), to eighteen,
which would agree so far with the twenty
kings.
Reviewing the high-priests of this second group,
the following are some of the most remarkable
incidents related of their times: — (1) The transfer
of the seat of worship from Shiloh in the tribe
of Ephraim to Jerusalem in the tribe of Judah,
effected by David, and consolidated by the
building of the magnificent Temple of Solomou.
(2) The organization of the Temple-service under
the high-priests, and the division of the priests
and Levites into courses, who resided at the
Temple during their term of service — all which
necessarily put great power into the hands
of an able high-priest. 11 (3) The revolt of the
ten tribes from the dynasty of David and from
the worship at Jerusalem, and the setting up of
a schismatical priesthood at Dan and Beersheba
(1 K. xii. 31 ; 2 Ch. xiii. 9, &c). (4) The
overthrow of the usurpation of Athaliah, tbe
daughter of Ahab, by Jehoiada the high-priest,
whose near relationship to king Joash, added to
his zeal against the idolatries of the house of
Ahab, stimulated him to head the revolution with
the royal guards, according to 2 K. xi., or with
the force of priests and Levites at his command,
according to 2 Ch. xxii. (see Wellhausen, HI.
pp. 196 sqq.). (5) The boldness and success
with which according to the Chronicler — Kings
is silent upon the matter — the high-priest
Azariah withstood the encroachments of the
king Uzziah upon the office and functions of
• It must, however, be borne in mind that Am+H.h
and Aiariali find no place In the Book of Kings, and In
this respect are quite on a par with the two names
rejected above, Ahitub II. and Zadok II.
» The sole ancient authority for these arrangements
Is tbe Book of Chronicles, which appears to transfer
some of the institutions of the second Temple to the
period of David and Solomon.
Digitized by
Google
1366
HIGH-PRIEST. THE
the priesthood. (6) The repair of the Temple
by Jehoiada, in the reign of Joash, the restora-
tion of the Temple-services by Azariah in the
reign of Hezekiah, and the discovery of the
Book of the Law, and the religious reformation by
Hilkiah in the reign of Josiah. [Deuteronomy.]
(7) In all these great religions movements,
however, excepting the one headed by Jehoiada,
it is remarkable how the civil power took the
lead. It was David who arranged all the
Temple-service, Solomon who directed the
building and dedication of the Temple, the
high-priest being not so much as named ;
Jehoshaphat who sent the priests about to
teach the people, and assigned to the high-
priest Amariah his share in the work ; Hezekiah
who headed the reformation, and urged on
Azariah and the priests and Levites; Josiah
who encouraged the priests in the service of
the house of the Lord. On the other hand, we
read of no opposition to the idolatries of
Manasseh by the high-priest ; and we know
how shamefully subservient Urijah the high-
priest was to king Ahaz, actually building an
altar according to the pattern of one at
Damascus, to displace the Brazen Altar, and
joining the king in his profane worship before it
(2 K. xvi. 10-16). The preponderance of the
civil over the ecclesiastical power, as an his-
torical fact, in the kingdom of Judah, seems to
be proved from these circumstances.
The priests of this series ended with Seraiah,
who was taken prisoner by Nebuzar-adan, and
slain at Riblah by Nebuchadnezzar, together
with Zephaniah the second priest or .Sagan,
after the burning of the Temple and the plunder
of all the sacred vessels (2 K. xxv. 18). His
son Jehozadak or Josedech was at the same time
carried away captive (1 Ch. vi. 15).
The time occupied by these (say) eighteen
high-priests who ministered at Jerusalem, was
about 454 years, which gives an average of
something more than twenty-five years to each
high-priest. It is remarkable that not a single
instance is recorded after the time of David of
recourse to the Urim and Thummim as a means
of inquiring of the Lord. The ministry of the
prophets seems to have superseded that of the
high-priests (see e.g. 2 Ch. xv., xviii., xx. 14,
15; 2 K. xix. 1, 2, xxii. 12-14; Jer. xxi. 1, 2).
Some think that Urim and Thummim ceased
with the theocracy ; others with the division of
Israel into two kingdoms. Nehemiah seems to
have expected the restoration of it (Neh. vii. 65),
and so perhaps did Judas Haccabaeus (1 Mace
iv. 46 ; cp. xiv. 41) ; while Joscphus affirms
that it had been exercised for the last time two
hundred years before he wrote, viz. by John
Hyrcanus (Whiston, note on Ant. iii. 8, and
Prid. Conn. i. 150, 151). It seems therefore
scarcely true to reckon Urim and Thummim as
one of the marks of God's Presence with Solo-
mon's Temple, which was wanting to the second
Temple (Prid. i. 138, 144 sq.). This early
cessation of answers by Urim and Thummim,
though the high-priest's office and the wearing
of the breastplate continued in force during so
many centuries, seems to confirm the notion
that such answers were not the fundamental,
hut only the accessory uses of the breastplate of
judgment. (But rid', sipr. I. (2).)
(c.) An interval of about fifty-two years
HIGH-PRIEST, THE
elapsed between the high-priests of the second
and third group, during which there wis
neither Temple, nor Altar, nor Ark, nor priest
Jehozadak, or Josedech, as it is written it
the A. V. of Haggai (i. 1, 14, &c ; Sept. and
Vulg., Josedec; Heb. and R. V. Jehozadak),
who should have succeeded Seraiah, lived and
died a captive at Babylon. The pontifical
office revived in his son Jeshua, of shun
such frequent mention is made in Ezra and
Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah, 1 Esd. and
Ecclus. ; and he therefore stands at the head of
this third and last series, honourably distin-
guished for his zealous co-operation with Zernb-
babel in rebuilding the Temple, and founding
the new religious community. His successors,
as far as the O. T. guides us, were Joiakim,
Eliashib, Joiada, Johanan, Jonathan (so Hen-
feld and others), and Jaddua (see Neh. iii. 10,
11, 22, 23). Of these we find Eliashib hindering
rather than seconding the zeal of the devout
Tirshatha Nehemiah for the observance of God's
law in Israel (Neh. xiii. 4, 7); and Johanan,
Josephus tells us, murdered his own brother
Jesus or Jeshua in the Temple, which led to its
further profanation by Bagoses, the general of
Artaxerxes Mnemon's army (Ant. xi. 7). Jaddua
was high-priest in the time of Alexander the
Great. Concerning him Josephus relates the
story that he went out to meet Alexander at
Sapha (probably the ancient Mizpeh) at the
head of a procession of priests ; and that whm
Alexander saw the multitude clothed in whits,
and the priests in their linen garments, and the
high-priest in blue and gold, with the mitre on
his head, and the gold plate, on which was the
Name of God, he stepped forward alone and
adored the Name, and hastened to embrace the
high-priest (Ant. xi. 8, §5). Josephus adds
among other things that the king entered
Jerusalem with the high-priest, and went np
to the Temple to worship and offer sacrifice;
that he was shown the " prophecies of Daniel
[see Daniel] concerning himself, and at the
high-priest's intercession granted the Jews
liberty to live according to their own laws,
and freedom from tribute on the Sabbatical
years. The story, however, is undoubtedly
apocryphal in its details, though the main fact
may be historical (see Schurer, I. L p. 18',
n. 1). It was the brother of this Jaddua,
Manasseh, who, according to the same authority,
was at the request of Sanballat made the first
high-priest of the Samaritan temple by Alex-
ander the Great.
Jaddua was succeeded by Onias I., his son.
and he again by Simon the Just, the last of
" the Men of the Great Synagogue," to whom
the Jews ascribe the completion of the Canon
of the 0. T. (Prideaux, Conn. i. 545). Of him
Jesus, the son of Sirach, Bjieaks in terms of glow-
ing eulogy in Ecclus. 1., and ascribes to him the
repair and fortification of the Temple, with other
works. (Others, e.g. Schurer, suppose that the
reference is to Simon II.) The passage (re. 1-
21) contains a vivid account of the ministrations
of the high-priest, in all the pomp and splendour
of his office, as exhibited in the period of the
writer. Upon Simon's death, his son Oniu
being under age, Eleazar, Simon's brother,
succeeded him. The high-priesthood of Eleaur
is memorable as being that under which the
Digitized by
Google
HIGH-PRIEST, THE
LXX. Version of the Scriptures was made at
Alexandria for Ptolemy Philadelphia, according
to the account of Josephus taken from Aristeas
(Ant. xii. 2), whose letter, however, is a forgery
[SEPTCAODrr].' The translation of the Hebrew
Scriptures into Greek, valuable as it was with
reference to the wider interests of religion, and
marked as was the Providence which gave it to
the world during this period as a preparation
for the approaching Advent of Christ, yet
viewed in its relation to Judaism and the high-
priesthood, was a sign, and perhaps a helping
cause, of their decay. It marked a growing
tendency to Hellenize, utterly inconsistent with
the spirit of the Mosaic economy. Accordingly,
in the high-priesthood of Eleazar's rival nephews,
Jesus and Onias, we find their very names
changed into the Greek ones of Jason and
Menelaus ; and with the introduction of this
new feature of rival high-priests we find one of
them, HeneUna, strengthening himself and
seeking support from the Syro-Grecian kings
against the orthodox party, by offering to
forsake the national laws and customs, and to
adopt those of the Greeks. The building of a
gymnasium at Jerusalem for the use of these
apostate Jews, and their endeavour to conceal
their circumcision when stripped for the games
(1 Mace i. 14, 15 ; 2 Mace. iv. 12-15 ; Joseph.
Ant. xii. 5, § 1), show the length to which this
spirit was carried. The acceptance of the
spurious priesthood of the temple of Onion from
Ptolemy Philometor by Onias (the son of Onias
the high-priest), who would have been the
legitimate high-priest on the death of Menelaus,
his uncle, is another striking indication of the
same degeneracy. By this flight of Onias into
Egypt the succession of high-priests in the
family of Jehozadak ceased ; for although the
Syro-Grecian kings had introduced much un-
certainty into the succession, by deposing at
their will obnoxious persons, and appointing
whom they pleased, yet the dignity had never
gone out of the one family. Alcimua, whose
Hebrew name was, according to Rutlinus (ap.
•Selden), Joachim, i.e. Joakim or Jehoiakim, of
which Eliakim (=Alkimus) is a natural variant
(cp. Judith iv. 6, Joakim, Greek = Eliakim,
Syriac and Vulg.), and who was made high-
priest by Antiochus Eupator on Menelaus being
put to death by him, was the first who was of
a different family; one, says Josephus, that
" was indeed of the stock of Aaron, but not of
this (Jehozadak's) family."
What, however, for a time saved the Jewish
institutions, infused a new life and consistency
into the priesthood and the national religion,
and enabled them to fulfil their destined course
till the Advent of Christ; was the cruel and
impolitic persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes.
This thoroughly aroused the piety and national
spirit of the Jews, and drew together in defence
of their Temple and country all who feared
God and were attached to their national institu-
tions. The result was that after the high-
priesthood had been brought to the lowest
degradation by the apostasy and crimes of the
last Onias or Menelaus, and after a vacancy of
r Even the Seder otam Zutta ascribes to " Ptolemy"
no more than the Qreek version of the Five Books of
the Law.
HIGH-PBIEST, THE 1367
seven yean had followed the brief pontificate of
Alcimua, his no less infamous successor, a new
and glorious succession of high-priests arose in
the Hasmonean family, who united the dignity
of civil rulers, and for a time of independent
sovereigns, to that of the high-priesthood.
Josephus, who is followed by Lightfoot, Selden,
and others, calls Judas Maccabaeus " high-priest
of the nation of Judah " (Ant. xii. 10, § 6) ; but,
according to the far better authority of 1 Mace,
x. 20, it was not till after the death of Judas
Maccabaeus that Alcimus himself died, and that
Alexander, king of Syria, made Jonathan, the
brother of Judas, high-priest. Josephus him-
self, too, speaks of Jonathan as " the first of the
sons of Asamoneus, who was high-priest " ( Vita,
§ 1). It is possible, however, that Judas may
have been elected by the people to the office of
high-priest, though never confirmed in it by the
Syrian kings. The Hasmonean family were
priests of the course of Joiarib, the first of the
twenty-four courses (1 Ch. xxiv. 7), whose
return from Captivity is recorded 1 Ch. ix. 10,
Neh. xi. 10. They were probably of the house
of Eleazar, though this cannot be affirmed with
certainty ; and Josephus tells us that he him-
self was related to them, one of his ancestors
having married a daughter of Jonathan, the
first high-priest of the house. This Hasmonean
dynasty lasted from B.C. 153, till the family
was damaged by intestine divisions, and then
destroyed by Herod the Great. Aristobulus,
the last high-priest of his line, brother of
Mariamne, was murdered by order of Herod, his
brother-in-law, B.C. 35. The independence of
Judaea, under the priest-kings of this race, had
lasted till Pompey took Jerusalem, and sent
king Aristobulus II. (who had also taken the
high-priesthood from his brother Hyrcanus) a
prisoner to Rome. Pompey restored Hyrcanus
to the high-priesthood, but forbade him to
wear the diadem. Everything Jewish was now,
however, hastening to decay. Herod made men
of low birth high-priests, deposed them at his
will, and named others in their room. In this
he was followed by Archelaus, and by the
Romans when they took the government of
Judaea into their own hands ; so that there were
no fewer than twenty-eight high-priests from
the reign of Herod to the destruction of the
Temple by Titus, a period of 107 years.* The
N. T. introduces us to some of these later and
oft-changing high-priests, viz. Annas and
Caiaphas — the former, high-priest at the com-
mencement of St. John Baptist's ministry, with
Caiaphas as second priest ; and the latter high-
priest himself at our Lord's crucifixion — and
Ananias, thought to be the same as Ananus, who
was murdered by the Zealots just before the
siege of Jerusalem, before whom St. Paul was
tried, as we read Acts xxiii., and of whom he
said, " God shall smite thee, thou whited wall."
Theophiltu, the son of Ananus, was the high-
priest from whom Saul received letters to the
synagogue at Damascus (Acts ix. 1, 14, Kuinoel).
• Josephus tells us of one Ananus and his five sons
who all filled the office of hlgb-prlest In torn. One of
these, Ansnus the younger, wis deposed by king
Agrlppa for the part he took in causing " James the
brother of Jesus who was called Christ" to be stoned
(Ant. xx. 9, } 1).
Digitized by
Google
1368
HIGH-PEIEST, THE
HIGH-PKIEST, THE
Both he and Ananias seem certainly to have
presided in the Sanhedrin, and that officially,
nor is Light foot's explanation (viii. 450 and
484) of the mention of the high-priest, though
Gamaliel and his son Simeon were respectively
presidents of the Sanhedrin, at all probable or
satisfactory (see Acts v. 17, &c). The last
high-priest was appointed by lot by the Zealots
from the coarse of priests called by Joseph us
Eniachim (probably a corrupt reading for Eli-
achira = El-jakim=Jakim, 1 Ch. zxiv. 12). He is
thus described by the Jewish historian : " His
name was Phannias : he was the son of Samuel
of the village of Aphtha, a man not only not of
the number of the chief priests, but who, such
a mere rustic was he, scarcely knew what the
high-priesthood meant. Yet did they drag him
reluctant from the country, and, setting him
forth in a borrowed character as on the stage,
they pat the sacred vestments on him, and
instructed him how to act on the occasion.
This shocking impiety, which to them was a
subject of merriment and sport, drew tears from
the other priests, who beheld from a distance
their Law turned into ridicule, and groaned over
the subversion of the sacred honours " (5. J. iv.
3, § 8). Thus ignominiously ended the series
of high-priests which had stretched in a scarcely
broken line, through nearly fourteen, or, ac-
cording to the common chronology, sixteen
centuries. The Egyptian, Assyrian, Babylonian,
Persian, Grecian, and Roman empires, which
the Jewish high-priests had seen in turn over-
shadowing the world, had each, except the last,
one by one withered away and died ; and now
the last successor of Aaron was stripped of his
sacerdotal robes, and the Temple which he
served laid level with the ground to rise no more.
But this did not happen till the true High-priest
and King of Israel, the Minister of the Sanctuary
and of the true Tabernacle which the Lord
pitched, and not man, had offered His one sacri-
fice, once for all, and had taken His place at the
right hand of the Majesty in the heavens, to
continue a Priest for ever, in the Sanctuary
which shall never be taken down.
The subjoined table shows the succession of
high-priests, as far as it can be ascertained, and
of the contemporary civil rulers.
CIVIL KULEIt.
Moses
Joshua
Othniet .
Ablshua .
Eli .
Samuel
Saul
David
Solomon .
[Rehobuam
Abyah .
Ass
HIGU-PEIEST.
Aaron.
Kleazar.
l'hlnehas.
Ablshua.
Eli.
Ahitub.
AbiJaJj.
Xailok and Ablathar.
Azariab. [Zodok.]*
Ahimaaz.]
Jobanan. [Azarlah.]
Azariab.
■ The names added in square brackets are from the
Seder olam Zutta, according to which Ablathar only was
high-priest under David, and Zadok under Solomon.
The names of Ahas (= Jehoabaz), Pedatah, Nerlab, ic.
seem worthy of notice as an evidence of a distinct
tradition. That " Jotham " should be high-priest under
Jotham, is hardly more remarkable than that " Aza-
riab.'* should be blgb-priest under Azariah-Uizlah
(2 Ch. xxvi. 17).
CIVIL KCLIR.
RIGH-rBIEST.
Jehoshaphat .
Amsrlah. [Ahas.]
Jehorom ....
Jeholada. [Jebotortb.]
Ahoiiah .
„ [Jehoshaphat. j
Jeboaah ....
,, and Zechariah.
[Jehoiade, Pedalab.]
Amazlab ....
? [Zedeklah.]
Czziah .
Axarlah. [Joel.]
Jotham ....
? [Jotham.]
Ahat ....
Urljoh.
HeseUah.
Axariah. [Nerlah.]
Manasseh . .
Sballnm. [Hoshalah.]
Amon ....
„ [Shallum.]
Jonah ....
Hllkiah. [Hllkloh.]
Jehoialdm
Axarlah? [Axarlah.]
ZedeUab.
Seraiah.
EvU-Herodach .
Jehozadak.
Zerubbabel (Cyrus and
Darius)
Jesbua.
MordecaU (Xerxes) .
Joiokim.
Eira and Nehenilah (Art*-
xerxes)
Ellashib.
Darius Notbus .
Jotoda.
Artaxerxes Mnemon
Jobanan.
Alexander the Great
Jaddua.
Onlss L (Ptolemy Soter,
Antlgonus) .
Oniasl.
Ptolemy Soter .
Simon I., the Just.
Ptolemy Philadelphus
Eleaxar.
« ». • .
Manasseh.
Ptolemy Energetes .
OnlasIL
Ptolemy Phi locator .
Simon II.
Seleucus IV. aud Antlochns
Eplphanes .
OnloslII.
Antlochus Eplphanes
(Joshua, or) Jason.
„ „
Onlas ill., or Mcnelaus.
Demetrius
Joctmua, or Aldmus.
Alexander Bales
Jonathan, brother of Judas
Msccabaeus(Hasxnaneaii).
Simon (Hasmonean) .
Simon (Hasmonean).
John Hyrcanus (Hum.) .
John Hyrcanus (Do.).
King Aristobulus (Hasm.)
Aristobulus (Do.).
King Alexsnder Jannaeus
(Hasmonean)
Queen Alexandra (Hasm.)
King Aristobulus II. (Has-
monean)
Pompey the Great and
Hyrcanus, or rather,
towards the end of his
pontificate, Antipater .
Pacorus the Parthian
Herod, k. of Judaea
Herod the Great
Archclans, k. of Judaea
Cyrenlus, governor of Syria,
second time .
Valerius Gratns, procurator
of Judaea
Alexander Jannaeus (Do.).
Hyrcanus H. (Do.).
Aristobulus II. (Da).
Hyrcanus II. (Do.).
Antlgonus (Do.).
Ananelus, or Hananeel.
Aristobulus (lost of Has-
moneaas) murdered by
Herod.
Ananelus restored.
Jesus, son of Phabes (i.e.
Pi-abl).">
Simon, son of Boetbus,
father-in-law to Herod.
Matthias, son of Theo-
phllus.
Joseph, son of Ellem or
Diem,
Joazar, son of Boetbus.
Eleaxar, son of Boethus.
Jesus, son of Sie or See.
Joazar (second time).
Asanas, or Annas, son of
Seth(=Seir).
Ishmael, son of PhaU or
Pl-abi.
' This name PI-aM (»3N-»D or »3K»D. *to0i, ■*»*■
xx. 8, y 8) Is Interesting as a form parallel to Phlnehss
IDfLVQi Pi-nehas), also a priestly name.
Digitized by
Google
HILEN
HILKIAH
1369
CTV1L St LIE.
HH>H-PBU8T.
Valerias Gratas, procurator
of Judaea • • Eleaxar, son of Ananas or
Annas.
„ „ . Simon, son of Kamithus
{i.e. Qamhith).
„ „ . Joseph, called ; Calaphas
(ha-tjayyaph).
Vitelline, governor of Syria Jonathan, son of Ananus.
. Theophllus, brother of
Jonathan.
Herod Agrippa I. . . Simon Cantheras, son of
Boethus.
„ Matthias, brother of Jona-
than, son of Ananas.
„ „ ElioneuB, son of Cantheras.
Uerod, king of Cbalcis . Joseph, son of Camel or
Kemedes (=Kamlthus).
„ „ . Ananias, son of tiedebaeua.
Herod Agrippa 11. . Ishmael, son of FhaU or
Pl-abl.
„ „ . Joseph, called Kabi, son of
" Simon the high-priest ■"
(t.e. Cantheras ?).
Ananus, son of Ananus or
Appointed by the people
Jesus, son of Damnaeus
(Jos. Ant. xx. 9, $ 4).
Jesus, son of Gamaliel.
Matthias, son of Theo-
phllos.
I'hanmas or Fhineesos (i.e.
Phinebas), son of Samuel.
The latter part of the above list is taken
parti j from Lightfoot, vol. ix. ch. iv. ; also in
part from Josephus directly, and in part from
Whiaton's note on Ant. xt. 8, § 5. See also the
histories of Ewald, Kuenen, Wellhausen, Grtttz,
and especially Schfirer. [A. C. H.] [C. J. B.]
HI'LEN (J^n ; B. SeXj-rf, A. NijAaV, BeUm),
the name of a city of Judah allotted with its
" suburbs " to the priests (1 Ch. vi. 58) ; and
which in the corresponding lists of Joshua is
called HOLOR. [G.] [W.]
HTLKI'AH Onji?^n and njp^n = the Lord
is my portion; B. XeAxclcu, A. -kIus; Helcias).
1. Hilkiahd, father of Eliakim (2 K. xviii.
37 ; Is. xxii. 20, xxxvi. 22). [EuAKIM.]
2. High-priest in the reign of Josiah (2 K.
xxii. 4 sq. ; 2 Ch. xxxiv. 9 sq. ; 1 Esd. i. 8).
According to the genealogy in 1 Ch. vi. 13
(A. V.), he was son of Shallum, and, from
Ezra Tii. 1, apparently the ancestor of Ezra the
scribe. His high-priesthood was rendered
particularly illustrious by the great reforma-
tion effected under it by king josiah, by the
solemn Passover kept at Jerusalem in the 18th
year of that king's reign, and above all by the
discovery which he made of the Book of the
Law of Hoses in the Temple, probably deposited
by the side of the Ark of the covenant within
the vail (Deut. xxxi. 9, 26).
A difficult and interesting question arises,
What was the book found by Hilkiah ? Various
answers have been given, bnt modern criticism
is mostly in favour of the Book of Deuteronomy,
and probably other portions of the Law (Eders-
heim, Bible History, iv. 182 sq.), or— more
briefly — Deut. xii.-ixvi. alone (Wellhausen,
Die Composition . . . d. ffistor. BIS. d. A. Ts.,
p. 189; Stade, Gesch. d. Yolkes Isr. p. 61).
AH the actions of Josiah which followed the
reading of the book found — the destruction of
all idolatrous symbols, the putting away of
wizards and workers with familiar spirits, and
the keeping of the Passover — were such as would
follow from hearing chapters xvi., xviii., and
others of Deuteronomy, while there is not
one that points to any precept contained in the
other Books and not in Deuteronomy. Further,
it is well known how full the writings of
Jeremiah are of direct references and of points
of resemblance to the Book of Deuteronomy.
Now this is at once accounted for on the sup-
position of the Law thus found by Hilkiah being
that Book, which would thus naturally be an
object of special curiosity and study to the
Prophet, and as naturally influence his own
writings (cp. Jer. xi. 3-5 with Deut. xxvii. 26).
Surprise has been sometimes expressed at
the previous non-acquaintance with this book
on the part of Hilkiah, Josiah, and the people
generally, which their manner of receiving it
plainly evidences ; and some have argued from
hence that " the law of Moses " is not of older
date than the reign of Josiah:* in fact that
some unknown person invented it, and Hilkiah
pretended to have found a copy in the Temple
in order to give sanction to the reformation
which they had in hand. If the charge of
fraud or forgery may be at once dismissed, is
the " needful illusion " stipulated by some critics
in explanation of what took place, much better ?
The following remarks will point out the true
inferences to be drawn from the narrative of
this remarkable discovery in the Books of Kings
and Chronicles. The direction in Deut. xxxi.
10-13 for the public reading of the Law at the
Feast of Tabernacles on each seventh year, or
year of release, to the whole congregation, as
the means of perpetuating the knowledge of
the Law, sufficiently shows that at that time
a multiplication of copies and a multitude of
readers were not contemplated. The same
thing seems to be implied also in the direction
given in Deut. xvii. 18, 19, concerning the copy
of the Law to be made, for the special use of
the king, distinct from that in the keeping of
the priests and Levites. And this paucity of
copies and of readers is just what one would
have expected in an age when the art of reading
and writing was confined to the professional
scribes, and to the very few others who, like
Moses, had learnt the art in Egypt (Acts vii. 22).
The troublous times of the Judges were obviously
more likely to obliterate than to promote the
study of letters. And whatever occasional
revival of sacred learning may have taken place
under such kings as David, Solomon, Jehoshaphat,
Uzziah, Jotham, and Hezekinh, yet on the other
hand snch reigns as that of Athaliah, the last
years of Joash, that of Ahaz, and above all the
long reign of Manasseh, with their idolatries
and national calamities, must have been most
unfavourable to the study of "the sacred
letters." On the whole, in the days of Josiah
irreligion and ignorance had overflowed all the
dykes erected to stay their progress. In spite
of such occasional acts as the public reading of
» The date preferred by Reuss, Kuenen, Dillmann(F)
and Cheyne (Expotitor, p. 95, Feb. 1892). Ewald,
Robertson Smith, Kittel, Driver (see LOT. p. 82, n. 2),
assign it to the reign of Manasseh ; Delitzacb and Rtebm
(Atitf. I. 2«« sq.) to the reign of Hesekiah.— [F.]
Digitized by
Google
1370
HILLEL
the Law to the people, enjoined by Jeboshaphat
(2 Ch. xvii. 9), and such isolated evidences of
the king's reading the Law, as commanded by
Moses, as the action recorded of Amaziah affords
(2 K. xiv. 6), and the yet more marked ac-
quaintance with the Law attributed to Hezekiah
(2 K. xviii. 5, 6) [Genealogy], everything in
Josiah's reign indicates a very low state of know-
ledge. How then can we wonder that under
such circumstances the knowledge of the Law
had fallen into desuetude ? or fail to see in the
incident of the startling discovery of the copy
of it by Hilkiah one of those many instances of
simple truthfulness which impress on the Scrip-
ture narrative such an unmistakable stamp of
authenticity, when it is read in the same guile-
less spirit in which it is written ? In fact, the
ignorance of the Law of Hoses which this his-
tory reveals is in most striking harmony with
the prevalent idolatry disclosed by the previous
history of Judaea, especially since its connexion
with the house of Ahab, as well as with the low
state of education which is apparent from so
many incidental notices.
The story of Hilkiah's discovery throws no
light whatever upon the mode in which other
portions of the Scriptures were preserved, and
therefore this is not the place to consider it.
But Thenius truly observes that the expression
in 2 K. xxii. 8 clearly implies that the existence
of the Law of Hoses was a thing well known to
the Jews. It is interesting to notice the con-
currence of the king with the high-priest in
the restoration of the Temple, as well as the
analogy of the circumstances with what took
place in the reign of Joash, when Jehoiada
was high-priest, as related in 2 Ch. xxiv.
[Chelcias.] [A. C. H.]
8. Hilkiah (B. om. ; Helcias), a Merarite
Levite, son of Amzi, one of the ancestors of
Ethan (1 Cb. vi. 45 ; Heb. v. 30).
4. Hilkiahu ; another Herarite Levite, second
son of Hosah ; among the doorkeepers of the
Tabernacle in the time of king David (1 Cb. xxvi.
11 ; B. om.).
5. Hilkiah ; one of those who stood on the
right hand of Ezra when he read the Law to the
people. Doubtless a Levite, and probably a
priest (Neh. viii. 4 ; B. 'EAmirf, K. X(\kuL,
A. -eia). He may be identical with the Hilkiah
who came up in the expedition with Jeshua and
Zerubbabel (xii. 7 ; om. BK*A.), and whose de-
scendant Hashabiah is commemorated as living
in the days of Joiakim (xii. 21 ; om. BK*A.).
6. Hilkiahu ; a priest, of Anathoth, father
of the prophet Jeremiah (Jer. i. 1).
7. Hilkiah, father of Gemariah, who was
one of Zedekiah's envoys to Babylon (Jer. xxix.
3). [W. A. W.]
HIL'LEL fyn=hc hath celebrated; B,
"EAAijA, A. 2«AA^m. Joseph. 'EAAijAoi; Mel),
a native of Pirathon in Mount Ephraim, father
of Abdon, one of the judges of Israel (Jndg.
xii. 13, 15).
HILLS. The structure and characteristics
of the hills of Palestine will be most con-
veniently noticed in the general description of
the features of the country. [Palestine.] But
it may not be unprofitable to call attention here
to the various Hebrew terms for which the
word " hill " has been employed in the A. V.
HIN
1. Gibeah, ny3|, from a root akin to 23$,
which seems to have the force of curvature or
humpishness. A word involving this idea is
peculiarly applicable to the rounded hills of
Palestine, and from it are derived, as has been
pointed out under Gibeah, the names of several
places situated on hills. Our translators (A. V.)
have been consistent in rendering gibeah by
" hill ; " in four passages only qualifying it as
"little hill," doubtless for the more complete
antithesis to " mountain " (Pss. lxv. 12, lxxii. 3,
cxiv. 4, 6, where R. V. has " little hills " in
cviv. 4, 6 only).
2. But they have also employed the same
English word for the very different term har,
"iri, which has a mnch more extended sense than
gibeah, meaning a whole district rather than an
individual eminence, and to which oar word
" mountain " answers with tolerable accuracy.
This exchange is always undesirable, but it
sometimes occurs so as to confuse the meaning
of a passage where it is desirable that the topo-
graphy should be unmistakable. For instance,
in Ex. xxiv. 4 the " hill " (R. V. "mount ") is
the same which is elsewhere in the same
chapter (vv. 12, 13, 18, &c.) and Book, con-
sistently and accurately rendered "mount"
and "mountain." In Num. xiv. 44, 45, the
"hill" is the "mountain" of t>. 40, as also
in Dent. i. 41, 43, compared with m. 24, 44 ;
and in Josh. xv. 9, compared with the pre-
ceding verse. The country "of the " hills "
(R. V. "hill country") in Dent, i.' 7, Josh,
ix. 1, x. 40, xi. 16, is the elevated district of
Judaih, Benjamin, and Ephraim, which is cor-
rectly called " the mountain " in the earliest
descriptions of Palestine (Num. xiii 29), and
in many subsequent passages. The " holy hill "
(Ps. iii. 4), the « hill of Jehovah " (xxiv. 3),
the "hill of God" (lxriii. 15), are nothing
else than "Mount Skm." In 2 K. i. 9 and
iv. 27, the use of the word " hill" (retained in
K- V.) obscures the allusion to Carmel, which
in other passages of the life of the prophet
(ej. 1 K. xviii. 19 ; 2 K. iv. 25) has the term
" mount " correctly attached to it. Other
places in the historical Books in which the same
substitution weakens the force of the narrative,
are as follows : — Gen. vii. 19 ; Deut. viii. 7 ;
Josh. xiii. 6, xviii. 13, 14 ; Judg. xvi. 3 ; 1 Sam.
xxiii. 14, xxv. 20, xxvi. 13 ; 2 Sam. xiii. 34 ;
1 K. xx. 23, 28, xxii. 17, &c. ,
3. On one occasion the word Ma'aleh, iT?W3,
is rendered "hill," viz. 1 Sam. ix. 11, where it
would be better to employ "ascent" (as in
R. V.) or some similar term.
4. In the N. T. the word " hill " is employed
to render the Greek word /Sovrot ; but on one
occasion it is used for Spot, elsewhere " moun-
tain," so as to obscure the connexion between
the two parts of the same narrrative. The
"hill" (R. V. " mountain ") from which Jesus
was coming down in Luke ix. 37, is the same as
" the mountain " into which He had gone for
His transfiguration the day before (cp. v. 28).
In Matt. v. 14, and Lnke iv. 29, Spot is also
rendered "hill," but without inconvenience.
In Luke L 39, the " hill country " ($ op«uH»
is the same " mountain of Judah " to which
reference is frequent in the O. T. [G.] [W.]
HIN. [Measube.1
Digitized by
Google
HIND
HIND. [Hart.]
HINGE. 1. "VX, <rr ("Vo , l> oardo, with thc
notion of turning (Ges. p: 1165). _ 2. TIB,
Bipapa, cardo, with the notion of insertion (Ges.
p. 1096). Both ancient Egyptian and modern
Oriental doors were and are hung by means of
pivots turning in sockets both on the upper and
lower sides. In Syria, and especially the
Hanran, there are many ancient doors consist-
ing of stone slabs with pivots carved out of the
same piece, inserted in sockets above and below,
and fixed during the building of the house. The
allusion in Prov. xxvi. 14 is thus clearly ex-
plained. The hinges mentioned in 1 E. vii. 50
were probably of the Egyptian kind, attached
to the upper and lower sides of the door (Buck-
ingham, Arab Tribes, p. 177 ; Porter, Damascus,
ii. 22, 192 ; Maundrell, Early Travels, pp. 447,
448, Bohn; Shaw, Travels, p. 210; Lord
Lindsay, Letters, p. 292 ; Wilkinson, Anc. Eg,
i. 15 [1878]). [H. W. P.]
HINNOM, VALLEY OP, otherwise called
" the valley of the son " or " children of Hin-
nom" (Dirna, or ""13 % ° n <* T , 3? N!,
variously rendered by LXX. <t>ipay( 'Ew»)i,
B. 'Ovbp in Josh. xv. 8, or vlov 'EiwS/i [2 K. xxiii.
10; Jer. vii. 29, 30, xxxii. 35], or B. Taiina,
A. Tel 'OwoV [Josh, xviii. 16]; also B. «V
TaifitviiiL, A. iv Tnfatvv&ii [2 Ch. xxviii. 3] ;
B. iv yi fare 'Eml/i, A. iv -yp Btt»6fi ; to xoXv-
dvSptov vivv rStv rtKvuv ainuv [Jer. xix. 2], sr.
vlov "EwoV [v. 6]), a ravine, got, taking its name,
according to Dean Stanley, from "some ancient
hero, the son of Hinnom," having encamped in
it (Stanley, S. f P. p. 172). It was on the
south side of Jerusalem, and formed the bound-
ary between Judah and Benjamin ; and to the
west of it there was a mountain which marked
the northern extremity of the vale, 'emeq, of
Rephaim (Josh. xv. 8; xviii. 16). It is also
mentioned as the northern limit of the district
occupied by the " children of Judah " after the
Captivity (Neh. xi. 30), and as being ncnr the
gate Harsith (R. V. marg. of potsherds ; A. V.
"east gate," marg. sun gate) of Jerusalem
(Jer. xix. 2). Ahaz and Manasseh burnt incense
and made their children " pass through the
fire " in the valley of Hinnom (2 Ch. xxviii. 3,
cp. 2 K. xvi. 3; 2 Ch. xxxiii. 6, cp. 2 K.
xxi. 6) ; probably at the " high places of To-
phet " or " of Baal," which were specially built
in connexion with the fiendish custom of infant
sacrifice to Molech, the fire-god * (Jer. vii. 31,
xxxii. 35). [Tophet.] To put an end to these
abominations the place was polluted by Josiah,
who rendered it ceremonially unclean by spread-
ing over it human bones and other corruptions
(2 K. xxiii. 10, 13, 14 ; 2 Ch. xxiv. 4, 5), from
which time it appears to have become the
common burial-place of the city, and to have
received the name of the Valley of Slaughter
(Jer. vii. 32, xix. 16). Most commentators
follow Buxtorf, Lightfoot, and others, in as-
serting that perpetual fires were here kept up
• In the Immediate vicinity. If not at the same spot,
must have been the blgb place which Solomon built
" for Molech, the abomination of the children of
Ammon " (1 K. xi. 1).
HINNOM, VALLEY OF 1371
for the consumption of bodies of criminals,
carcases of animals, and whatever else was com-
bustible ; but the Rabbinical authorities usually
brought forward in support of this idea appear
insufficient, and Robinson declares (i. 274) that
" there is no evidence of any other fires than
those of Molech having been kept up in this
valley," referring to Rosenmiiller, Bibliseh.
Oeogr. n. i. 156, 164. For the more ordinary
view, see Hengstenberg, Christol. ii 454, iv. 41 ;
Keil on Kings ii. 147, Clark's edit. ; and cp. Is.
xxx. 33, lxvi. 24.
From its ceremonial defilement, and from the
detested and abominable fire of Molech, if not
from the supposed ever-burning fnneral piles,
the later Jews applied the name of this valley
Ge Hinnom, Gehenna, to denote the place of
eternal torment, and some of the Rabbins hero
fixed the " door of hell ; " a sense in which it is
used by our Lord. [Gehenka.] It gave iu
name to the " Valley gate " of Jerusalem b (2 Ch.
xxvi. 9 ; Neh. ii. 13, 15, iii. 13) ; and it is per-
haps " the valley " kox' iioxhv (Jer. ii. 23), the
"valley of the shadow of death" (Ps. xxiii. 4),
and the "valley of vision " (Is. xxii. 1, 5). In
Jer. xxxi. 40, it is apparently referred to as
the " valley, 'emee, of the dead bodies."
The Valley of Hinnom has been variously
identified with— (1.) Wady er-Rabdbeh, which
passes round the W. and S. sides of the spur on
which Jerusalem is built. This valley com-
mences in a broad shallow depression, or basin,
to the N.W. of the city, to which the term
'emeq, used by Jeremiah (xxxi. 40) in his de-
scription of the boundary of the restored " holy "
Jerusalem, might well be applied. The basin
may possibly be the " valley of Shaveh, which
is the king's dale "(Gen. xiv. 17), the "king's
dale" (2 Sam. xviii. 18) in which Absalom
reared up a pillar that according to Josephus
(4nt. vii. 10, § 3) was only two stadia from
Jerusalem; and, perhaps, the "valley of Je-
hoshaphat " (Joel iii. 2, 12), or " of decision "
(r. 14). Almost in the centre of the depression
is the Birket Manilla, a large open reservoir,
surrounded by Muhammadan tombs, which some
authorities hare erroneously identified as the
" upper pool " of Gihon. [Gihon.] From this
reservoir the' valley runs E.S.E. to a point
opposite the Jaffa Gate, and in a distance of
550 yards falls 79 feet. It then follows a
southerly direction for 730 yards, and gradually
contracts, until, at the Birket es-Sultdn, which
occupies its whole breadth, it begins to assume
the character of n ravine. Above this reservoir,
which is 141 feet below the Birket Mamitla, and
was called in the Middle Ages Germanus, the
aqueduct conveying water from "Solomon's
Pools " to the Temple crosses the valley ; and
at its lower end is the road from Jerusalem to-
Bethlehem. About 130 yards below the Birket
cs- Sultan the vallcv sweeps round to the E., and
descends rapidly, 320 feet in 1000 yards, to its
junction with the Kedron. It is now a deep
ravine between the steep slopes of the modern
Zion and the broken cliffs, honeycombed with
rock-hewn tombs, which, rising in a succession
of terraces, form the northern slopes of the
>■ It may also have given Its name to the gate Gennatb
(Ge-hennath) In the first wall (Joseph. B. J. v. 4, } 2).
Digitized by
Google
1372 HINNOM, VALLEY OP
" Hill of Evil Counsel." Amidst these tombs is
the traditional Aceldama ; and on the height
above tradition places the tree on which Judas
hanged himself. Where the valley joins the
Kedron there is an open plot of ground, occupied
by gardens, that may well be " the pleasant and
woody spot, full of delightful gardens watered
from the fountain of Siloah," which Jerome
identified with Tophet, and which is perhaps
" the fields " of Jer. xxxi. 40. If, as seems pro-
bable, the Valley of Rephaim, which Joseph us
says {Ant. vii. 12, § 4) extended towards Beth-
lehem, is that now called el-Bukei'a, over which
the road to Bethlehem runs, W. er-Rababeh
must be the Valley of Hinnom. It answers ex-
actly to the minute topographical description
in Josh. xv. 8, xviii. 16, and is one of the most
important features in the district. This view
has the support of Robinson (Phys. Oeog.
p. 90 sq.), Stanley (S. $ P. p. 172), Barclay {City
of the Great King, p. 90), Riehm (HWB. s. v.);
fobler (Topog. ii. 39 sq.), Baedeker -Socin
(Hbk.\ &c
(2.) The narrow ravine, called by Josephus
the Tyropoeon Valley, that divides the spur, on
which Jerusalem stands, into two unequal
halves, has been proposed by Professor Robertson
Smith (Encyc. Brit. s. v. Jerusalem), Professor
Sayce (PEFQy. Stat. 1883, p. 213), Rev. W.
Birch (PEFQy. Stat. 1878, p. 179), and
Schwarz (Dot H. L. p. 190). It is argued
in support of this view that pre-exilic Jerusalem
was confined to the eastern hill ; that the
Tyropoeon is a veritable gai; and that a
boundary following its course would give
the western hill to Judah and the eastern to
Benjamin, thus meeting the supposed difficulty
in Josh. xv. 63, Judg. i. 3-8, 21, where Jeru-
salem is given to Judah. On the other hand,
the Tyropoeon is a minor topographical feature
compared with W. er-Babdbeh and the Kedron,
and so not likely to have been selected as the
boundary between two tribes, or to have been
alluded to in the terms of Neh. xi. 30. Dean
Stanley has suggested (8. $ P. p. 176) that the
ancient city stood on neutral ground, and was
excluded equally from the boundaries of each
tribe. [But see Jerusalem.] It has been
suggested by Dr. Bonar {Imp. Bib. Diet. s. v.
Jerusalem) that Josephus mistook gebcnmmm
for cheese-makers, and translated it rvporoioi,
the Hebrew words being so very similar, and
by M. Clermont-Ganneau (MS. note) that yi\-
Ptvwin> in the primitive text of Josephus was
taken by an ignorant reader for the transcription
of Gebinin (cheeses), as if from gcbinah, cheese,
and translated in the margin by rvpovoiay.
(3.) The Valley of the Kedron has been pro-
posed by Sir C. Warren (Recov. of Jer. p. 307),
who apparently bases his argument on the mis-
translation " east gate " of A. V. in Jer. xix. 2
(see above); and on Arab tradition, which
identifies the Kedron with Wady Jahannum (Le
Strange, Pal. under the Moslems, p. 218 sq.).
This was the view of Jerome (05.* p. 160, 9);
and it appears to have been adopted by Dean
Stanley (Recov. of Jer. xiv.). It is true that
the lower part of the Kedron valley may well
be called a ravine, gai; but the distinction
between the valley (nachal) of the Kedron and
the ravine (gai) of the children of Hinnom is
apparently always maintained in the Bible;
HIRAM
and the Kedron valley does not meet the re-
quirements of Josh. xv. 8, xviii. 16.
A possible explanation of the difficulty is that
the true Valley of Hinnom, mentioned as a
geographical feature in Joshua and Nehemiah,
is tthe W. er-Babdbeh ; and that after the intro-
duction of infant sacrifices the name was loosely
applied to those portions of the three valleys
nearest to Tophet. [W.]'
HIPPOPOTAMUS. The marg. reading of
R. V. for ntona. [Behemoth.]
HI'BAH (rrvn, ? = noble; Etpds ; Hiram),
an Adullamite, the friend (1H) of Judah (Gen.
xxxviii. 1, 12 ; and see v. 20). For « friend "
the LXX. and Vulg. have "shepherd," probably
reading \i\B\
HI'BAM, or HTJ'RAM (0"Vn, or DTMI [see
HuramJ probably for OTTO* or D11HK, a
Phoenician title = brother of the exalted one;
cp. Bathgen, Beitr. z. Semit. Reliijionsgeschichte,
p. 156 ; Xtipafi ; Hiram). 1. The king of Tyre
who sent workmen and materials to Jerusalem,
first (2 Sam. v. 11, 1 Ch. xiv. 1) to build a
palace for David, whom he ever loved (1 K. r.
1), and again (1 K. v. 10, vii. 13 ; 2 Ch. ii. 14,
16) to build the Temple for Solomon, with
whom he had a treaty of peace and commerce
(1 K. v. 11, 12). The contempt with which he
received Solomon's present of Cabul (1 K. ix.
12) does not appear to have caused any breach
between the two kings. He admitted Solomon's
ships, issuing from Joppa, to a share in the
profitable trade of the Mediterranean (1 K. x.
22) ; and Jewish sailors, under the guidance of
Tyrians, were taught to bring the gold of India
(1 K. ix. 26) to Solomon's two harbours on the
Red Sea (see Ewald, Ocsch. Isr. iii. 345-347).
Eupolemon (ap. Euseb. Praep. Enang. ix. 30)
states that David, after a war with Hiram,
reduced him to the condition of a tributary
prince. Dius the Phoenician historian, and
Menander of Ephesus (ap. Joseph, c. Ap. i. 17,
18), assign to Hiram a prosperous reign of 34
years, and relate that his father was Abibal,
his son and successor Baleazar ; that he rebuilt
various idol-temples, and dedicated some splen-
did offerings ; that he was successful in war ;
that he enlarged and fortified his city ; that he
and Solomon had a contest with riddles or dark
sayings (cp. Samson and his friends, Judg. xiv.
12), in which Solomon, after winning a large
sum of money from the king of Tyre, was
eventually outwitted by Abdemon, one of his
subjects. The intercourse of these great and
kindred-minded kings was much celebrated by
local historians. Josephus (Ant. viii. 2, §8)
states that the correspondence between them
with respect to the building of the Temple was
preserved among the Tyrian archives in his
days. With the letters in 1 K. v. and 2 Ch.
ii. may be compared not only his copies of the
letters, but also the still less authentic letters
between Solomon and Hiram, and between
Solomon and Vaphres (Apries?), which are
preserved by Eupolemon (ap. Euseb. Praep.
Enang. ix. 30), and mentioned by Alexander
Polyhistor (ap. Clem. Alex. Strom, i. 21, p. 332).
Some Phoenician historians (ap. Tatian, ami.
Digitized by
Google
v HIRCANU8
Grace. § 37) relate that Hiram, besides sup-
plying timber for the Temple, gave bis daughter
in marriage to Solomon (so Hamburger, BE.
s. n., referring to 1 K. xxxiii. 11, but Kiehm,
HWB. a. n., rejects this as very improbable).
Jewish writers in less ancient times cannot
overlook Hiram's uncircumcision notwithstand-
ing his services towards the building of the
Temple. Their legends relate (ap. Eisenm. Ent.
Jud. i. 868) that because he was a God-fearing
man and built the Temple he was received alive
into Paradise ; but that, after he had been there
a thousand years, he sinned by pride, and was
thrust down into hell.
The so-called Tomb of Hiram stands on the
hillside east of Tyre. The sarcophagus of
limestone rests on a massive pedestal, the whole
perfect if weather-beaten, "a solitary, vener-
able relic of remote antiquity " (Porter, Hdbk.
ii. 395). Hiram's name is also connected with
a fountain near Tyre, over which a massive
stone structure has been raised.
2. Hiram was the name of a man of mixed
race (1 K. vii. 13, 40), the principal architect
and engineer sent by king Hiram to Solomon ;
also called Huram in the Chronicles. On the
title of 3N = " master," or " father," given to
him in 2 Ch. ii. 13, iv. 16, see Huram, No. 3.
[W.T. B.] [F.]
HIRCA'NUS ('Tpiawis ; Hircamu), "a son
of Tobias," who had a large treasure placed for
security in the treasury of the Temple at the
time of the visit of Heliodorus (c. 187 B.C. ;
2 Mace iii. 11). Josephus also mentions
" children of Tobias " (Ant. xii. 5, § 1, xoi8«
Ta0tov), who, however, belonged to the faction
of Menelaus, and notices especially a son of one
of them (Joseph) who was named Hyrcanus
(Ant. xii. 4, § 2 sq.). But there is no sufficient
reason for identifying (as Riehm prefers, HWB.
s. n.) the Hyrcanus of 2 Mace, with this grand-
son of Tobias, either by supposing that the
ellipse (rov Ta&iov) is to be so filled up
(Grotius, Calmet), or that the sons of Joseph
were popularly named after their grandfather
(Ewald, Oesch. iv. 309), which could scarcely
have been the case in consequence of the great
eminence of their father.
The name appears to be simply a local ap-
pellative, and became illustrious afterwards in
the Maccabean dynasty, though the circum-
stances which led to its adoption are unknown
(yet cp. Joseph. Ant. xiii. 8, § 4). [Macca-
bees.] [B. F. W.]
HITTITES (Wli pl- D'Fin ; fem. T1WI, pi.
JVfin ; Xrrraioi), an important Canaanite tribe.
Gesenius compares the name with Jltf, " fear," but
the word is probably not of Semitic origin. In
Genesis (x. 15) Heth (Tin) is mentioned as a son
of Canaan, son of Ham; and the original inha-
bitants of Sidon, Arka, Simyra, Hamath, and
other cities of Phoenicia, are attributed to the
same family, with Canaanite tribes of the south,
including Jebusites, Amorite*, Girgashites, and
Hivites. The passage is of great ethnical im-
portance. The sons of Ham included Cush (in
Mesopotamia), Mizraim (in Egypt), Phut, and
Canaan. This population is carefully distin-
guished from the Semitic race (Shem) and from
HITTITES
1373
the white race (probably Aryan) of Asia Minor
and Armenia. It thus appears that the Hittites,
named as the first of Canaanite tribes, were of
the same stock as the conquering Cushites of
Chaldea, who advanced into Assyria, and among
whom Nimrod is mentioned as a celebrated
hero. To the same stock also certain tribes of
Mizraim (Egypt) are said to have belonged
(v. 13), including the Philistines. In later
times, we read (e. 18), "the families of the
Canaanites spread abroad " (or " swelled ") from
Sidon to Gaza, and as far east as the Jordan
valley. The account terminates (v. 20) with
the words, " These are the sons of Hum according
to their families (or " extensions "), and accord-
ing to their languages, in their countries, and
in their nations (or " multitudes ")." It appears
natural to suppose that, as they themselves
were of a distinct stock, so also the " languages "
here specified may have differed from those of
the sons of Shem. It would also seem to be
indicated that the original home of the Canaan-
ite (or " lowlander ") was in Northern Syria and
Phoenicia, where Sidon was the " first-born of
Canaan," and that the extension of the race
was southwards towards Gaza.
Abram is said (Gen. xv. 18), on entering the
Land of Promise, to have found Hittites, with
other tribes, including Amorites, Rephaim, Ca-
naanites, Girgashites and Jebusites, and also
with the Kenites, Kadmonites and Kenizzites,
who dwelt south of Hebron, already possessing
the country ; and at Hebron (Gen. xxiii. 3, 7, 8 :
cp. xxv. 10) the "sons of Heth" (DCJ 'j}3)
were established as owners of a city with fields;
they buried in tombs (v. 6) and possessed a
silver currency (e. 16); and merchants were
known to them — a civilised condition which
monumental evidence also shows to have existed
at this early period. This early extension of
the Hittites to the extreme south agrees with
the statement of Ezekiel (xvi. 3), which makes
the original Jebusite population in Jerusalem to
have been of mixed Amorite and Hittite origin
— " thy father was an Amorite and thy mother
a Hittite." The Hittites did not confine theni-
selves to marriages within the limits of their
own tribe. Esau married two Hittite wives
(Gen. xxvi. 34), and a similar alliance was
feared in Jacob's case (Gen. xxvii. 46). About
the time of the Exodus the Hittites (Num. xiii.
29) are said to have inhabited the mountains,
with Jebusites and Amorites, north of the
Amalekites. In Deuteronomy (vii. 1) they are
mentioned as one of the seven nations of Pales-
tine, and stand first as though the most im-
portant of all (cp. Ex. xxxiii. 2). In the book
of Joshua they are, however, mentioned only in
the north of Syria (Josb. i. 4; cp. Judg. i. 26):
in " Lebanon, even unto the great river, the river
Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites." In
David's time Uriah the Hittite (2 Sam. xii.) was
resident in Jerusalem, married to Bathsheba,
whose name is Semitic, and who may perhaps
have been a Hebrew woman. The census of
David's dominions was carried on the north as
far as Tahtim-hodshi (2 Sam. xxiv. 6 ; cp.
Driver in loco), which should be read "(the
land of) the Hittites towards Kadesh," sub-
stituting EHp D'nnn ; cp. Lucian's recension,
e if ~fi[v XnTTitl/u KoJ^s ). In Solomon's time the
" kings of the Hittites " are mentioned, with the
Digitized by
Google
1374
HITTITES
kings of Syria, as receiving, through the medium
of merchants, from Egypt, chariots at a price
of about £100, and horses valued at £25 each.
Solomon married Hittite wives (1 Kings xi. 1)
as well as women of Semitic race from Moab,
Edom, and Ammon. About 800 B.C. the " kings
of the Hittites " were also feared by the Syrians
(2 K. vii. 6), who supposed an alliance with
Israel: "the king of Israel hath hired against
us the kings of the Hittite3, and the kings of
the Egyptians." They disappear after this date
from Hebrew history, and the explanation is
found in the monumental records of the destruc-
tion of their power by Sargon in 717 B.C.
There probably remained, however, much Hittite
blood in the veins of the population, for the
Hebrews early intermarried with the Canaanite
tribes (Judg. in. 5).
The names of the Hittites mentioned in the
Bible are worthy of careful consideration, since
we have seen that the race was of a distinct
stock, not descendants of Shem. The names of
Ephron and Beeri (Gen. xxiii. 3 ; xxvi. 34) have
no proper meaning as Semitic words, nor has
that of Toi or Tou, king of Hamath in David's
time (2 Sam. viii. 9, 10); while Zohar, Elon,
Judith, and Bashemath have been rendered as
Hebrew names (Gen. xxvi. 34). In David's
time, Ahimelech (1 Sam. xxvi. 6) and Uriah
(2 Sam.) have names of which a Semitic render-
ing is possible. Mixture of race is probably
indicated by such names, and the simplest ex-
planation of the difficulty in finding an appro-
priate derivation in some cases appears to be
that the words, like many others in the Bible,
are not of Hebrew origin. Other references to
the Hittites as a Canaanite tribe are found in
the Pentateuch (Exod. iii. 8, 17 ; xiii. 5 ; xxiii.
28 : cp. Josh. ix. 1), and the last passage again
connects them with Northern Syria. The result
of the Biblical notices is, therefore, that the
Hittites were a people akin to the Cushites of
Babylonia, spreading in early times over North-
ern Syria, and southwards to the Hebron moun-
tains, where they were settled and civilised ;
that they were still ruled by kings in the
Lebanon region in Solomon's time, when they
traded with Egypt by aid of Hebrew and Phoe-
nician merchants ; that they intermarried with
the Hebrews, but remained independent in
David's time, and finally that they disappear
from history after the reign of Ahab.
The monumental notices of the Hittites are
numerous and important, derived from both
Egyptian and Assyrian sources, and agreeing in
a remarkable manner with the Biblical account,
which they supplement with something ap-
proaching to a continuous history. Of the
various Canaanite tribes, as the exception of
the Amorites, the Hittites are the only nation
of which the name is monumentally preserved.
Both from the Bible and from the monuments
we gather that the Hittites were more powerful
and important than other Canaanite peoples,
and that they maintained their independence
in the north, while the rest were subdued by
the Hebrews in the south, allying themselves
to David as neighbours, and by marriage to
Solomon, who, if his mother Bathsheba (the
wife of Uriah) was of the same race as her
first husband, was himself half a Hittite by
birth.
HITTITES
The earliest historic notice of the region of
the Northern Lebanon, which was ruled by the
Hittites, is found in the recently translated
inscriptions of Tell Loh (on the Lower Tigris ; cp.
Records of the Past, N. S., ii. 75 sq.), in which
the Akkadian king Gudea, about 2500 B.C.,
states that he ruled from the lower to the
upper sea, and cut cedars in Amanus (Northern
Lebanon), and brought diorite from ilahan,
which scholars agree — on account of other
notices of the region — in identifying with the
Sinai tic peninsula (see T. G. Pinches, Pro-
ceedings of the Victoria Institute, Jan. 1891).
This text makes it clear that the Akkadians, or
non-Semitic aborigines of Chaldea, who had
attained to an advanced civilisation, were ex-
tending their conquests even earlier than the
time usually assigned to Abraham's migration,
at least as far as the north-east shores of the
Mediterranean, and were in communication with
the Sinaitic miners. The Akkadians are usually
regarded as representing the Cushite population
of Chaldea, already noticed, who were of the
same original stock as the Hittites, according
to the Book of Genesis ; and their language,
as identified by Sir H. Rawlinson, and by
the numerous authorities who have accepted
his views, was an agglutinative Mongolic dia-
lect, represented in our own times by the
archaic Mongol and Turkic languages of Central
Asia.
Another early race, thought to have been of
the same stock, had advanced from Commagene,
or the region east of the Euphrates near the
Taurus, and had settled in Lower Egypt as early
as 2000 B.c. They are called the Men or Menti,
apparently the later Minni or Minyans, a well-
known tribe of Asia Minor, and described as
living east of Ruten or Syria, and in the land
of Assyria. They were finally driven out by
the Theban kings, and are connected with the
Hyksos, whose portraits are now held by many
scholars to give strong evidence of Mongolic
derivation. According to Mariette and other
scholars, one of these Hyksos dynasties is to be
regarded as of Hittite origin. It is perhaps to
this element in the mixed population of Egypt,
which also included Semitic and African stocks,
that the Book of Genesis refers, in speaking of
Egyptian tribes akin to the other sons of Ham
in Chaldea and in Canaan.
With the rise of the great 18th Egyptian
dynasty the Asiatics were driven back to their
own countries, and Thothmes I. in the 17th
century B.C. (about 1666 b.c. according to
Brugsch) extended his conquests far north into
Ruten or Syria, and even into Naharaim (" the
two rivers ") or the region beyond the Euphrates.
Horses and chariots were among the spoils
which he took from the Syrians in this cam-
paign. In 1600 B.C., however, a formidable
league of Syrians encountered Thothmes III.,
and attempted to throw off the Egyptian yoke.
A great battle was fought near Megiddo in
Central Palestine, and among the opponents was
the king of Kadesh, who, as will appear imme-
diately, may probably have been a Hittite. The
very remarkable list of spoils taken after the
Egyptian victory attests the wealth and civilisa-
tion of Syria at this early period (see Accords of
the Past, O. S., ii. 37). The whole of Palestine,
except the hills of Jerusalem and Hebron, then
Digitized by
Google
HITTITES
held by the Amorites, fell into the power of
Thothmes HI. in consequence of this decisive
engagement, and his victories were poshed
north wards to Tnnep (Tennib) and Kadesh on
the Orontes — the Hittite capital, where trees
were cut down and the harvest carried off.
The Egyptian rule was re-established as far as
Xahtraim, and even the king of Assyria became
tributary. Among the tributary princes the
chief of the Uittites is mentioned, from whom
wss exacted tribute of gold, silver, negro slaves,
and boat-loads of ivory.
The country of the Hittites, with the regions
further south, remained subject to Egypt for a
century and a half after this conquest until the
time of Amenophis IV.
The very remarkable
tablets found in 1887 in
Upper Egypt, at Tell Amarna,
written in the cuneiform
character, and in the
majority of cases in a Semitii
language, contain several
notices of the Hittites (Thon-
tafelftad von el Amarna,
ed. H. Wmckler, 1889-90).
There are about 300 of these
letters: some from princes
of Assyria, Babylon, and
Syria; some from governors
appointed by the Pharaohs
in Palestine and Syria, and /
all addressed to Amenophis ^
III. and his son Amenophis
IT. In one of these the
king of Alosha (a Syrian
region) begs the king of
Egypt not to make any treaty
with the kings of the Hittites
or of Shinar. In another
letter the king of the Hit-
tites is said to have been
taken captive in the land of
Mitani, which was close to
Northern Syria, east of the
Euphrates. In other letters
the Egyptian governors or
allies say that the king of
«he Hittites has seized the
town of Tunep (Tennib), and
has rebelled, devastating the
fonntry, and that it is
fared he will overrun Phoe-
nicia. There are other no-
tices of the ",land of the
Hittites" (Khati); and in
the later reign, when the
Egyptian power was deca-
dent, there are notices oi
rebellion and of an attack on the Egyptian
governors by the Northern Hittites. The most
interesting letter in the collection, for our
present purpose, is, however, one from Tarkon-
•kra, king of Rezeph, not far from Palmyra,
who calls himself king of the Hittites, and who
sends presents to Amenophis HI., including tin,
precious stones, and choice woods. The language
«fthis letter, which includes 38 lines of writing,
kaj been recognised by Dr. Winckler and other
wholars to be probably that of the Hittites.
It is not Semitic, and several scholars have
pointed out that the forms of the verbs,
HITTITES
1375
the pronouns, and other words, serve to
show that the language of this letter is
connected with the Akkadian dialect of Lower
Chaldea,
After the fall of the 18th dynasty and the
loss of Syria, a reconqnest was effected by
Seti I. after his defeat of the Amorites near
Hebron. He states in one of his inscriptions
(see Chabas, Voyage cTtm Ajyptien, p. 327) that
he carried off "chiefs of the Rutennu (or
Syrians) from the land of the Kheta" or
Hittites ; but these victories were transient, and
it was not until the accession of Rameses II.
(about 1360 B.C.) that a permanent reconquest
was effected. This great monarch, after taking
rhalanx of the BftSttai or Khuin, with the fortified town of Kadesh on the Orontea, surrounded
by 'luufclu ditehes, over which arc bridges (rigs. ■> and 3). CTnebee.)
Ascalon and the towns of Upper Galilee, ad-
vanced by the sea-coast to the Dog River near
Beirut, and crossed the Lebanon near Afka,
descending to the valley of the Orontes near the
Lake of Amuli (the present Lake of Yammuneh).
Here he took prisoners, who falsely represented
that the Hittites of Kadesh on the Orontes
(Kades) had fled to Aleppo; and pushing in front
of his army along the west bank of the Orontes,
he fell into an ambush, and nearly lost his life.
The Hittites were however driven back on the
arrival of Egyptian troops, and fled to Kadesh,
which, on the sculptures representing this event
Digitized by
Google
1376
HITTITES
HITTITE8
(at Thebes), is pictured as a walled town with
towers, surrounded by the river. The position
fully accords with that of the present site of a
ruined town on the Orontes south of Emesa,
discovered in 1881 to still retain the name
Kades. This city, which appears to be the
Kndytis (ii. 159, iii. 5) in Syria of Herodotus,
was the southern capital of the Hittiteg; but
the troops of other Hittite princes, including
the ruler of Aleppo, were allied with the Prince
of Kadesh, and took part in the battle (see
Records of the Poet, 0. S., ii. 87). On the
sculptures the Hittites are represented armed
with shields and spears, each warrior driven in
a two-horsed chariot, having a charioteer beside
him. Corps of infantry, standing in regular
columns, are also shown near the city. After
Kadesh had been reduced, Kameses pushed his
way northwards, taking vengeance on the
Hittite allies, among whom the natives of
Aradus, Carchemish, Aleppo, and Naharaim
are enumerated, with the Mysians, Dardanians,
and other unknown tribes. The discovery of
the cartouche of Kameses II. on the rock bas-
relief of Mount Sipylus, near Smyrna, shows
that the Egyptian advance was pushed west-
wards to the shores of the Aegean. Another
text of the same reign (perhaps later) refers to
a dispute between the Hittites and the Egyp-
tians, concerning two statues of the Pharaoh
which had been set up in a Hittite city. Tunep
was conquered in the expedition which ensued,
and the Egyptians again reached Naharaim or
Mesopotamia (Brugsch, Hist. Egypt, ii. 63). The
result of these victories was an alliance, ce-
mented by marriage, between Rameses II. and
Kheta Sar, the king of the Hittites. His eldest
daughter so married to the Pharaoh received
the Egyptian name Ur-niaa-uoferu-ra. The
inscription states that "she herself knew not
the impression which her beauty made on the
heart " of her royal husband (Brugsch, Hist.
Egypt, ii. 75, 86). Another very important
document of this reign is an Egyptian copy of
a treaty between Kheta Sar, king of the Hit-
tites, and Rameses II. (Records of the Past,
O. S., iv. 25 ; Chabas, Voyage <fun jfigyptien,
p. 333): the original — which Chabas supposes
to have been in the Hittite language — is stated
to have been written on a silver plate, and on
the opposite side was a figure of Set, the Hittite
god, embracing the Hittite king, with an in-
scription commencing, " image of Set, king of
heaven and earth, grant that the compact made
by Kheta Sar, prince of the Kheta . . ." The
Egyptian copy is unfortunately here mutilated.
The provisions of the treaty are very impor-
tant, and the document contains also historical
information and valuable religious indications.
It was sent by an envoy named Tartesebu from
Kheta Sar, son of Maurasar and grandson of
Saplili, Hittite kings. His elder brother Mautur
is said to have fought Seti I. (breaking the
earlier treaty) and to have been killed, bnt it
was now desired to restore the condition of
peace and alliance existing in the time of Saplili
and of Mautur himself. Some of the clauses
regulate the extradition of criminals and fugi-
tives, and it is stipulated that such refugees
are to be restored by either party, and are not
to be punished by loss of eyes, feet or tongue,
nor are their wives, children, or mothers to be
punished, or any accusation brought against
them. " Skilled workmen " from Syria or from
Egypt, sent to the other country for special
work, are not to be retained. The alliance
in time of war is to be offensive as well as
defensive. The gods are called to witness the
treaty, including Ammon, Phra, Set, and lstar (or
Antarata), with a thousand gods and a thousand
goddesses on either side : and in addition the
mountains, rivers, sea, wind, and clouds are
invoked. This interesting document betokens
a settled condition of civilisation, and an ani-
mistic creed.
The previous conflict with the Kheta was
lightly regarded after peace was made, so that a
court scribe writes, " History had nothing to
report of the Kheta people, but that they had
one heart and one soul with Egypt " (Brugsch,
Hist. Egypt, ii. 86). In the reign of Meneptah
(1300 B.c.) a great inroad of tribes from the
north occurred, but the Hittites appear to have
remained friendly to Egypt, and mention is
made of wheat taken in ships from Egypt to
preserve the lives of the Kheta people — pro-
bably in a time of famine. A century later how-
ever another invasion, in which the Danau (or
Greeks) took part, was repulsed by Rameses III.
(1200 B.C.): the Hittites are said to have been
unable to withstand these northern hordes, who
encamped in the land of the Amorites. They
were however punished equally with others in
the return expedition, when the Egyptians con-
quered Cyprus, and took Carchemish, Aleppo,
Tarsus, and other places in the north. The
king of the Hittites was taken alive and made
a fprisoner, with the Amorite chief and with
others.
About 1120-1100 B.c, when the power of
Egypt had decayed, Tiglath-pileaer I. began to
push westwards from Assyria, and attacked the
Hittite tribes, among whom the Kaskaya and
Hurunaya are specified as "warriors of the
Khati" (Records of the Past, v. 6). A
hundred and twenty chariots were taken, and
the Assyrians, crossing the Euphrates on skin
rafts, reached " Carchemish, belonging to the
country of the Khati," and advanced to the
Mediterranean or " upper sea of the setting
sun." Iniel was king of Hamath at this time
(cp. Records of the Past, iii. 52), and Mitani
or Commagene, which was overrun, appears
to have been held by a race of the same
stock with the Hittites, judging from the lan-
guage of the long letter of Dusratta, king of
Mitani, to Amenophis III., which contains 500
lines of cuneiform writing. Further troubles
awaited the Hittites in the reign of Assur-
nasir-pal (883-858 B.C.), when their princes
were carried into captivity, and spoil taken by
the Assyrians, including silver, gold, tin, copper,
oxen, sheep, and horses: Carchemish was put
to tribute, and gold and linen vestments were
taken thence. From the Hittite chief Lubarna
were taken 20 talents of silver, 1 talent of
gold, 100 talents of tin, 1000 oxen, 10,000
sheep, with the precious vessels of the palace,
chariots, and engines of war. The Assyrians
again reached the Mediterranean, and took
Gebal, Arvad, Tyre and Sidon. Shalmaneaer II.
(860-825 B.c.) also attacked these regions
(" Black Obelisk," Records of the Past, v. 30),
and took Pethor, a " Hittite city " west of the
Digitized by
Google
HITTITES
Euphrates (cp. Num. xxli. 5): the "kings of
the Hittites'' gave tribute, after Anianus (the
Northern Lebanon) and Aleppo had been taken.
The Hittite princes, with Irkhulena, king of
Hamath, had leagued themselves with Ben-
hadad of Syria to withstand this advance, but
in the great battle in the plains of Northern
Syria had been defeated, and the allies are said
to have lost 20,500 men, slain with arrows.
Carchemish was taken in 855 B.C., and six years
later we again read of eighty-nine cities con-
quered, belonging to the " Hittites of the land
of Hamath." Twelve Hittite kings are enu-
merated as contemporary rulers at this time.
The final overthrow of their independence was
effected by Sargon (Records of the Past, vii. 31),
who found Pisiris, king of Carchemish, to have
made an alliance with Mita the Moschian. The
city was not only taken by the Assyrians in
717 B.C., bat its inhabitants were carried off
(like the Israelites) as captives to Assyria, and
the town was repeopled with Assyrian colonists ;
gold and silver, treasures of the palace, 50
chariots, and 200 riders with 3000 foot-soldiers
were captured. The Hittite name thus dis-
appears from monumental history within a
century of the latest notice of their kings in
the Old Testament. It is curious, however,
that Sargon speaks of Ashdod, in Philistia, as a
Hittite city, as though some remnant of the
southern tribe still survived. At the present
day the name of the Hittites seems to linger at
the villages of Hatta (V*>.) and Kefr Hatta in
Philistia, as well as at the ruin of Tell Hatta,
not far from Kadesh on the Orontes. It is also
noticeable that the Jews of Persia in later
times believed that remnants of the Canaanite
population survived in Central Asia, and that
Ptolemy (vi. 15, 16) speaks of the Khatae as a
people near Cashgar. He evidently refers to
the important Mongol people called the Khitai
(Royal Asiatic Society Journal, xiii. ii.% who
played a great part in the early history of
Turkestan, and who conquered Western China
about 900 a.d. They were conquered by
Genghiz Khan ; and if the Hittites were a
Mongolic race, it is not impossible that some
connexion exists between the Khitai and the old
Kheta or Khati of the monuments.
HITTITES
1377
HwdofBttUte. (ThriM.)
As regards the nationality of the Hittites, the
late Dr. Birch of the British Museum suggested
that the Kheta were Mongols. He was followed
by Rev. H. G. Tomkins (Times of Abraham,
1878) and by the present writer in 1883.
Dr. Sayce has recently (The DittiUs, 1888)
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
adopted the same view, and has well described
(p. 15) the appearance of the Kheta, as depicted
on the Egyptian monuments. "The Hittites,"
he says, " were a people with yellow skins, and
' Mongoloid ' features, whose receding foreheads,
obliqne eyes, and protruding upper jaws are as
faithfully represented on their own monuments
as they are on those of Egypt." The type may
be seen in our own times among the Tartars
of Turkestan, and even among the Turkish
peasants of the Taurus, close to the Hittite
country. The sculptures also represent them
as wearing pigtails— a Tartar custom imposed
on the Chinese at the time of the Tartar con-
quest. They wear boots similar to those of the
modern Turks and Arabs, and in some cases a
short jerkin, with a tall conical cap, such as
Herodotus ascribes to the Sacae (vii. 64), and
which was common among the Tartars of the
Middle Ages, and worn also by the Etruscans in
Italy (the tutulus of classic writers): the chiefs
are represented however in long robes, and
Kheta Sar is shown wearing a lofty tiara.
As regards the language of the Hittites, many
theories have been advanced : it has been com-
pared with Egyptian and Hebrew, though neither
of these views is now supported by any scholar
of eminence, Brugsch and Chabas having pro-
nounced it non-Semitic — a view in which Dr.
Sayce concurs. It has also been compared with
Armenian, Georgian, Basque, and Chinese ; but
these languages are far too modern, and too
much decayed from their earlier forms, to be
considered legitimate subjects for comparative
study. The question at present depends on the
study of names of persons and places in the
Hittite country, which appear to be neither
Semitic nor Aryan, but are comparable with
ancient Turanian words; and on the under-
standing of the letter of Tarkondara the Hittite
prince, already mentioned as written in the
Hittite language, and in the well-known cunei-
form script.
The remains of an ancient native civilisation,
in the region which the Hittites ruled for so
many centuries, have very naturally been sup-
posed to show the workmanship of the Hittites
and of their allies of the same race ; and this is
confirmed by the physiognomy of the people
represented, who are usually beardless, with
Mongol features, and in some cases wearing
pigtails. This theory of the origin of the Syrian
bas-reliefs and inscriptions was first put forward
by Dr. W. Wright in 1874, and soon after found
an advocate in Dr. Sayce. There is indeed no
known race to whom the carving of these
monuments can be attributed with greater pro-
bability than it may be to the Hittite popula-
tion. But the more distant examples, in Asia
Minor and Armenia, which appear to be later in
some cases than those of Carchemish and
Hamath, may have been executed by tribes of
the same stock, who cannot strictly be called
Hittites. History tells us nothing of any
" Hittite empire," for in the time of Barneses II.
and in the time of Sargon alike we find nume-
rous chiefs of the Hittites, ruling at different
cities, and allied to each other, under some daring
or powerful leader, against their foreign foes.
The monuments so grouped represent a civili-
sation distinct from that of either Chaldea or
Egypt, but which has been thought to supply
Digitized by
Google
1378
HITTITES
the early prototypes for Greek and Phoenician
art. The earliest discovery of Hittite inscrip-
tions was made by liurckhanlt in 1812 at
Hamath. Since then many travellers have
added to what is now a constantly increasing
store of sculptures, inscriptions, seals, and
gems, marked by the hieroglyphic symbols, and
the peculiar features of a native art, which had
its home in Northern Syria and on the southern
slopes of the Taurus. Among such travellers
were Major Fischer, George Smith, Perrot,
Tyrwhitt Drake, Sir C. W. Wilson, and quite
recently HH. Ilumann and Puchstein; while
new and valuable rinds have been made in 1890
by Prof. Ramsay and Mr. Hogarth. The regions
in which further finds may be expected have
not, however, yet been exhausted. The Hittite
monuments in Syria occur at Hamath, Aleppo,
and Carchcmish, with one doubtful example at
Damascus. Further north they occur frequently
near Merash, and also at Samosata on the
Euphrates north of Edessa. On the west other
examples are known at Tyana, and near it at
Ibreez, also yet further west near Ephesus (on
the Weeping Niobe of Mount Sipylus) and in
the pass of Karabel, where the figures now found
are mentioned by Herodotus (ii. 106). Seals
with Hittite characters have been brought from
Lydia, and east of the Halys are the important
ruins of Pteria and Eyuk, where the same art
and the same system of hieroglyphic writing are
found. Similar seals have also been found in
Nineveh, and an inscribed bowl in Babylon, but
these may be spoils taken from another region
by Assyrians and later Babylonians.
As regards the age of these monuments, the
most important clue is that discovered by Dr.
Gollob in 1882. He found that the cartouche
of Rameses 1 1, is incised on the ancient carving
called the " Weeping Niobe " — a bas-relief
having a few clearly Hittite symbols in relief
onr the field. It is clear therefore that this
monument existed already in 1360 B.C., and it is
not improbable that the monuments of Hamath
and Carchemish may be referred to a more
remote date, contemporary with the earliest
Akkadian and Egyptian sculptures.
The subject of many of these bas-reliefs is
religious. Winged figures are represented, and
fabulous monsters, deities standing on various
animals — such as the lion, the hare, and the
two-headed eagle (which became a device in
later times among the Seljuks and Mongols).
The sphinx and the winged horse, the gryphon,
&c, are also found associated with Hittite
symbols, and demons are represented much as
among the Akkadians and Assyrians : the winged
sun, common also to Egyptians and Babylonians,
is a Hittite emblem. The figures as a rule are
clumsy, and recall the early art of Babylonia,
Greece, and Phoenicia, but they are perhaps
more archaic than any of these latter. The
Turkish boot, the conical cap, the pigtail, the
bow and spear and shield, and a very heavy
sword, are represented ; while the females wear
a cylindrical hat and a robe in many pleats.
Some of the garments of kings and deities are
adorned with patterns said still to be in use in
Asia Minor. Most of the males are beardless,
but a few cases occur in which a long beard is
represented, with a shaven upper lip, as among
the Phoenicians and Cypriote Greeks. The best
HITTITES
executed reliefs yet found are from Carchemish.
The hieroglyphic characters accompanying these
sculptures represent the heads of animals (such
as the bull, stag, sheep, ram, ass, dog, lion,
camel, and hare), with a full figure of an
eagle, and human heads, legs, arms, feet and
hands, together with other less distinct emblems.
Monument from .', r.itiis.
The system included over a hundred signs, which
recur on all the texts. Some bear close resem-
blance in form, and probably in meaning, to the
emblems of Egypt and of the Akkadians, but
those which appear to denote grammatical
terminations are distinct from the signs of other
systems. The following particulars may be
stated as generally agreed upon by all scholars
who have given serious attention to the matter.
(1) The Hittite system is distinct and native.
(2) It must be studied on the same principles
which led to the recovery of the cuneiform and
Egyptian, being mainly syllabic as shown by the
number of signs in use. (3) It was probably
the origin of the syllabary used in Cyprus, and
from this syllabary the sounds proper to the
older emblems may in a few cases be recovered.
[But see Peiser, Die Hetitischen Iiuchriften,
p. xv.] (4) The lines read alternately from
right to left and left to right, as in early Greek.
(5) The syllables me arranged vertically in the
line, as in the early Akkadian inscriptions.
The questions which remain in dispute refer
to the proper sound and meaning of the emblems,
and to the language which should be used for
comparison. The view taken by Dr. Sayce (The
Hittites, p. 134) is that the language spoken by
the tribes round Lake Van in the 9th century
Digitized by
Google
H1TTITES
B.C. " may belong to the same family of speech."
The objection taken to this view is that, in the
opinion of Dr. Mordtmann and of other scholars,
this Vannic language is an Aryan dialect, akin
to ancient Persian or to Armenian. If the
Hittites were, as Dr. Sayce has said, a " Mon-
goloid " people, it seems improbable that their
language should hare been Aryan, especially at
so early an historic period. Dr. Sayce, how-
ever, does not admit the Vannic to be an Aryan
language. [C. R. C.]
(The truth is that oar knowledge of the
language represented by the rock-inscriptions of
Van is only less limited And precarious than our
knowledge of the language (or languages) re-
presented by the supposed Hittite inscriptions.
At present, whatever our more or less probable
conjectures, we do not certainly know the
sonnd of a single "Hittite" symbol. Hardly
any two investigators are agreed upon the read-
ing of the bilingual " Boss of Tarkondemos," of
which only a questionable cast is known to exist
(cp. Rylands' remarks on the anthenticity of
this relic, PSBA. Not. 1880). The latest
handling of the « boss," that of Dr. F. E. Peiser
of Breslau, a well-known Assyrian scholar,
differs from all preceding attempts at decipher-
ment in the values assigned to several of the
six "Hittite" characters. The same may be
said of the new "bilingual'' seal, found in
Cilicia, and now in the Ashmolean Museum
(Academy, Jan. 9, 1892; Nachtrag zur Peiser,
Die Hctitischen Inschriften, Berlin, 1892). The
cuneiform letter of Tarhun-darauS, king of Ar-
zapHu), discovered at Tell al-Amarna, may or
may riot be the letter of a " Hittite " prince
(Winckler doubtfully transcribes Tar-hu-un-da-
ra-rfu : see Der Thontafelfund von el Amarna, i.
No. 10 ; Academy, No. 916, p. 343 sq.). It is
uncertain whether Arzapi was the Biblical
Bezejch, which the Assyrians called Rasappa.
Halevy places it in Asia Minor {Journal Asia-
tiqye, 1890, i. p. 292), and Dr. Lehmann com-
pares an apparently gentilic Lycian name 'BPN
(SamaMumukin, Naehtrage, p. 113, Leipz. 1892).
One thing is clear to every transcriber : if the
ietter of the king of Arzapi is " Hittite," the
much longer letter of DuSratta cf Mitaiu (p.
1376, col. 2) is not Hittite (Winckler, ioitf.,
No. 27). Moreover, the languages of these two
ancient letters are confessedly as remote from
the Semitic tcngues as from each ether. But
all the Hittite proper names recorded in the Old
Testament are of a decidedly Semitic complexion,
and some of them, like Beeri and Uriah, are
transparent Hebrew. As Prof. Robertson Smith
has observed, with perfect justice, " Though the
so-called Hittite monuments, which have given
rise to so much speculation, may afford evidence
that a non-Semitic people from Asia Minor at
one time pushed its way into Northern Syria, it
is pretty clear that the Hittites of the Bible,
i.e. the non-Aramaic communities of Coele-Syria,
were a branch of the Canaanite stock, and that
the utmost concession that can be made to
modern theories on this subject is that they may
for a time have been dominated by a non-
Semitic aristocracy " (Bel. of Semite*, 1st ser.
pp. 11, 12). But if there is no consensus of
qualified opinion as to the language of the in-
scriptions, neither is there yet any general
agreement as to their probable date. So far
HIVITE8, THE
1379
from referring the stones from Hamath and
Jerabis to an earlier period than that of
Ramses II. (p. 1378, col. 1), Puchstein, who
holds that they are of Commagenian not Hittite
origin, assigns all the so-called Hittite sculp-
tures to the period between the 7th and 10th
centuries B.C. Peiser repeats these dates ; but,
with present information, it is futile to attempt
precision.
See Lenormant, Originet de Fhistoire.; Thomas
Tyler, The Inscription of Tarkutimmc, and the
Monuments from Jerablus, PSBA. Nov. 1880
(see also Nature, March, April, 1888); A. H.
Sayce, The Monuments of the Hittites, TSBA.,
July 1881 ; The Hittites, the Story of a forgotten
Empire, 1888;— W. H. Rylzods, Inscribed Stones
from Jerabis, TSBA. vii. 1882; The Aleppo
Inscription, PSBA. June 1883; An Inscribed
Bowl, ibid., May 1885 ; — Perrot, Revue Archeo-
logique, December 1882 (on M. Schlumberger's
terra-cotta seals, with supposed Hittite inscrip-
tions: cp. Rylands in PSBA. Feb. 1884, TSBA.
viii. 422 sqq., where these objects are figured
from the originals); Gollob, Wiener Studien,
1882 (on the inscriptions of the so-called Niobe
at Mount Sipylos: cp. Krall, ibid., who calls
attention to the fact that the cartouche of
Ramses II. is incorrect in several important
respects); Hommel, Die Kultur der Hethiter
(Semiten), Leipzig, 1883 ; also ZK. i. 330 sqq..
1884; C. J. Ball, The Nev> Hieroglyphs of
Western Asia, CQB., July 1885 (cp. PSBA. June
1888); W. Wright, Empire of the Hittites, 1884;
Hirschfeld, Die Felsenreliefs in Klemasien, Berlin,
1887 ; Halevy in the Revue des ftudesjuives, Oct.,
Dec 1887; C. R. Conder, Altaic Hieroglyphs
and Hittite Inscriptions, 1887 ; Menant, Comptes
Mendus, &c, 1890, and in Maspero's Receuil,
vol. xiii. ; Lea Hittites, Paris, 1891 ; Puchstein,
Pseudo-Hethitische Kunsl, Berlin, 1890; Degli
Hittim o Hethei et delle loro Migrozioni (re-
prints from the Civilta Cattolica), 1890-92, by
C. de'Cara; Leon de Lantsheere, De la race et
de la langue des Hittites, Bruxelles, 1892 ; F. E.
Peiser, Die Hetitischen Inschriften, Berlin, 1892.
Specially on the Bilingual of Tarkondemos,
Sayce, TSBA., July 1888; Pinches, PSBA.
March 1885; Amiaud, ZA. i. 1886; Goleni-
scheff, PSBA., May 1888.] [C. J. B.]
HI'VITES, THE C?nn, ic. the Chiwite:
i Eicuos; in Josh. ix. 7(LXX. v. 13), b Xoflpaios,
and so A. in Gen. xxxiv. 2 : Hevaeus). The
name is, in the original, uniformly found in the
sing, number, and is so given in R. V. It never
has, like that of the Hittites, a plural, nor does
it appear in any other form. Perhaps we may
assume from this that it originated in some
peculiarity of locality or circumstance, as in the
case of the Amorites — " mountaineers : " and
not in a progenitor, as did that of the Ammon-
ites, who are also styled Beng-Ammon— children
of Amnion; or the Hittites, BenS-Cheth —
children of Heth. The name is explained by
Ewald (ftesch. i. 318) as Binnenlander, that is,
" Midlanders ; " by Gesenius (Thes. p. 451) as
pagani, " villagers." In the following passages
the name is given in the A. V. in the singular —
THE Hivite : — Gen. x. 17 ; Ex. xxiii 28, xxxiii.
2, xxxiv. 11; Josh. ix. 1, xi. 3 ; 1 Ch. i. 15;
also Gen. xxxiv. 2, xxxvi. 2. In all the rest it
is plural.
4 T 2
Digitized by
Google
1380
HIVITES, THE
1. In the genealogical tables of Genesis, "the
Hirite " is named as one of the descendants — the
sixth in order— of Canaan, the son of Ham (Gen.
x. 17 ; 1 Ch. i. 15). In the first enumeration
of the nations who, at the time of the call of
Abraham, occupied the Promised Land (Gen. xv.
19-21), the Hivites are omitted from the Hebrew
text (though in the Samaritan and LXX. their
name is inserted). This has led to the con-
jecture, amongst others, that they are identical
with the Kadmosites, whose name is found
there and there only (Reland, Pal. p. 140;
Bochart, Phal. It. 36, Can. i. 19). But are not
the Kadmonites rather, as their name implies, the
representatives of the BenS-Kedem, or "children
of the East " ? The name constantly occurs in
the formula by which the country is designated
in the earlier Books (Ex. iii. 8, 17, xiii. 5, xxiii.
23, 28, xxxiii. 2, xxxiv. 11 ; Deut. vii. 1, xx. 17 ;
.losh. iii. 10, ix. 1, xii. 8, xxiv. 11), and also in
the later ones (1 K. ix. 20; 2 Ch. viii. 7; bat
cp. Ezra ix. 1 and Neh. ix. 8). It is, however,
absent in the report of the spies (Num. xiii. 29),
a document which fixes the localities occupied
by the Canaanite nations at that time. Perhaps
this is owing to the then insignificance of the
Hivites, or perhaps to the fact that they were
indifferent to the special locality of their
settlements.
2. We first encounter the actual people of the
Hivites at the time of Jacob's return to Canaan.
Shechem was then (according to the current
Hebrew text) in their possession, Hamor the
Hivite being the " prince (tPBO) of the land "
(Gen. xxxiv. 2). They were at this time, to
judge of them by their rulers, a warm and
impetuous people, credulous, and easily deceived
by the crafty and cruel sons of Jacob. The
narrative further exhibits them as peaceful and
commercial, given to " trade " (tn>. 10, 21), and to
the acquiring of " possessions " of cattle and
other " wealth " (et>. 10, 23, 28, 29). Like the
Hittites, they held their assemblies or conferences
in the gate of their city (v. 20). We may also
see a testimony to their peaceful habits in the
absence of any attempt at revenge on Jacob for
the massacre of the Shechemites. Perhaps a
similar indication is furnished by the name of
the god of the Shechemites some generations
after this — Baal-berith — Baal of the league, or
the alliance (Judg. viii. 33, ix. 4, 46); by the
way in which the Shechemites were beaten by
Abimelech (p. 40) ; and by the unmilitary cha-
racter, both of the weapon which caused Abime-
lech's death and of the person who discharged it
(ix. 53).
The A. MS., and several other HSS. of the
LXX., in the above narrative (Gen. xxxiv. 2)
substitute " Horite " for " Hivite." The change
is remarkable from the usually close adherence
of the A. CoJex to the Hebrew text, but it is
not corroborated by any other of the ancient
Versions, nor is it recommended by other con-
siderations. No instances occur of Horites in
this part of Palestine, while we know, from a
later narrative, that there was an important
colony of Hivites on the highland of Benjamin
at Gibeon, tec, no very great distance from
Shechem. On the other hand, in Gen. xxxvi. 2,
where Aholibama, one of Esau's wives, is said to
have been the daughter of the daughter of Zibeon
the Hivite, all considerations are in favour of
HIZKIJAH
reading " Horite " for " Hivite." In this case
we fortunately possess a detailed genealogy of
the family, by comparison of which little doubt
is left of the propriety of the change (cp. vv. 20,
24, 25, 30, with c. 2), although no ancient
Version has suggested it here.
3. We next meet with the Hivites during the
conquest of Canaan (Josh. ix. 7, xi. 19). Their
character is now in some respects materially
altered. They are still evidently averse to
fightiug, but they have acquired — possibly by
long experience in traffic — an amount of craft
which they did not before possess, and which
enables them to turn the tables on the Israelites
in a highly successful manner (Josh. ix. 3-27).
The colony of Hivites,* who made Joshua and
the heads of the tribes their dupes on this
occasion, had four cities — Gibeon, Chephirah,
Beeroth, and Kirjath-jearim — situated, if our
present knowledge is accurate, at considerable
distances asunder. It is not certain whether
the last three were destroyed by Joshua or not
(xi. 19) ; Gibeon certainly was spared. In v. 11
the Gibeonites speak of the " elders " of their
city, a word which does not necessarily point to
any special form of government, as is assumed
by Winer (Ileviter\ who uses the ambiguous
expression that they "lived under a republican
constitution " (in republicanitcher Verfassung) !
See also Ewald (Getch. i. 318-9).
4. The main body of the Hivites, however,
were at this time living on the northern confines
of Western Palestine — " under Hermon, in the
land of Mizpeh" (Josh. xi. 3) — "in Mount
Lebanon, from Mount Baal-hermon to the
entering in of Hamath " (Judg. iii. 3). Some-
where in this neighbourhood they were settled
when Joab and the captains of the host, in their
tour of numbering, came to " all the cities of
the Hivites " near Tyre (2 Sam. xxiv. 7). In
the Jerusalem Targum on Gen. x. 17, they are
called Tripolitans (*J$?^B'"|D), a name which
points to the same general northern locality.
5. In speaking of the A VIM, or Avvites, a
suggestion has been made by the writer that
they may have been identical with the Hivites.
This is apparently corroborated by the fact that,
according to the notice in Deut. ii., the name of
the Avites vanished before the Hivites appear
on the scene of the sacred history. It is per-
haps some corroboration of this that the LXX.
(both MSS.) unmistakably translate Avim by
Eioioi, Hivites. [G.] [W.]
HIZKI'AH, R. V. HEZEKIAH (n'j5fn =
strength of Jah; 'Ef«Ki'ar; Ezechia), an an-
cestor of Zephaniah the prophet (Zeph. i. 1).
HIZKI'JAH, K. V. HEZEKI'AH (njiWl:
'Efeirla ; Ezechia), according to the punctuation
of the A. V. and R. V., a man who sealed the
covenant of reformation with Ezra and Nehemiab
(Neh. x. 17). But some think that the name
should be taken with that preceding it, as " Ater-
Hizkijah," a name given in the lists of those
who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel.
Further, the two names following these in x. 17,
■ Here again the LXX. (both MSS.) have Horites for
Hivites; but we cannot accept the change without
further consideration.
Digitized by
Google
HOBAB
18 (Azznr, Hodijah) are by some considered
only corrupt repetitions of them.
This and the preceding name are identical
with, and are the same as those given in A. V.
as, Hkzekiah.
HO'BAB (33*n, ? = beloved ; B. 'O$d0, A.
'Q/Mft in Judg! BA. 'lu$d$; Bobab). This
name is found in two places only (Num. x. 29 ;
Judg. iv. 11), and it seems doubtful whether it
denotes the father-in-law of Moses, or his son.
(1.) In favour of the latter are (a) the express
statement that Hobab was "the son of Raguel "
(Num. x. 29) ; Raguel or Reuel — the Hebrew
word in both cases is the same — being identified
with Jethro, not only in Ex. ii. 18 (see Knobel-
Dillmann in loco ; cp. iii. 1, &c), but also
by Josephus, who constantly gives him that
name. (b) The fact that Jethro had some time
previously left the Israelite camp to return to
his own country (Ex. xviii. 27). The words
" the father-in-law of Hoses " in Num. x. 29,
though in most of the ancient Versions connected
with Hobab, will in the original read either
way, so that no argument can be founded on
them. (2.) In favour of Hobab's identity with
Jethro are (a) the words of Judg. iv. 11 ; but
it should be remembered that this is (ostensibly)
of later date than the other, and altogether a
more casual statement. (o) josephus in speak-
ing of Raguel remarks once (Ant. ii. 12, § 1)
that he " had Iothor (i.e. Jethro) for a surname "
(toOto yap 1\v ivlicArifta t$ 'VayoiriK). From
the absence of the article here, it is inferred by
Whiston and others that Josephus intends that
be had more than one surname, but this seems
hardly safe.
The Muhammadan traditions are certainly in
favour of the identity of Hobab with Jethro.
He is known in the Koran and elsewhere, and in
the East at the present day, by the name of
Shu'aib ( ^ ujjg ), doubtless a corruption of
Hobab (Ew'ald, Oeschichte, ii. 59, note). Accord-
ing to those traditions, he was the prophet of
God to the idolaters of Madijan (Midian), who
not believing his message were destroyed (Lane's
Koran, pp. 179-181); he was blind (ib. p. 180,n.);
the rod of Moses was his gift, — it had once been
the rod of Adam, and was of the myrtle of
Paradise, See. (ib. p. 190 ; Weil's BiM. Legends,
pp. 107-109). The name of Shu'aib still remains
attached to one of the Widys on the east side of
the Jordan, opposite Jericho, through which,
according to the tradition of the locality
(Seetzen, Seiscn, 1834, ii. 319, 376), the children
of Israel descended to the Jordan. [Bbth-
NnfRAH.] According to this tradition, there-
fore, he accompanied the people as far as the
Promised Land, though whatever weight that
may possess is, when the statement of Ex. xviii.
27 is taken into account, against his identity
with Jethro. Other places bearing his name
and those of his two daughters are shown at
Sinai and on the Gulf of 'Akabah (Stanley, 8. $
P. p. 33 ; Palmer, Desert of the Exodus, p. 75).
His tomb was shown at Tiberias (Ibn Batuta, ii.).
But whether Hobab was the father-in-law of
Moses or not, the notice of him in Num. x. 29-
32, though brief, is full of point and interest.
While Jethro is preserved to us as the wise and
practised administrator, Hobab appears as the
HODESH
1381
experienced Bedawi sheikh, to whom' Moses
looked for the material safety of his cumbrous
caravan in the new and difficult ground before
them. The tracks and passes of that "waste
howling wilderness " were all familiar to him,
and his practised sight would be to them " in-
stead of eyes " in discerning the distant clumps
of verdure which betokened the wells or springs
for the daily encampment, and in giving timely
warning of the approach of Amalekites or other
spoilers of the desert. [Jethro.] [G.] [W.]
HO'BAH (fnin = concealed, Ges. ; Xu0a\ ;
Jffoba), the place to which Abraham pursued the
kings who had pillaged Sodom (Gen. xiv. 15).
It was situated "to the north of Damascus"
(pg>01? 7tto^St?). Josephus mentions a tradi-
tion concerning Abraham which he takes from
Nicolaus of Damascus : " Abraham reigned at
Damascus, being a foreigner . . . and his name
is still famous in the country; and there is
shown a village called from him The Habitation
of Abraham " {Ant. i. 7, § 2). It is remarkable
that in the village of Burzah, 3 miles north
of Damascus, there is a wall held in high
veneration by the Muhammadans, and called
after the name of the patriarch, Masgid' Ibrahim,
" the prayer-place of Abraham." The tradition
attached to it is that here Abraham offered
thanks to God after the total discomfiture of the
eastern kings. Behind the wall is a cleft in the
rock, in which another tradition represents the
patriarch as taking refuge on one occasion from
the giant Nimrod. It is remarkable that the
word Hdbah signifies "a hiding-place."
The Jews of Damascus affirm that the village
of Q'ihar, not far from Burzah, is the Hobah of
Scripture. They have a synagogue there dedi-
cated to Elijah, to which they make frequent
pilgrimages (see Bandb. for Syr. and Pal. ;
Stanley, 8.$ P. p. 414*). [J. L. P.] [W.]
HOD 0\>] = glory; BA. "08; Bod), one of
the sons of Zophah, among the descendants of
Asher (1 Ch. vii. 37).
HODAI'AH (Ketib, IflJHin, altered in the
Keri to WlJVltol, »'.#. Hodavyahu = praise ye
Jah, or his praise is Jah ; B. 'OSoXla, A. 'fiiWa ;
Oduia), son of Elioenai, one of the last mem-
bers of the royal line of Judah ; mentioned 1 Ch.
iii. 24.
hodavi'AH (fijnta = rrrtn ; ba. -aso-
vla; Odoia). 1. A man of Manasseh, one of
the heads of the half-tribe on the east of Jordan
(1 Cb. v. 24).
2. (B. 'OSvti, A. 'niovti; Oduia.) A man
of Benjamin, son of Has-senuah (1 Ch. ix. 7).
3. (B. SoSovid, A. iaSovid [the a having been
carried on from the previous word]; Odavia.)
A Levite, who seems to have given his name
to an important family in the tribe — the Bene-
Hodaviah (Ezra ii. 40). In Nehemiah the name
appears as Hodevah. Lord A. Hervey has called
attention to the fact that this name is closely
connected with Judah (Genealogies, p. 119).
This being the case, we probably find this
Hodaviah mentioned again in iii. 9.
HODESH (Bhh = new moon ; *ASa ; Bodes),
a woman named in the genealogies of Benjamin
Digitized by
Google
1382
HODEVAH
(1 Ch. viii. 9) as the wife of a certain Shaharaim,
and mother of uvea children. Shaharaim had
two wires besides Hodesh, or possibly Hodesh
was a second name of one of those women
(c. 8> The LXX. by rendering Baara B. 'lfauSi,
A. BoaSd, and ,Hodesh 'ASd, seem to wish to
establish such a connexion.
HODEVAH (Tiffin, Keri mm ; KA.
ObSovla, B. Boutovti; Oduia), Bene-Hoderah,
a Levite family, returned from captirity with
Zerubbabel (Meb. rii. 43). In the parallel lists
it is giren as Hodaviah (No. 3) and SUDIAS.
HODI'AH (TVHhn = glory of Jah; B. i,
'IoWa, A. $ 'lovtala; Odaia), one of the two
wires of Ezra, a man of Judan, and mother to
the founders of Keilah and Eshtemoa (1 Ch.
ir. 19). She is doubtless the same person as
Jehudijah (in v. 18; that is, "the Jewess;"
B. 'ASeid, B. 'Uui) ; in fact, except the article,
which is disregarded in the A. V., the two
names are identical [cp. Hodaviah, No. 3].
Uodiah is exactly the same name as Hodijah,
under which form it is giren more than once in
the A. V.
HODI'JAH (Tinfa ; BNA. 'nJowl; Odia,
Odaia). This is in the original precisely the same
name as the preceding, and is so giren in R. V.,
though spelt differently in the A. V.
1. A Levite in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah
(Neh. viii. 7 ; and probably also ix. 5, x. 10).
The name with others is omitted in the first two
of these passages in the LXX.
2. (B.-'flSov/u^ A. 'OSovd; Odaia.) Another
Levite at the same time (Neh. x. 13).
8. (BA. 'OSouti ; Odaia.) A layman ; one of
the "heads" of the people at the same time
(Neh. x. 18).
HOCKLAH (jhin = partridge; B. 'Ey\d,
AF. A17ACL. [in Josh.] Aly\&n; Begla), the
third of the fire daughters of Zelophehad, in
whose farour the law of inheritance was altered
so that a daughter could inherit her father's
estate when he left no sons (Num. xxri. 33
[LXX. c. 37], xxvii. 1, xxxri. 11 ; Josh. xrii. 3).
The name also occurs in Betk-hoqlah, which
see.
HO'HAM (Onin, Ges.; Akd>; Oham), king
of Hebron at the time of the conquest of Canaan
(Josh. x. 3); one of the fire kings who were
pursued by Joshua down the pass of Bethhoron,
and who were at last captured in the care at
Makkedah and there put to death. As king
of Hebron he is frequently referred to in Josh, x.,
but his name occurs in the abore passage only.
HOLM-TREE (rpTros ; Hex) occurs only in
the apocryphal story of Susanna (v. 58). The
passage contains a characteristic play on the
names of the two trees mentioned by the elders in
their evidence. That on the mastich (qwr.. .
iyytXot axt"*t <") is noticed under that head
[Mastich]. That on the holm-tree (wpivov)
is "the Angel of God waiteth with the
sword to cut thee in two " {rplaai <rt). For
the historical significance of these puns, see
Susanna. The xpinot of Theophrastus {Hist.
Plant, iii. 7, § 3, and 16, § 1, and elsewhere)
and Dioscorides (i. 144) denotes, there can be no
HOMAM
doubt, the Quercus coccifera, L, and the Q.pseudo-
coccifera, Desf., which is perhaps not specifically
distinct from the first-mentioned oak. The iles
of the Roman writers was applied both to the
holm-oak {Querela ilex, L.) and to the Q. cocci-
fera or kermes oak. See Pliny, N. H. xri. 6.
For the oaks of Palestine, see a paper by
Dr. Hooker in the Trans, of the Linn. Soc. xxiii.
pt. ii. pp. 381-387. [Oak.] [W. H.]
HOLOFER'NES, or, more correctly, Olo-
KERNE8 fOXo^foirjtX was, according to the
book of Judith, a general of Nebuchadnezzar,
king of the Assyrians (Judith ii. 4), who was
slain by the Jewish heroine Judith during the
siege of Bethulia. [Judith.] The name is a
debased form of Oropbernes, a standing title of
the princes of Cappadocia. It occurs twice in
Cappadocian history, as borne by the brother of
Ariarathes I. (c. B.O. 350), and afterwards
by a pretender to the Cappadocian throne,
who was at first supported and afterwards
imprisoned by Demetrius Soter {c. B.C. 158).
The termination (cp. tisnphernes, &c.) points to
a Persian origin, but the meaning of the word
is uncertain. Ball compares the names of two
Median princes conquered by Esar-haddon,
Sidir-parna and E-parna. This illustrates the
Syriac rendering of Olophernes, |v«nV[ JJi-
pharna. See Speaker's Oman, on Judith /. c
[B. F.W.] [F.]
HO'LON (j^'n : XaKoi, [in Josh. xv.jBA. X«-
hoviiv ; [in Josh, xxi.] B. fi r«AA(t, A. 'QXar : Olon,
Uolon). 1. A town in the mountains of Judah ;
one of the first group, of which Debir was appa-
rently the most considerable. It is named
between Goshen and Giloh (Josh. xr. 51), and
was allotted with its "suburbs" to the priests
(xxi. 15). In the list of priests' cities of 1 Ch. ri.
the name appears as Hilen. In the Onomattkon
{'Cl\<i, OS* p. 291, i ; Ocho, OS. 2 p. 176, 29)
it is mentioned, but not so as to imply its then
existence. The site has not ret been recovered,
but it may perhaps be Bait Aula, on a spur N.W.
of Hebron and S.W. of Kh. Jala, Giloh.
2. fliVri; XeA<£r; Helon.) A city of Moab
(Jer. xlriii. 21, only). It was one of the towns
of the ifishor, the lerel downs (A V. "plain
country ") east of Jordan, and is named with
Jahazah, Dibon, and other known places; but
no identification of it has yet taken place, nor
does it appear in the parallel lists of Num. xxxii.
and Josh. xiii. It is mentioned by Eusebius
{Xt\i>y ^ koI 'EA<Sx, OS* p. 290, 74) as a town
of Moab, without any indication of position.
fa.] [w.]
HO'MAM (Dpin, (?)= extermination, Ges.;
Ai/xdy ; Homan), the form under which in 1 Ch. i.
39 an Edomite name appears, which in Gen.
xxxri. 22 is giren Heham. Homam is assumed
by Gesenius to be the original form {Thes.
p. 385 a). By Knobel (cp. Dillmann* on Gen.
I. c), the name is compared with that of Ho-
maimah (f , > » — )■ a town now ruined, though
once important, halfway between IVtra and
Ailath, on the ancient road at the back of the
mountain. See Laborde, Journey, p. 207,
Amcime"; also the Arabic authorities mentioned
by Knobel. [G.] [W.]
Digitized by
Google
HOMEB
HOMER. [Measures.]
HONEY. We hare already noticed [Food]
the extensive use of honey as an article of
ordinary food among the Hebrews: we shall
therefore in the present article restrict our-
selves to a description of the different articles
which passed under the Hebrew name of <f bash
(JP2"V). (1.) In the first place it applies to the
product of the bee, to which we exclusively
apply the name of honey. All travellers agree
in describing Palestine as a land " flowing with
honey " (Ex. iii. 8), bees being abundant even
in the remote parts of the wilderness, where
they deposit their honey in the crevices of the
rocks or in hollow trees. In some parts of
Northern Arabia the hills are so well stocked
with bees, that no sooner are hives placed than
they are occupied (Wellsted's Travels, ii. 123).
The Hebrews had special expressions to describe
the exuding of the honey from the comb, such
as nopheth (ft^j), "dropping" (Cant. iv. 11;
Prov. v. 3, xxjv. 13); suph (t|«, "over-
flowing " (Ps. xix. 10 ; Prov. xvi. 24), and ya'ar
(TIP= Jhwmg honey) or yafirSh (1T11P ; 1 Sam.
xiv. 27 ; Cant. v. 1)— expressions which answer
to the met acetwn of Pliny (xi. 15) : the second
of these terms approaches nearest to the sense
of " honeycomo," inasmuch as it is connected
with ndpheth in Ps. xix. 10, " the droppings of
the honeycomb" (R. V.). (2.) In the second
place, the term d'bash applies to a decoction of
the juice of the grape, which is still called dibs,
and which forms an article of commerce in the
East ; it was this, and not ordinary bee-honey,
which Jacob sent to Joseph (Gen. xliii. 11), and
which the Tyrians purchased from Palestine
(Ezek. xxvii. 17). The mode of preparing it is
described by Pliny (xiv. 11): the must was
either boiled down to a half (in which case it
was called defrutum), or to a third (when it
was called siracum, or sapa, the tripaios otyos
and eifoyia of the Greeks) : it was mixed either
with wine or milk (Virg. Oeorg. i. 296; Ov.
Fast. iv. 780) : it is still a favourite article of
nutriment among the Syrians, and has the
appearance of coarse honey (Russell, Aleppo, i.
82). (3.) A third kind has been described by
some writers as " vegetable " honey, by which
is meant the exudations of certain trees and
shrubs, such as the Tamarix mannifera, found
in the Peninsula of Sinai or the stunted oaks of
Luristan and Mesopotamia. The honey which
Jonathan ate in the wood (1 Sam. xiv. 25), and
the "wild honey "which supported St. John the
Baptist (Matt. iii. 4), have been referred to this
species. We do not agree with this view : the
honey in the wood was in such abundance that
Jonathan took it up on the end of a stick ; but
the vegetable honey is found only in small
globules, which must be carefully collected and
strained before being used (Wellsted, ii. 50).
The use of the term ya'ar in that passage is
decisive against this kind of honey. The fi4\t
Sryfaor of Matthew need not mean anything else
than the honey of the wild bees, which we have
already stated to be common in Palestine, and
which Josephns (B. J. iv. 8, § 3) specifies among
the natural productions of the plain of Jericho :
the expression is certainly applied by Diodorus
Sicnlus (xix. 94) to honey exuded from trees ;
HOOK, HOOKS
1383
but it may also be applied like the Latin
met si/testre (Plin. xi. 16) to a particular kind
of bee-honey. (4.) A fourth kind is described
by Josephus (/. c.) as being manufactured from
the juice of the date.
The prohibition against the use of honey in
meat offerings (Lev. ii. 11) appears to have been
grounded on the fermentation produced by it,
honey soon turning sour, and even forming vinegar
(Plin. xxi. 48). This fact is embodied in the
Talmudical word hidbish = " to ferment," de-
rived from d'bash (cp. Knobcl-Dillmann in loco).
Other explanations have been offered, as that
bees were unclean (Pbilo, De Sacrif. vi. App.
ii. 255), or that the honey was the artificial
dibs (Bahr, Symbol, ii. 323> [W. L. B.] [F.]
HOOD. Is. iii 23 (R.V. " turban"). [Head-
dress.]
HOOK, HOOKS. Various kinds of hooks
are noticed in the Bible, of which the following
are the most important : —
1. Fishing-hooks (JTIV, YD, Amos iv. 2 ;
nan, Job xli. 2 ; Is. xix. 8 ; Hab. i. 15). The
first two of these Hebrew terms mean pri-
marily thorns, and secondarily fishing-hooks, from
the similarity in shape, or perhaps from thorns
having been originally used for the purpose ; in
both cases the LXX. and Vulg. are mistaken in
their renderings, giving SrKois and contia for
the first, \4finras and ollis for the second : the
third term refers to the contraction of the mouth
by the hook.
2. rtn (A. V. "thorn," R. V. "hook "), pro-
perly a ring (tyt\Xtov, circuius) placed through
the month of a large fish and attached by a
cord (jfcOK) to a stake for the purpose of keep-
ing it alive in the water (Job xli. 2) ; the word
(in v. 2a) meaning the cord is rendered "hook"
in the A. V. (R. V. " rope ") and = tr x aivos.
3. nn and fllCI, generally rendered " hook "
in the A. V. after the LXX. tyiuorpor, bnt pro-
perly a ring (circtilus), such as in ov.: country is
placed through the nose of a bull, and similarly
used in the East for leading about lions (Ezek.
xix. 4, where the A. V. has " with chains," R. V.
" with hooks "), camels and other animals, A
similar method was adopted for leading prisoners,
as in the case of Manasseh, who was led with
rings (2 Ch. xxxiii. 11 ; A. V. "among the
thorns," R. V. " in chains," marg. with hooks).
An illustration of this practice is found in a
bas-relief discovered at Khorsabad (Layard,
ii. 376). The expression is used several times
in this sense (2 K. xix. 28 ; Is. xxxvii. 29 ;
Ezek. xxix. 4, xxxviii. 4). The term E'piD is
used in a similar sense in Job xl. 24 (A. V.,
marg. bore his nose with a gin; R. V. text,
" pierce through his nose with a snare ").
Book. (iAyard'B Nimntk.)
i. WW, a term exclusively used — reference
to the Tabernacle, rendered "hooks" in the
A. V. and R. V. The LXX. varies in its render-
Digitized by
Google
1384
HOPHNI
ing, sometimes giving K«j>a\ls, i.e. the capital of
the pillars, sometimes itpdtov and ayKiiXv; the
expenditure of gold, as given in Ex. xxxviii. 28,
has led to this doubt ; they were, however, most
probably hooks (Ex. xxvi. 32, 37 ; xxrii. 10 sq. ;
xxxviii. 10 sq.) : the word seems to have given
name to the letter 1 in the Hebrew alphabet,
from a similarity of its form, both in the Hebrew
square character and in Phoenician, to a hook
(see MV.»).
5. mDTD, a vine-dresser's pruning-hook (Is.
ii. 4, xviii. 5 ; Micah iv. 3 ; Joel in. 10).
6. J7tD and 1?\0 (uptiypa), a flesh-hook for
getting up the joints of meat out of the boiling
pot (Ex. xxvii. 3 ; 1 Sam. u. 13, 14).
7. D'FIBB' (Ezek. xl. 43), a term of very
doubtful meaning, probably meaning " hooks "
(as in the text of A. V. and R. V.), used for the
purpose of hanging up animals to flay them
(paxilli bifurci, Gesen. Thesa>ir. p. 1470) : other
meanings given are — ledges (R. V. marg. ; labia,
Vulg.) ; pens for keeping the animals previous
to their being slaughtered ; hearth-stones, as in
A. V. marg. ; and lastly, gutters to receive and
carry off the blood from the slaughtered animals
(see Cornill and Orelli [in Strack u. Zocklcr's
Kgf. Komm.] in loco). * [W. L. B.] [F.]
HOPH'NI 03Sn,? = m]/jSat [cp. the name
of Sabaean kings DJDPI ; see M V."] ; 'Ocpvl) and
PlilXEKAS, the two sons of Eli, who fulfilled
their hereditary sacerdotal duties at Shiloh.
Their brutal rapacity and lust, which seemed
to acquire fresh violence with their father's in-
creasing years (1 Sam. ii. 22, 12-17), filled the
people with disgust and indignation, and pro-
voked the curse which was denounced against
their father's house first by an unknown pro-
phet (tm. 27-36), and then by Samuel (1 Sam. iii.
11-14). They were both cut off" in one day in
the flower of their age, and the Ark which they
had accompanied to battle against the Philistines
was lost on the same occasion (1 Sam. iv. 10, 11).
The predicted ruin and ejectment of Eli's house
were fulfilled in the reign of Solomon. [Eli ;
Zadok.] The unbridled licentiousness of these
young priests gives us a terrible glimpse into
the fallen condition of the chosen people (Ewald,
liesch. ii. 538-638; Stanley, Hist, of the Jewish
Church, Lecture xvii.). The Scripture calls them
" sons of Belial " (1 Sam. ii. 12); and to this
our great poet alludes in the words —
" to him no temple stood
Or altar smoked ; yet who more oft than be
In temples and at altars, when the priest
Turns atheist, as did Ell's sons, who filled
With lust and violence the house of God ? "
Par. Lost, 1. 492. [F. W. F.]
HOB, MOUNT (inn "lh, ia "Hor the
mountain," remarkable as the only case in which
the name comes first). 1. ('ftp to (Spot ; Mons
Hor), the mountain on which Aaron died (Num.
xx. 25, 27, xxxiii. 38; Deut, xxxii. 50). The
word Hor is regarded by the lexicographers as
an archaic form of liar, the usual Hebrew term
for "mountain" (Gesenius, Thes. p. 3916), so
that the meaning of the name is simply " the
mountain of mountains," as the LXX. have it
in another case (see below, No. 2), to Spos rb
ipos ; Vulg. mons altissimus ; and Jerome (Ep.
HOB, MOUNT
ad Fabiolam) non m monte simpliciter std in
mantis monte.
The few facts given us in the Bible regarding
Mount Hor are soon told. It was "on the
boundary line " (Num. xx. 23) or " at the edge "
(xxxiii. 37) of the land of Edom. It was the
next halting-place of the people after Kadesh
(xx. 22; xxxiii. 37), and they quitted it for
Zalmonah (xxxiii. 41) in the road to the Red
Sea (xxi. 4). It was during the encampment at
Mount Hor that Aaron was gathered to his
fathers. At the command of Jehovah, he, his
brother, and his son ascended the mountain, in
the presence of the people, " in the eyes of all
the congregation." The garments, and with the
garments the office, of high-priest were taken
from Aaron and put upon Eleazar, and Aaron
died there in the top of the mountain. In the
circumstances of the ascent of the height to die,
and in the marked exclusion from the Promised
Land, the end of the one brother resembled the
end of the other ; but in the presence of the two
survivors, and of the gazing crowd below, there
is a striking difference between this event and
the solitary death of Moses.
Mount Hor " is one of the very few spots con-
nected with the wanderings of the Israelites
which admit of no reasonable doubt " (Stanley,
3, fP.f. 86). It is almost unnecessary to state
that it is situated on the eastern side of the
great valley of the 'Arabah, the highest and
most conspicuous of the whole range of the
sandstone mountains of Edom, having close
beneath it on its eastern side — though, strange
to say, the two are not visible to each other —
the mysterious city of Petra. The tradition has
existed from the earliest date. Josephus does
not mention the name of Hor (Ant. iv. 4, § 7),
but he describes the death of Aaron as taking
place "on a very high mountain which sur-
rounded the metropolis of the Arabs," which
latter "was formerly called Arke, but now
Petra." In the Onomasticon of Eusebius and
Jerome (OS* p. 291, 88 ; p. 175, 14) it is Or mons
— " a mountain in which Aaron died, close to the
city of Petra." When it was visited by the
Crusaders (see the quotations in Robinson,
p. 521), the sanctuary was already on its top,
and there is little doubt that it was then what it
is now — the Q'abal Nabi Harun, " the mountain
of the Prophet Aaron."
Mount Hor is formed of beds of red sandstone
and conglomerate which have a gentle "dip,"
or inclination eastwards, towards Wadi Musa,
and rise in a precipitous wall of natural masonry,
tier above tier, with their faces to the west.
The base of the cliff of sandstone rests upon a
solid mass of granite and porphyry traversed by
dykes ; and against the western face of this, beds
of cretaceous limestone are thrown down by a
large fault which runs north and south. The
sandstone resting on the granite has the appear-
ance of " a mountain on a mountain," and its
summit, crowned by the little white mosque
that covers the tomb of Aaron, is somewhat in
the form of a rude pyramid. "The mount is
flanked by two remarkable bastions of sandstone,
standing erect on the granitic base, and some-
what in advance of the mural cliffs." The
granite base on which the sandstone rests is the
"plain of Aaron," beyond which Burckhardt
was, after all his toils, prevented from ascending
Digitized by
Google
HOB, MOUNT
{Travels in Syria and the H. L., pp. 429, 430).
From this place an ancient path, similar to that
on G'abal Musa, with worn steps made out of
boulders at difficult parts, leads up the mountain
to another level space, or platform, from which
the highest peak rises abruptly, and here sheep
are sacrificed to " the Prophet Aaron." A flight
of steps cut out of the rock leads hence up a
steep precipice to the tomb itself, and about
halfway up these steps is a large cistern or
chamber covered in with arches, over which the
staircase is built. The altitude of Mount Hor
above the sea is about 4,580 ft., above Petra
about 1,325 ft., and above the Dead Sea about
5,872 ft. (Hull, PEP. Mem. " Geology," p. 106,
with geological section; Hull and Kitchener,
Mount Stir, pp. 86, 95, 2 1 1 ; Palmer, Desert of tie
Exodus, pp. 434, 435).
The mosque, an ordinary Muslim t/w/S, is a
small square building, measuring inside about
28 ft. by 33 (Wilson, Lands, p. 295), with its
door in the S.W. angle. Over the door is an
inscription, stating that the building was
HOE, MOUNT
138o
restored by ash-Shim'ani, the son of Muhammad
Kaladn, Sultan of Egypt by his father's orders,
A.H. 739. The wall is built of rude stones, in
part broken columns; all of sandstone, but
fragments of granite and marble lie about.
Steps lead to the flat roof of the wait, from
which rises the usual white dome. The interior
consists of two chambers, one below the other.
The upper one has four large pillars and a stone
chest, or tombstone, like one of the ordinary
slabs in churchyards, but larger and higher,
and rather bigger at the top than at the bottom.
At its head is a high round stone, on which
sacrifices are made, and which retained, when
Stephens saw it, the marks of the smoke and
blood of recent offerings. "On the slab are
Arabic inscriptions, and it is covered with shawls,
chiefly red. One of the pillars is hung with
votive offerings of beads, &c, and two ostrich
eggs are suspended over the chest. Steps in the
N.W. angle lead down to the lower chamber,
which is partly in the rock, but plastered. It
is perfectly dark. At the end, apparently under
View of tharammlt of Meant Hor. (From Lsborda.)
the stone chest above, is a recess guarded by a
grating. Within this is a rude protuberance,
whether of stone or plaster was not ascertainable,
resting on wood, and covered by a ragged pall.
This lower recess is no doubt the tomb, and
possibly ancient. What is above is only the
artificial monument and certainly modern."*
In one of the walls of the upper chamber is a
" round polished black stone," one of those
mysterious stones of which the prototype is the
Kaaba at Mecca, and which, like that, would
appear to be the object of great devotion (Mar-
tineau, pp. 419-20).
The impression received on the spot is that
Aaron's death took place in the small basin
between the two peaks, and that the people were
stationed either on the plain at the base of the
• According to Col. Kitchener, who visited Mount
Hor In 1883, tbe building contains only "the usual
carpet-covered cenotaph, with some ostrich eggs hanging
over it — all In an uncared-for condition " (Mount Stir,
p. an).
peaks, or at that part of the Wadi Kusaibah
from which the top is commanded. Josephus
says that the ground was sloping downwards
{xarirtts fa to x"pl°* i Ant. iv. 4, § 7> But
this may be the mere general expression of a
man who had never been on the spot. The
greater part of the above information was
kindly communicated to the writer by Dean
Stanley.
The chief interest of Mount Hor will always
consist in the prospect from its summit— the
last view of Aaron — " that view which was to
him what Pisgah was to his brother." It is
described at length by Irby (p. 134), Wilson (i.
292-9), Martineau (p. 420), and is well summed
up by Stanley in the following words: — "We
saw all the main points on which his eye must
have rested. He looked over the valley of the
'Arabah counteracted by its hundred water-
courses, and beyond, over the white mountains
of the wildemeas they had so long traversed ; and
at the northern edge of it there must have been
visible the heights through which the Israelites
Digitized by
Google
1386
HOB, MOUNT
HOB HAGIDGAD
had vainly attempted to force their way into the
Promised Land. This was the western view.
Close around him on the east were the rugged
mountains of Edom, and far along the horizon
the wide downs of Mount Seir, through which
the passage had been denied by the wild tribes
of Esau who hunted over their long slopes." On
the north lay the mysterious Dead Sea gleaming
from the depths of its profound basin (Stephens
Incidents). "A dreary moment, and a dreary
scene — such it must have seemed to the aged
priest. . . . The peculiarity of the view is the
combination of wide extension with the scarcity
of marked features. Petra is shut out by inter-
vening rocks. But the survey of the Desert on
one side, and the mountains of Edom on the
other, is complete ; and of these last the great
feature is the mass of red bald-headed sandstone
rocks, intersected not by valleys but by deep
seams " (& # P. p. 87). Though Petra itself is
entirely shut out, one outlying building — if it
may be called a building — is visible, that which
goes by the name of the Dair, or Convent. Dean
Stanley has thrown out a suggestion on the
connexion between the two which is well worth
investigation.
2. (to (pot to opos; nuns altissimus.) A
mountain, entirely distinct from the preceding,
named, in Num. rxxiv. 7, 8, only, as one of the
marks of the northern boundary of the land
which the children of Israel were about to con-
quer. The identification of this mountain has
always been one of the puzzles of Sacred Geo-
graphy. The Mediterranean was the western
boundary. The northern boundary started from
the sea ; the first point in it was Mount Hor,
and the second the entrance of Hamath. Since
Sidon was subsequently allotted to the most
northern tribe — Asher, and was, so far as we
know, the most northern town so allotted, it
would seem probable that the northern boundary
would commence at about that point ; that is,
opposite to where the great range of Lebanon
breaks down to the sea. The next landmark,
the entrance to Hamath, is the valley of the
Electheros, Sahr al-Kabir, which rises not far
from Horns, the ancient Hamath, and divides the
Lebanon from the range to the north. Surely
" Mount Hor " then can be nothing else than the
great chain of Lebanon itself. Looking at the
massive character and enormous height of the
range, it is very difficult to suppose that any in-
dividual peak ur mountain is intended and not
the whole mass, which takes nearly a straight
course between the two points just named, and
includes below it the great plain of the Buk&a
and the whole of Palestine properly so called.
The Targum Pseudojon. renders Mount Hor
by Umanos, probably intending Amana. The
latter is also the reading of the Talmnd (Gittin 8,
quoted by Fttrst, sub voce), in which it is con-
nected with the Amana named in Cant. iv. 8.
But the situation of this Amana is nowhere in-
dicated by them. It cannot have any connexion
with the Amana or Abana river which flowed
through Damascus, as that is quit* away from
the position required in the passage. By the
Jewish geographer Parchi (Benj. of Tudela,
413, 4c), for various traditional and linguistic
reasons, a mountain is fixed upon very far to the
north ; in fact, though they do not say so, very
near the Morn Amanns of the classical geo-
graphers. But this is soma 200 miles north of
Sidon and 150 above Hamath, and is surely an
unwarranted extension of the limits of the Holy
Land. Schwarz (pp. 6, 32) with greater proba-
bility identifies it with the bold promontory,
Has esh-Shu&aA, known to the Greeks as Theo-
prosopon, to the south of Tripolis (sea other
conjectures in Dillmann.* For the views of
the Jewish commentators, see Neubauer, 04bg.
du Talmud, p. 7 sq.). The great range of Leba-
non is so clearly the natural northern boun-
dary of the country, that there seems no reason
to doubt that the whole range is intended by
the term Hor. Robinson, however (Phys. Oeog.
p. 314), limits this Hor " to the northern end
of Lebanon Proper, or a spur connected with
it." [G.] [W.]
HOUAM (D"}h = elevated, great; BA Atxiu;
Horam), king of Gezeb at the time of the con-
quest of the south-western part of Palestine
(Josh. x. 33). He came to the assistance of
Lachisb, but was slaughtered by Joshua with all
his people.
HO'BEB (2"l.n=dry: XatfP; A. in Deut. i.
19, 5ox w * : Horeb). Ex. iii. 1, xvii. 6, xxxiii.
6 ; Deut. i. 2, 6, 19, iv. 10, 15, v. 2, ix. 8, xviii.
16, xxix. 1; 1 K. viii. 9, xix. 8; 2 Ch. v. 10;
Ps. cvi. 19; Mai. iv. 4; Ecclus. xlviii. 7.
[Sinai.]
HOBE'M (D"m=dedicated : B. Me/aAaapcfp,
A. Ma-ySaAniupaV, both by inclusion of the pre-
ceding name ; Horem), an unidentified fortified
place in the territory of Naphtali ; named with
Iron, Migdal-el, and Beth-anath (Josh. xix. 38).
Van de Velde (i. 178-9 ; Memoir, p. 322) suggests
Hurah (in PEF. lists Kh. et-K&rah) as the site
of Horem. It is an ancient site in the centre
of the country, half-way between the Has en-
Ndkiirah and the Lake Merom. It is also in
favour of this identification that Hurah is near
Tarun, probably the representative of the ancient
Iron, named with Horem. Conder (Hbk. p. 415)
suggests Kh. Harah, in the hills W. of Jfcis.
[G.] [W.]
HOB HAOED'GAD, R. V. HOB HAG-
GIDOAD OJ"IJn l' n ; r» tpos TatydS; Morn
Gadgad — both reading in for in), the name of
a desert station where the Israelites encamped
(Num. xxxiii. 32, 33), probably the same as
Gudgodah (Deut. x. 7). In both passages it
stands in sequence with three others, — Moserah
or Moseroth, Beeroth, Bene Jaakan, and Jotbath
or Jotbathah ; but the order is not strictly pre-
served [see Wilderness of Wandering]. It is
observable that on the west side of the 'Arabah
Robinson (vol. i., map) has a Wady GhidSghidh,
which may bear the same meaning ; bat as that
meaning might be perhaps applied to a great
number of localities, it would be dangerous to
infer identity. The junction of this wady with
the 'Arabah would not, however, be unsuitable
for a station between Mount Hor, near which
Moserah lay (cp. Num. xx. 28, Deut. x. 6), and
Ezion-geber. Dillmann* (Num. /. c.) argues
from the epithet Hor that it was in the land of
the Horites near Aaron's burial-plnce.
[H.H.] [W.]
Digitized by
Google
HORI
HOm. 1. CTI, but in Ch. '>"fm=mAabUant
of cava, Oct., Font ; in Gen. A. Xotyti, in Ch.
A. Xo#i, B.Xotftl; Hon), a Horite, u his name
betokena; son of Lotan the son of Seir, and
brother to Hemam and Homam (Gen. xxxvi. 22 ;
1 Ch. i. 39). No trace of the name appears to
hare bean met with in modern times.
& (A. Xoj>ptl ; Horraeorum,') In Gen. xxxvi.
30, the name has in the original the defi-
nite article prefixed — '"jhn = "the Horite;"
and is in fact precisely the same word as that
which in the preceding verse, and also in r. 21,
is rendered in the A. V. " the Horites."
8. Q~iV\ ; A. iovpl, B. Xovptl, the a being
carried on from the previous word ; Hurt.) A
man of Simeon, father of Shaphat, who repre-
sented that tribe among the spies sent np into
Canaan by Moses (Num. xiii. 5).
HCRITES and HO'BIMS (nh, Gen. xiv. 6,
and Wy\ Deut. ii. 12 ; Xoftcuoi ; Chorraei,
Horraei: also Horite in the sing., Gen. xxxvi-
20, Xotfxuot ; Horraeus), the aboriginal inhabi-
tants of Mount Seir (Gen. xiv. 6), and probably
allied to the Emim and Rephaim. The name
Horite (nh, " a troglodyte," from lin, " a hole "
or " cave") appears to have been derived from
their habits as " cave-dwellers." Their excavated
dwellings are still found in hundreds in the
sandstone cliffs and mountains of Edom, and
especially in Petra. [Edom and Edomites.] It
may, perhaps, be to the Horites that Job refers in
xxx. 6, 7. They are only three times mentioned
in Scripture : first, when they were smitten by
the kings of the Last (Gen. xiv. 6) ; then when
their genealogy is given in Gen. xxxvi. 20-30
and 1 Ch. i. 38— 12 ; and lastly when they were
exterminated by the Edomites (Deut. ii. 12, 22).
It is probable that they were not Canaanites, but
an earlier race, who inhabited Mount Seir before
the posterity of Canaan took possession of Pales-
tine (Ewald, Gach. i. 304-5). [J. L. P.] [W.]
HOB'MAH (nDTI : bnt in Num. xxi. 3,
Jndg. L 17, 'AniBtfia, A. [in Judg.] i^oMiptwrtt ;
Num. xiv. 45, B. 'Epfiir, AF. -a ; Josh. xii. 14,
B. 'EstuM, A. -a ; xv. 30, B. 'EjyuC, A. 'EpprfA ;
1 Sam. xxx. 30, B. 'UpttfutH), A. Poppd : Horma,
Herma, Harma,Arama : its earlier name Zephath,
DBV, is found in Judg. i. 17) was the chief
town of a " king " of a Canaanitish tribe reduced
by Joshua (Josh. xii. 14 ; cp. Judg. i. 17). It
was situated in the Negeb, or extreme south of
Palestine, and became a city of the territory of
Judah (Josh. xv. 30), but apparently belonged
to Simeon, whose territory is reckoned as part
<>f the former (Josh. xix. 4; cp. 1 Ch. iv. 30).
It was at or near the foot of the pass by which
the Israelites ttempted to enter Palestine, and
where they <vere defeated (Num. xiv. 45 ; Deut.
i. 44) ; and U was afterwards captured and de-
stroyed by Judah and Simeon (Num. xxi. 3 ;
Judg. 17). The seeming inconsistency between
the two last passages may be relieved by sup-
posing that the vow made at the former period
was fulfilled at the latter, and the name (the root
of which, DVI, constantly occurs' in the sense
of " to devote to destruction," or " utterly to
destroy ") given by anticipation. It is mentioned
in the lists of towns (Josh. xv. 30, xix. 4) next
HOBN
1387
to Ziklag; and it was one of the places friendly
to David, to which a share of the spoil, taken
from the marauding Amalekites, was sent (1 Sam.
xxx. 30). Hormah would appear, from indica-
tions in the narrative, to have been not far from
Kadesh (cp. Num. xiii. 26, and xiv. 40-45),
and in the S.E. portion of the Negeb in the
vicinity of Seir (Deut. i. 44 ; cp. i. 2). But the
question of its site — of which, according to Dill-
mann* (on Num. xiv. 45), no trace has been
found — forms part of a much larger one : viz.,
the route by which the Israelites approached
the Holy Land [Wilderness of Wandering].
Robinson (ii. 181) identifies Zephath with the
well-known pass Es-SBfah, l\sua$\> by which
travellers from Petra to Hebron ascend to the
highest level of the Negeb. This view is chal-
lenged by Mr. Wilton {The Negeb, &c, pp. 199,
200)on account of the impracticability of the pass,
for a host sach as the Israelites were. Mr. Row-
lands (Williams' Holy City, i. 464) identifies it
with Sebaita, to the S. of Khalasah ; and in this
he is supported by Prof. Palmer, who gives an
interesting description of the ruins (Desert of
the Exodus, pp. 373-380). [W.j
HORN. I. Literal. (Josh. vi. 4, 5; cp.
Ex. xix. 13; 1 Sam. xvi. 1, 13; 1 K. i. 30; Job
xiii. 14.) — Two purposes are mentioned in the
Scriptures to which the horn seems to have been
applied. Trumpets were probably at first merely
horns perforated at the tip, such as are still
used upon mountain-farms for calling home the
labourers at meal-time. If the A. V. and R. V.
(text) of Josh. vi. 4, 5 ("rams' horns," JTj?
?3i'n) be correct, this would settle the ques-
tion, some critics taking ?3i v with the Targ.
and Rabbis as equivalent to the Arabic M?31' t ram
(see Knobel-Dillmann on Ex. xix. 12), a signifi-
cation which Fried. Dehtzsch (Proleg. eines nram
Heb.-Aram. Wdrterb. z. A. T. p. 124, n. 2) finds
also in the Assyrian ibilu or abilu, the ram as
leader of (wild) sheep. Others, however, seem
to think that ?3^' has nothing to do with ram
(cp. R. V. marg. of Josh. I. c, jubile), and that
]*Tj3, horn, serves to indicate an instrument which.
Digitized by
Google
1388
HORN
originally was made of horn, though afterwards,
no doubt, constructed of different materials (cp.
Varr. L. L. v. 24, 33, " cornua quod ea quae
nunc cunt ex aere tunc fiebant bubulo e cornu ").
[Cornet.] The horns which were thus made
into trumpets would probably be those of oxen
rather than of rams, the latter scarcely pro-
ducing a note sufficiently imposing to suggest
its association with the fall of Jericho.
The word horn is also applied to a flask, or
vessel made of horn, containing oil (1 Sam.
ivi. 1, 13 ; 1 K. i. ?9), or used as a kind of
toilet-bottle, filled with the preparation of anti-
mony with which women tinged their eyelashes
(Keren-happuch = cosmetic-horn, name of one of
Job's daughters, Job xlii. 14). So in English
drinking-horn (commonly called a horny. In
the same way the Greek nipat sometimes signi-
fies bugle, trumpet (Xen. Anab. ii. 2, § 4), and
sometimes drinking-horn (vii. 2, § 23). In like
manner the Latin cornu means trumpet, also
oil-cruet (Hor. Sat. ii. 2, 61) and funnel (Virg.
Georg. iii. 509).
II. Metaphorical. 1. From similarity of
form. — To this use belongs the application of
the word horn to a trumpet of metal, as already
mentioned. Horns of ivory — that is, elephants'
teeth — are mentioned in Ezek. xxvii. 15 : either
metaphorically from similarity of form ; or, as
seems more probable, from a vulgar error. The
horns of the altar (Ex. xxvii. 2) are not supposed
to have been made of horn, but to have been
metallic projections from tbe four corners (ymyicu
KtparotiSus, Joseph. B.J. v. 5, § 6). [Altar,
p. 101.] The peak or summit of a hill was
called a horn (Is. v. 1, where hill = horn in
Heb. [see A.V. and R.V. marg.] ; cp. Klpas, Xen.
Anab. v. 6, § 7, and cornu, Stat. Thtb. y. 532;
Arab. Kurun Hatttn, Robinson, BOA. Bes. ii. 370 ;
Germ. Schreckhorn, Wetterhorn, Aarhorn; Celt,
cairn). In Hab. iii. 4 (" he had horns coming
out of his hand ") the context implies rays (R. V.
text) of light.
The denominative Jip = " to emit rays," is
used of Moses' face (Ex! xxxiv. 29, 30, 35) ; so
all the Versions except Aquila and the Vulgate,
which have the translations KfpardSris Jfy, cor-
nuta erat (cp. Knobel-Dillmann in loco). This
curious idea has not only been perpetuated by
paintings, coins, and statues (Zornius, Biblioth.
Antiq. i. 121), but has at least passed muster
with Grotius (Annot. ad loc.), who cites Aben-
Ezra's identification of Moses with the horned
Mnevis of Egypt, and suggests that the pheno-
menon was intended to remind the Israelites of
the golden calf! Spencer (Leg. Hebr. iii., Diss,
i. 4) tries a reconciliation of renderings upon
the ground that cornua = radii lucis ; but Span-
heim {Diss. vii. 1), not content with stigmatiz-
ing the efforts of art in this direction as " prae-
postera industria," distinctly attributes to
Jerome a belief in the veritable horns of Moses.
Bishop Taylor, in all good faith, though of
course rhetorically, compares the " sun's golden
horns " to those of the Hebrew Lawgiver.
2. From similarity of position and use. — Two
principal applications of this metaphor will be
found — strength and Aonour. Of strength the
horn of the unicorn [Unioorn] was the most
frequent representative (Deut. xxxiii. 17, &c),
bat not always: cp. 1 K. xxii. 11, where horns
of iron, worn defiantly and symbolically on the
HORN
head, are possibly intended. Expressive of the
same idea, or perhaps merely a decoration, is
the Oriental military ornament mentioned by
Taylor (Calmet's Frag, cxiv.), and the conical
cap observed by Dr. Livingstone among the
II. iii uf S; utli Africans ornamented » itli buffalo-boms.
(Livingstone, Trttvtll, pp. 450, 4fll.)
natives of S. Africa, and not improbably sug-
gested by the horn of the rhinoceros, so abun-
dant in that country (see Livingstone's Travels,
pp. 365, 450, 557 j cp. Taylor, /. c> Among the
Druses upon Mount Lebanon, the married women
wear silver horns on their heads. The spiral
coils of gold wire projecting on either side from
the female head-dress of some of the Dutch pro-
vinces are evidently an ornament borrowed from
the same original idea.
Heads o/ modern Asiatics
In the sense of honour, the word Aorn stands
for the abstract (my horn, Job xvi. 15 ; all the
horns of Israel, Lam. ii. 3), and so for the supreme
authority (cp. the story of Cippus, Ovid, Met.
xv. 565 ; and the horn of the Indian Sachem
mentioned in Clarkson's Life of Perm). It also
stands for concrete, whence it comes to mean
king, kingdom (Dan. viii. 2, &c. ; Zech. i. 18 ;
cp. Tarquin's dream in Accius, ap. Cic. Die.
i. 22) ; hence on coins Alexander and the Seleu-
cidae wear horns (see drawing on p. 86), and
the former is called in Arabia two-horned
(Kor. xviii. 85 sq.), not without reference to
Dan. viii.
Out of either or both of these two last meta-
phors sprang tbe idea of representing gods with
horns. Spanheim has discovered such figures
on the Roman denarius, and on numerous Egyp-
tian coins of the reigns of Trajan, Hadrian, and
the Antonines (Diss. v. p. 353). The Bacchus
TavponJpas, or comutus, is mentioned by Euri-
pides (Bacch. 100), and among other pagan
absurdities Arnobius enumerates " Dii cornuti "
(c. Gent. vi.). In like manner river-gods are
represented with horns (" taurifonnis Aufidus,"
Hor. Od. iv. 14, 25; ravpiuoppov H/i/ia Kr)<pi-
Digitized by
Google
HOBNET
gov, Eur. Ion, 1231). For various opinions on
the ground-thought of this metaphor, see Notes
and Queries, i. 419, 456. Manx legends speak
of a tarroo-ushtey, i.e. water-bull (see Cregeen's
Manx Diet.}. See Bochart, Hieroz. ii. 288 ;
and, for an admirable compendium, with re-
ferences, Zornius, JBibliotheca Antiguaria, ii.
106 sq, [T. E.B.]
HORNET (fTinX, sir'Sh; v^xla; crabro;
Arab. .•JO], zatibur; Vespi crabro, L.). No
question has arisen as to the correctness of the
translation, although the word only occurs three
times in the O. T. In each passage the tir'ah
is spoken of as an instrument in God's hand for
the punishment and expulsion of the Canaanites :
" I will send hornets before thee, which shall
drive out the Hivite, the Canaanite, and the
Hittite from before thee " (Ex. xxiii. 28). "The
Lord thy God will send the hornet among them "
(Deut. vii. 20). " I sent the hornet before you,
which drave them out from before you " (Josh,
xxiv. 12). Much has been written on the
question whether these passages are to be in-
terpreted literally, and whether swarms of
hornets did aid in compelling the flight of the
Canaanites ; or whether their attacks are spoken
of metaphorically, as in the case of the expression,
" The Amorites .... came out against you, and
chased you as bees do." So in classical writers
the oestrus or gadfly is metaphorically used to
signify " terror " or " madness." The hornet, it
is suggested, may simply mean the panic and
alarm with which the approach of the hosts of
Israel would inspire the Canaanite. It has also
been observed that we have no recorded instance
in Scripture history of the intervention of
hornets. There does not, however, appear to be
much force in this negative argument, for there
are recorded instances in profane history of
hornets having multiplied to such a degree as
to become a pest to the inhabitants. Aelian gives
an account (xi. 28) of the people of Megara
having been on one occasion driven from their
city by a plague of mice, and the inhabitants of
Phaselis by swarms of wasps. Upon this Bochart
suggests that the story may have arisen from a
tradition handed down from their ancestors, as
Phaselis was a Phoenician colony, and even as
late as the time of Xerxes spoke the pure
Phoenician language; and these ancestors may
have been fugitive Canaanites. Antenor of
Crete, as quoted by Aelian (xvii. 35), tells how
the people of Rhaucus in that island were com-
pelled to leave their home in consequence of the
attacks of swarms of bees. Herodotus was told
that in one part of the Danube the bees occupied
the north bank in such numbers that it was
impossible to penetrate further. It is known
that the furious attacks of hornets, when their
nest has been disturbed, will drive cattle and
horses to madness, and have frequently caused
the death of the animals. In Palestine the
hornet is very abundant. That it was equally
so in early times we may infer from the name
Zoreah, i.e. " place of hornets " (Josh. xv. 23), as
well as from the frequent mention of the insect
in the Talmudical writers (see Lewysohn, Zool.
§ 405). There are immense numbers of species
of hornet; which is really not a group dis-
tinguishable from the wasp, except for its size ;
HOBONITE, THE
1389
and these species are distributed over the whole
world excepting the Arctic regions. The different
hornets are all included in the insect family
Diplopteryga, and sub-family Yespidae. They
vary much in the form and position of their
nests and combs. Some construct very large
nests underground, others in rocks ; others
suspend their combs, as does the English Yespa
crabro, under slabs of stone or other secure
shelter. But all place their combs horizontally
with the mouths of the cells downwards. They
are never perpendicular, like the combs of bees.
I noticed four species of hornet very common
in the Holy Land, but did not meet with the
British Yespa crabro. All the species were
larger than our own. Two of them make nests
like our species, suspending them by a papier-
mache' pillar from a beam or stone or the roof of
a cave; the horizontal combs being suspended
in the centre, one beneath the other, by a strong
papier-machi column. An umbrella-shaped
shield of the same material shelters the whole
string of combs. The two other species (jve in
larger communities, and construct their paper
nests underground, or in cavities of rocks with
their combs also placed horizontally. These
are sometimes two feet in diameter. Should a
horse tread on a nest, it is necessary to fly with
all speed, for the combined attack from such a
swarm has been known to be fatal. [H. B. T.]
HOBONA'IM (D'3'lh = too caverns; in Is.
T. 7 'Apttrul/t, A. 'ASwkIm; in Jer. [o. 5, BMA.]
'Clpavaift, sometimes 'Opavatfi, &c. ; Oronaim),
a town of Moab named with Zoar and Luhith (Is.
xv. 5; Jer. xlviii. [LXX. xxxi.] 3, 5, 34), but
to the position of which no clue is afforded
either by the notices of the Bible or by men-
tion in other works. It seems to have been
on an eminence, and approached (like Beth-
boron) by a road which is styled the " way "
Cqnj, Is. xv. 5), or the "descent " (jfCO, Jer.
xlviii. 5). From the occurrence of a similar
expression in regard to Luhith, we might
imagine that these two places were sanctuaries,
on the high places to which the Eastern worship
of those days was so addicted. If we accept
the name as Hebrew, we may believe the dual
form of it to arise, either from the presence of
two caverns in the neighbourhood, or from there
having been two towns, possibly an upper and
a lower, as in the case of the two Beth-horons,
connected by the ascending road. It occurs on
the Moabite Stone under the form JJ*TTI (see
MV.") and as having been taken by king Mesha,
either from the Edomites or the Israelites (see
Records of the Past, N. S. ii. p. 203); and it is
possibly the same place as the 'Op&rai of Jose-
phus (Ant. xiii. 15, § 4; xiv. 1, § 4). Conder
(Heth # Moab, p, 403) connects it with Wady
Ohieir, up which runs an ancient road.
From Horonaim possibly came Sanballat the
Horonite. [G.] [W]
HORO'NITE, THE fl'WI; B.4 'Apvrtl;
Horonites), the designation of Sanballat, who
was one of the principal opponents of Nehe-
miah'g works of restoration (Neh. ii. 10, 19
xiii. 28). It is derived by Gesenius ( Thes. p. 459)
from Horonaim the Moabite town, but by Fiirst
(Handwb.) from Horon, i.e. Beth-horon. Which
Digitized by
Google
1390
HORSE
it these is the more accurate is quite uncertain.
The former certainly accords well with the
Ammonite and Arabian who were Sanballat's
comrades ; the latter is perhaps more ety-
mologically correct. [G.] [W.]
HORSE. The most striking feature in the
Biblical notices of the horse is the exclnsire
application of it to warlike operations ; in no
instance is that useful animal employed for the
purposes of ordinary locomotion or agriculture,
if we except Is. xxviii. 28, where we learn that
horses (A. V. "horsemen") were employed in
threshing, not however in that case put in the
gears, but simply driven about wildly over the
strewn grain. This remark will be found to
be borne out by the historical passages here-
after quoted ; but it is equally striking in the
poetical parts of Scripture. The animated de-
scription of the horse in Job xxxix. 19-25,
applies solely to the war-horse ; the " quiver-
ing mane " (A. V. " thunder ") which " clothes
his neck ; " his lofty bounds " as a grasshopper ; "
his hoofs " digging in the valley with excite-
ment ; his terrible snorting — are trought before
us, and his ardour for the strife :
Be swalloweth the ground with fierceness and rage ;
Neither bellevetb he that it is the sound of the trumpet.
He saith among the trumpets, Ha, ha !
And he smelleth the battle afar off, the thunder of the
captains, and the shouting (A. V.).
So again the bride advances with her charms to
an immediate conquest, " as a company of horses
(R. V. "a steed") in Pharaoh's chariots"
(Song of Sol. i. 9) ; and when the Prophet
Zechariah wishes to convey the idea of perfect
peace, he represents the horse, no more mixing
in the fray as before (ix. 10), but bearing on his
bell (which was intended to strike terror into the
foe) the peaceable inscription " Holiness unto
the Lord " (xiv. 20). Lastly, the characteristic
of the horse is not so much his speed or his
utility, but his strength (Ps. xxxiii. 17, cxlvii.
10), as shown in the special application of the
term abbir (T3K), i.e. strong, as an equivalent
for a horse (Jer. viii. 16 ; xlvii. 3 ; I. 11).
The terms under which the horse is described
in the Hebrew language are usually sus and
parish (DID' CIS). The origin of these terms
is not satisfactorily made out; .Pott (JStym.
Forach. i. 60) connects them respectively with
Susa and Pares, or Persia, as the countries
whence the horse was derived ; and it is worthy
of remark that sus was also employed in Egypt
for a mare, showing that it was a foreign term
there, if not also in Palestine. There is a
marked distinction between the sus and the
parish : the former were horses for driving in
ihe war-chariot, of a heavy build; the latter
were for riding, and particularly for cavalry.
This distinction is not observed in the A. V.
from the circumstance that parish also signifies
" horseman ; " the correct sense is essential in
the following passages : 1 K. iv. 26, " forty (see
below) thousand . . . chariot horses and twelve
thousand cavalry horses " (A. V. " horsemen ") ;
Ezek. xxvii. 14, "driving horses and riding
(R, V. war-) horses " (A. V. " horsemen ") ; Joel
ii. 4, " as riding horses (A. V. and R. V. text
" horsemen," R. V. marg. war-horses), so shall
they run ; " and Is. xxi. 7, " a train of horses
HORSE
in couples " (A. V. " a chariot teith a couple of
horsemen " ; R. V. text, " a troop, horsemen in
pairs"). In addition to these terms we have
rekesh (B'jn, of undoubted Hebrew origin) to
describe a swift horse, used for the royal post
(Esth. viii. 10, 14; A. V. "mule ") and similar
purposes (1 K. iv. 28 ; A. V. " dromedary," R.V.
" swift steed "), or for a rapid journey (Mic. i.
13) ; rammak 0|BT)» used once for a mare (Esth.
viii. 10 ; A. V. " dromedary," R.V. " the stud "),
a Persian word £*>> an( l *"»«* (HD4D) in Song
of Sol. i. 9, where it is regarded in the A V. as
a collective term, " company of horses ; " it
rather means, according to the received punctua-
tion, " my mare," but still better, by a slight
alteration in the punctuation, " mares " (R. V.
text " a steed," marg. steeds).
The Hebrews in the patriarchal age, as a
pastoral race, did not stand in need of the
services of the horse, and for a long period
after their settlement in Canaan they dispensed
with it, partly in consequence of the hilly
nature of the country, which only admitted of
the use of chariots in certain localities (Judg. i.
19), and partly in consequence of the prohibition
in Deut. xvii. 16, which would be held to apply
at all periods. Accordingly they hamstrung
the horses of the Canaamtes (Josh. xi. 6, 9).
It was only on the maritime plains, in the
plain of Esdraelon and on the north-eastern
frontier, that chariots could be employed in
warfare to any purpose. In these, while Israel
had neither horses nor chariots, the Canaanites
were well supplied with both. Consequently
the usual order of successful invasions was
reversed. The aboriginal Canaanites were
driven out of the hills, but remained in the
plains. The mountains were the secure and
peaceful, the level and plain district: the
insecure, parts of the country. In the stcry of
the conquest by Joshua, we do not find chariots
mentioned till, after his subjugation of the
central and hill country, Jabin king of Hazor
met him in the far north near the waters of
Merom, " with horses and chariots very many "
(Josh. xi. 4). This was a new feature in the
war, and Joshua then received the command
to "hough the horses and burn the chariots."
Again, after a lapse of another 150 years, the
horses of another Jabin king of Canaan were a
terror to Israel ; " for he had nine hundred
chariots of iron, and twenty years he mightily
oppressed the children of Israel " (Judg. iv. 3).
' Then when the swamps and mud of the Kishon
had engulfed the chariot-wheels, the horsehoofs
were broken by the plunging and trampling of
their mighty ones.
David first established a force of cavalry and
chariots after the defeat of Hadadezer (2 Sam.
viii. 4), when he reserved a hundred chariots,
and, as we may infer, all the horses : for the
rendering " houghed all the chariot horses " is
manifestly incorrect. Shortly after this Absalom
was possessed of some (2 Sam. xv. 1). But the
great supply of horses was subsequently effected
by Solomon through his connexion with Egypt ;
he is reported to have had " forty thousand stalls
of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand
cavalry horses " (1 K. iv. 26), and it is worthy of
notice that these forces are mentioned parenthe-
Digitized by
Google
HORSE
tically to account for the great security of life and
property noticed in the preceding Terse. There
is probably an error in the former of these
numbers ; for the number of chariots is given
in 1 K. z. 26, 2 Ch. i. 14, as 1400 ; and con-
sequently if we allow three horses for each
chariot, two in use and one as a reserve, as
was usual in some countries (Xen. Cyrop. vi. 1,
§ 27X the number required would be 4,200, or,
in round numbers, 4,000, which is probably the
correct reading. Solomon also established a
very active trade in horses, which were brought
by dealers out of Egypt and resold at a profit to
the Hittites, who lived between Palestine and
the Euphrates. The passage in which this
commerce is described (1 K. x. 28, 29) is
unfortunately obscure ; the tenor of t>. 28
seems to be that there was a regularly estab-
lished traffic (R. V. " The horses which Solomon
had were brought out of Egypt "), the Egyptians
bringing the horses to a mart in the south of
Palestine and handing them over to the Hebrew
dealers at a fixed tariff. The price of a horse was
fixed at 150 shekels of silver, and that of a chariot
at 600 ; in the latter we must include the horses
(for an Egyptian war-chariot was of no great
value), and conceive, as before, that three horses
accompanied each chariot, leaving the chariot
itself at 150 shekels. In addition to this source
of supply, Solomon received* horses by way of
tribute (1 K. i. 25). The force was maintained
by the succeeding kings, and frequent notices
occur both of riding horses and chariots (2 K.
ix. 21, 33, xi. 16), and particularly of war-
chariots (1 K. xxii. 4 ; 2 K. iii. 7 ; Is. ii. 7).
The force seems to have failed in the time of
Hezekiah (2 K. xviii. 23) in Judah, as it had
previously in Israel under Jehoahaz (2 K.
xiii. 7). The number of horses belonging to
the Jews on their return from Babylon is stated
as 736 (Neh. vii. 68).
The northern kingdom was better adapted
for the use of cavalry and chariots than the
southern ; and Ahab, Jehoram, and Jehu are
repeatedly mentioned as using chariots for their
ordinary mode of travelling. But in the reign
of Jehoahaz the son of Jehu, a fatal blow was
struck at the power of the lsraelitish kingdom,
by the annihilation of its cavalry and chariots,
only 50 horses and 10 chariots being left (2 K.
xiii. 7); and from the sneers of Rabshakeh, it
would seem that the southern kingdom was not
much better supplied with this military arm.
In the countries adjacent to Palestine, the use
of the horse was much more frequent. It was
introduced into Egypt probably by the Hyksos,
as it is not represented on the monuments
before the 18th dynasty (Wilkinson, i. 386
[1878]). At the period of the Exodus horses
were abundant there (Gen. xlvii. 17, 1. 9;
Ex. ix. 3, xiv. 9, 23; Dent. xvii. 17), and
subsequently, as we have already seen, they
were able to supply the nations of Western
Asia. The Jewish kings sought the assistance
of the Egyptians against the Assyrians in this
respect (Is. xxxi. 1, xxxvi. 8; Ezek. xvii. 15).
The Canaanites were possessed of them (Deut.
xx. 1 ; Josh. xi. 4 ; Judg. iv. 3, v. 22, 28), and
likewise the Syrians (2 Sam. viii. 4 ; 1 K. xx.
1 ; 2 K. vi. 14, vii. 7, 10)— notices which are
confirmed by the pictorial representations on
Egyptian monuments (Wilkinson, i. 393, 397,
HORSE
1391
401), and by the Assyrian inscriptions relating
to Syrian expeditions. But the cavalry of the
Assyrians themselves and other eastern nations
was regarded as most formidable; the horses
themselves were highly bred, as the Assyrian
sculptures still testify, and fully merited the
praise bestowed on them by Habakkuk (i. 8),
•' swifter than leopards, and more fierce than
the evening wolves." Their riders " clothed in
blue, captains and rulers, all of them desirable
young men" (Ezek. xxiii. 6), armed with the
" bright sword and glittering spear " (Nah. iii.
3), made a deep impression on the Jews, who,
plainly clad, went on foot ; as also did their
regular array, as they proceeded in couples,
contrasting with the disorderly troops of asses
and camels which followed with the baggage
(Is. xxi. 7, rikeb in this passage signifying rather
a train than a single chariot). The number em-
ployed by the Eastern potentates was very great,
Holofernes possessing not less than 12,000 (Jud.
ii. 15). At a later period we have frequent
notices of the cavalry of the Graeco-Syrian
monarchs (1 Mace. i. 18, iii. 39, &c.).
Under the Romans, that national genius for
road-making which has left its traces in the
remotest parts of Europe, greatly increased the
facilities for the employment of horses even in
the most rugged districts of Palestine. The
track of the chariot-road to Egypt (Acts viii.
28), first constructed by Solomon, was paved
by the Romans; and traces of the wheel-worn
pavement, both of this and of several other
roads among the hills near Hebron, are still to
be seen. In the wilds of Gilead and Bashan, nud
in the pavement from the ruins of Gadara to tue
Jordan, and among the theatres and temples of
Rabbath Amnion, we mark the wheel-ruts and
the worn footholes of the horses, where wheels
have never rolled for over 1000 years.
The best horses in Palestine are now supplied
from Arabia and Egypt. But the breed of the
latter country is now, and probably was in the
Trappings of A«yritui hone. (IjiyanL)
days when Solomon imported his horses thence,
of Arabian origin. East of Jordan almost every
man is mounted, and the horse has superseded
the dromedary in their predatory warfare. The
Syrian baggage horse is from a mixed race, and
though not often exceeding 15 hands in height,
and of no great speed, yet is endued with
wonderful powers of endurance.
Digitized by
Google
1392
HOBSE
With regard to the trappings and manage-
ment of the hone, we have little information ;
the bridle (risen) wa» placed over the horse's
nose (Is. xzz. 28), and a bit or curb (metheg) is
also noticed (2 K. xix. 28; Ps. xxxii. 9; Prov.
xxvi. 3; Is. xxxvii. 29. In the A. V. it is
incorrectly given " bridle," with the exception
HORSELEACH
of Ps. xxxii.). The harness of the Assyrian
horses was profusely decorated, the bits being
gilt (1 Esd. iii. 6), and the bridles adorned with
tassels ; on the neck was a collar terminating is
a bell, as described by Zechariah (xiv. 20).
Saddles were not used until a late period: in
the annexed cut one with a pad is represented.
Assyrian horsemen of the time of Sennacherib.
The horsemen were armed with long spears
("the glittering spear," Nah. iii. 3), or with
bows, as we see in the Assyrian sculptures.
The horses were not shod, and therefore hoofs
Assyrian bora. (Nlmrad.)
as hard " as flint " (Is. v. 28) were regarded
as a great merit. The chariot-horses were
covered with embroidered trappings — the "pre-
cious clothes" manufactured at Dedan (Ezek.
xrvii. 20): these were fastened by straps and
buckles, and to this perhaps reference is made
in Pror. xxx, 31, in the term zarzir, "one
girded about the loins " (A. V. " greyhound."
See Gebthotjnd). Thus adorned, Hordecai
rode in state through the streets of Shushan
(Esth. vi. 9). White horses were more par-
ticularly appropriate to such occasions, as being
significant of victory (Rev. vi. 2 j xix. 11, \t)
Horses and chariots were used also in idolatrous
processions, as noticed in regard to the sun (2 k*.
xxiii. 11). [W. L. B.] [H. B. T.J
HOB8ELEACH (nj3^>», 'a/Sgis;
fSStMa; sanguisuga ; Arab. SIP,
Aftlp, 'olag, 'alaqah) occurs once only,
viz. Prov. xxx. 15, "The horseleach
hath two daughters, crying, Give,
give." There is no doubt from the
identity of the Hebrew and Arabic
words that 'aluqah denotes some
species of leech, or rather is the
generic term for any bloodsucking
annelid, such as Hirudo medicinalis,
L. (the medicinal leech), Baemopit
sanguisuga, L. (the horseleech), Bdella
Irochetia, and Aulattoma, all found
in the marshes and pools of the
Bible-lands. Send tens (Comment, in
Prov. 1. c.) and Bochart (Hieroi.
iii. 785) have endeavoured to show
that 'aluqah is to be understood to
signify "fate," or "impending mis-
fortune of any kind " (fatum untcntj*
impendent); they refer the Hebrew
term to the Arabic l aluq,res appenu,
affixa homini. The " t wo daughters "
are explained by Bochart to signify Hades
(71NK*) and the grave, which are never satisfied.
This explanation is certainly very ingenious, but
where is the necessity to appeal to it, when the
important old Versions are opposed to any such
interpretation ? The bloodsucking leeches, such
as Hirudo and Baemopit, were without a doubt
known to the ancient Hebrews ; and as the leech hss
been for ages the emblem of rapacity and cruelty,
there is no reason to doubt that this annelid is
denoted by 'aluqah. The Arabs to this dsy
denominate the Lomotil Nilotica, 'alaq. As to
Digitized by
Google
HOBSE-GATE
the expression " tiro daughters," which has been
by tome writers absurdly explained to allude to
" the doable tongue " of a leech — this animal
baring no tongue at all — there can be no doubt
that it is figurative (cp. Delitzsch and Strack,
Comm. in loco), and is intended, in the lan-
guage of Oriental hyperbole, to denote its blood-
thirsty propensity, evidenced by the tenacity
with which a leech keeps its hold on the skin
(if Hirudo), or mucous membrane (if Haemopis).
Comp. Horace, Ep. ad. Pis. 476 ; Cicero, Ep. ad
Attiam, i. 16 ; Plautus, Epid. act iv. sc 4. The
etymology of the Hebrew word, from an unused
root which signifies " to adhere," is eminently
suited to "a leech." Gesenius (Thes. p. 1038)
reminds us that the Arabic 'alik is explained in
Camus by ghul, " a female monster like a vampire
which sucked human blood." The passage in
question, however, has simply reference to a
" leech." The valuable use of the leech {Hirudo)
in medicine, though undoubtedly known to Pliny
•sd the later Roman writers, was in all pro-
bability unknown to the ancient Orientals ; still
they were doubtless acquainted with the fact
that leeches of the above-named genus would
attach themselves to the skin of persons going
barefoot in ponds ; and they must have been
cognisant of the propensity horseleeches (Haemo-
pis) have of entering the mouth and nostrils of
cattle as they drink. The horseleech (Haemo-
pis tmgvisvga, L.) is very common in all the
stagnant waters of Palestine, and onr animals
frequently suffered from its attacks, as it attaches
itself firmly to the inside of the nostril or to
the palate, causing much pain and loss of blood.
It clings with such tenacity to its hold as to
be almost torn in two before it can be detached.
The medicinal leech (Hirudo medicinalis, L.) is
still more abundant, especially in clear streams,
where it is scarcely possible to turn a stone
without finding some adhering to its under-
sur&ce.
The leeches or blood-sacking worms are
annelids with red blood, and no external organs
of respiration or branchiae. They can convert
the anterior extremity of the body into a suctorial
cavity, or flattened disk round the mouth, which
i« formed of three horny jaws. They have
usually ten eyes ; some species only eight. They
swim very rapidly, with a serpentine and sinuous
bounding of the body. [W. H.] [H. B. T.]
H0B8E-GATE. [Jerusalem.]
HO-SAH (TOTl = refuge ; B. 'Ioo-ety, A.
lowd; Hosa), a city of Asher, not identified
(Josh. xix. 29), the next landmark on the
boundary to Tyre. Conder (PEF. Mem. i. 51)
ass suggested el-'Ezziyah, but this is very
doubtful. [G.] [W.]
HO'8AH (HDn = refuge; B. 'O<ro~& [«.
'CM] and 'loo-cei, A. 'Go-Tie and 'Clai.; Horn), a
awn who was chosen by David to be one of the
first doorkeepers (A. V. " porters ") to the Ark
after its arrival in Jerusalem (1 Ch. xvi. 38).
He was a Merarite Levite (xxvi. 10), with " sons
»nd brethren " thirteen, of whom four were cer-
tainly sons (to. 10, 11) ; and his charge was
especially the "gate Shallecheth," and the
causeway, or raised road which ascended (v. 16,
n^JRjrwpo).
BIBLE DICT. VOL. I.
HOSEA
1393
HOSAN'NA (io-co-vd ; neo-Heb. KJM5»in,
from Hi nV'K'in. Ps. cxviii. 25 ; aSiaoy Hi, as
Theophylact correctly interprets it), the cry of
the multitudes as they thronged in our Lord's
triumphal procession into Jerusalem (Matt. xxi.
9, 15 ; Mark xi. 9, 10 ; John xii. 13). The Psalm
from which it was taken, the 118th, was one with
which they were familiar from being accustomed
to recite the 25th and 26th verses at the Feast of
Tabernacles. On that occasion the Great Halle!,
consisting of Psalms cxiii.-cxviii., was chanted
by one of the priests, and at certain intervals
the multitudes joined in the responses, waving
their branches of willow and palm, and shout-
ing as they waved them, Hallelujah, or Hosanna,
or "O Lord, I beseech Thee, send now pros-
perity " (Ps. cxviii. 25). This was done at the
recitation of the first and last verses of Ps.
cxviii. ; but, according to the school of Hillel, at
the words " Save now, we beseech Thee " (v. 25).
The school of Shammai, on the contrary, say it
was at the words " Send now prosperity " of the
same verse. Rabban Gamaliel and R. Joshua
were observed by R. Akiba to wave their branches
only at the words " Save now, we beseech Thee "
(Mishna, Succah, iii. 9). On each of the seven days
during which the Feast lasted, the people thronged
the court of the Temple, and went in proces-
sion about the Altar, setting their boughs bend-
ing towards it ; the trumpets sounding as they
shouted Hosanna. But on the seventh day they
marched seven times round the Altar, shouting
meanwhile the great Hosanna to the sound of
the trumpets of the Levites (Lightfoot, Temple
Service, xvi. 2). The children also, who could
wave the palm branches, were expected to take
,part in the solemnity (Mishna, Succah, iii. 15;
Matt. xxi. 15). From the custom of waving
the boughs of myrtle and willow during the
service the name Hosanna was ultimately trans-
ferred to the boughs themselves, so that accord-
ing to Elias Levita ( Thisbi, i. v.), " the bundles
of the willows of the brook which they carry at
the Feast of Tabernacles are called Hosannas."
The term is frequently applied by Jewish writers
to denote the Feast of Tabernacles, the seventh
day of the Feast being distinguished as the great
Hosanna (Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. s.v. ITC). It was
not uncommon for the Jews in later times to
employ the observances of this Feast, which was
pre-eminently a feast of gladness, to express
their feelings on other occasions of rejoicing
(1 Mace xiii. 51 ; 2 Mace x. 6, 7), and it is not,
therefore, matter of surprise that they should
have done so under the circumstances recorded
in the Gospels. [W. A. W.]
HOSE'A, the first in order of the Minor
Prophets. 1. His name (i#\>\ i LXX. 'fioV i
Vulg. Osee ; hence A. V. Osee in Rom. ix. 25)
means deliverance or salvation. It is more cor-
rectly transliterated Hoshea. It is identical
• According to Jerome (Comm. on i. 1), the MSS. of
the LXX. and Vet. Lat. in his day read Aim), Aute.
Cheyne compares the form Auti' of the Assyrian In-
scriptions (Scbrader, Keilinschriften, p. M6). This
reading Is not found in any extant MS. of the LXX.
here, but in Num. xlii. 9, 17, all the MSS. read Aicrii or
AioT)t. Volck in Herzogs calls the reading 'Oo-iti "a
hexaplar correction."
4 U
Digitized by
Google
1394
HOSEA
with the name originally borne by Joshua (Num.
xiii. 16) and that of the last king of Israel (2 K.
it. 30).
2. Of Hosea's life and personal history nothing
is known beyond what may be gathered from his
Book. But he there tells us of the Divine dis-
cipline by which he was educated for his pro-
phetic mission. " He had to understand the
principles of his country's history by most fearful
passages in his own " (Maurice, Prophets and
Kittys, p. 203). He took to wife Gomer the
daughter of Diblaim. There is no need to
suppose that she had already fallen into sin
when he married her. She is not directly called
" a harlot," but " a wife of whoredom," a womau
with a tendency and inclination to sin. She
proved unfaithful to him. Then, as he meditated
on his bitter lot, he perceived that he had acted
as he had done by direction of Jehovah. He
recognised that the impulse which had led him to
marry her was a Divine voice (i. 2). He realised
that his own love for his erring wife, and her
unfaithfulness to him, were but a faint reflexion
of Jehovah's love for Israel and Israel's unfaith-
fulness to Jehovah. The experience of his own
life impressed upon him this double truth, which
underlies the whole of his teaching. For years
he bore with her infidelity. She had children,
to whom he was directed to give names signifi-
cant of the judgment (Jezreel) and rejection
(Lo-ruhamah, Lo-ammi) of the guilty nation.
At last she deserted him altogether. She fell
(we are not told how) into slavery. Out of that
slavery he was directed to redeem her. He
brings her home, and keeps her in seclusion,
deprived at once of opportunities for her old sins,
and of the legitimate rights of a wife. Mean-
while he waits with tender patience, if perchance
her love for him might return. This course of
action was designed to symbolise the unfailing
love of Jehovah for Israel, and the discipline of
exile by which He purposed to wean them from
their idolatries, and win back their allegiance.
It is hardly too much to say that the literal
interpretation of the narrative is the key to the
right understanding of the Book. If we would
enter into Hosea's intensity of feeling, we must
realise how it had been generated. But it has
been so commonly maintained that the narra-
tive of chs. i.-iii. is purely an allegory, that
the literal interpretation needs some defence.
First, it must be observed that there is no hint
in the narrative itself that it is anything but a
record of actual occurrences in the Prophet's
life. Next, such actual circumstances would be
a far more forcible means of education to the
Prophet himself, and of instruction to his con-
temporaries, than any mere vision or allegory.
How was he led to represent the covenant
relation of Jehovah to Israel as a marriage
relation ? Granted that the conception of the
marriage of the deity with his land was familiar
to Semitic nations, why was Hosea specially
induced to bring it into prominence, and give it
a moral application ? His own domestic history
supplies the answer. Further, if the narrative
were only an allegory, we should naturally expect
the wife to bear a significant name as well as
the children. But while Jezreel, Lo-ruhamah,
and Lo-ammi tell their own story, Gomer bath-
Diblaim baffles all attempts to extract from it a
reasonable meaning. The natural inference is
HOSEA
that it was the actual name of a woman, not
part of an allegory. Lastly, the literal inter-
pretation is supported by the parallel of Isaiah's
family with their significant names (Is. viii. 1 sq.,
18 ; cp. vii. 3).
The only serious objection to the literal inter-
pretation is the moral objection. How, it is
argued, could God, consistently with His holiness,
have commanded the Prophet to take an unchaste
i wife ? How could the Prophet, consistently with
the fundamental principles of morality, have
recognised the command as Divine? The ob-
I jection is formidable, but it falls to the ground
| if Gomer had not fallen into sin when Hosea mar-
ried her. This view, as has already been pointed
| out, is actually suggested by the language used,
and it is in harmony with the symbolism. Her
character, like that of Israel when Jehovah
chose it to be His people, was still undeveloped.
That God should command His servant to enter
on a marriage which was to result in a lifelong
sorrow is no matter for surprise. It is but an
illustration of the principle of sacrifice. Hosea
must learn through suffering, that he might be
able to teach.
Another, but hardly satisfactory solution of
the " moral objection " is offered by some inter-
preters (e.g., Dr. Pusey, following Jerome and
Augustine,). Hosea, they suppose, married Gomer
with full knowledge of her character, in the
hope of reforming her. This, it is urged, would
not be immoral, but an act of self-denial. There
is, however, no hint of such a purpose in the
narrative, nor does it suit the symbolism so well
as the view taken above.
The " moral objection " is indeed an objection
to the allegorical not less than to the literal
interpretation if the action commanded was one
repugnant to the moral sense. And if the
Prophet had a faithful wife, it seems incredible
that he should expose her to suspicion by an
allegory which certainly does not bear its
allegorical character on the face of it.
Another objection to the literal interpretation
is based on the mistaken view that the woman
of ch. iii. is not Gomer, but another. The com-
mand to take another wife proves, it is said,
that no real marriage is intended. But the
natural sense of the passage is that Hosea was
to take means to recover Gomer, in spite of her
infidelity ; and the symbolism absolutely requires
this interpretation. Jehovah did not purpose
to choose another nation to be His people, but
to take steps to recall Israel to its allegiance
to Him.
For a full discussion see Nowack, Hosea, pp.
48 sq. Cp. Wellhausen in his ed. of Week's
Einleitung, § 208 ; Prof. Robertson Smith's Pro-
phets of Israel, pp. 178 sq. ; Dean Plumptre's
suggestive poem " Gomer," in Lazarus and other
Poems.
The narrative of his unhappy marriage, and
one or two possible allusions to opposition and
persecution met with in the fulfilment of his
ministry (iv. 4 ; ix. 7, 8), are the only personal
details. In this respect the Book is a remark-
able contrast to that of Amos. Yet what is told
is enough to bring us into touch and sympathy
with the Prophet.
3. It is plain that the sphere of Hosea's
ministry was the Northern kingdom. Judah is
ouly mentioned incidentally. In i. 7 the mercy
Digitized by
Google
HOSEA
refused to Israel is promised to Judali ; in xi.
12 — if the precarious rendering of A. V. and
It. V. text is retained— Judab is commended for
its faithfulness in contrast to the apostasy of
Israel. In iv. 15 Judah is bidden to take
warning from Israel; in i. 11 the ultimate
reunion of the divided kingdoms is predicted.
But for the most part Judah is only incidentally
introduced as sharing the guilt and destined to
share the punishment of Israel (v. 5, 10-14 ; vi.
4, 11 ; viii. 14; x. 11; xi. 12 [R. V. marg., which
is probably right] ; xii. 2). Jerusalem is not once
mentioned. On the other hand, Israel, Ephraim,
and Samaria are constantly before the Prophet's
eyes. It is to them that his prophecy is
addressed.
It is equally clear that he was himself a
native of the Northern kingdom, and not, like
Amos, sent there on a temporary mission. This
is evident not so much from particular ex-
pressions referring to his own experience (vi. 10,
" In the house of Israel / have seen a horrible
thing ") or betraying his nationality (i. 2, " the
land"=the land of Israel; vii. 5, "our king"=
the king of Israel), but from the whole tone and
contents of the prophecy. " He knows this
kingdom, as every line betrays, from personal
acquaintance, and in all its relations and cir-
cumstances, its joys and its calamities, in the
very heart of its aims and its prospects ... He is
acquainted with it from the depths of his heart,
and follows all its doings, aims, and fortunes,
with the profound feeling gendered of such a
sympathy as u conceivable in the case of a
native prophet only " (Ewald's Prophets of the
Old Testament, i. 211, Eng. tr.). He shows
complete familiarity with the internal condition
of the kingdom ; with the depth and hopeless-
ness of its social corruption ; with the crimes of
its kings and nobles and priests ; with the in-
trigues of its politicians for alliances with Egypt
or Assyria ; with the religious apostasy which
united a nominal worship of Jehovah with
idolatry and Baal-worship and an ntter disregard
of morality. The picture is drawn with a force
and feeling which attest an eye-witness, who
felt intensely and bitterly that his own country
was being dragged down to ruin by the sins
which he rebuked but could not check.
The impression produced by the general tone
of the prophecy is confirmed by the geographical
references, and by the language of the Book.
The places mentioned all belong to the Northern
kingdom. Mizpah in Gilead, and Tabor in
Galilee, describe the extent of the kingdom from
cast to west ; Samaria is frequently mentioned
(vii. 1 ; viii. 5, ; x. 5, 7 ; xiii. 16); Jezreel(i.4,
5, 11; ii. 22); Shechem (vi. 9); Gilead (vi. 8;
xii. 11) ; Gilgal (iv. 15; ix. 15 ; xii. 11); Bethel,
sometimes sarcastically called Beth-aven (iv. 15 ;
v. 8; x. 5, 8, 15); Gibeah (v. 8; ix. 9; x. 9);
Ramah (v. 8). Lebanon supplies him with
imagery (xiv. 5-7).
Peculiarities of language indicate Northern
authorship. The forms 'jn (vi. 9) and % rfa"in
(xi. 3) are Aramaean; and the words ili13
(v. 13), D'aaty (viii. 6), nni(xia. i),not found
elsewhere in the 0. T., are also Aramaean.
There can then be no reasonable doubt that
Hosea not only prophesied to Israel, but was a
native and citizen of the Northern kingdom.
HOSEA
1395
Ewald, indeed, maintains that he wrote his
Book in Judah, whither he had been compelled
to flee from the persecutions of his countrymen.
His grounds for this view are as follows. (1) In
his earlier prophecies (i.-iii.) Hosea speaks hope-
fully of Judah (i. 7); in his later prophecies
(iii.-xiv.) Judah is represented as corrupt and
in danger of falling along with Israel (v. 5, 10,
12-14; vi. 11; viii. 14; x. 11; xi. 12; xii. 2).
This change of view was due to closer acquaint-
ance with Judah, gained from actual residence
there. (2) The word " there," in vi. 7, 10, ix.
15, xiii. 8, indicates that" the writer surveyed the
kingdom of Israel from outside. (3) In v. 8 sq.
the alarm proceeds from South to North. These
arguments are not conclusive. The second and
third certainly do not prove that the writer
was resident in Judah ; and as for the first, it is
admitted that chs. iv.-xiv. belong to a later
period than chs. i.-iii. ; Judah was rapidly
deteriorating, and the sterner tone of the Pro-
phet's language was justified. It would seem
that the Prophet had become better acquainted
with the condition of the Southern kingdom ;
but it is rash to assume that this could not
have been the case without his actually residing
there.
Duhm's conjecture (Theologie der Propheten,
p. 130 sq.) that Hosea was a priest can only be
mentioned here. His reasons are ingenious, but
not convincing (cp. Nowack, Hosea, p. viii.).
4. Later traditions about Hosea possess no
historical value. His father, Beeri, was identi-
fied with the Reubenite prince Beerah, carried
captive by Tiglath-pileser (1 Ch. v. 6 ; Yuchasin,
f. 12 a), and, according to the Jewish canon
that when a prophet's father is mentioned he
was also a prophet, Beeri was himself a prophet,
though he only uttered two words of prophecy,
which are incorporated in Is. viii. 19 and Job
xxviii. 25 b (Vayyikra liabba, c. 15). The
patristic accounts name Baalmoth (Ephraim the
Syrian on Hos. i. 1) or Belemoth (Pseudo-Epi-
phanius, de Vitis Proph. ; Isidore of Seville,
da Vita et Obitu Sanctorum, c 41), or Belemon
(Pseudo-Dorotheus, ap. Chron. Pasch. p. 147), in
the tribe of Issachar, as Hosea's birthplace, and
relate that he died in peace and was buried in
his own land. On the other hand, the Jewish
work Shalsheleth ■ haqqabbdbah (f. 19) relates
that he died in Babylon, leaving directions
that he should be buried in his native country ;
that his body was accordingly placed on a
camel, which forthwith conveyed it to Safed in
Galilee, where it was buried. An Arabic tra-
dition says that he was buried at Almenia near
Tripoli ; while the traveller Burckhardt relates
that his grave was shown by the Arabs in the
neighbourhood of the ancient Ramoth-gilead.
The student curious in such matters may consult
Carpzov"s Introduction, part iii. p. 274 sq., or
Wiinsche's Comm. p. iii. sq.
5. The title prefixed to the Book (i. 1) assigns
as the date of Hosea's ministry "the days of
Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hczekiah, kings of
Judah, and the days of Jeroboam the son of
Joash, king of Israel." According to the com-
monly received chronologv, Jeroboam II. reigned
from 825 to 784 B.c. ; Uzziah from 810 to 758
B.C. ; Hezckiah from 726 to 698 B.C. Recent
investigations, however, make it all but certain
that Jeroboam's reign must be placed later, and
4 U 2
Digitized by VjOOQlC
1396
H08EA
that he did not die until 764 B.C. at the earliest.
[Chbonoi/WY.] Two interregnums are assumed
in the history of the Northern kingdom during
this period: one of eleven rears between the
death of Jeroboam II. and the accession of Zecha-
riah ; and one of nine years after the death of
Peknh. These interregnums are inferred from
the synchronisms or cross references between
the regnal years of the kings of Israel and
Judah. But the actual history gives no hint of
them. It it implied in 2 Kings xiv. 29 that
Zechariah succeeded his father in the usual way;
and in 2 Kings xv. 30 that Hoshea ascended the
throne immediately after his murder of Pekah.
It seems to be tolerably certain that these in-
terregnums should be cut out. Some chrono-
logists go further, and infer from a comparison
of the dates on the Assyrian monuments that
Jeroboam reigned till 750 B.C. or even later.
The period between the death of Jeroboam
and the fall of Samaria is thus shortened by
twenty or possibly thirty-four years. The de-
cline of Israel was more rapid, and its final
ruin followed the denunciations of Hosea more
closely, than has commonly been supposed.
How far, it must now be asked, does the
statement of the title agree with the internal
evidence of the Book ?
(1) The prophecies contained in chs. i.-iii.
must belong to a period before the extinction
of the house of Jehu by the murder of Zechariah
(i. 4: cp. Amos vii. 9, 11 ; 2 K. xv. 10-12).
But they cannot be placed later than the time
of Jeroboam. The prosperity which marked
the reign of that powerful monarch was still
unbroken (ii. 5-12); but it had borne evil
fruit, and the nation was ripe for punishment.
We can hardly be wrong in assigning this part
of the Book to the closing years of the reign
of Jeroboam.
(2) The rest of the Book (iv.-xiv.) belongs to
a later period. It reflects the state of anarchy
into which Israel fell after Jeroboam's death,
when Zechariah, after six months' reign, was
murdered by Shallum, and Shallum in turn,
after a month's reign, was murdered by Menahem,
who. inflicted horrible vengeance on those who
refused to support him, and could only maintain
himself on the throne by becoming the vassal
of Assyria (2 K. xv. 13 sq.).
The state of affairs described in Hosea corre-
sponds strikingly to these circumstances. When
once the strong hand of Jeroboam had been
removed, evils of every kind broke out with-
out restraint. The king and his court are de-
scribed as encouraging one another in wicked-
ness, and sunk in debauchery (vii. 3, 5). They
pervert justice ; they are not leaders but mis-
leaders (iv. 18, v. 10). The priests, instead of
rebuking the people's sin, encourage it, because
it augments their revenues (iv. 8). Nay, the
priest actually turns bandit on his own account
(vi. 9). Foul immoralities are shamelessly
practised (iv. 10 sq.) ; fidelity, humanity, piety,
have vanished; falsehood and violence are
universal (iv. 1 sq. ; vi. 8 sq. ; vii. 1 ; x. 4).
Men profess to worship Jehovah (viii. 2), and
think to propitiate Him by sacrifice (v. 6) ; but
they ignore His real requirements (vi. 6), and
are besotted with their senseless idolatries (iv.
17 ; viii. 4 ; xiii. 2). The root evil of all is
that in their prosperity they have forgotten
HOSEA
Jehovah (iv. 7; viii. 14; xiii. 6); so when
danger threatens they look to Assyria and
Egypt instead of turning in penitence to Him
(v. 4, 13 ; vii. 11 sq. ; viii. 9). They will not
tolerate rebuke (iv. 4), but despise and persecute
the prophet (ix. 7, 8). For such a nation nothing
remains but sharp and speedy judgment.
At the latest .these prophecies were all de-
livered before the fall of Samaria (xiii. 16);
but indeed the terminus ad quern of Hosea's
ministry may be fixed considerably earlier. The
confederacy of Pekah and Rezin against Ahaz
drove him to appeal to Assyria for help (2 K.
xvi. 7). Tiglath-pileser accordingly invaded
the kingdom of Israel, and ravaged and depopu-
lated Northern Palestine, Galilee, and Gilead
(2 K. xv. 29), ao. 734.
Of this invasion, and of this change in the
relation between Israel and Assyria, there is no
trace in Hosea. He speaks of Gilead as still a
part of the Northern kingdom (v. 1 ; vi. 8 ;
xii. 11; contrast Micah vii. 14), while Assyria
is nowhere spoken of as an enemy, but as a
worthless and dangerous ally (v. 13; vii. 11;
viii. 9 ; xii. 1 ; xiv. 3). There is no trace in
Hosea of the circumstances which called forth
the great prophecies of Isaiah vii. sq. ; and his
public ministry does not appear to have been
continued beyond the reign of Henahem in Israel,
and Jotham in Judah. He was thus the con-
temporary of Amos, Isaiah, and Micah ; but the
work of Amos was probably ended before that
of Hosea began, and Hosea's ministry had closed
before Isaiah and Micah had come into promi-
nence."
One allusion, indeed, has been supposed to
mark a later date. Shalman, who sacked Beth-
arbel (x. 14), has been thought to be Shalman-
eser IV., the successor of Tiglath-pileser. Th«
reference is too obscure to outweigh the other
evidence, and Schroder (KAT? p. 440), after
stating the objections to the identification of
Shalman with any of the Assyrian kings named
Shalmaneser, points out that Salsmana occurs
in an inscription of Tiglath-pileser as the
name of a king of Moab. There was an Arbela
near Pella on the east of the Jordan, and
the reference may be to some well-known
episode in the disordered times after the death
of Jeroboam. A recent event close at hand
would most naturally be mentioned thus inci-
dentally.
How then is the statement of the title to be
reconciled with the conclusions drawn from
internal evidence, if, on the one hand, the
greater part of the Book must be assigned to
the period after the reign of Jeroboam, and, on
the other hand, no part of it can be placed so
late as the time of Hezekiah or even Ahaz?
The most probable explanation is that " in the
days of Jeroboam " was the original title to the
first section of the Book only (i.-iii.), and that
" in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Abaz, and
Hezekiah " is an addition by a later editor, who
wished to mark that Hosea belonged to the same
age as Isaiah and Micah (cp. Is. i. 1 ; Micah
i. IX without necessarily implying that his
b Prof. Sayce In the Jcurah Quarterly Review, 1. 1 S3 sq.,
endeavours, but upon insufficient grounds, to snow Out
chs. tv. sq. are as late as the reign of Hoehea.
Digitized by
Google
HOSEA
prophetic work extended throughout the whole
of the period.
6. Contents and plan The two fundamental
ideas of the Book are the unfaithfulness of Israel
to Jehovah, and the unquenchable love of
Jehovah for Israel. In the first division of the
Book (i.-iii) these ideas are symbolically ex-
pressed by the circumstances of the Prophet's
domestic life, which have already been discussed.
The same ideas underlie the second division
of the Book (iv.-xiv.)- It contains a series of
discourses, in which the sins of the people in all
ranks of life are exposed and censured ; warning
is given of the inevitable chastisement which
must follow ; yet hope of final pardon and re-
storation is held out.
The two divisions are clearly separated. The
circumstances of the Prophet's life out of which
the teaching of chs. i.-iii. directly springs, are
not referred to in chs. ir.-xiv. Internal evi-
dence shows that the first part must he assigned
to the closing years of the reign of Jeroboam ;
the second part to the period subsequent to his
death.
Attempts have been made (as by Volck, in
Herzog, ££.', following in the main an art. by
Delitzsch in the Zritsch. f. Protestant, u. Kirche,
for 1854, xxviii. 98 sq.) to trace a chronological
arrangement in the second part. They are, how-
ever, unsatisfactory. Some plan and progress of
thought may be marked, but no precise and exact
division of subject is to be looked for in a Prophet
like Hosea, inspired by intense feeling, burning
with shame and indignation at the sights he saw,
yet yearning with a tender love for the guilty
nation. The ideas of Israel's sin and impending
punishment are interlaced. The Prophet circles
round and round his theme, and constantly
recurs to the same thoughts. Three groups of
prophecies may perhaps be distinguished. In
the first (iv.-viii.), Israel's guilt ; in the second
(ix.-xi. 11), Israel's punishment; in the third
(xi. 12-xiv.), Israel's hope of restoration, come
into special prominence.
The following analysis may be a help to
study : —
Part I., chs. i.-iii.
(1) The Prophet's domestic relations, sym-
bolical of the unfaithfulness, judgment, and
rejection of Israel (i. 2-9). Yet this doom
shall one day be reversed and Israel restored
(i. 10— ii- 1).* Abruptly the Prophet reverts to
the present, chides Israel for her faithlessness in
deserting Jehovah and ascribing her prosperity
to the Baalim, and predicts the punishment
which awaits her (ii. 2-13). But punishment
is for reformation, not destruction. There will
be a second Exodus, a fresh wilderness-discipline,
a new covenant of universal peace. The ideal
relation of Israel to her God will in the end be
realised (ii. 14-23).
(2) An interval has elapsed. Gomer has
deserted Hosea, and fallen into slavery. But
Hosea, at God's command, redeems her and
retains her in a state of virtual widowhood,
waiting till her affection for him may return.
So in captivity Israel will be cut off at once
from its idolatries and from the worship of
• Prof. Cheyne, following Steiner and Heilprlu. would
transpose this sectton to the end of cb. 11., In order to
avoid the extreme abruptness of the transitions.
HOSEA
1397
Jehovah, until punishment has done its work
and the people repent (iii. 1-5).
Part II., chs. iv.-xiv.
(1) Israel's guilt. The accusation (iv.-viii.) .
(a) The corruption of the nation as a whole
(iv.).
The prevalent immorality (m. 1-5) is traced
to its source in ignorance, for which selfish
and unprincipled priests are to blame, and
will suffer (vv. 6-10). The people are wholly
abandoned to idolatry and licentiousness (re.
11-14). Let Judah take warning from the sin
of Israel. It is incurable and ripe for punish-
ment (ee. 15-19).
(6) The universal godlessness of the nation,
from its rulers downward, and its impending
punishment (v.-vii.).
Priests and rulers, instead of helping the
nation to amend its ways, have drawn it into
sin (v. 1-7). The threatened storm of judg-
ment breaks over Israel and Judah. In vain do
they seek help from Assyria. They cannot
escape from Jehovah's hand. He will with-
draw His presence until they repent, and with
contrite hearts turn to Him Who alone can
heal (v. 8-vi. 3). But from such a hope the
Prophet turns sadly back to the actual present. '
Israel's goodness is transitory, evanescent. The
means by which Jehovah has endeavoured to
bring them to repentance have borne no lasting
fruit. Their corruption is inveterate (re. 4-11).
The desperate condition of Israel is disclosed
when any attempt at reform is made. The
rulers delight in the wickedness of the people.
The people in turn intrigue against their kings
(vii. 1-7). The suicidal policy of seeking help
from foreign nations will issue in ruin (or. 8-
16).
(c) Fresh declaration of Israel's sin and
punishment (viii.).
The enemy is at hand to avenge the broken
covenant. Self-willed secession from the house
of David led to idolatry. The idols cannot help,
but will themselves be destroyed (viii. 1-7).
Their Assyrian alliance will be their ruin.
False and formal worship will not avail them.
The cities in which they trust will be consumed
with fire (ee. 8-14).
(2) Israel's punishment. The sentence (ix.-
xi. 11).
Speedily will Israel be driven from its own
land into a joyless exile (ix. 1-9). All their
past history testifies to the ingratitude with
which they have requited Jehovah's love. Re-
jection is the inevitable result of such continued
rebellion (ee. 10-17). Israel's idolatry has in-
creased in proportion to its prosperity. King,
idols, altars shall share a common ruin (x. 1-8).
Israel has sinned as in ancient days. They have
perverted the Divine laws of right. Nation and
king shall perish together (cb. 9-15). From the
first Jehovah had chosen and guided Israel with
loving care ; but they abandoned Him, and now
they must be punished. Yet He cannot utterly
destroy them, and He will one day restore them
to their own land (xi. 1-11).
(3) Redemption through judgment. The
Restoration (xi. 12 — xiv.).
The faithlessness of Israel, and even of Julian,
is shown by their idolatries and foreign alliances.
Yet the history of their ancestor Jacob should
have taught them to trust Jehovah (xi. 12—
Digitized by
Google
1398
HOSEA
xii. 6). The chosen people has become no better
than a Canaanite, whose only aim is gain ; there-
fore they must return to the wilderness. They
hare not been left without warning, yet the
land is full of idols. Once more the history of
Jacob should have taught them Jehovah's good-
ness. For such flagrant ingratitude nothing
remains but punishment (to. 7-14).
Israel was a mighty nation, but idolatry is its
ruin. Jehovah has preserved them from Egypt
onwards, yet the more they prospered the mure
they forsook Jehovah, and now He will turn
against them (xiii. 1-8). Israel is doomed ;
they have turned against their only help. Their
self-chosen king cannot save them. Samaria
shall be captured with all the worst horrors of
war (ra. 9-16). Yet let Israel repent and turn
from their sins; Jehovah's love will go out to
them as of old, and with His blessing the nation
will once more flourish (xiv.).
7. Style and literary characteristics. — " Osee,"
writes St. Jerome, "commaticus est et quasi
per sententias loquens " (Pracf. ad Os.). " Ho-
seam perlegentes," says Lowth, "nonnunquam
videmur in sparsa quaedam Sibyllae folia inci-
dere " {Praelectioms, p. 220). This abruptness
and want of connexion may in part be due to
the form in which Hosea's prophecies have coine
down to us. Even if they were reduced to writ-
ing by the Prophet himself (which there seems
no reason to doubt, though it is incapable of
proof), and not preserved through the recol-
lections of his disciples, they can be but an ab-
stract and outline of the discourses originally
delivered, at different times and under different
circumstances.
But in the main the style of the Prophet un-
questionably reflects his character, and the con-
ditions under which he worked. The tender
sensitiveness of his nature had been developed by
the discipline of his life. His loyalty to Jehovah
fills him with holy indignation at the monstrous
ingratitude of his countrymen. He cannot be
blind to the enormity of their corruption. He
sees that repentance is impossible; that only
judgment remains. But he yearns over them
with an infinite love and pity. "A divine
amazement, anger, and sorrow give him words
which roll on in exhauatless stream. Feel-
ing, not reason, guides his pen. He is in no
mood for calm reflexion and measured periods.
His heart is too full of painful emotion, of
heavy foreboding, to unfold his thoughts in
long calm sentences, to arrange bis words in
close and intimate connexion. The thought is
too full, the sentence too hasty and abrupt. The
discourse often breaks off, as it were, into sobs "
(Ewald, Prophets, i. 218). Hence the obscure
allusions, the ideas thrown out and left without
explanation, the abrupt transitions, which make
the Book one of the most difficult in the 0. T.
Hosea was gifted with an acute power of
observation and rich poetical fancy. He is re-
markable for the abundance and boldness of
his' figures. His language is characterised
by striking originality, which disdains to be
fettered by too rigid laws of language and
grammar. Inversions, anacolutha, ellipses, are
frequent, together with paronomasias and plays
on words. Peculiar words, or common words
in peculiar senses, rare orthographies, unusual
constructions, are frequently found. Some at
HOSEA
least of these characteristics may be due to lis
Northern origin (see Simson, p. 35 sq. ; Now&ck,
p. xix. sq. ; Cheyne, p. 32 sq.).
8. It is generally thought that Hoses was
acquainted with the Book of Amos. Hos. ir. 3
may refer to Amos viii. 8 ; Hos. iv. 15, i. 5, 8,
to Amos i. 5, v. 5 (Beth-aven for Beth-el);
Hos. viii. 14 to the refrain in Amos i. 4, 7, 10,
12, 14, ii. 2, 5 ; Hos. xi. 10 to Amos i. 2 (simile
of lion). Hos. xiv. 5-9 may reflect the imager;
of Canticles.
Hosea shows, and presumes in his hearers, an
intimate knowledge of the past history of Israel
He refers perhaps to the Fall (vi. 7, R. V. text),
though the allusion is doubtful ; to the destruc-
tion of the " cities of the plain " (xi. 8) ; to Jacob's
history (xii. 3, 4, 12); to the Exodus (ii. 15;
xi. 1 ; xii. 9, 13 ; xiii. 4) ; to the wanderings in
the wilderness (ix. 10, xiii. 5) ; to the sin of
Baal-peor (ix. 10) ; to the trespass of Achan
(ii. 15); to the sin of Gibeah (ix. 9, x. 9); to
the self-willed demand for a king (xiii. 10, 11).
A number of parallelisms to the thought and
language of the Pentateuch and earlier Historical
Books may be collected. Whether Hoses was
acquainted with these Books in their present
form, or only with documents and traditions out
of which they were compiled, is an interestinf
question which cannot be discussed here (see
Sharpe's Hosea, pp. 83 sq., for a full list of pas-
sages, and Cheyne's Jfosea, pp. 34 sq., for sow
necessary cautions). But of far more importance
than the question of the exact literary form in
which Hosea knew it, is the plain fact that
Hosea unquestionably regards the past history
of Israel as possessing unique religious
significance.
9. Numerous allusions in later Books indicate
acquaintance with Hosea. Jeremiah, who was
in many ways a kindred spirit, appears to hare
been specially influenced by the Bonk. The
figure of the marriage relation between Jehovaa
and Israel is taken up and developed in Is. 1,
liv. ; Jer. ii., iii. ; Ezek. xvi., xxiii. Cp., too,
Is. i. 23 with Hos. ix. 15 ; Jer. iii. 18, 22 with
Hosea i. 11, xiv. 2, 5 ; Jer. iv. 3 with Hosea J.
12; Jer. viii. 5 with Hosea xi. 5; Jer. ix. 1-
with Hosea xiv. 9; Jer. xiv. 10 with Hoses
viii. 13, ix. 9; Jer. xxx. 9 with Hosea iii 3;
Ezek. xxxiv. 23 sq. with Hosea iii. 5, ii. 18 sq- i
Zech. x. 9 with Hosea ii. 23 ; Zcch. xiii. 2 with
Hosea ii. 17 ; and other passages.
10. Quotations in the N. T.— Hosea ii- 1 »
quoted as " fulfilled " in Matt. ii. 15. Our Lord
twice appeals to Hosea vi. 6 in Matt. ix. 13, xii. 7 :
and uses the words of x. 8 in Luke xxiii. 30 (cp.
Rev. vi. 16). St. Paul combines Hosea ii. 23 sad
i. 10 in Rom. ix. 25, 26 ; and quotes xiii. 14 in
1 Cor. xv. 55. 1 Pet. ii. 10 is a reminiscence of
Hosea i. 6, 9 ; ii. 1, 23. Cp. also Hosea vi. 2 with
1 Cor. xv. 4 ; xiv. 2 with Heb. xiii. 15.
11. Hosea's teaching is based on the funda-
mental truth of the covenant which Jehovah has
made with Israel (vi. 7 ; viii. 1) ; and the nation
is regarded as an individual, possessing a con-
tinuity of life, and responsible for its acts. This
covenant dates from the Exodus (ii. 3 ; o- ' >
xii. 9, 13 ; xiii. 4 : cp. Ex. iv. 22), though e«n
in earlier days Jehovah had preserved their
ancestor Jacob (xii. 3-5, 12). The intimac;
of the relation between Jehovah and Israel i*
expressed by the two figures of marriage and
Digitized by
Google
HOSEA
aonship. The figure of aonihip implies, on the
one hand paternal care, on the other filial obe-
dience ; the figure of marriage (impressed on the
Prophet's mind by the experience of his own
life) adds the thought of an intimate fellowship,
a close and indissoluble union, originating in
Jehovah's free love and choice, and demanding
a response of love from Israel. The obligations
of the covenant were embodied in a law, which
the priests had neglected to teach (iv. 6), and
which Israel had transgressed and despised
(viii. 1, 12). The moral requirements of Jehovah
are summed up under the heads of " truth,
mercy, and the knowledge of God " (iv. 1, vi. 6);
"righteousness and mercy" (x. 12); "mercy
and judgment " (xii. 6) : compare the terms of
the new betrothal of the purified people (ii. 19,
20). Specially characteristic of Hosea's teach-
ing is the word hesed ("7Dn, ii. 19 ; iv. 1 ; vi.
4, 6 ; x. 12 ; xii. 6). It is Tendered " loving-
kindness," " mercy," or " goodness," and it in-
cludes the ideas of " love " (iydnni), " piety,"
or " dutiful regard " of man to his fellow-man.
"Jehovah and Israel form, as it were, one
community, and hesed is the bond by which
the whole community is knit together. It is
not necessary to distinguish Jehovah's hesed
to Israel, which we would term His grace,
Israel's duty of hesed to Jehovah, which we
would call piety, and the relation of hesed
between man and man, which embraces the
duties of love and mutual consideration. To
the Hebrew mind these three are essentially one,
and all are comprised in the same covenant.
Loyalty and kindness between man and man are
not duties inferred from Israel's relation to
Jehovah, they are parts of that relation ; love
to Jehovah and love to one's brethren in Jeho-
vah's house are identical (cp. iv. 1 with vi.
4, 6." (Robertson Smith, Prophets of Israel,
p. 162.) It is characteristic of the difference
between Amos and Hosea that Amos never uses
the word. Amos is a stern preacher of righteous-
ness. He represents Jehovah as the judge of
Israel. Hosea goes deeper, and deals with the
springs of action. He reveals another side of
the Divine character, and introduces the motive
of love.
Israel's sins are all summed up in its apostasy
from Jehovah. The desertion of Jehovah for
Baal and other false gods (i. 2 ; ii. 2 sq. ; iv.
1 2 sq. ; v. 3 sq. ; ix. 1) ; the calf- worship which
Hosea condemns as no better than Baal-worship
(viii. 5 sq. ; xiii. 2) ; the hankering for foreign
alliances, which implied distrust of Jehovah,
their natural protector (vii. 11, 13; viii. 9, 10:
cp. v. 13 ; xii. 1 ; xiv. 3), are all so many acts
of unfaithfulness to the marriage tie. The
separation of the kingdoms was equally an act
of apostasy. The unity of the nation corre-
sponded to the unity of God. Jehovah's spouse
should be one people. And idolatry had been
the direct consequence of the separation (viii. 4).
The deep moral corruption of the nation, about
which in its manifold forms Hosea has so much
to say, is traced also to the absence of the know-
ledge of God (iv. 6). It was intimately con-
nected with false worships, for the Phoenician
nature worship was essentially immoral.
Hosea's view of Israel's future is rooted in his
conviction of the imperishableness of Jehovah's
love for Israel (xi. 8 sq.). Chastisement must
HOSHAMA
1399
indeed come, but it will be for correction, not for
destruction. The kingdom of Israel must come
to an end (iii. 4 ; x. 3, 7 ; xiii. 10) ; Samaria
must be destroyed (xiii. 16); Ephraim shall
return to Egyptian bondage (ix. 3), and go into
captivity in Assyria (ix. 3 ; xi. 5). But the day
of restoration will come (xi. 10 sq.) : Israel and
Judah will be reunited under the house of
David (i. 1 1 ; iii. 5) ; false worship and idolatry
will cease (ii. 17 ; xiv. 8) ; there will be no
more coquetting with foreign nations (xiv. 3);
the nation will once more dwell in its own land
in peace and prosperity, in perfect harmony
with nature and with its God (ii. 18 sq. ; iii. 5 ;
xiv. 5 sq.).
The heathen world is not included in
Hosea's prospect. His prophecy is limited to
Israel. He leaves it to his successors, Isaiah
and Micah, to speak of the time when the nations
will stream up to Jerusalem to learn Jehovah's
law (Is. ii. 2-4 ; Mic. iv. 1-3) ; when even
Assyria and Egypt, the bitterest enemies of the
chosen people, will serve Jehovah (Is. xix. 16 sq.).
12. Commentaries. — A full list of the older com-
mentaries will be found in Rosenmiiller's Scholia,
vii. 1, pp. 8 sq., 32 sq. ; and of the literature of
this century down to 1880 in Nowack's Com-
mentary, pp. xxxv. sq. Of special commentaries
on Hosea it may suffice here to mention those of
Simson (1851); Wiinsche (186S), interesting
for its constant reference to Jewish exegesis ;
Nowack (1880), most thorough and careful ;
Scholz (1882): in English, Sharp*, Notes and
Dissertations on the Prophecy of Hosea (1884) ;
Cheyne, in The Cambridge Bible for Schools and
Colleges (1884), sympathetic and suggestive ;
and (unrivalled as a general survey) Prof.
Robertson Smith's Prophets of Israel, Lect. IV.
Cp. also Driver, LOT. ch. vi. [A. F. K.]
HOSEN (Dan. iii. 21), plur. form of A.-S.
hose. The word originally meant any kind of
covering for the legs, and not merely stockings
as now (Lumby, Glossary of Bible Words, s. n.,
in Eyre and Spottiswoode's " Teacher's Bible ").
HOSHAI'AH (rVlTBnn = Jak hath saved;
Osaias). 1. fflo-auf.) A man who assisted in
the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem after
it had been rebuilt by Nehemiah (Neh. xii.
32). He led the princes (ne>) of Judah in the
procession, but whether he himself was one of
them we are not told.
2. The father of a certain Jezaniah, or Aza-
riah, who was a man of note after the destruc-
tion of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. xiii.
[LXX. xlix.] 1 [T.» Macuralos, A. Moo-auk, K.»
•n<rafo»]> xliii. [LXX. I.] 2 [T.'and A. as before,
K. 1 MoooWoj, «•*• Mfoo-o--]).
HOSHA'MA (Mpenn = Jah hath heard ;
B. 'ilcrafuie, A. 'ntra/ui; Soma), one of the
sons of Jeconiah, or Jehoiachin, the last king
of Judah but one (1 Ch. iii. 18). It is worthy
of notice that, in the narrative of the cap-
ture of Jeconiah by Nebuchadnezzar, though
the mother and the wires of the king are men-
tioned, nothing is said about his sons (2 K. xxir.
12, 15). In agreement with this is the denuncia-
tion of him as a childless man in Jer. xxii. 30.
There is good reason for suspecting some confusion
Digitized by
Google
1400
HOSHEA
in the present state of the text of the genealogy
of the royal family in 1 Ch. iii. ; and these facts
would seem to confirm it.
HOSHE'A (»Knn = healing; 'turni; Osee%
the 19th, Inst, and best king of Israel. He suc-
ceeded Pekah, whom he slew in a successful
conspiracy, thereby fulfilling a prophecy of
Isaiah (Is. vii. 16). Although Josephus calls
Hoshea a friend of Pekah (tplkov ru>os iri&ov-
\fiaavros atrry, Ant. ix. 13, § 1), we have no
ground for calling this " a treacherous murder "
(Prideaux, i. 16). It took place B.C. 737, "in
the twentieth year of Jotham " (2 K. xv. 30),
»'.«. " in the twentieth year after Jotham became
sole king," for he only reigned sixteen years
(2 K. xv. 33). But there must have been an
interregnum of at least eight years before
Hoshea came to the throne, which was not till
b.c. 729, in the twelfth year of Ahaz (2 K.
xvii. 1 : we cannot, with Clericus, read fourth
for twelfth in this verse, because of 2 K. xviii.
9). This way of reconciling the apparent dis-
crepancy between the passages has been adopted
by Ussher, Des Vignoles, Tiele, &c. (Winer, s. v.
ffoseas). The other methods suggested by
Hitzig, Lightfoot, &c, are mostly untenable
(Keil on 2 K. xv. 30).
The true aspect of Hoshea's elevation comes to
us from the Assyrian inscriptions. Tiglath-
pileser records that in his twelfth year (B.C. 734)
he advanced as far as Gaza, capturing Galfeed]
and [A]bel on the way (see 2 K. xv. 29, 30),
and " the land of the house of Omri, the dis-
tant . . . the whole of its inhabitants with
their possessions to Assyria I deported. Pekah,
their king, I slew, ffosea over them I appointed.
Ten ... I received from them " (Schrader, Cu-
neiform Inscriptions, p. 255). It appears from
this inscription that Hoshea was raised to the
throne because he stood at the head of the
Assyrian party in Ephraim, whereas Pekah was
in alliance with Rezin, king of Damascus. Tig-
lath-pileser took Damascus in 732, and Hoshea
was probably one of the vassal kings who there
waited upon him, though he is not mentioned
as Ahaz (" Joahaz ") is by the conqueror.
It is expressly stated (2 K. xvii. 2) that
Hoshea was not so sinful as his predecessors.
According to the Rabbis, this superiority con-
sisted in his removing from the frontier-cities
the guards placed there by his predecessors to
prevent their subjects from worshipping at
Jerusalem (Seder Olam Rabba, cap. 22, quoted
by Prideaux, i. 16), and in his not hindering the
Israelites from accepting the invitation of Heze-
kiah (2 Ch. xxx. 10), nor checking their zeal
against idolatry (id. xxxi. 1). This encomium,
however, is founded on the untenable sup-
position that Hezekiah's Passover preceded the
fall of Samaria [Hezekiah], and we must be
content with the general fact that Hoshea
showed a more theocratic spirit than the former
kings of Israel. The compulsory cessation of the
calf-worship may have removed his greatest
temptation, for Tiglath-pileser had carried off
the golden calf from Dan some years before
(Sed. 01. Sab. 22), and that at Bethel was
taken away by Shalmaneser in his first invasion
(2 K. xvii. 3 ; Hos. x. 14 ; Prideaux, /. a). But,
whatever may have been his excellences, he
still "did evil in the sight of the Lord," and
HOSHEA
it was too late to avert retribution by any
improvements.
In the third year of his reign (B.C. 726) Shal-
maneser IV., impelled probably by mere thirst
of conquest, came against him, cruelly stormed
the strong caves of Beth-arbel (Hos. x. 14), and
made Israel tributary (2 K. xvii. 3) for three
years. At the end of this period, encouraged
perhaps by the revolt of Hezekiah, Hoshea
entered into a secret alliance with So, king of
Egypt (who was either the 2«u«x 01 of Manetho,
and son of Safiaxus, Herod, ii. 137 ; Keil,
Vitringa, Gesenius, &c. ; Jahn, Hebr. Com.
§ xl. ; or else Sabaco himself, Wilkinson, Anc
Eg. i. 308 [1878J; Ewald, Qesch. iii. 610), to throw
off the Assyrian yoke. The alliance did him no
good ; it was revealed to the court of Nineveh
by the Assyrian party in Ephraim, and Hoshes
was immediately seized as a rebellious vassal,
shut up in prison, and apparently treated with
the utmost indignity (Mic. v. 1). If this
happened before the siege (2 K. xvii. 4), we
must account for it either by supposing that
Hoshea, hoping to dissemble and gain time, had
gone to Shalmaneser to account for his conduct,
or that he had been defeated and taken prisoner
in some unrecorded battle. That he disappeared
very suddenly, like " foam upon the water," we
may infer from Hos. x. 7, xiii. 11. The siege of
Samaria lasted three years ; for that " glorious
and beautiful city " was strongly situated like
" a crown of pride " among her hills (Is. xxriii.
1-5). During the course of the siege Shal-
maneser must have died, for it is certain that
Samaria was taken by his successor Sargon is
B.C. 722, who thus laconically describes the
event in his Annals : — " Samaria I looked at, I
captured ; 27,280 men (families?) who dwelt in
it I carried away. I constructed fifty chariots in
their country ... I appointed a governor over
them, and continued upon them the tribute of
the former people " (Botta, 145, 1 1, quoted by
Dr. Hincks, J. of Sacr. Lit. Oct. 1858 ; Layard,
Nin. and Bab. i. 148). This was probably B.C.
721 or 720. For the future history of the un-
happy Ephraimites, the places to which they
were transplanted by the policy of their con-
queror and his officer, " the great and noble
Asnapper " (Ezra iv. 10), and the nations by
which they were superseded, see Samaria. Of
the subsequent fortunes of Hoshea we know
nothing. He came to the throne too late, and
governed a kingdom torn to pieces by foreign
invasion and intestine broils. Sovereign after
sovereign had fallen by the dagger of the
assassin ; and we see from the dark and terrible
delineations of the contemporary Prophets
[Hosea, Micah, Isaiah], that murder and
idolatry, drunkenness and lust, had eaten like
" an incurable wound " (Mic. i. 9) into the
inmost heart of the national morality. Ephraim
was dogged to its ruin by the apostate policy of
the renegade who had asserted its independ-
ence (2 K. xvii. ; Joseph. Ant. ix. 14 ; Prideaus,
i. 15 sq. ; Keil, On Kings, ii. 50 sq., Engl, ed.;
Jahn, Hebr. Com. § xl. ; Ewald, Qesch. iii. 607-
613; Rosenmiiller, Bibl. Geogr. ch. ix., Eng'-
transl. ; Rawlinson, Herod, i. 149). [F. W. F.]
HOSHE'A (Of\T]= healing. The name U pre-
cisely the same as that of the Prophet known to
us as Hosea). 1. The son of Nun, U. Joshua
Digitized by
Google
HOSPITALITY
(Dent, xxxii- 44 ; and also in Nam. xiii. 8, A. V.
Oshea, R. V. Hoshea). It was probably his ori-
ginal name, to which the Divine name of Jah was
afterwards added — Jehoshua, Joshua — "Jeho-
vah's help." The LXX. in this passage misses
the distinction, and have 'Itjtrouj ; Vulg. Josue.
2. {'tUHi; Oaee.) Son of Azaziah (1 Ch.
xxvii. 20) ; like his great namesake, a man of
Ephraim, ruler (ndgkl) of his tribe in the time
of king David.
8. (B. 'CUnfi&y A. 'flm)<; Otee.) One of
the heads of the "people" — i\*. the laymen —
who sealed the covenant with Nehemiah (Neh.
x. 23). [W. A.W.] [F.]
HOSPITALITY. The rites of hospitality
are to be distinguished from the customs pre-
vailing in the entertainment of guests [Food ;
Meals], and from the laws and practices relat-
ing to charity, almsgiving, &c. Hospitality was
regarded as one of the chief virtues by most
nations of the ancient world, and especially by
peoples of the Semitic stock ; but that it was
not characteristic of the latter alone is amply
shown by the usages of the Greeks and even of the
Romans. Race undoubtedly influences its exer-
cise, and it must also be ascribed in no small
degree to the social state of a nation. Thus the
desert tribes have always placed the virtue
higher in their esteem than the townsfolk of the
same descent as themselves; and in our own
day, thongh an Arab townsman is hospitable,
he entertains notions on the subject different
from those of the Arab of the desert (the Bedawi).
The former has fewer opportunities of showing
his hospitality ; and when he does so, he does
it not so much with the feeling of discharging
an obligatory act as of performing a social duty.
With the advance of civilisation the calls of
hospitality become less and less urgent. The
dweller in the wilderness, however, finds the
entertainment of wayfarers to be a part of his
daily life, and that to refuse it is to deny a com-
mon humanity. Viewed in this light, the
notions of the Greeks and of the Romans must be
appreciated as the recognition of the virtue
where its necessity was not of the urgent cha-
racter that it possesses in the more primitive
lands of the East. The ancient Egyptians re-
sembled the Greeks ; but, with a greater exclu-
siveness, they limited their entertainments to
their own countrymen, being constrained by the
national and priestly abhorrence and dread of
foreigners. This exclusion throws some obscurity
on their practices in the discharge of hospitality;
but otherwise their customs in the entertain-
ment of guests resembled those well known to
classical scholars — customs probably derived in
a great measure from Egypt.
While hospitality is acknowledged to have
been a wide-spread virtue in ancient times, we
must concede that it flourished chiefly among
the race of Shem. The 0. T. abounds with
illustrations of the religious ordinance to use
hospitality, and of the strong national belief in
its importance : so, too, in the writings of the
N. T. ; and though the Eastern Jews of modern
times dare not entertain a stranger lest he be
an enemy, and the long oppression they have
endnred has begotten that greed of gain that
has made their name a proverb, the ancient
hospitality still lives in their hearts. The
HOSPITALITY
1401
desert, however, is yet free ; it is as of old a
howling wilderness ; and hospitality is as neces-
sary and as freely given as in patriarchal times.
Among the Arabs we find the best illustrations
of the old Bible narratives, and among them
see traits that might beseem their ancestor
Abraham.
The laws respecting strangers (Lev. xix. 33,
34) and the poor (Lev. xxv. 14 sq. ; Deut. xv. 7),
and concerning redemption (Lev. xxv. 23 sq.),
&c, are framed in accordance with the spirit of
hospitality ; and the strength of the national
feeling regarding it is shown in the incidental
mentions of its practice. In the Law, compas-
sion to strangers is constantly enforced by the
words, " for ye were strangers in the land of
Egypt " (cp. Lev. xix. 34). And before the Law,
Abraham's entertainment of the Angels (Gen.
xriii. 1 sq.), and Lot's (xix. 1), are in exact
agreement with its precepts and with modern
usage. So Hoses was received by Jethro, the
priest of Midian, who reproached his daughters,
though he believed him to be an Egyptian, say-
ing, " And where is he ? why is it that ye have
left the man ? call him, that he may eat bread "
(Ex. ii. 20). The story of Joseph's hospitality
to his brethren, although he knew them to be
such, appears to be narrated as an ordinary
occurrence ; and in like manner Pharaoh received
Jacob with a liberality not merely dictated by
his relationship to the benefactor of Egypt.
Like Abraham, " Manoah said unto the Angel of
the Lord, I pray thee, let us detain thee until
we shall have made ready a kid for thee"
(Judg. xiii. 15) ; and, like Lot, the old man of
Gibeah sheltered the Levite when he saw him,
" a wayfaring man in the street of the eity : and
the old man said, Whither goest thou? and
whence comest thou ? . . . Peace be with thee ;
howsoever, let all thy wants lie upon me ; only
lodge not in the street. So he brought him
into his house, and gave provender unto the
asses ; and they washed their feet, and did eat
and drink " (Judg. xix. 17, 20, 21).
In the N. T. hospitality is yet more markedly
enjoined ; and in the more civilised state of
society which then prevailed, its exercise became
more a social virtue than a necessity of patri-
archal life. The good Samaritan stands for all
ages as an example of Christian hospitality,
embodying the command to love one's neigh-
bour as oneself; and Christ's charge to the
disciples strengthened that command : " He that
receiveth you receiveth Me, and he that receiveth
Me receiveth Him that sent Me . . . And who-
soever shall give to drink unto one of these
little ones a cup of cold water [only], in the
name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he
shall in no wise lose his reward " (Matt,
x. 42). The neglect of Christ is symbolised by
inhospitality to our neighbours, in the words
" I was a stranger, and ye took Me not in "
(Matt. xxv. 43). The Apostles urged the Church
to " follow after hospitality," using the forcible
words tV <pi\o((yiav husKovrts (Rom. xii. 13;
cp. 1 Tim. v. 10) ; to remember Abraham's ex-
ample, " Be not forgetful to entertain strangers,
for thereby some 'have entertained Angels un-
awares " (Heb. xiii. 2) ; to " use hospitality one
to another without grudging " (1 Pet. iv. 9) ;
while a Bishop must be a " lover of hospitality "
(Tit. i. 8; cp. 1 Tim. lii. 2). The practice of
Digitized by
Google
1402 HOSPITALITY
the early Christians was in accord with these
precepts. They had all things in common, and
their hospitality was a characteristic of their
belief.
If such has been the usage of Biblical times,
it is in the next place important to remark how
hospitality was shown. In the patriarchal ages
we may take Abraham's example as the most
fitting, as we hare of it the fullest account ;
and by the light of Arab custom we may see,
without obscurity, his hasting to the tent-door
to meet his guests, with the words, " My lord,
if now I hare found favour in thy sight, pass
not away, 1 pray thee, from thy servant : let a
little water, I pray yon, be fetched, and wash
your feet, and rest yourselves nnder the tree,
and I will fetch a morsel of bread, and comfort
ye your hearts." " And," to continue the
narrative in the vigorous language of the A. V.,
" Abraham hastened into the tent unto Sarah,
and said, Make ready quickly three measures of
fine meal, knead it, and make cakes upon the
hearth. And Abraham ran unto the herd, and
fetched a calf tender and good, and gave it unto
a young man, and he hasted to dress it. And
he took butter and milk, and the calf which he
had dressed, and set it before them; and he
stood by them under the tree, and they did
eat." A traveller in the Eastern desert may
see, through the vista of ages, this far-off ex-
ample in its living traces. " Hospitality," says
Lane, " is a virtue for which the natives of the
East in general are highly and deservedly ad-
mired ; and the people of Egypt are well enti-
tled to commendation on this account. A word
which signifies literally ' a person on a journey '
(musifir) is the term most commonly employed
in this country in the sense of a visitor or guest.
There are very few persons here who would
think of sitting down to a meal, if there was a
stranger in the house, without inviting him to
partake of it, unless the latter were a menial, in
which case he would be invited to eat with the
servants. It would be considered a shameful
violation of good manners if a Muslim abstained
from ordering the table to be prepared at the
usual time because a visitor happened to be
present. Persons of the middle classes in this
country, if living in a retired situation, some-
times take their supper before the door of their
house, and invite every passenger of respectable
appearance to eat with them.' This is very
commonly done among the lower orders. In
cities and large towns claims on hospitality are
infrequent, as there are many wakalahs or
khans, where strangers may obtain lodging ;
and food is very easily procured : but in the
villages travellers are often lodged and enter-
tained by the Sheykh or some other inhabitant ;
and if the guest be a person of the middle or
higher classes, or even not very poor, he gives
a present to the host's servants, or to the host
himself. In the desert, however, a present is
seldom received from a guest. By a Sunnah
law a traveller may claim entertainment, of
• " It Is said to have been n custom of some of the
Bannekees (the family no renowned for their generosity)
to keep open house during the hours of meals, and to
allow no one who applied at such times for admission
to be repulsed."— Lane's Thou.ta.ni and One Nightt,
eh. v. note ST.
HOSPITALITY
any person able to afford it to him, for three
days. The account of Abraham's entertaining
the three Angels, related in the Bible, presents
a perfect picture of the manner in which a
modern Bedawi sheykh receives travellers
arriving at his encampment. He immediately
orders his wife or women to make bread,
slaughters a sheep or some other animal, and
dresses it in haste, and bringing milk and any
other provisions that he may have ready at
hand, with the bread and the meat which he
has dressed, sets them before his guests. If
these be persons of high rank, he stands by
them while they eat, as Abraham did in the
case above all nded to. Most Bedawis will suffer
almost any injury to themselves or their families
rather than allow their guests to be ill-treated
while under their protection. There are Arabs
who even regard the chastity of their wives as
not too precious to be sacrificed for the gratifica-
tion of their guests (see Burckhardt's Notes cm
the Bedouins, &c, 8vo ed., i. 179, 180) ; and at
an encampment of the Bisharin, I ascertained
that there are many.persons in this great tribe
(which inhabits a large portion of the desert
between the Nile and the Red Sea) who offer
their unmarried daughters (cp. Gen. xxi. 8 ;
Judg. xix. 24) to their guests, merely from
motives of hospitality, and not for hire " (Mod.
Eg. ch. xiii.). Lane adds that there used to be
a very numerous class of persons, called Tufai-
lls, who lived by spunging, presuming on the
well-known hospitality of their countrymen,
and going from house to house where entertain-
ments were being given. The Arabs along the
Syrian frontier usually pitch the Sheykh's tent
towards the west, that is, towards the inhabited
country, to invite passengers aDd lodge them on
their way (Burckhardt's Notes on the Bedouins,
&c, 8vo ed., i. 33) ; it is held to be disgraceful
to encamp in a place out of the way of travel-
lers; and it is a custom of the Bedawis to
light tires in their encampments to attract
travellers, and to keep dogs which, besides watch-
ing against robbers, may, in the night-time,
guide wayfarers to their tents. Hence a hos-
pitable man is proverbially called " one whose
dogs bark loudly." " Approaching an encamp-
ment, the traveller often sees several horsemen
coming towards him, and striving who shall be
first to claim him as a guest. The favourite
national game of the Arabs before Islam illus-
trates their hospitality. It was called " Maisir,"
and was played with arrows, some notched and
others without marks. A young camel was
caught and killed, and divided into twenty-four
portions : those who drew marked arrows had
shares in proportion to the number of notches ;
those who drew blanks paid the cost of the camel
among them. Neither party, however, ate of
b The time of entertainment, according to the precept
of Mohammad, is three days, and he permitted a guest
to take this light by force ; although one day and one
night Is the period of the host's being " kind " to him
(MUhkat ei-Mutabih, II. 329). Burckhardt (.Vofcj on
the Bedouins, kc. i. 178, 179) says that a stranger
without friends in a camp alights at the first tent, where
the women, In the absence of the owner, provide for his
refreshment. After the lapse of three days and four
hours, he must, if he would avoid censure, either
assist In household duties, or claim hospitality at
another tent.
Digitized by
Google
HOTHAM
the flesh of the camel, which was always given
to the poor ; and " this they did out of pride and
ostentation," says Sale, "it being reckoned a
shame for a man to stand out, and not venture
his money on such an occasion." Sale, how-
ever, is hardly philosophical in this remark,
which concerns only the abuse of a practice
originally arising from a national virtue : but
Mohammad forbade the game, with all other
games of chance, on the plea that it gave rise
to quarrels, &c (Sale's Preliminary Discourse,
p. 96, ed. 1836, and Koran, ch. ii. and v.).
The Oriental respect for the covenant of bread
and salt, or salt alone, certainly sprang from
the high regard in which hospitality was held.
Even accidentally to taste another's salt imposes
this obligation ; and to so great an extent is
the feeling carried that a thief has been known
to give up his booty in obedience to it. Thus
Al-Laith As-Saflar, when a robber, left his booty
in the passage of the royal treasury of Sig'ist&n ;
accidentally he stumbled over, and, in the dark,
tasted a lump of rock-salt: his respect for his
covenant gained his pardon, and he became the
founder of a royal dynasty. The Arab pecu-
liarity was carried into Spain by the so-called
Moors.
For the customs of the Greeks and Romans in
the entertainment of guests, and the exercise of
hospitality generally, the reader is referred to
the Diet, of Gr. & £om. Antiq., art. Hospitium.
They are incidentally illustrated by passages in
the N. T., but it is difficult to distinguish be-
tween those so derived and the native Oriental
customs which, as we have said, are very similar.
To one of the customs of classical antiquity a
reference is supposed to exist in Rev. ii. 17 :
" To him that overcometh will I give to eat of
the hidden manna, and will give him a white
■tone, and in the stone a new name written,
which no man knowetb, saving he that receiveth
[it]." [E. S. P.]
HOTHAM (Drrtn= signet ring; B. XuBdv,
A. X«8d/i ; Hotham), a man of Asher ; son of
Ueber, of the family of Beriah (1 Ch. vii. 32).
HO'THAN, R. V. HOTHAM (DJjin ;
B. KoOdr, A. XttBiv ; Hotham), a man of Aroer,
father of Shama and Jehiel, two of the heroes
of David's guard (1 Ch. xi. 44). The substitu-
tion of Hothan for Hotham is an error which has
been retained in the A. V. from the edition of
1611 till now. Cp. the rendering of the LXX.
both of this and the preceding name.
HOTHIR ("I'flta,? = fulness; B. 'aenpd,
'Hflti, A. 'latSipt, 'UStpt; Othir), the thirteenth
son of Hehas, " the king's seer " (1 Ch. xxv. 4),
and therefore a Kohathite Lcvite. He had the
charge of the twenty-first course of the musicians
in the service of the Tabernacle (xxv. 28).
HOUGH (pron. hock) from the A.-S. hoh =
the ham of the leg. The word is applied in
Josh. xi. 6, 9 ; 2 Sam. viii. 4, to cutting the
hamstrings of an animal and thus disabling it
(see Lumby, Gloss, of Bible Words, s. n., in Evre
and Spottiswoode's «' Teacher's Bible "). [F.]
HOUE (J\V&, Kngt?, Chald.). This word is
first found in Dan. iii. 6, iv. 19, 33, v. 5 ; and it
HOUR
1403
occurs several times in the Apocrypha (Judith
xiv. 8 ; 2 Esd. ix. 44). It seems to be a vague
expression for a short period, and the frequent
phrase " in the same hour " means " immedi-
ately": hence we find TXB&ji substituted in the
- rt :
Targum for Vl~)2, " in a moment " (Num. xvi.
21, &c). 'tipa is frequently used in the same
way by the N. T. writers (Matt. viii. 13 ; Luke
xii. 39, &c). It occurs in the LXX. as s>
rendering for various words meaning time, just
as it does in Greek writers long before it ac-
quired the specific meaning of our word " hour."
Sd'ah is still used in Arabic both for an hour
and a moment.
The ancient Hebrews were probably unac-
quainted with the division of the natural day into
twenty-four parts. The general distinctions of
" morning, evening, and noonday " (Ps. Iv. 17)
were sufficient for them at first, as they were
for the early Greeks (Horn. II. xxi. Ill) ; after-
wards the Greeks adopted five marked periods
of the day (Jul. Pollux, Onom. i. 68; Dio
Chrysost. Oral. ii. de Glor.), and the Hebrews
parcelled out the period between sunrise and
sunset into a series of minute divisions distin-
guished by the sun's course [Day], as is still
done by the Arabs, who have stated forms of
prayers for each period (Lane's Mod. Eg. i.
ch. 3).
The early Jews appear to have divided the
day into four parts (Neh. ix. 3), and the night
into three watches (Jndg. vii. 19) [Day ;
Watches], and even in the N. T. we find a
trace of this division in Matt. xx. 1-5. There
is, however, no proof of the assertion sometimes
made, that Spa in the Gospels may occasionally
mean a space of three hours.
The Greeks adopted the division of the day
into twelve hours from the Babylonians (Herod,
ii. 109 ; cp. Rawlinson, Herod, ii. p. 334). At
what period the Jews became first acquainted
with this way of reckoning time is unknown,
but it is generally supposed that they too learnt
it from the Babylonians during the Captivity
(Waehner, Ant. Heir. § v. ch. i. 8, 9). They may
have had some such division at a much earlier
period, as has been inferred from the fact that
Ahaz erected a sun-dial in Jerusalem, the use of
which had probably been learnt from Babylon.
There is, however, the greatest uncertainty as
to the meaning of the word fwlFO (A. V. "de-
grees," Is. xxxviit. 8). [Dial.] It is strange
that the Jews were not acquainted with this
method of reckoning even earlier ; for, although
a purely conventional one, it is naturally
suggested by the months in a year. Sir G.
Wilkinson thinks that it arose from a less
obvious cause (Rawlinson, Herod, ii. 334). In
whatever way originated, it was known to the
Egyptians at a very early period. They had twelve
hours of the day and of the night (called Nau=
hour), each of which had its own genius, drawn
with a star on its head. The word is said by
Lepsius to be found as far back as the 5th
dynasty (Rawlinson, Herod, ii. 135).
[The Romans had two methods of reckoning
the hours of the day : one, in common with other
nations and in general use, from sunrise to sun-
set; the other, peculiar to themselves and
adapted to legal and technical purposes (Bil-
finger, Der biirgerliche Tag, p. 198 sq.), from
Digitized by
Google
1404
HOUSE
midnight to midnight. St. John is usually
thought to hare adopted this latter reckoning,
but the question is very complicated. See
Westcott on St. John xix., Add. note ; Cross in
Class. Rev., June 1891 ; andDods, The Gospel of
St. John, i. 132.— F.]
There are two kinds of hours, viz. (1) the as-
tronomical or equinoctial hour, i.e. the twenty-
fourth part of a civil day, which, although
'•known to astronomers, was not used in the
affairs of common life till towards the end of the
4th century of the Christian era " (Diet, of Or. Sf
Rom. Ant. s. v. Hord) : and (2) the natural hour
(which the Rabbis called JlViOt, Kmpucei or tan-
paroles), Le. the twelfth part of the natural day, or
of the time between sunrise and sunset. These are
the hours meant in the N. T., Josephus, and the
Rabbis (John xi. 9, &c. ; Joseph. Ant. xiv. 4, § 3),
and it must be remembered that they perpetually
vary in length, so as to be very different at
different times of the year. Besides this, an
hour of the day would always mean a different
length of time from an hour of the night except
at the equinox. From the consequent un-
certainty of the term there arose the proverbial
expression "not all hours are equal" (R. Joshua
ap. Carpzov. App. Crit. 345). At the equinoxes
the third hour would correspond to 9 o'clock;
the sixth would always be at noon. To find the
exact time meant at other seasons of the year
we must know when the sun rises in Palestine,
and reduce the hours to our reckoning accord-
ingly. [Dat.] (Winer, s.vv. Tag, Uhren; Jahn,
Arch. Bibl. § 101.) What horologic contrivances
the Jews possessed in the time of our Lord is
uncertain; but we may safely suppose that
they had gnomons, dials, and clepsydrae, all of
which had long been known to the Persians and
other nations with whom they had come in
contact. Of course the first two were inaccurate
and uncertain indications, but the water-clock
by ingenious modifications, according to the
season of the year, became a very tolerable
assistance in marking time. Mention is also
made of a curious invention called THIS? ~11"1V,
t » :
by which a figure was constructed so as to drop
a stone into a brazen basin every hour, the
sound of which was heard for a great distance
and announced the time (Otho, Lex. Sab. s. v.
Hord).
For the purposes of prayer the old division of
the day into four portions was continued in the
Temple service, as we see from Acts ii. 15, iii.
1, x. 9. The Jews supposed that the third hour
had been consecrated by Abraham, the sixth by
Isaac, and the ninth by Jacob (Kimchi ; Schoett-
gen, Uor. Hebr. ad Acts iii. 1). It is probable
that the canonical hours observed by the Ro-
man Catholics (of which there are eight in the
twenty-four) are derived from these Temple
hours (Moses and Aar. iii. 9).
The Rabbis pretend that the hours were
divided into 1080 D'p^n (minutes) and 56,848
D'WT (seconds), which numbers were chosen
because they are so easily divisible (Gem. Hier.
Berachoth, 2, 4; in Re land, Ant. Hebr. iv. 1,
§19). [F. W. F.]
HOUSE (n?3; oUos; domus ; Chald. TM3.
to pass the night, Gesen. Thes. p. 191 o), a dwell-
ing in general, whether literally, as house, tent,
HOUSE
palace, citadel, tomb ; derivatively, as taberna-
cle, temple, heaven; or metaphorically, as family.
Although, in Oriental language, every tent
(see Gesen. p. 32) may be regarded as a house
(Harmer, 06s. i. 194), yet the distinction be-
tween the permanent dwelling-house and the
tent must have taken rise from the moment of
the division of mankind into dwellers in tents
and builders of cities, i.c. of permanent habita-
tions (Gen. iv. 17, 20; Is. xxxviii. 12). The
Hebrews did not become habitually dwellers in
cities till the sojourn in Egypt and after the
conquest of Canaan (Gen. xlvii. 3 ; Ex. xii. 7 ;
Heb. xi. 9), while the Canaanites as well as the
Assyrians were from an earlier period builders
and inhabitants of cities, and it was into the
houses and cities built by the former that the
Hebrews entered to take possession after the con-
quest (Gen. x. 11, 19, xix. 1, xxiii. 10, xxxiv. 20 ;
Num. xi. 27; Deut. vi. 10, 11). The private
dwellings of the Assyrians and Babylonians hare
altogether perished, but the solid material of the
houses of Syria, east of the Jordan, may perhaps
have preserved entire specimens of the ancient
dwellings, even of the original inhabitants of
that region (Porter, Damascus, ii. 195, 196;
Graham in Camb. Essays, 1859, p. 160, &c. ; cp.
Buckingham, Arab Tribes, pp. 171, 172).
In inferring the plan and arrangement of
ancient Jewish or Oriental houses, as alluded to
in Scripture, from existing dwellings in Syria,
Egypt, and the East in general, allowance must
be made for the difference in climate between
Egypt, Persia, and Palestine, a cause from which
would proceed differences in certain cases of
material and construction, as well as of domestic
arrangement.
1. The houses of the rural poor in Egypt, as
well as in most parts of Syria, Arabia, and
Persia, are for the most part mere huts of mud,
or sun-burnt bricks. In some parts of Palestine
and Arabia stone is used, and in certain districts
caves in the rock are used as dwellings (Amos v.
11 ; Bartlett, Walks, &c, p. 117 ; Caves). The
houses are usually of one story only, viz. the
ground-floor, and sometimes contain only one
apartment. Sometimes a small court for the
cattle is attached ; and in some cases the cattle
are housed in the same building, or the people
live on a raised platform, and the cattle round
them on the ground (1 Sam. xxviii. 24 ; Irby
and Mangles, p. 70; Jolliffe, Letters, i. 43;
Buckingham, Arab Tribes, p. 170 ; Burckhardt,
Travels, ii. 119 ; Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 72).
In Lower Egypt the oxen occupy the width of
the chamber farthest from the entrance, which
is built of brick or mud, about four feet high,
and the top is often used as a sleeping-place in
winter. The windows are small apertures high
up in 'the walls, sometimes grated with wood
(Burckhardt, Travels, i. 241, ii. 101, 119, 301,
329 ; Lane, Mod. Eg. i. 44). The roofs are com-
monly but not always flat, and are usually formed
of a plaster of mud and straw laid upon boughs or
rafters ; and upon the flat roofs, tents or " booths "
of boughs or rushes are often raised to be used
as sleeping-places in summer (Irby and Mangles,
p. 71; Niebuhr, Descr. pp. 49, 53; Layard, A'in.
$ Bab. p. 112; Nineveh, i. 176; Burckhardt,
Syria, p. 280; Travels, i. 190 ; Van Egmont, ii. 32 ;
Malan, Magdala 4' Bethany, p. 15). To this de-
scription the houses of ancient Egypt and also
Digitized by
Google
HOUSE
of Assyria, as represented in the monuments, in
great measure correspond (Layard, Monuments
of Nineveh, pt. ii. pi. 49, 50 ; bas-relief in Brit.
Mus. Assyrian Room, No. 49 ; 1st Egypt. Room,
case 17; Wilkinson, Anc. Eg. i. 13 [1878];
HOUSE
1405
A Kestori&n Huum', with slopes ui>uu I lie roof fur sleeping.
(LftTaxd. Xinetth, 1. 177.)
Martinean, East. Life, i. 19, 97). In the towns
the houses of the inferior kind do not differ much
from the above description, but they are some-
times of more than one story, and the roof-
terraces are more carefully constructed. In
Palestine they are often of stone (Jolliffe, i. 26).
2. The difference between the poorest houses
and those of the class next above them is greater
than between these and the houses of the first
/vw\
AnrjrrUn Hook, Konrnnjlk.
rank. The prevailing plan of Eastern houses of
this class presents, as was the case in ancient
Egypt, a front of wall, whose blank and mean
appearance is usually relieved only by the door
and a few latticed and projecting windows
( Views in Syria, ii. 25). Within this is a court
or courts with apartments opening into them.
Some of the finest houses in the East are to be
found at Damascus, where in some of them are
seven such courts. When there arc only two,
the innermost is the harim, in which the women
and children live, and which is jealously secluded
from the entrance of any man but the master of
the house (Burckhardt, Travels, i. 188; Van
Egmont, ii. 246, 253; Shaw, p. 207; Porter,
Damascus, i. 34, 37, 60; Chardin, Voyages, vi. 6;
Lane, Mod. Eg. i. 179, 207). Over the door is a
projecting window with a lattice more or less
elaborately wrought, which, except in times of
public celebrations,' is usually closed (2 K. ix. 30 ;
Shaw, Travels, p. 207 , Lane, Mod. Eg. i. 27).
The doorway or door bears an inscription from
Entrance to House In Cairo. (lane, Modtrm Kgppllamt.)
the Kur'an, as the ancient Egyptian houses had
inscriptions over their doors, and as the Israelites
were directed to write sentences from the Law
over their gates. [Gate.] The entrance is
usually guarded within from sight by a wall or
some arrangement of the passages. In the pas-
sage is a stone seat for the porter and other ser-
vants (Lane, Mod. Eg. i. 32 ; Shaw, Trav. p. 207 ;
Chardin, Voy. iv. 111). Beyond this passage is
an open court like the Roman impluvium, often
paved with marble. Into this the principal apart-
ments look, and are either open to it in front, or
are entered from it by doors. An awning is
sometimes drawn over the court, and the floor
Inner court of House In Cairo, with Yak'ad.
(lane. Modem* Eynitunu.)
strewed with carpets on festive occasions (Shaw,
p. 208). On the ground-floor there is generally
an apartment for male visitors, called mandwah.
Digitized by
Google
1406
HOUSE
having a portion of the floor sunk below the rest
called durH'ah. This is often paved with marble
or coloured tiles, and has in the centre a foun-
tain. The rest of the floor is a raised platform
called Wean, with a mattress and cushions at
the back on each of the three sides. This seat
or sofa is called dlwan. Every person on en-
trance takes off his shoes on the durk&'ah before
stepping on the Uwan (Ex. iii. 5 ; Josh. T. 15 ;
Luke vii. 38). The ceilings over the liican
and durka'ah are often richly panelled and
ornamented (Jer. xiii. 14). [Ceiling.] The
stairs to the upper apartments are in Syria
usually in a corner of the court (Robinson, iii. i
302). When there is no upper story, the lower I
rooms are usually loftier. In Persia they are
open from top to bottom, and only divided from '
the court by a low partition (cp. Wilkinson, Anc.
Eg. i. 8-10 [1878]; Chardin,iv.ll9; Burckhardt,
Travels, i. 18, 19; Views in Syria, i. 56).
Around part, if not the whole, of the court is
a verandah, often nine or ten feet deep, over |
which, when there is more than one floor, runs
a second gallery of like depth with a balustrade
(Sbaw, p. 208). Bearing in mind that the re- !
ception room is raised above the level of the
court (Chardin, iv. 118; Views in Syria, i. 56),
we may, in explaining the circumstances of the
HOUSE
room where onr Lord was (Hiss Rogers, Dom,
Life in Palestine, p. 47 ; Malan, /. c).
The stairs to the upper apartments or to
the roof are often shaded by vines or creeping
plants, and the courts, especially the inner ones,
planted with trees. The court has often a well
or tank in it (Ps. exxviii. 3 ; 2 Sam. xvii. 18 ;
Russell, Aleppo, i. 24, 32 ; Wilkinson, i. 6-8 •
Lane, Mod. Eg. i. 32 ; Views in Syria, i. 56).
Court of Housti at Anti.xli
miracle of the paralytic (Mark ii. 3; Luke
v. 18), suppose, 1. that our Lord was standing
tinder the verandah, and the people in front in
the court. The bearers of the sick man ascended
the stairs to the roof of the house, and taking
off a portion of the boarded covering of the
verandah, or removing the awning over the im-
pluvium, to ftitroy, in the former case let down
the bed through the verandah roof, or in the
latter, down by way of the roof, Sia tuit mpiuav,
and deposited it before the Saviour (Shaw, p. 2 12).
2. Another explanation presents itself in con-
sidering the room where the company were
assembled as the vxtpyov, and the roof opened
for the bed to be the true roof of the house
(Trench, Miracles, p. 199; Lane, Mod. Eg. i. 39).
3. And one still more simple is found in regard-
ing the house as one of the rude dwellings now
to be seen near the Sea of Galilee, a mere room
"10 or 12 feet high and as many or more
square," with no opening except the door. The
roof, used as a sleeping-place, is reached by a
ladder from the outside, and the bearers of the
paralytic, unable to approach the door, would
thus have ascended the roof, and, having un-
covered it (O-opvlavTts), let him down into the
KiVRli of House in Cairo. (Lane.)
Besides the mandarah, there is sometimes a
second room, either on the ground or upper
floor, called Ka'ah, fitted with diwans, and at
the corners of these rooms portions taken off
and enclosed form retiring rooms (Lane, i. 39 ;
Russell, i. 31, 33).
When there is no second floor, but more than
one court, the women's apartments, hartm,
harem or haram
(f-
. and .
~ ,».> secluded, or
prohibited, with which may be compared the
Hebrew Armon, jiD"1N, Stanley, S. # P. App.
§ 82), are usually in the second court ; other-
wise they form a separate building within the
general enclosure, or are above on the first floor
(Lane, Mod. Eg. i. 179, 207 ; Views in Syria,
i. 56). The entrance to the harem is crossed
by no one but the master of the house and the
domestics belonging to the female establish-
ment. Though this remark would not apply
Digitized by
Google
HOUSE
HOUSE
1407
in the game degree to Jewish habits, the privacy
of the women's apartments may possibly be
indicated by the "inner chamber" ("lin;
Ta/utTov; cvbicuium) resorted to as a hiding-
place (1 E. xx. 30, xxii. 25 ; see Judg. xv. 1).
Solomon, in his marriage with a foreigner,
introduced also foreign usage in this respect,
which was carried farther in subsequent times
(1 K. vii. 8; 2 K. xxiv. 15). [Women.] The
harem of the Persian monarch (D'tW JV3 ; i
yvvamiiv; damns femmantm) is noticed in the
Book of Esther (ii. 3).
When there is an upper story, the Ka'ah forms
the most important apartment, and thus
probably answers to the irtpfov, which was
often the "guest-chamber" (Luke xxii. 12;
Acta i. 13, ix. 37, xx. 8 ; Burckhardt, Trav. i.
154; Miss Rogers, pp. 130, 177; Robinson, ii.
229). The windows of the upper rooms often
project one or two feet, and form a kiosk or
latticed chamber, the ceilings of which are
elaborately ornamented (Lane, i. 27 ; Russell,
i. 102 ; Burckhardt, Trav. i. 190). Such may
have been the "chamber in the wall" (H 1 ?!?;
inep$ov, coenaculum ; Gesen. p. 1030) made, or
rather set apart for
Elisha, by the Shu-
nammite woman (2 K.
iv. 10, 11). So also
the " summer par-
lour " of Eglon (Jndg.
iii. 20, 23, but see
Wilkinson, i. 11), the
" loft " of the widow
of Zarephath (1 K.
xvii. 19). The " lat-
tice" (roab; 8«-
tumtoV; cancellf)
through which Aha-
ziah fell, perhaps
belonged to an upper
chamber of this kind
(2 K. i. 2), as also
the "third loft" Orpi-
tntyov) from which
Eutychus fell (Acts
xx. 9 ; comp. Jer.
xxii. 13). There are
usually no special
bed-rooms in Eastern
houses, and thus the
room in which Ishbo-
sheth was murdered
was probably an
ordinary room with
a dlvcan, on which
he was sleeping
during the heat of the day (2 Sam. iv. 5, 6;
Lane, i. 41).
Sometimes the dlwSn is raised sufficiently to
allow of cellars underneath for stores of all
kinds (raiueia, Matt. xxiv. 26 ; Russell, i. 32).
The outer doors are closed with a wooden
lock, but in some cases the apartments are di-
vided from each other by curtains only (Lane,
i. 42 ; Chardin, iv. 123 ; Russell, i. 21).
There are no chimneys, but fire is made when
required with charcoal in a chafing-dish ; or a
fire of wood might be kindled in the open court
of the house (Luke xxii. 55; Russell, i. 21;
Hoiue In a rtrM«t at Cairo. (From
Boterte.)
Lane, i. 41 ; Miss Rogers, p. 153 ; Chardin,
iv. 120).
Besides the mandarah, some houses in Cairo
have an apartment called mai'ad, open in front
to the court, with two or more arches, and
a railing; and a pillar to support the wall
above (Lane, i. 38). It was in a chamber of
this kind, probably one of the largest size to be
found in a palace, that our Lord was being ar-
raigned before the high-priest, at the time
when the denial of Him by St. Peter took place.
He " turned and looked " on Peter as he stood
by the fire in the court (Luke xxii. 56, 61 ;
John xviii. 24), whilst He Himself was in the
" hall of judgment," the mak'ad. Such was the
" porch of judgment " built by Solomon (1 K.
vii. 7), which finds a parallel in the golden alcove
of Mohammed Uzbek (Ibn Batuta, Trav. p. 76,
ed. Lee).
Before quitting the interior of the house, we
may observe that on the divan the " corner " is
the place of honour (cp. Amos iii. 12, the
" couch " [R. V.] being the divan), which is
never quitted by the master of the house in re-
ceiving strangers (Russell, i. 27 ; Miss Rogers,
pp. 168-171; Malan, Tyre and Sidon, p. 38). The
roofs of Eastern houses are, as has been said,
mostly flat, though there are sometimes domes
over some of the rooms. The fiat portions are
plastered with a composition of mortar, tar,
ashes, and sand, which in time becomes very
bard, but when not laid on at the proper
season is apt to crack in winter, and the rain
is thus admitted. In order to prevent this,
every roof is provided with a roller, which is
set at work after rain. In many cases the
terrace roof is little better than earth rolled
hard. On ill-compacted roofs grass is often
found springing into a short-lived existence
(Prov. xix. 13, xxvii. 15 ; Ps. exxix. 6, 7 ; Is.
xxxvii. 27 ; Shaw, p. 210 ; Lane, i. 27 ; Robinson,
iii. 39, 44, 60).
In no point do Oriental domestic habits differ
more from European than in the use of the roof.
Its flat surface is made useful for various house-
hold purposes, as drying corn, hanging up linen,
and preparing figs and raisins (Shaw, p. 211;
Burckhardt, Trav. i. 191). The roofs are used
as places of recreation in the evening, and often
as sleeping-places at night (2 Sam. xi. 2, xvi. 22 ;
Dan. iv. 29 ; 1 Sam. ix. 25, 26 ; Job xxvii. 18 ;
Prov. xxi. 9 ; Shaw, p. 211 ; Russell, i. 35 ; Char-
din, i v. 116; Laj-ard, Nineteh, i. 177; Robinson,
ii. 234). They were also used as places for de-
votion, and even idolatrous worship (Jer. xxxii.
29, xix. 13; 2 K. xxiii. 12; Zeph. i. 5; Acts x.
9). At the time of the Feast of Tabernacles,
booths were erected by the Jews on the tops of
their houses, as in the present day huts of
boughs are sometimes erected on the housetops
as sleeping-places, or places of retirement from
the heat in summer time (Neh. viii. 16 ; Burck-
hardt, Syria, p. 280). As among the jews the
seclusion of women was not carried to the extent
of Mohammedan usage, it is probable that the
house-top was made, as it is among Christian
inhabitants, more a place of public meeting,
both for men and women, than is the case among
Mohammedans, who carefully seclude their
roofs from inspection by partitions (Burckhardt,
Trav. i. 191; cp. Wilkinson, i. 23). The
Christians at Aleppo, in Russell's time, lived
Digitized by
Google
1408
HOUSE OF GOD
contiguous, and made their house-tops a means
of mutual communication to avoid passing
through the streets in time of plague (Russell,
i. 85). In the same manner the house-top
might be made a means of escape by the stairs
by which it was reached without entering any
of the apartments of the house (Matt. xxir. 17,
I. 27 ; Luke xii. 3).
Both Jews and heathens were in the habit
of wailing publicly on the honse-tops (Is. xr.
3, xxii. 1 ; Jer. xlviii. 38). Protection of the
roof by parapets was enjoined by the Law
(Dent, xxii. 8). The parapets thus constructed,
of which the types may be seen in ancient
Egyptian houses, were sometimes of open work,
and it is to a fall through or over one of these
that the injnry by which Ahaziah suffered is
sometimes ascribed (Shaw, p. 211). To pass over
roofs for plundering purposes, as well as for
safety, would be no difficult matter (Joel ii. 9).
In ancient Egyptian and also in Assyrian houses
a sort of raised story was sometimes built above
the roof, and in the former an open chamber,
roofed or covered with awning, was sometimes
erected on the house - top (Wilkinson, i. 9 ;
Layard, Mon. of Nin. ii. pi. 49, 50).
There are usually no fire-places, except in the
kitchen, the furniture of which consists of a
sort of raised platform of brick with receptacles
in it for fire, answering to the " boiling places "
(1"I I I7B>3D ; (uryttptia; culinae) of Ezekiel (xh'i.
23 ; Lane, i. 41 ; Gesen. p. 249 ; Miss Rogers,
p. 153).
Special apartments were devoted in larger
houses to winter and summer uses (Jer. xxxvi.
22 ; Amos iii. 15 ; Chardin, iv. 119).
The ivory house of Ahab was probably a
palace largely ornamented with inlaid ivory.
[Palace.]
The circumstance of Samson's pulling down
the house by means of the pillars, may be ex-
plained by the fact of the company being as-
sembled on tiers of balconies above each other,
supported by central pillars on the basement;
when these were pulled down, the whole of the
upper floors would fall also (Judg. xvi. 26 ;
Shaw, p. 211).
Houses for jewels and armour were built
and furnished under the kings (2 K. xx. 13).
The draught house (JllNinO; Korptiv; latrinae)
was doubtless a public latrine, such as exists
in modern Eastern cities (2 K. x. 27 ; Russell,
i. 34).
Leprosy in the house was probably a nitrous
efflorescence on the walls, which was injurious
to the salubrity of the house, and whose re-
moval was therefore strictly enjoined by the
Law (Lev. xiv. 34, 55 ; Kitto, Phys. Oeogr. of
Pal., p. 112; Winer, s. v. Bauser ; Michaelis,
• Laws of Moses, iii 297 : see Defoe, Plague of
London, p. 187).
The word JV3 is prefixed to words consti-
tuting a local name, as Bethany, Bethhoron,
&c. In modern names it is represented by Beit,
as Beitlahm. [H. W. P.]
HOUSE OP GOD. The expression occurs
in the A. V. of Judg. xx. 18, 26, xxi. 2, as a
translation of bN*JV3. The R. V. renders the
Hebrew more correctly " Bethel " (see B. D.,
Amer. ed.). [F.]
HUMTAH
HUK'KOK (ppn, ? = rock excavation; B"
'Iarara, A. 'iKiix; Ifucuea), a place on the
boundary of Naphtali (Josh. xix. 34) named next
to Aznoth-Tabor. It is mentioned by Eusebins
and Jerome (OS.' p. 261, 82 ; p. 166, 7 ; Efafe,
Icoc), but in such a manner as to show that
they knew nothing of it but from the text. By
Hap-Parchi in 1320, and in this century by
Wolcott and by Robinson, Hukkok has been
recovered in Yakik, a village in the mountains
of Naphtali, west of the upper end of the Sea of
Galilee, about 7 miles S.S.W. of Safed, and at
the head of Wddy el-' Amid, though Dillmann *
considers this too far north. An ancient
Jewish tradition locates here the tomb of Ha-
bakkuk (Zunz, in B. Tudela, ii. 421 ; Schwarz,
p. 182 ; Robinson, iii. 81, 82 ; PEF. Mem. i.
364; Guenn, Galilee, i. 354 sq.> [G.J [W.]
HU'KOK (PP*n ; B. 'I«d*, A. "Iaitd* ; Huoac\
a name which in 1 Ch. vi. 75 is substituted
for Helkath in the parallel list of the Gershonite
cities in Asher, in Josh. xxi. 31.
HUL fan; OSa, in 1 Ch., B. om., A. OSS;
Bui; cp. 1 Ch. i. 17), the second son of Aram,
and grandson of Shem (Gen. x. 23). The geo-
graphical position of the people whom he repre-
sents is not well decided. Josephus (Ant. i. 6,
§ 4) and Jerome fix it in Armenia ; Schulthens
(Parad. p. 262) on etymological grounds (as
though the name = ?in, sand) proposes the
southern part of Mesopotamia (cp. the name
of the district Hulija in the Assyrian inscrip-
tions; see Delitzsch [1887] and Dillmann* in
loco); Von Bohlen (Introd. to Gen. ii. 249)
places it in the neighbourhood of Chaldaea.
Some favour the district about the roots of
Lebanon, where the names Ard el-Buleh, a dis-
trict to the north of Lake Merom ; OB\aSa, a
town, or locality, noticed by Josephus (Ant. it. '
10, § 3), between Galilee and Trachonitis ; and
Golan, and its modern form Javtdn, bear some!
affinity to the original name of BuI,ot, as it should
rather be written, Chid. [W. L. B.] [W.]
HUI/DAH (iTjfo; 'OAjw; Olda\ a pro-
phetess, whose husband Shallum was keeper of
the wardrobe in the time of king Josiah, and
who dwelt in the suburb (Rosenmuller ad Zeph.
i. 10) of Jerusalem. While Jeremiah was still
at Anathoth, a young man unknown to fame,
Huldah was the most distinguished person for
prophetic gifts in Jerusalem ; and it was to her
that Josiah had recourse when Hilkiah fonnd a
book of the Law, to procure an authoritative
opinion on it (2 K. xxii. 14 ; 2 Ch. xxxiv. 22).
The name is found in Palmyrene inscriptions
(MV. 11 ), and on coins such as that of a Naba-
tean queen contemporary with Pompey (Riehm,
HWB.B.D.). [W. T. B.] [F.]
HUMTAH (TOpn ; B. Zipd, A. Xawurri ;
Athmatha), a city of Judah, one of those in the
mountain-district, the next to Hebron (Josh. xr.
54). It was not known to Eusebius and Jerome
(see OS* p. 241, 53; p. 130, 20; 'Knitaei,
Amatthar), nor has it since been identified.
There is some resemblance between the name and
that of Kimath (Ki/tctO), one of the places added
by the Vat. LXX. to the list in the Hebrew
text of 1 Sam. xxx. 27-31. [G.] [W.]
Digitized by
Google
HUNTING
HUNTING. The objects for which hunting
is practised, indicate the various conditions of
society and the progress of civilisation. Hunt-
ing, as a matter of necessity, whether for the
extermination of dangerous beasts, or for pro-
curing sustenance, betokens a rude and semi-
civilised state ; as an amusement, it betokens an
advanced state. In the former, personal prowess
and physical strength are the qualities which
elevate a man above his fellows and fit him for
dominion, and hence one of the greatest heroes
of antiquity is described as a " mighty hunter
before the Lord " (Gen. x. 9), while Ishmael, the
progenitor of a wild race, was famed as an
archer (Gen. xxi. 20), and Esau, holding a simi-
lar position, was " a cunning hunter, a man of
the field "(Gen. xxv. 27). The latter state
may be exemplified, not indeed from Scripture
itself, but from contemporary records. Among
the accomplishments of Herod, his skill in the
chase is particularly noticed ; he kept a regular
stud and a huntsman (Joseph. Ant. xvi. 10, § 3),
followed up the sport in a wild country (Ant.
xv. 7, § 7) which abounded with stags, wild
asses, and bears, and is said to have killed as
many as forty head in a day (B. J. i. 21, § 13).
The wealthy in Egypt and Assyria followed the
sports of the field with great zest ; they had
their preserves for the express purpose of pre-
serving and hunting game (Wilkinson's Anc.
Egypt, i. 215 [1878] ; Xen. Cyrop. i. 4, § 5, 14),
and drew from hunting scenes subjects for de-
corating the walls of their buildings, and even
the robes they wore on state occasions.
The Hebrews, as a pastoral and agricultural
people, were not given to the sports of the
field; the density of the population, the earnest-
ness of their character, and the tendency of their
ritual regulations, particularly those aSecting
food, all combined to discourage the practice of
hunting ; and perhaps the examples of Ishmael
and Esau were recorded with the same object.
There was no lack of game in Palestine; on
their entrance into the land, the wild beasts
were so numerous as to be dangerous (Ex. xxiii.
29) ; the utter destruction of them was guarded
against by the provisions of the Mosaic Law
(Ex. xxiii. 11 ; Lev. xxv. 7). Some of the
fiercer animals survived to a late period, as lions
(Judg. xiv. 5 ; 1 Sam. xvii. 34 ; 2 Sam. xxiii.
20 ; 1 K. xiii. 24, xx. 36) and bears (1 Sam.
xvii. 34 ; 2 K. ii. 24). Jackals (Judg. xv. 4) and
foxes (Cant. ii. 15) were also numerous ; hart,
roebuck, and fallow deer (Dent. xii. 15 ; 1 K.
iv. 23) formed a regular source of sustenance,
and were possibly preserved in enclosures. The
manner of catching these animals was either
by digging a pitfall (JITO*), which was the
usual manner with the larger animals, as the
lion (2 Sam. xxiii. 20; Ezek. xix. 4, 8); or
secondly by a trap (flB), which was set under
ground (Job xviii. 10), in the run of the animal
(Prov. xxii. 5), and caught it by the leg (Job
xviii. 9); or lastly by the use of the net, of
which there were various kinds, as for the
gazelle (?) (Is. Ii. 20, A. V. "wild bull," R. V.
"antelope"), and other animals of that class.
[Net.] The method in which the net was
applied is familiar to us from the descriptions
in Virgil (Am. iv. 121, 151 sq., x. 707 sq.); it
was placed across a ravine or narrow valley,
BIBLE BICT. — VOL I.
HUB
1409
frequented by the animals for the sake of water,
and the game was driven in by the hunters and
then despatched either with bow and arrow, or
spears (cp. Wilkinson, i. 214). The game selected
was generally such as was adapted for food
(Prov. xii. 27), and care was taken to pour out
the blood of these as well as of tame animals
(Lev. xvii. 13).
Birds formed an article of food among the
Hebrews (Lev. xvii. 13), and much skill was
exercised in catching them. The following were
the most approved methods. (1) The trap (PIB),
which consisted of two parts: a net, strained
over a frame, and a stick to support it, but so
placed that it should give way at the slightest
touch ; the stick or springe was termed K>j?iQ
(Amos Hi. 5, "gin;" Ps. lxix. 22, "trap*');
this was the most usual method (Job xviii. 9 ;
Eccles. ix. 12; Prov. vii. 23). (2) The snare
(D'BY, from DOV, to braid; Job xviii. 9, A. V.
" robber," R. V. " gin "), consisting of a cord
(730, Job xviii. 10 ; cp. Ps. xviii. 5, cxvi. 3,
cxl. 5), so set as to catch the bird by the leg.
(3) The net, which probably resembled those
used in Egypt, consisting of two sides or frames,
over which network was strained, and so ar-
ranged that they could be closed by means of a
cord : the Hebrew names are various. [Net.]
(4) The decoy, to which reference is made in
Jer. v. 26, 27 — a cage of a peculiar construc-
tion (3473) — was filled with birds, which acted
as decoys '; the door of the cage was kept open
by a piece of stick acting as a springe (JVITB'D),
and closed suddenly on the entrance of a bird.
The partridge appears to have been used as a
decoy (Ecclus. xi. 30). [W. L. B.]
HUTHAM (DWn, (?) = inhabitant of the
coast, Ges. ; LXX. om. ; Hupham), a son of
Benjamin, founder of the family (Mishp&chah)
of the Huphamites (Num. xxvi. 39). In the
lists of Gen. xlvi. and 1 Ch. vii. the name is
given as Hoppim, which see.
HUPHAMITES, THE ('OWnn; LXX.
om. ; JIuphamitac), descendants of HUPHAM of
the tribe of Benjamin (Num. xxvi. 39).
HUPTAH (riSn=a covering; B. '0 X x°<t>P<^
A. 'Oiptpi; Hoppha), a priest in the time of
David, to whom was committed the charge of
the thirteenth of the twenty-four courses in the
service of the House of God (1 Ch. xxi v. 13).
HUPTIM (D^Bn =coteringt: Gen. xlvi. 21,
A. 'OQi/ilr, D. 'OQiitiv; Ophim: 1 Ch. vii. 12,
B. 'Aircpfiv, A. 'Aiptlfi; Napham), head of a
Benjamite family. According to the text of the
LXX. in Gen., a son of Bela [Bela], but
according to Ch. a son of Ir or Iri, who was one
of the sons of Bela. The sister of Huppim mar-
ried into the tribe of Manasseh. [A. C. H.]
HUE CHIT, Eur). 1. ("lip; Joseph. *Opos.)
A man who is mentioned with Moses and Aaron
on the occasion of the battle with Am.ilck at
Rephidim (Ex. xvii. 10), when with Aaron he
stayed up the hands of Moses (e. 12). He is men-
tioned again in xxiv. 14, as being, with Aaron,
4 X
Digitized by
Google
1410
HUB
left in charge of the people by Moses daring his
ascent of Sinai. It would appear from this that
he must have been a person connected with the
family of Moses and of some weight in the camp.
The Utter would follow from the former. The
Jewish tradition, as preserved by Josephus
(Ant. iii. 2, § 4), is that he was the husband of
Miriam, and (iii. 6, § 1) that he was identical
with . „ . . ..
8. (* fl P) Tne grandfather of Bezaleel, the
chief artificer of the Tabernacle—" son of Uri,
son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah " (Ex. xxxi. 2,
xxxv. 30, xxxviii. 22), the full genealogy being
given on each occasion (see also 2 Cb. i. 5). In
the lists of the descendant* of Judah in 1 Ch.
the pedigree is more fully preserved. Hur there
appears as one of the great family of Pharez.
He was the son of Caleb ben-Hezron, by a second
wife, Ephrath (ii. 19, 20 ; cp. t>. 5, also iv. I), the
first fruit of the marriage (ii. 50, iv. 4), and the
father, besides 0ri (r. 20), of three sons, who
founded the towns of Kirjath-jearim, Beth-lehem,
and Beth-gader (o. 51). Bur's connexion with
Beth-lehem would seem to have been of a closer
nature than with the others of these places, for
he himself is emphatically called "Abi-Beth-
lehem"— the "father of Bethlehem" (iv. 4).
Certainly Beth-lehem enjoyed, down to a very
late period, a traditional reputation for the arts
which distinguished his illustrious grandson.
Jesse, the father of David, is said to have been
a weaver of the vails of the Sanctuary (Targ.
Jonathan, 2 Sam. xxi. 19), and the dyers were
still lingering there when Benjamin of Tudela
visited Bethlehem in the 13th century.
In the Targum on 1 Ch. ii. 19 and iv. 4,
Ephrath is taken as identical with Miriam : but
this would be to contradict the more trustworthy
tradition given above from Josephus.
In his comments on 1 Ch. iv. 1 (Qwest. Hebr.
in Paralip.), Jerome overlooks the fact that the
five persons there named as " sons " of Judah
are really members of successive generations;
and he attempts, as his manner is, to show that
each of them is identical with one of the im-
mediate sons of the Patriarch. Hur he makes
to be another name for Onan.
3. (OJp, Joseph. Oo>?j$.) The fourth of the
five " kings " C^TO ; LXX. and Joseph. Ant. iv.
7 § 1, goo-iAeis) of Midian, who were slain with
Balaam after the "matter of Peor" (Num. xxxi.
8). In a later mention of them. (Josh. xiii. 21)
they are called "princes" (W?3) of Midian
and "dukes" ('S'DJ; not the word commonly
rendered "duke," but probably with the force
of dependence, see Keil on Josh. I. c. and Dill-
raann « on Num. J. c. ; LXX. foopa) of Sihon king
of the Amorites, who was killed at the same
time with them. No further light can be
obtained as to Hur.
4. (BA. omit.) Father of Rephaiah, who
was ruler of half of the environs QQB, A. V.
"part," R. V. "district") of Jerusalem, and
assisted Nehemiah in the repair of the wall
(Neh. iii. 9). . _ _
6. (B. Bouip)- The "son of Hur "— Ben-Chur
—was commissariat officer for Solomon in Mount
Ephraim (1 K. iv. 8). The LXX. A. gives the word
Ben both in its original and its translated form
(Bi> vShi 'Op), a not infrequent custom with
HUSHAH
them. Josephns (Ant. viii. 2, § 3) has OBpi|t as
the name of the officer himself. The Vulg.
(Benhur) follows the Hebrew, and is in turn
followed in the margin of the A. V. It is
remarkable that the same form is observed in
giving the names of no less than five out of the
twelve officers in this list. [G-] [W.]
HUTtAI 0?ri; B. O&ptl, A. -pi; Hurai),
one of David's guard — Hurai of the torrents of
Gaash — according to the list of 1 Ch. xi. 32. In
the parallel catalogue of 2 Sam. xxiii. 30 the
R is changed to D, as is frequently the case, and
the name stands as Hiddai. Kennicott has ex-
amined the discrepancy, and, influenced by the
readings of some of the MSS. of the LXX.,
decides in favour of Hurai as the genuine name
(Dissert, p. 194>
HU'BAM (OTin, Ges. [MV.»=no% bom,
but possibly an abbreviation for OTjntf, or
"TO*]; Assyr. Hirummu; B. 'Clip, A. 'i«iu;
Huram). 1. A Benjamite ; son of Bela, the first-
born of the Patriarch (1 Ch. viii. 5).
2. The form in which the name of the king of
Tyre in alliance with David and Solomon— and
elsewhere given as Hiram — appears in Chroni-
cles, (a.) At the time of David's establishment
at Jerusalem (1 Ch. xiv. 1). In the A. V. and
R. V. the name is Hiram, in accordance with the
Ketib or original Hebrew text (DYfl); but in
the marginal correction of the Masorets (Qeri)
it is altered to Huram (Dlin), the form which
is maintained in all its other occurrences in these
Books. The LXX. Xeipdft Vulg. Hiram, and
Targum, all agree with the Khetib. (6.) At the
accession of Solomon (2 Ch. ii. 3, 11, 12 ; viii. 2,
18 ; ix. 10, 21 : in each of these cases also the
LXX. has BA. X«ipd>» and the Vulg. Hiram).
3. The same change occurs in Chronicles in
the name of Hiram the artificer, which is given
as Huram in the following places : 2 Ch. ii. 13 ;
iv. 11, 16. In the first and last of these a
singular title is given him — the word Ab,
"father"—" Huram my father,"* and "Huram
his father." No doubt this denotes the respect
and esteem in which he was held, according to
the similar custom of the people of the East st
the present day.' There also the LXX. and
Vulgate follow the form Hiram, [O.] [F.]
HUTU C"Wn = linen-toeaver ; B. Oifti, A
Obpl ; Huri), a Gadite ; father of Abihail, a chief
man in that tribe (1 Ch. v. 14).
HU'SHAH (ntrin = haste; »fi<rdV; Hm),*
name which occurs in the genealogies of the
tribe of Judah (1 Ch. iv. 4)—" Ezer, father of
• The A. V. and R. V. (text) of 2 Ch. U. 13 tote
the words " of Huram my fatherti " to mean the Ufc
king i but this is unnecessary, and the Hebrew will we"
bear the rendering given above (K. V. marg.).
b Analogous to this, though not exactly suniltr, a
Joseph's expression (Gen. xlv. 8), "God hath m>*
me a father unto Pharaoh." Cp. also 1 Mace xi. »•
where note the use of the two terms " cousin " (ffvyyn'Tfc
v. 31) and " lather " (». 32). Somewhat anatogonvloo,
is the use of terms of relationship— "brother," " cott *'
—In legal and official documents of our own and oW
n tries.
Digitized by
Google
HUSHAI
Hushah." It may well be the name of a place,
like Etam, Gedor, Beth-lehem, and others, in the
preceding and succeeding verses ; but we hare
no means of ascertaining the fact, since it occurs
nowhere else. For a patronymic possibly derived
from this name, see Hushathite.
HU'SHAIpE«in=?Bic*; B. Xowwt, A. [some-
times] and Joseph. Xovcrl; Chusai), an Archite,
i.e. possibly an inhabitant of a place called Erec
(2 Sam. xv. 32 sq. ; xvi. 16 sq.). He is called
the «' friend " of David (2 Sam. xv. 37 : in
1 Ch. xxvii. 33, the word is rendered "com-
panion ; " cp. Joseph. Ant. vii. 9, § 2 : the LXX.
has a strange confusion of Archite and bpx'~
treupos = chief friend). To him David confided
the delicate and dangerous part of a pretended
adherence to the cause of Absalom. His advice
was preferred to that of Ahithophel, and speedily
brought to pass the ruin which was intended.
His son Baana was one of Solomon's commissariat
officers (1 K. iv. 16). Hushai himself was pro-
bably no longer living; at any rate his office
was filled by another (1 K. iv. 5> (T. E. B.]
HU'SHAM (DPII, in Chronicles DtWn
= quick ; 'A<r6fi ; Jfusam), one of the kings of
Edom, before the institution of monarchy in
Israel (Gen. xxxvi. 34, 35 ; 1 Ch. i. 45, 46).
He is described as " Husham of the land of the
Temanite;" and he succeeded Jobab, who is
taken by the LXX. in their addition to the Book
of Job to be identical with that Patriarch.
HU'SHATHITE, THE OflBWl, and twice
in Chronicles *nt?nn ; de Ilusati, Husathites),
the designation of two of the heroes of David's
guard. 1. Sibbechai (2 Sam. xxi. 18 [B. i
"AoroTwfl**, A. 'Aowrao-TwwfJ; 1 Ch. xi. 29
[B. a 'KM, N. i 'laStL, A. i 'Air«.»fJ, xx. 4 [B.
eaoaBtl, A. o Oio-oflfJ, xxvii. 11 [B. o 'UaBtl,
A. om.]). In the last of these passages he is
said to have belonged to the Zarhites; that is,
(probably) to the descendants of Zerah of the
tribe of Judah. So far this is in accordance
with a connexion between this and Hushah ; a
name, apparently of a place, in the genealogies of
Judah. Josephus, however {Ant. vii. 12, § 2),
mentions Sibbechai as a Hittite.
2. (B. 'kvuBtlrnt [bis], A. 'KraBaMrqs and
'AoraSelrns ; de Husati.) A patronymic ap-
plied to one Mebunnai (2 Sam. xxiii. 27), a
corruption of SiBBEcnAi (see Driver, Notes on
the Heb. Text of the SB. of Samuel, in loco).
HU'SHIM. l.(D*rn ; «Ao-o>; Busim.) In
Gen. xlvi. 23, " the children of (VIS) Dan " are
said to have been Hnshim. The name is plural,
as if of a tribe rather than an individual, which
perhaps is one way of accounting for the use of
the plural in " children " (for another view see
Knobel in Dillmann * on Gen. xxxvi. 25). In the
list of Num. xxvi. 42 the name is changed to
Shuham.
Hushim figures prominently in the Jewish
traditions of the recognition of Joseph, and of
Jacob's burial at Hebron. See the quotations
from the Midrash in Weil's Sib. Legends, p. 88,
note, and the Targum Pseudojon. on Gen. 1. 13.
In the latter he is the executioner of Esau.
HUSKS
1411
2. (DtCTl, i.e. Chushshim ; B. om., A. 'Affifi -,
Hasan), a member of the genealogy of Benjamin
(1 Ch. vii. 12); and here again apparently (as
the text now stands) the plural nature of the
name is recognised, and Hushim is stated to be
"the sons of {Bene) Aher" (see Bertheau in
Exeg. Hdbuoh. ad loc.).
8. (D'B'in and DȣTI: B. in e. 8, Sanri*,
in v. 11 '{Itripir, A. 'tUrifi; Husim, but in v. 11
Mehusim, by inclusion of the Hebrew particle.)
The name occurs again in the genealogy of Ben-
jamin, but there as \ hat of one of the two wives
of Shaharaim (1 Ch. viii. 8), and the mother of
two of his sons (v. 1 1). In this case the plural
significance of the name is not alluded to.
HUSKS. By this word the A. V. and R. V.
texts have rendered Ktpdna in Luke xv. 16, cor-
rectly explained in the R. V. margin, pods of the
carob tree. The tree is mentioned in this single
passage in Scripture. It is also known as the
locust tree (Ceratoria siiiqua, L.), belonging to the
botanical order Leguminosae. The name carob
tree is derived from the Talmudic 3VTH, charub;
m
Arabic \^)*j>-, ' J j'.~", <.'A<ot«5, cAurnuo,
whence too the Italian carouba. It is one of the
most common trees in Egypt and in Palestine
from Hebron northwards, and is a very con-
spicuous and attractive feature in the landscape,
with its dense, deep-green foliage. The leaves
are pinnate, like those of onr ash-tree, but more
ovate and very dark, glossy, and evergreen. The
carob blossoms in February, and from April to
June yields enormous quantities of pods. These
are flat and narrow, from 6 to 10 inches in
length, and shaped like a horn, whence the
Greek name. When ripe, they are of a dark
Pods of the Cvob Tree.
purple colour , but when green and tender, they
have an agreeable, sweet taste. They are often
chewed, or steeped in water to supply a pleasant
drink, like the tamarind of the West Indies,
which they somewhat resemble in flavour.
4X2
Digitized by
Google
1412
HUZ
HYMENAEUS
Pliny (v. 24) writes, " Hand procnl abesse vide-
antur, et pradulces siliqusc, nisi quod in its cortex
ipse manditur." The Mishna mentions the
carob beans as common food for cattle (Shabb. 24,
§ 2). Columella in bis treatise on husbandry
speaks of the carob tree as affording food for
swine: " Nemora sunt convenientissima quae
vestiuntur .... tamaricibus " (>.«. the carob)
(De Be Stat. vii. 9). Our Lord in the parable
represents the prodigal, when reduced to the
most abject misery, as fain to fill his belly with
the husks : and so we find it spoken of in classical
authors as the food of the very poorest. Horace
writes of the poor poet, " Vivit siliquia et pane
secundo" (Ep. n. i. 123). So Persius of the
youths who hand themselves over to the training
of the Stoics —
" Insomnia quibns et detonsa Juventus
Invlgllat, siliqnis et grandl pasta polenta."
(Ste(. Ui. 64.)
And Juvenal, "Sed laudem siliquas occultus
ganeo " (ii. 58>
These " husks " are still to be seen on the stalls
in every Eastern bazaar, and are still especially
used by the Christians for feeding pigs. The
writer has seen in the woods north-east of Acre,
herds of swine feeding under the carob trees. The
carob tree is grown in all the countries bordering
on the Mediterranean. Large quantities of the
beans are exported from Malta to England, for
feeding horses, under the name of locust beans.
The tree is sometimes called " St. John's bread,"
from the tradition that its fruit was the locusts
on which the Baptist was sustained in the
wilderness. But the locust of the Gospel
history was, as all commentators now are agreed,
the ordinary insect of that name, and which the
Arabs commonly use as food. [H. B. T.]
HUZ OfW, U. Vz, as in R. V., in which form
the name is uniformly given elsewhere in the
A. V. ; A. "tli ; Hut), the eldest son of Nahor
and Milcah (Gen. xxii. 21). [Buz ; CJz.]
HUZ'ZAB Q-Vri ; ?> 6r6<rra<ris ; miles cap-
tivus) was, according to the general opinion of
the Jews (Buxtorfs Lexicon ad voc. 2V), the
queen of Nineveh at the time when Nahum
delivered his prophecy (ii. 7). This view was
also adopted by the A. V. (text) and K. V.
(text), and has been defended by Ewald. Many
modern expositors, however, incline to the
belief that JJuzzab here is not a proper name at
all, but the Hophal of the verb 3V3 (Buxtorf
Gesenius), and this is allowed as possible by the
marginal reading of the A V., that which teas
established, and of the R. V., it is decreed, follow-
ing Gesenius. The Assyrian historical inscrip-
tions reveal to us no such royal name as Huzzab,
either of king or queen, so that the marginal
renderings (cp. also the LXX.), which translate
the word, are certainly to be preferred.
[G. R.] [T. G. P.]
HYAENA. Authorities are at variance as to
whether the term sabu'a (IFI3 V) in Jer. xii. 6
means a " hyaena," as the LXX. has it (ialvrj),
or a " speckled bird," as in the Vulgate, A. V.
and R. V. The etymological force of the word
is equally adapted to either, the hyaena being
restaked. The only other instance iu which it
occurs is as a proper name, Zeboim (1 Sam.
xiii. 18, "the valley of hyaenas," Aquilt;
Neh. xi. 34). The Talmudical writers describe
the hyaena by no less than four names, of which
sabu'a is one (Lewysohn, Zool., § 119). The
Arabic name *j u o,dAabu , ,seems allied to it. The
opinions of Bochart (Hieroz. ii. 163) and Gesenius
(lies, p. 1149) are in favour of the same ritv;
nor could any room for doubt remain, were it
not for the word l ayit (C)V ; A. V. " bird ") con-
nected with it, which in all other passages refers
to a bird. The hyaena was common in ancient
as in modern Egypt, and is constantly depicted
on monuments (Wilkinson, i. 213, 225 [1878])
The sense of the passage in Jeremiah implies a
fierce strong beast, not far below the lion in the
parallel passage (v. 8) : the hyaena fully answers
to this description. Though cowardly in his
nature, he is very savagewhen once he attacks, and
the strength of his jaws is such that he can crunch
the thigh-bone of an ox (Livingstone's Travels,
p. 600). The striped hyaena (Hyaena striata, L)
is very common in every part of Palestine. I
have met with it in localities as distinct in
character as Beersheba, the Jordan Valley, Jeru-
salem, Mount Carmel, and Tabor. The country
affords it peculiar facilities, for its favourite home
is in caves or rock-hewn tombs, with which the
land is honeycombed. But where these are not, it
resides indifferently in woods, thickets or deserts.
It rarely attacks living prey, unless very haul
driven by hunger, but feeds on carrion and
especially on bones, which it collects and stores
in its caves. I have found seven camels' skulls
together in a hyaena's den. But it is detested
as the most unclean of animals, more particularly
from its habit of prowling about burial-grounds
and exhuming the corpses. Even when the
grave is protected by heavy stones, the hyaenas
will burrow alongside, and so drag forth the
body. The hyaena is in fact the Oriental in-
carnation of a ghoul : and I know not a sound
more ghostly than the wail of this beast in
the dead of night, when encamped in some
lonely desert. [W. L. B.] [H.B.T.]
HYDAS'PES ('TMottiij), a river noticed in
Judith i. 6, in connexion with the Euphrates
and Tigris. It is uncertain what river i>
referred to ; the well-known Hydaspes of India
(the Jhelam of the Panjd'i) is too remote to
accord with the other localities noticed in the
context. It may be an error for the Choaspes
of Susiana. The Syriac has Ulai, the Eulaeus
of Pliny (Hist. Nat. vi. 31 ; cp. Dan. viii. %
which Ball thinks to be probably the original
word here (see Speaker's Comm. on Judith, '• eX
Zbckler (" Die Apokryphen d. A. T." in Stract
u. Zbckler's Kg/. Komm., in loco) thinks that
the choice lies between the Choaspes and the
Eulaeus. [W. L. B] [*"•]
HYMENAETJS ("tiiwaas), the name of s
person occurring twice in the Pastoral letters
which, we believe, were written by St Paul "
Timothy ; the first time classed with Alexander.
and with him " delivered to Satan, that th«y
might learn not to blaspheme " (1 Tim. i. J*)-
and the second time classed with Philetus, and
with him charged with having " erred concern-
ing the truth, saving that the resurrection i»
Digitized by
Google
HYMENAEUS
past already," and with having thereby " over-
thrown the faith of some " (2 Tim. ii. 17, 18).
These latter expressions, coupled with " the
shipwreck of faith " attributed to Hymenaeus
in the context of the former passage (v. 19),
surely warrant our understanding both pas-
sages of the same person, notwithstanding the
interval between the dates of the two letters.
When the first was written, he had already
made one proselyte ; before the second was
penned he had seduced another : and if so, the
only points further to be considered are, the
error attributed to him, and the sentence im-
posed upon him.
I. The error attributed to him was one that
had been in part appropriated from others, and
has frequently been revived since with additions.
What initiation was to the Pythagoreans, wis-
dom to the Stoics, science to the followers of
Plato, contemplation to the Peripatetics, that
" knowledge " (yraaa) was to the Gnostics. As
there were likewise in the Greek schools those
who looked forward to a complete restoration of
all things (iiroKariiTTairis, v. Heyne ad Virg.
Eel. iv. 5, cp. Aen. vi. 745): so there was
"a regeneration" (Tit. iii. 5; Matt. xix. 28),
"a new creation " (2 Cor. v. 17, see Alford ad
loc. ; Rev. xxi. 1), " a kingdom of heaven and of
Messiah or Christ " (Matt. xiii. ; Rev. vii.)— and
herein popular belief among the Jews coincided
— unequivocally propounded in the N. T. ; but
here with this remarkable difference, namely,
that, in a great measure, it was present as well
as future — the same thing in germ that was to
be had in perfection eventually. "The king-
dom of God is within you," said our Lord (Luke
xvii. 21). "He that is spiritual judgeth all
things," said St. Paul (1 Cor. ii. 15). " He that
is born of God cannot sin," said St. John (1 Ep.
iii. 9). There are likewise two deaths and two
resurrections spoken of in the N. T. ; the first
of each sort, that of the soul to and from sin
(John iii. 3-8), " the hour which now is " (ibid,
y. 24, 25, on which see Aug. De Civ. Dei, xx.
6) ; the second, that of the body to and from
corruption (1 Cor. xv. 36-44 ; also John v. 28,
29), which last is prospective. Now as the doc-k
trine of the resurrection of the body was found
to involve immense difficulties even in those
early days (Acts xvii. 32 ; 1 Cor. xv. 35 : how
keenly they were pressed may be seen in St.
Aug. De Civ. Dei, xxii. 12 sq.), while on the
other hand there was so great a predisposition
in the then current philosophy (not even extinct
now) to magnify the excellence of the soul above
that of its earthly tabernacle, it was at once
the easier and more attractive course to insist
upon and argue from the force of those passages
of Holy Scripture which enlarge upon the
glories of the spiritual life that now is, under
Christ, and to pass over or explain away alle-
gorically all that refers to a future state in
connexion with the resurrection of the body. In
this manner we may derive the first errors of
the Gnostics, of whom Hymenaeus was one of
the earliest. They were on the spread when
St. John wrote ; and his grand-disciple, St.
Irenaeus, compiled a voluminous work against
them (Adv. Haer.). A good account of their
full development is given by Gieseler, E. H.,
Per. I. Div. I. § 44 sq.
II. As regards the sentence passed upon him
HYMENAEUS
1413
— it has been asserted by some writers of emi-
nence (see Corn, a Lnpide ad 1 Cor. v. 5), that
the " delivering to Satan " is a mere synonym
for ecclesiastical excommunication. Such can
hardly be the case. The Apostles possessed
many extraordinary prerogatives, which none
have since arrogated. Even the title which
they bore has been set apart to them ever since.
The shaking off the dust of their feet against a
city that would not receive them (Matt. x.
14), even though the same injunction was
afterwards given to the Seventy (Luke x. 11),
and which St. Paul found it necessary to act
upon twice in the course of bis ministry (Acts
xiii. 51 and xviii. 6), has never been a pract.ct
since with Christian ministers. "Anathema,"
says Bingham, "is a word that occurs fre-
quently in the ancient canons " (Antiq. xvi. 2,
16), but the form "Anathema Maranatha" is
one that none have ever ventured upon since
St. Paul (1 Cor. xvi. 22). As the Apostles
healed all manner of bodily infirmities, so they
seem to have possessed and exercised the same
power in inflicting them, — a power far too
perilous to be continued when the manifold
exigencies of the apostolical age had passed
away. Ananias and Sapphira both fell down
dead at the rebuke of St. Peter (Acts v. 5, 10) ;
two words from the same lips, " Tabitha, arise,"
.sufficed to raise Dorcas from the dead (ibid. ix.
40). St. Paul's first act in entering upon his
ministry was to strike Elymas the sorcerer with
blindness, his own sight having been restored to
him through the medium of a disciple (ibid. ix.
17, xiii. 11); while soon afterwards we real
of his healing the cripple of Lystra (ibid. xiv.
8). Even apart from actual intervention by the
Apostles, bodily visitations are spoken of in the
case of those who approached the Lord's Supper
unworthily, when as yet no discipline had been
established : " For this cause many are weak
and sickly among you, and a good number
(bcavot, in the former case it is a-oAAof) sleep "
(1 Cor. xi. 30).
On the other hand, Satan was held to be the
instrument or executioner of all these visitations.
Such is the character assigned to him in the
Book of Job (i. 6-12, ii. 1-7). Similar agencies
are described in 1 K. xxii. 19-22 and 1 Ch. xxi.
1. In Ps. lxxviii. 49, such are the causes to
which the plagues of Egypt are assigned. Even
our Lord submitted to be assailed by him more
than once (Matt. iv. 1-10: Luke iv. 13 says,
"departed from Him for a season"); and "a
messenger of Satan was sent to buffet " the very
Apostle whose act of delivering another to the
same power is now under discussion. At the
same time large powers over the world of spirits
were authoritatively conveyed by our Lord to
His immediate followers (to the Twelve, Luke
ix. 1 ; to the Seventy, as the results showed,
ibid. x. 17-20).
It only remains to notice five particulars con-
nected with its exercise, which the Apostle
himself supplies. 1. That it was no mere
prayer, but a solemn authoritative sentence,
pronounced in the Name and power of Jesus
Christ (1 Cor. v. 3-5). 2. That it was new
exercised upon any without the Church : " them
that are without God judgeth " (ibid. v. 13), he
says in express terms. 3. That it was " for the
destruction of the flesh," i.e. some bodily visi-
Digitized by
Google
1414
HYMN
tation. 4. That it was for the improvement of
the offender ; that " his spirit might be saved in
the day of the Lord Jesus" (ibid. v. 5); and
that " he might learn not to blaspheme " while
upon earth (1 Tim. i. 20). 5. That the Apostle
could in a given case empower others to pass
such sentence in his absence (1 Cor. v. 3, 4).
Thus, while the " delivering to Satan " may
resemble ecclesiastical excommunication in some
respects, it has its own characteristics likewise,
which show plainly that one is not to be con-
founded or placed on the same level with the
other. Nor again does St. Paul himself deliver to
Satan all those in whose company he bids his con-
verts " not even to eat " (1 Cor. v. 1 1 ). See an able
review of the whole subject by Bingham, Anliq.
vi. 2, 15. [Excommunication.] [E. S. Ff.]
HYMN. This word is not used in the Eng-
lish Version of the 0. T., and only twice in the
N. T. (Ephes. v. 19; Col. iii. 16); though in the
original of the latter the derivative verb occurs
in three places (Hatt. xxvi. 30, cp. Mark xiv.
26; Acts xvi. 25; Heb. ii. 12). The LXX.,
however, employ it freely in translating the Heb.
names for almost every kind of poetical composi-
tion (Schleusn. Lex. Sjuros). In fact the word
does not seem to have had for the LXX. any
very special meaning ; and they called the Heb.
book of Tehitlim the Book of Psalms, not of
Hymns. Accordingly the word psalm had for the
later Jews a definite meaning, while the word
hymn was more or less vague in its application,
and capable of being used as occasion should
arise. If a new poetical form or idea should be
produced, the name of Ay win, not being embarrassed
by a previous determination, was ready to asso-
ciate itself with the fresh thought of another
literature. And this seems to have been actually
the case.
Among Christians the Hymn has always been
something different from the Psalm : a different
conception in thought, a different type in com-
position. There is some dispute about the hymn
sung by our Lord and His Apostles on the occa-
sion of the Last Supper ; but even supposing it
to have been the Ifallil, or Paschal Hymn, consist-
ing of Pas. cxiii.-cxviii., it is obvious that the
word hymn is in this case applied not to an
individual Psalm, but to a number of Psalms
chanted successively, and altogether forming a
kind of devotional exercise which is not unaptly
called a hymn. The prayer in Acts iv. 24-30 is
not a hymn, nnless we allow non-metrical as well
as metrical hymns. It may have been a hymn
as it was originally altered ; but we can only
judge by the Greek translation, and this is
without metre, and therefore not properly a
hymn. In the jail at Philippi (Acts xvi. 25),
Paul and Silas " sang hymns " (K. V. ; " praises,"
A. V.) unto God, and so loud was their song that
their fellow-prisoners heard them. This must
have been what we mean by singing, and not
merely recitation. It was in fact a veritable
singing of hymns. And it is remarkable that
the noun hymn is only used in reference to the
services of the Greeks, and in the same passages
is clearly distinguished from the psalm (Ephes. v.
19; Col. iii. 16), "psalms, and hymns, and
spiritual songs."
It is probable that no Greek version of the
Psalms, even supposing it to be accommodated to
HYMN
the Greek metres, would take root in the affec-
tions of the Gentile converts. It was not only a
question of metre, it was a question of tiou ; and
Greek tunes required Greek hymns. So it wis is
Syria. Richer in tunes than Greece, for Greece
had but eight, while Syria had 275 (Benedict.
Fref. vol. v. Op. Eph. Syr.), the Syrian hymno-
graphers revelled in the varied luxury of their
native music ; and the result was that splendid
development of the Hymn, as moulded by the
genius of Bardesanes, Harmonius, and Ephrem
Syrus. In Greece the eight tunes which seem
to have satisfied the exigencies of church-music
were probably accommodated to fixed metres,
each metre being wedded to a particular tone.
This is also the case in the German hymnolcgy,
where certain ancient tunes are recognised u
models for the metres of later compositions, sad
their names are always prefixed to the hymns in
common use.
It is worth while inquiring what profane
models the Greek hymnographers chose to work
after. In the old religion of Greece the word
hymn had already acquired a sacred and liturgical
meaning, which could not fail to suggest its
application to the productions of the Christian
muse. So much for the name. The special
forma of the Greek hymn were various. The
Homeric and Orphic hymns were written is the
epic style, and in hexameter verse. Their metre
was not adapted for singing; and therefore,
though they may have been recited, it is not
likely that they were sung at the celebration of
the mysteries. We turn to the Pindaric hymns,
and here we find a sufficient variety of metre,
and a definite relation to music These hymns
were sung to the accompaniment of the lyre;
and it is very likely that they engaged the
attention of the early hymn - writers. The
dithyramb, with its development into the
dramatic chorus, was sufficiently connected
with musical traditions to make its form a
fitting vehicle for Christian poetry ; and there
certainly is a dithyrambic savour about the
earliest known Christian hymn, as it appears in
Clem. Alex. pp. 312, 313, ed. Potter.
. The first impulse of Christian devotion was
to run into the moulds ordinarily used by the
worshippers of the old religion. This was more
than an impulse, it was a necessity, and a two-
fold necessity. The new spirit was strong ; hut
it had two limitations : the difficulty of conceit-
ing a new musico-poetical literature ; and the
quality so peculiar to devotional music, of
lingering in the heart after the head has been
convinced and the belief changed. The oH
tunes would be a real necessity to the new life ;
and the exile from his ancient faith wouhl
delight to hear on the foreign soil of a new
religion the familiar melodies of home. Arch-
bishop Trench has indeed laboured to show that
the reverse was the case, and that the early
Christian shrank with horror from the sweet,
but polluted, enchantments of his unbelieving
state. We can only assent to this in so far as
we allow it to be the second phase in the history
of hymns. When old traditions died away, and
the Christian acquired not only a new belief, hat
a new social humanity, it was possible, and it
was desirable too, to break for ever the attenuated
thread that bound him to the ancient world.
And so it was broken ; and the trochaic ssd
Digitized by
Google
HYSSOP
iambic metres, unassociated as they were with
heathen worship, though largely associated with
the heathen drama, obtained an ascendant in the
Christian Church. In 1 Cor. xiv. 26 allusion is
made to improvised hymns, which being the out-
burst of a passionate emotion would probably
assume the dithyrambic form. But attempts
have been made to detect fragments of ancient
hymns conformed to more obvious metres in
Ephes. r. 14 ; Jas. i. 17 ; Rev. i. 8 sq., zv. 3.
These pretended fragments, however, may with
much greater likelihood be referred to the swing
of a prose composition unconsciously culminating
into metre. It was in the Latin Church that
the trochaic and iambic metres became most
deeply rooted, and acquired the greatest depth
of tone and grace of finish. As an exponent of
Christian feeling they soon superseded the ac-
centual hexameters; they were used mnemoni-
cally against the heathen and the heretics by
Commodianus and Augustine. The introduction
of hymns into the Latin Church is commonly
referred to Ambrose. But it is impossible to
conceive that the West should have been so far
behind the East : similar necessities must have
produced similar results ; and it is more likely
that the tradition is due to the very marked
prominence of Ambrose as the greatest of all the
Latin hymnographers.
The trochaic and iambic metres, thus im-
pressed into the service of the Church, have
continued to hold their ground, and are in fact
the 7's, S.M., CM., and L.M. of our modern
hymns ; many of which are translations, or at
any rate imitations, of Latin originals. These
metres were peculiarly adapted to the grave and
sombre spirit of Latin Christianity. Less ecstatic
than the varied chorus of the Greek Church,
they did not soar upon the pinion of a lofty
praise, so much as they drooped and sank into
the depths of a great sorrow. They were sub-
jective rather than objective ; they appealed to
the heart more than to the understanding ; and
if they contained less theology, they were fuller
of a rich and Christian humanity. Cp. Daniel's
Thesaurus Hymnologicus, Halis et Lipsiae, 1841-
1855 ; Lateinische Hymnen, &c, by F. G. Mono ;
Gesange Christlicher Vorzeit, by C. Fortlage,
Berlin, 1844; Sacred Latin Poetry, by R. C.
Trench ; Ephrem Syria, by Dr. Burgess ; Hahn's
Bardesanet; Julian's Vict, of Hymnology.
(T. E. B.]
HYSSOP Qfo& 'izob; Straonros). Perhaps
no plant mentioned in the Scriptures has given
rise to greater differences of opinion than this.
The question of the identification of the 'ezdb of
the Hebrews with any plant known to modern
botanists was thought by Casaubon " adeo diffi-
ciii$ ad exptioandwn, ut videatur Esaias expec-
tandus, qui certi aliquid no* doceat." Had the
botanical works of Solomon survived, they might
have thrown some light upon it. The chief
difficulty arises from the fact that in the LXX.
the Greek Goawrot is the uniform rendering of
the Hebrew 'ezcb, and that this rendering is
endorsed by the Apostle in the Epistle to the
Hebrews (ix. 19, 21), when speaking of the
ceremonial observances of the Levitical law.
Whether, therefore, the LXX. made use of the
Greek ttrcrmos as the word most nearly re-
sembling the Hebrew in sound, as Stanley
HYSSOP
1415
suggests (S. $ P. p. 21, note), or as the true
representative of the plant indicated by the
latter, is a point which, in all probability, will
never be decided. Botanists differ widely even
with regard to the identification of the vaawrot
of Dioscorides. The name has been given to the
Satureia Oraeca and the S. Juliana, to neither of
which it is appropriate, and the hyssop of Italy
and South France is not met with in Greece,
Syria, or Egypt. Daubeny {Led. on £om.
Husbandry, p. 313), following Sibthorpe, iden-
tifies the mountain-hyssop with the Thymbra
sptcata, but this conjecture is disapproved of
by KUhn (Comm. in LHosc. iii. 27), who in the
same passage gives it as his opinion that the
Hebrews used the Origanum Aegyptiacum in
Egypt, the 0. Syriaeum in Palestine, and that
the hyssop of Dioscorides was the 0. Smyrnaeum.
The Greek botanist describes two kinds of
hyssop, iptirii and mprevr^, and gives maak'tp.
as the Egyptian equivalent. The Talmudists
make the same distinction between the wild
hyssop and the garden-plant used for food.
The 'ezSb was used to sprinkle the doorposts of
the Israelites in Egypt with the blood of the
Paschal lamb (Ex. xii. 22) ; it was employed in
the purification of lepers and leprous houses
(Lev. xiv. 4, 51), and in the sacrifice of the red
heifer (Num. xix. 6). In consequence of its
detergent qualities, or from its being associated
with the purificatory services, the Psalmist
makes use of the expression, " purge me with
'izSb" (Ps. li. 7). It is described in 1 K. iv. 33
as growing on or near walls. In John xix. 29
the phrase vaadntf mptttms corresponds to
■wtpiBth xaXifitp in Matt, xxvii. 48 and Mark
xv. 36. If therefore KtzK&uif be the equivalent
of iiaaarrcp, the latter must be a plant capable
of producing a stick three or four feet in length.
Five kinds of hyssop are mentioned in the
Talmud. One is called 31tN simply, without
any epithet : the others are distinguished as
Greek, Roman; wild hyssop, and hyssop of
Cochali (Mishna, Negaim, xiv. 6). Of these the
four last mentioned were profane ; that is, not
to be employed in purifications (Mishna, Parali,
xi. 7). Maimonides (de Vacca Sufa, iii. 2) says
that the hyssop mentioned in the Law is that
which was used as a condiment. According to
Porphyry (De Abstin. iv. 7), the Egyptian
priests on certain occasions ate their bread mixed
with hyssop ; and the sa'tar, or wild marjoram,
with which it has been identified, is often an
ingredient in a mixture called dukkah, which is
to this day used as food by the poorer classes in
Egypt (Lane, Mod. Eg. i. 200). It is not im-
probable, therefore, that this may have been the
hyssop of Maimonides, who wrote in Egypt ;
more especially as R. D. Kimchi (Lex. s. v.),
who reckons seven different kinds, gives as the
equivalent the Arabic JjuO, sa'tar, origanum.
or marjoram, and the German Dosten or Wohl-
gemuth (Rosenm. Jfandb.). With this agrees
the Tanchum Hieros. MS. quoted by Gesenius.
So in the Judaeo-Spanish version, Ex. xii. 22 is
translated "y tomar<des manojo de origano."
But Dioscorides makes a distinction between
origanum and hyssop when he describes the
leaf of a species of the former as resembling the
latter (cp. Plin. xx. 67), though it is evident
that he, as well as the Talmudists, regarded
Digitized by
Google
1416
HYSSOP
them as belonging to the same family. In the
Syrian of 1 K. iv. 33 hyssop is rendered by
1g>rtV | life, "houseleek," although in other
passages it is represented by |£>0)> zufs, which
the Arabic translation follows in P«. li. 9 and
Heb. ix. 19, while in the Pentateuch it has
za'tar for the same. Patrick (on 1 K. iv. 33)
was of opinion that 'ezob is the same as the
Ethiopic 'atab Cazab, or 'azob), which represents
the hyssop of Ps. li. 9, as well as qlvaVpor, or
mint, in Matt, xxiii. 23.
Bochart decides in favour of marjoram, or
some plant like it (Hieroz. i. b. 2, c. 50), and to
this conclusion, it must be admitted, all ancient
tradition points. The monks on Jebel Husa
give the name of hyssop to a fragrant plant
called ja'deh, which grows in great quantities
on that mountain (Robinson, BM. Res. i. 157).
Celsius (Hierobot. i. 423), after enumerating
eighteen different plants, thyme, southernwood,
rosemary, French lavender, wall rue, and the
maidenhair fern among others, which have been
severally identified with the hyssop of Scripture,
concludes that we have no alternative but to
accept the Hyssopas officinalis, "nisi velimus
apostolum corrigere qui to 31TN Saatrror reddit
Heb. ix. 19." He avoids the difficulty in John
xix. 29 by supposing that a sponge tilled with
vinegar was wrapped round a bunch of hyssop,
and that the two were then fastened to the end
of a stick. Dr. Kitto conceived that he had
found the peculiarities of the Hebrew 'ezSb in
the Phytolacca decandra, a native of America.
Tremellius and Ben Zeb render it by " moss."
It has been reserved for the ingenuity of a
German to trace a connexion between Aesop, the
Greek fabulist, and the 'izSb of 1 K. iv. 33
(Hitzig, Die Spruche Salomo's, Einl. § 2).
An elaborate and interesting paper by the
late Dr. J. Forbes Royle, On the Hyssop of
Scripture, in the Journ. of the Roy. As. Soc.
viii. 193-212, goes far to throw light upon this
difficult question. Dr. R., after a careful inves-
tigation of the subject, arrived at the conclusion
that the hyssop is no other than the caper-
plant, or Capparis spinosa of Linnaeus. The
Arabic name of this plant, 'asaf, by which it is
sometimes, though not commonly, described,
bears considerable resemblance to the Hebrew.
It is found in Lower Egypt (Forsk&l, Ftor. Eg.-
Arab.; Plin. xiii. 44). Burckhardt (Trav. in
Syr. p. 536) mentions the 'aszef as a tree of fre-
quent occurrence in the valleys of the peninsula
of Sinai, "the bright green creeper which
climbs out of the fissures of the rocks "
(Stanley, S. ty P. p. 21, &c), and produces a fruit
of the size of a walnut, called by the Arabs
Felfel Jibbcl, or mountain pepper (Shaw, Spec.
Phytoor. Afr. 39). Dr. R. thought this to be
undoubtedly a species of capparis, and probably
the caper-plant. The Capparis spinosa was
found by M. Bov4 (Rel. oVun Voy. Baton, en E</.,
&c.) in the desert of Sinai, at Gaza, and at
Jerusalem. Lynch saw it in a ravine near the
convent of Mar Saba (Exped. p. 388). It is thus
met with in all the localities where the 'ezdb is
mentioned in the Bible. With regard to its
habitat, it grows in dry and rocky places and
on walls: "quippe quum capparis quoque
seratur siccis maxime " (Plin. xix. 48). De
("andulle describes it as found "in muris et
HYSSOP
rupestribus." The caper-plant was believed to
be possessed of detergent qualities. According
to Pliny (xx. 59), the root was applied to the
cure of a disease similar to the leprosy. La-
marck (Enc. Botan. art. Caprier) says, "La
capriers . . . aont regardes comme . . . anti-
scorbutiques." Finally, the caper-plant is
capable of producing a stick three or four feet
in length. Pliny (xiii. 44) describes it in Egypt
as " firmioris ligni frutex," and to this property
Dr. Royle attaches great importance, identi-
fying as he does the v<T<r6r<p -of John xix. M
with the KaXifitp of Matthew and Mark. Be
thus concludes: "A combination of circum-
stances, and some of them apparently too
improbable to be united in one plant, i cannot
believe to be accidental, and have therefore
considered myself entitled to infer, what I hope
I have succeeded in proving to the satisfaction
of others, that the caper-plant is the hyssop of
Scripture." Whether his conclusion is sound or
not, his investigations are well worthy of atten-
tion ; but it must be acknowledged that, setting
aside the passage in John xix., which roaj
possibly admit of another solution, there teem
no reason for supposing that the properties of
the 'ezdb of the Hebrews, may not be found in
some one of the plants with which the tradition
of centuries has identified it. That it may have
been possessed of some detergent qualities which
led to its significant employment in the pnri-
factory service is possible; but it does not
appear from the narrative in Leviticus that its
use was such as to call into action any medicinal
properties by which it might have been charac-
terised. In the present state of the evidence,
therefore, there does not seem sufficient reason
for departing from the old interpretation, which
identified the Greek uaaawos with the Hebrew
aim. [W. A. W.]
Admitting the identity of Hits* and lenms,
there seems no historical or other ground, beyond
the conjectures of modern botanists, for identify-
ing the Sfffftnros of the ancients with the genus
of labiate plants to which the name of Hyssop"
has been applied ; or Satureia, allied to the mints.
The rendering of afafl! by Sco-anros seems to have
had no stronger foundation than the similarity
of sound. But surely the key to the signification
of the Hebrew should first be looked for in its
cognate Arabic. And here we find u-iji'i®*/'
the identical word as the name of the familiar
and well-known caper (Capparis spinosa, W-
Next, comparing all the passages in which
'ezdb is mentioned, we find that it was a plant
that grew in Egypt, that it grew also in the
desert of Sinai and in Palestine, that it pev
out of chinks in walls and cliffs— for "Solomon
spake of trees, from the cedar tree that i« ">
Lebanon, even unto the hyssop that springe*"
out of the wall" (1 K. iv. 33)— and that it
was capable of producing a stem of some length.
None of these conditions meet in any specie*
of Satureia or Hyssopus, but they do in ft
asaf of the Arabs. The caper is plentiful i»
the chinks of ruins in Egypt. It is a striking
feature in the Sinaitic desert. Dean Stanley
remarks, " The lasaf or asaf, the caper plant, the
bright green creeper, which climbs out of the
fissures of the rocks in the Sinaitic valleys, hat
Digitized by
Google
IBHAB
been identified, on grounds of great probability,
with the hyssop or 'ez6b of Scripture, and thns
explains wnence came the green branches nsed,
even in the deserts, for sprinkling the water
over the tents of the Israelites " (5. <$■ P. p. 21).
So in the deserts of North Africa, after travelling
for hours without detecting a green leaf, I have
often in some desolate gorge been arrested by
the patches of deepest green clinging here and
there to the face of the cliff, in startling contrast
to all around, and without a trace of moisture
to nourish their verdure. The caper hangs from
the walls of Jerusalem, and especially about the
old Temple area. It clings to the rocks in the
gorge of the Kedron. On the face of the Mons
Quarantania, overhanging Jericho, it lets down
its festoons of gauzy blossom in the month of
January. It trails its branches, several feet
long, on the sands of the plain of Shittim, and at
the south-east of the Dead Sea. The leaves of
the caper are ovate, and the stem has short
recurved spines below the junction of each leaf.
The blossom is very! open, loose, and white, with
many long straggling lilac stamens. The fruit
is a pod, of the shape and size of a walnut. The
blossom bud is the caper of commerce.
Caper-berry is the rendering in R. V. of
."0i»3N, 'abiySnah, A. V. "desire," xirwapu,
capparis, in Eccles. xii. 5, "The grasshopper
shall be a burden, the caper-berry shall fail," the
only passage where the word 'occurs. The
Revisers are supported by Vallesius, Ursinus,
and other critics. The sense according to this
rendering is that the caper, which was eaten
before meals as a provocative to appetite, shall
fail to stimulate the declining powers of the
aged. On this use of the caper Plutarch re-
marks: rtoAAol ray imoalrtir, i\aia>v h\fidta
XanfiAyomts, ff Kdrrapiy ytvadfuroi rax*as
dWAajSor (tol taptaTfyrcano tV Kpjjir (Sympos.
ri.2). [H.B.T.]
IBHAB ("ITI3* = [God] chooses : in Sam.
B. 'Iptip, A. 'I«0a> ; in Ch. B. Bad>, A. 'Uflaip:
Syr. Jucobor ; Jebahar, Jebaar), one of the sons
of David, mentioned in the lists next after
Solomon and before Elishua (2 Sam. v. 15;
1 Ch. iii. 6, xiv. 5). Ibhar was born in
Jerusalem, and from the second of these pas-
sages it appears that he was the son of a wife
and not of a concubine. He never comes forward
in the history in person, nor are there any
traditions concerning him. For the genealogy
of David's family, see David.
IB'LEAM (DD^ : in Josh. B. and A. omit ;
in Judg. 'Ic0Aaap; in 2 K. B. 'Eir£Aaa>, A.
'I/BAad/i: Jcblaam), a city of Manasseh, with
villages or towns (Heb. " daughters ") dependent
on it (Judg. i. 27). Though belonging to Ma-
nasseh, it appears not to have lain within the
limits allotted to that tribe, but to have been
situated in the territory of either Issachar or
Asher (Josh. xvii. 11). It is not said which of
the two, though there is no doubt from other
indications that it was the former. The ascent
of Que, the spot at which Ahaziah received his
1CON1UM
1417
death-wound from the soldiers of Jehu, was
" at (3) Ibleam " (2 K. ix. 27), somewhere near
the present Jenin, probably to the north of it,
about where the village Jelameh now stands.
Conder {Bbk. p. 407), Tristram {Holy Places, p
221), Riehm (MWB.), and others (cp.Dillmann'
on Josh. /. c.) identify it with Bel'ameh to the
south of Jenin ; but neither of these places meet
the requirements of the narrative so well as
Jelameh, which is on the natural road from
Jezreel to Judah.
In the list of cities given out of Hanasseh to
the Kohathite Levites (1 Ch. vi. 70), Bileam is
mentioned, answering to Gath-rimmon in the
list of Josh. xxi. Bileam is possibly a mere alter-
ation of Ibleam, though this is not certain.
[G.] [W.]
IBNEI'AH (iTJ3^ = Jah builds; B. Bo-
raoV, A. 'Uftved ; Jobania), son of Jeroham,
a Benjamite, who was a chief man in the
tribe apparently at the time of the first settle-
ment in Jerusalem (1 Ch. ix. 8).
IBNI'JAH (JVJ3» = Jah builds ; B. Ba-
yaid, A. 'IeSaraaf ; Jebania), a Benjamite (1 Ch.
ix. 8>
IB'RI 0*U»; B. 'Aflaf, A. 'n/SM; Hebri), a
Herarite Levite of the family of Jaaziah (1 Ch.
xxiv. 27), in the time of king David, concerned
in the service of the house of Jehovah.
The word is precisely the same as that else-
where rendered in the A. V. " Hebrew."
IB'ZAN (t??K; B. 'Aftountr, A. "Ere/W;
Joseph. 'AtfrdVqi ; Abesan), a native of Bethlehem,
who judged Israel for seven years after Jephthah
(Judg. xii. 8, 10). He had thirty sons and thirty
daughters, and took home thirty wives for his
sons, and sent out his daughters to as many
husbands abroad. He was buried at Bethlehem.
From the non-addition of " Ephratah," or
"Judah," after Bethlehem, and from Ibzan
having been succeeded by a Zebulonite, it seems
pretty certain tnat the Bethlehem here meant
is that in the tribe of Zebulun (Josh. xix. 15;
see Joseph. Ant. v. 7, §73). [Noldeke and
Budde {Die BB. Bidder u. Samuel, p. 97) are
disposed to attach but little value to Ibzan's
history. — F.] There is not a shadow of pro-
bability in the notion which has been broached
as to the identity of Ibzan with Boaz (TV3).
The history of his large family is singularly at
variance with the impression of Boaz given us
in the Book of Ruth. [A. C. H.]
I-CHABOT) (*rta3-»st, from »K [shortened
from I'K], the ordinary negative in Ethiopian
and Phoenician [cp. R. V. marg. and see HV."],
and "1^33, "glory," Gesen. p. 79, inglorious;
B. Oim0apx<>fi<b9, A. Oimixa$tie, which seems
to be derived from 'IK, " woe " [cp. oici in
1 Sam. iv. 8, Gesen. p. 39] ; Ichabod), the son
of Phinehas, and grandson of Eli. In giving
birth to him his mother died of grief at the
news of the sndden deaths of her husband and
father-in-law. His brother's name was Ahijah
(1 Sam. iv. 21 ; xiv. 3). [H. W. P.]
ICONIUM fUoVior), the modern Konieh, is
situated in the western part of an extensive
Digitized by
Google
1418
ICONIUM
plain, oo the central table-land of Asia Minor,
and not far to the north of the chain of Taurus.
This level district was anciently called Lyca-
oiu. Xenophon (Anab. i. 2, 19) reckons
Iconium as the most easterly town of Phbygia ;
but all other writers speak of it as being in
Lycaonia, of which it was practically the capi-
tal. It was on the great line of communication
between Ephesus and the western coast of the
peninsula on one side, and Tarsus, Autioch, and
the Euphrates on the other. We see this indi-
cated by the narrative of Xenophon (I. c.) and
the letters of Cicero (ad Fam. iii. 8, v. 20,
xv. 4). When the Roman provincial system
was matured, some of the moat important roads
intersected one another at this point, as may be
seen from the map in Leake's Asia Minor.
These circumstances should be borne in mind,
when we trace St. Paul's journeys through the
district. Iconium was a well-chosen place for
missionary operations. The Apostle's first visit
was on his first circuit, in company with Bar-
nabas; and on this occasion he approached it
from Antioch in Pisidia, which lay to the west.
From that city he had been driven by the per-
secution of the Jews (Acts xiii. SO, 51). There
were Jews in Iconium also; and St. Paul's first
efforts here, according to his custom, were made
in the synagogue (xiv. 1). The results were
considerable both among the Hebrew and Gentile
population of the place (»6.). We should notice
that the working of miracles in Iconium is
emphatically mentioned (xiv. 3). The intrigues
of the Jews again drove him away ; he was in
danger of being stoned, and he withdrew to
Lyotka and Dekbe, in the eastern and wilder
part of Lycaonia (xiv. 6). Thither also the
enmity of the Jews of Antioch and Iconium
pursued him ; and at Lystra he was actually
stoned and left for dead (xiv. 19). After an
interval, however, he returned over the old
ground, revisiting Iconium and encouraging the
Church which he had founded there (xiv. 21, 22).
These sufferings and difficulties are alluded to
in 2 Tim. iii. 11 ; and this brings us to the
consideration of his next visit to this neigh-
bourhood, which was the occasion of his first
practically associating himself with St. Timothy.
Paul left the Syrian Antioch, in company with
Silas (Acts xv. 40), on his second missionary
circuit; and travelling through Cilicia (xv.
41), and np through the passes of Taurus into
Lycaonia, approached Iconium from the east, by
Ocrbe and Lystra (xvi. 1, 2). Though appa-
rently a native of Lystra, Timothy was evidently
well known to the Christians of Iconium (xvi.
2); and it is not improbable that his circum-
cision (xvi. 3) and ordination (1 Tim. i. 18,
iv. 14, vi. 12; 2 Tim. i. 6) took place there.
On leaving Iconium, St. Paul and his party tra-
velled to the N.W. ; and the place is not
mentioned again in the sacred narrative, though
there is little doubt that it was visited by the
Apostle again in the early part of his third
circuit (Acts xviii. 23). From its position it
could not fail to be an important centre of
Christian influence in the early ages of the
Church. The curious apocryphal legend of
St. Thecla, of which Iconium is the scene, must
not be entirely passed by. The " Acta Pauli et
Theclae" are given in full by Grabe (Spirit.
vol. i.) and by Jones (On the Canon, vol. ii.
IDDO
353-411). It is natural here to notice one
geographical mistake in that document, rit
that Lystra is placed on the west instead of the
south. In the declining period of the Roman
empire, Iconium was made a ootonia. In the
Middle Ages it became a place of great con-
sequence, as the capital of the Seljuk sultans.
Hence the remains of Seljuk architecture, which
are conspicuous here, and which are described
by many travellers. Konieh is still s town of
considerable size (Leake, Tour in Am Miw,
p. 49 ; Hamilton, Researches in Asia jfinor, ii
205 ; Texier, Asie Mineure, p. 661 sq. ; Murray,
Hbk. to Asia Minor ; Ramsay, The Histor. Geo-
graphy of Asia Minor, pp. 332, 377-8, 39J-5)
[J.S.H.] [ff.]
IITALAH (rrfor ; B. "Ifp«x<*\ A. 'I«*|Aa;
Jedala and Jerala), one of the non-identified
cities of the tribe of Zebulun, named between
Shimron and Bethlehem (Josh. xii. 15; see
Dillmann* in loco). Neubauer (Geog. *
Talmud, p. 189) gives the name as Yidalah, or
" according to the Talmud, Hiriyeh." Schwara
(B. L. p. 137) and Van de Velde (Map, 1866)
would identify it with Kh. Kireh, S. of M
Keimun, Jokneam. But this is too far from
Shimron and Bethlehem, and Conder (PEF.
Mem. i. 288) identifies it, with more probability,
with the ruins el-ffuicarah, south of Beit XaAa,
Bethlehem. It is not named in the Ow
masticon. [G.] [W]
ID'BASH QffSV, ; B. 'lafids, A. 'lya/*;
Jedebos), one of the" three sons of Abi-Etam—
" tbe father of Etam " — among the fiunilia
of Judah (1 Ch. iv. 3). The Selelponite is
named as his sister. This list is probably a
topographical one, a majority of the name
being those of places.
IDTJO. 1. (Kty; B. 'Ax**, A. 3at**;
Addo.) The father of Abinadab, one of
Solomon's monthly purveyors (1 K. iv. 14).
2. (TO; A. 'AMI, B. 'A8ef; Addo). A de-
scendant of Gershom, son of Levi (1 Ch. vi. 21).
In the reversed genealogy (v. 41) the name i>
altered to Udaiah, and we there discover that
he was one of the forefathers of Asaph the seer.
a (n\ ; BA. laSSai ; Jaddo.) Son of Zecha-
riah, ruler (nagid) of the tribe of Manasseh east
of Jordan in the time of David (1 Ch. xivii. 21).
4. 0^?J» •'•«• Ye'doi ; but in the correction of
the Keri'lW, Ye'do; BA. 'Ma; AaVo.) A
seer (Tljtl) whose "visions" (TflW) sgainst
Jeroboam incidentally contained some of the
acts of Solomon (2 Ch. ix. 29). He also
appears to have written a chronicle or storj
(Midrash, Gesen. p. 357 ; Driver, LOT. p. *97)
relating to the life and reign of Abijah (2 Ch.
xiii. 22), and also a book "concerning genea-
logies," in which the acts of Rehoboam were
recorded (xii. 15). These books are lost, hut
they may have formed part of the foundation
of the existing Books of Chronicles (Bertheau,
Chron. Introd. § 3). The mention of his having
prophesied against Jeroboam probably led to his
identification in the ancient Jewish traditions
(Jerome, Quaest. Hebr. in 2 Ch. xii. 15, Jaddo;
Joseph. Ant. viii. 3, § 5, lateV* with the "m«
Digitized by
Google
IDOL, IMAGE
of God " out of Judah who denounced the altar
of that king (1 K. zii. 1). He has alto been
identified with Oded (see Jerome on 2 Ch. it. 1),
and by the best texts of the LXX. (see above)
with Joel.
5. (WTO, in Zech. VW; in Ezra, B. 'Ma,
A. 'AS84; Addo.) The grandfather of the Prophet
Zechariah (Zech. i. 1, 7), although in other
places Zechariah is called "the son of Iddo"
(Ezra t. 1, vi. 14). Iddo returned from Baby-
lon with Zerubbabel and Jeshua (Neh. xii. 4),
and in the next generation — the " days of
Joiakim," son of Jeshua (tie. 10, 12)— his house
was represented by Zechariah (». 14). In 1 Esd.
vi. 1, the name is Addo.
6. (TIN; LXX- om. ; Eddo.) The chief of
those who assembled at Casiphia, at the time
of the second caravan from Babylon, in the
reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus B.C. 458. He
was one of the Nethinim, of whom 220 re-
sponded to the appeal of Ezra to assist in the
Return to Judaea (Ezra viii. 17 ; cp. v. 20). In
the Apocr. Esdras the name is Saddeub and
Daddeot. [G.] [W.]
IDOL, IMAGE. As no less than twenty-
one different Hebrew words have been rendered in
the A. V. either by " idol " or " image," and that
by no means uniformly, it will be of some ad-
vantage to attempt to discriminate between
them, and assign, as nearly as the two languages
will allow, the English equivalents for each.
But, before proceeding to the discussion of those
words which in themselves indicate the objects
of false worship, it will be necessary to notice
a class of abstract terms, which, with a deep
moral significance, express the degradation as-
sociated with it, and stand out as a protest of
the language against the enormities of idolatry.
Such are —
1. J1K, 'men, rendered elsewhere "nought,"
"vanity," "iniquity," "wickedness," "sorrow,"
See, and— once only—" idol" (Is. lxvi. 3). The
primary idea of the root seems to be emptiness,
nothingness, as of breath or vapour ; and, by a
natural transition, in a moral sense, wickedness
in its active form of mischief, and then, as the
result, sorrow and trouble. Hence 'men denotes
a vain, false, wicked thing, and expresses at
once the essential nature of idols, and the con-
sequences of their worship. The character of
the word may be learnt from its associates. It
stands in parallelism with D$M, 'epheti (Is. xli.
29), which, after undergoing various modifica-
tions, comes at length to signify " nothing ; "
with ^M, hebel, " breath " or " vapour," itself
applied as a term of contempt to the objects of
idolatrous reverence (Deut. xxxii. 21 ; 1 K. xvi.
13; Ps. xxxi. 6; Jer. viii. 19, x. 8); with Kit?,
shdu', " nothingness," " vanity ; " and with "liX*,
shiqer, " falsehood " (Zech. x. 2) : all indicating
the utter worthlessness of the idols to whom
homage was paid, and the false and delusive
nature of their worship. It is employed in an
abstract sense to denote idolatry in general in
1 Sam. xv. 23. There is much significance in
the change of name from Bethel to Bethaven,
the great centre of idolatry in Israel (Hos. iv.
15, x. 5). Cp. also the use of )1K for flil (Helio-
IDOL, IMAGE
1419
polis), and the implied sense of a city of idols
(Ezek. xxx. 17).
2. 7vK, 'Hit, is thought by some to have a
sense akin to that of Ij^B', shiqer, " falsehood,"
with which it stands in parallelism in Job xiii. 4,
and would therefore much resemble 'men, as
applied to an idol. Delitzsch (on Hab. ii. 18)
derives it from the negative particle 7K, 'al, " die
Nichtigen" (cp. MV." s. n. %>K, ii.). The
word occurs in the Sabaean inscriptions under
the form TlTtOK, as the plural of 7tt, gods (cp.
Bathgen, Beitr. x. Semit. Seligionsgeschichte,
p. 129), and this may be said to strengthen
the contention of those who make Tvtt a di-
minutive of ?tt, " god," the additional syllable
indicating the greatest contempt. In this case
the signification above mentioned is a subsidiary
one. The word is applied to the idols of Egypt
and Phoenicia (Is. xix. 3 ; Jer. xiv. 14), Noph or
Memphis (Ezek. xxx. 13). In strong contrast
with Jehovah it appears in Ps. xc. 5, xcvii. 7 ;
the contrast probably being heightened by the
resemblance between 'ttilim and 'OShbn. A some-
what similar play upon words is observable in
Hab. ii. 18, DvJp« D»Ww, 'OUhn 'OUnOm
("dumb idols," A. V.).
3. nD'K, 'emah, in plural t2t3'K, " terrors "
(R. V. marg.), and hence an object of horror or
terror (Jer. 1. 38), in reference either to the
hideousness of the idols or to the gross character
of their worship. In this respect it is closely
connected with —
4. T1$BD, miphleseth, a " fright," " horror,"
applied to the idol of Maachah, probably of
wood, which Asa cut down and burned (1 K. xv.
13 ; 2 Ch. xv. 16 ; in both places, R. V. "an
abominable image "). The opinion, advanced
by Movers, that this was the Phallus, the symbol
of the productive power of nature (.PAoen. i.
571), cannot be maintained (cp. Keil on 1 K.
/. c, and Robertson Smith, Religion of the
Semites, i. 437). In 2 Ch. xv. 16, the Vulg.
rendering "simulacrum Priapi" (cp. Hor.,
" furum aviumque maxima formido ") does not
bear such an application. The LXX. had a
different reading, which it is not easy to deter-
mine. They translate in 1 K. xv. 13 the same
word both by airotos (with which corresponds
the Syr. 1»)i, 'ids, "» festival," reading per-
haps JTiyg, 'Ssereth, as in 2 K. x. 20; Jer. ix.
2) and jrarao'ifovis (Luc. KaraXiatis), while in
Chronicles it is tltaKor. Possibly in 1 K. xv.
13 they may have read Fin^^t?, mtfuUathah
(see other conjectures in Klostermann in loco
[Strack u. Zdckler, Kg/. JTomm.]), foriWV^DD,
miphlastah, as the Vulg. specum, of which
" simulacrum turpissimum " is a correction.
With this must be noticed, though not actually
rendered " image " or " idol,"
6. 71^3, hOsheth, "shame," or "shameful
thing " (B. y. ; Jer. iii. 24, xi. 13 ; Hos. ix. 10),
applied to Baal or Baal-Peor, as characterising
the obscenity of his worship.
Digitized by
Google
1420
IDOL, IMAGE
With 'elU is found in close connexion —
6. Dv3?3, gilt&lim, also a term of contempt,
but of uncertain origin (Ezek. xxx. 13). The
Rabbinical authorities, referring to such passages
as Ezek. iv. 2, Zeph. i. 17, have favoured the in-
terpretation given in the margin of the A. V. to
Deut. xxix. 17, "dungy gods" (Vulg. tordet,
sordes idolorum, 1 K. xv. 12). Gesenius
(Thcs.) gives his preference to the rendering
" stones, stone gods," thus deriving it from 73,
gal, " a heap of stones," while MV." prefers
"clods." Idols were frequently symbolized in
the conical stone (e.g. of Astarte) or in the cairn
of stones, alike animated by a god (see Robertson
Smith, i. 189 sq.). The expression is applied,
principally in Ezekiel, to false gods and their
symbols (Deut. xxix. 17 ; Ezek. viii. 10, &c). It
stands side by side with other contemptuous
terms in Ezek. xvi. 36, xx. 8; as for example
J>j?B>, thiqef, " filth," " abomination " (Ezek. viii.
10)? and
7. The cognate pj«?, thigquf, " filth," " im-
purity," especially applied, like theqet, to that
which produced ceremonial uncleanness (Ezek.
xxxvii. 23 ; Nah. iii. 6), such as food offered in
sacrifice to idols (Zech. bt. 7 ; cp. Acts xv. 20,
29). As referring to the idols themselves, it
primarily denotes the obscene rites with which
their worship was associated, and hence, by
metonymy, is applied both to the objects of
worship and also to their worshippers, who
partook of the impurity, and thus " became
loathsome like their love," the foul Baal-Peor
(Hos. ix. 10).
We now come to the consideration of those
words which more directly apply to the images
or idols, as the outward symbols of the deity
who was worshipped through them. These
may be classified according as they indicate that
the images were made in imitation of external
objects, and to represent some idea or attribute ;
or as they denote the workmanship by which
they were fashioned. To the first class belong —
8. ?£p, sew/, or 7JJD, temel (with which
-Gesenius compares as cognate a?% selem, the
Lat. timilit, the Greek 6fut\6\), signifies a
"likeness," "semblance," especially that of a
statue (Baudissin in MV."). It is used in the
same sense both of male and females in Phoeni-
cian inscriptions (M V. 1 '). The Targ. in Deut.
iv. 16 gives KTW, sura, "figure," as the
equivalent; while in Ezek. viii. 3, 5 it is rendered
by OpX, flldm, " image." In the latter passages
the Syriac has )AV>.o. qdimti, "a statue"
(the arli\r) of the LXX.), which more properly
corresponds to maffebah (see No. 15 below);
and in Deut. mi gene's, "kind "-(yivm).
The word in 2 Ch. nxiii. 7 &Qf 7} 7£9) is
rendered by the Syriac " images of four faces,"
the latter words representing the one under
consideration. In 2 Ch. xxxiii. 15 the Syriac
adopts "carved images," following the LXX.
rb yAwrroV. On the whole the Gk. tiK&v of
Deut. iv. 16, 2 Ch. xxxiii. 7, and the sinrnia-
IDOL, IMAGE
crtim of the Vulgate (2 Ch. xxxiii. 15), most
nearly resemble the Hebrew timet.
9. D^V, filem (Ch. d!?V, filem; Assyr.
talmu) is by lexicographers connected with Ti,
*»/, " a shadow." It is the " image " of God
in which man was created (Gen. i. 27 ; cp. Wisl.
ii. 23), distinguished from rUCt, dimiih, or
" likeness," as an " image " is distinguished
from the " idea " which it represents (Schmidt.
de Imag. Dei in Bom. p. 84), though it would
be rash to insist upon this distinction. In tht
N. T. tlxiip appears to represent the latter
(Col. iii. 10 ; cp. LXX. of Gen. v. 1), as ojufe/iii
the former of the two words (Rom. i. 23.
viii. 29 ; Phil. ii. 7), but in Heb. x. 1 thttu
is opposed to o-/cfa as the substance to the
unsubstantial form, of which it is the perfect
representative. The LXX. render dlm&th by
ifiotoHTis, Afiolufui, *Ik6v, BfuHos, and titan
most frequently by (My, though sWap*
efSvAor, and^rwroj also occur. But whatever
abstract term may best define the meaning of
filem, it is unquestionably used to denote the
visible forms of external objects, and is applied
to figures of gold and silver (1 Sam. vi. 5;
Num. xxxiii. 52 ; Dan. iii. 1), such as the golden
image of Nebuchadnezzar, as well as to those
painted upon walls (Ezek. xxxiii. 14). " Image *
perhaps most nearly represents it in all passages.
In Sabaean and Palmyrene inscriptions it repre-
sents an " image " (MV. 11 ), but in the Teuna
inscriptions it is the name of a god probably
imported from Aramaic belief, whose picture is
portrayed on a stele (Bathgen, pp. 80-1). DJJf,
applied to the human countenance (Dan. iii. 19),
signifies the "expression," and corresponds
to the itia of Matt, xxviii. 3, though (UhsStk
agrees rather with the Platonic usage of the
latter word.
10. ntOFt, temunSh, rendered "image"(K.V.
" form ") in Job iv. 16 ; elsewhere "similitude"
(Deut. iv. 12), " likeness " (Deut, v. 8) : " form "
or " shape " would be better. In Deut. iv. 16
jt is in parallelism with JVJ3FI, tabnith, literally
" built ; " hencs " plan," or "model " (2 K. xvi.
10 ; cp. Ex. xx. 4 ; Num. xii. 8).
11. 3Vr, 'o*so,'12. 3y£, 'ifeb (Jer. nii-
28), or 13.* 3p, Mse* (Is. xlviii. 5), "a figure,"
all derived from a root 2tV, 'Sfdb, " to work,"
or " fashion " (akin to 3XIT, chatab, and the
like), are terms applied to idols as expressing
that their origin was due to the labour of nun.
The verb in its derived senses indicates the
sorrow and trouble consequent upon severe
labour, but the latter seems to be the radical
idea. If the notion of sorrow were the more
prominent, the words as applied to idols might
be compared with 'aven above. In Is. lviii. 3 it
is rendered in the Peshitto " idols " (A. V. and
R. V. "labours"), but the reading was evidently
different. In Ps. exxxix. 24, 3¥» TJ"!^, *«*
'6feb, is " idolatry."
14. TX, sir, once only applied to an idol (Is.
xlv. 16; LXX. wje-oi, as if O^K, lytoi). Tl»
word usually denotes "a pang," but in thu
instance is probably connected with the roots
"II X, stir, and 1Y\ y Afar, and signifies "•
shape " or " mould, and hence an " idol."
Digitized by
Google
IDOL, IMAGE
15. rnVD, mastibSh, anything set up, a
"statue'" (~=3»yj, nlstb, Jer. xliii. 13; A. V.
" images " [marg. statues'], R. V. " pillars " [marg.
obelis/isj), applied variously ; e.g to a monolithic
pillar or a memorial stone like those erected by
Jacob on four several occasions (Gen xxviii. 18
[see Dillmann* in loco ; Dillmann* on Deut.
xvi. 22], xxxi. 45, xxxv. 14, 15) to commemorate
a crisis in his life, or to mark the grave of
Rachel ; or to such cairns of stones as were set
up by Joshua (Josh. iv. 9) after the passage of
the Jordan and at Shechem (xxiv. 26), and by
Samuel when victorious over the Philistines (1
Sam. vii. 12). When solemnly dedicated, they
were anointed with oil, and libations were
poured upon them. The word is applied to
denote the obelisks which stood at the entrance
to the temple of the Sun at Heliopolis (Jer.
xliii. 13 ; see R. V. marg.), two of which were
a hundred cubits high and eight broad, each of
a single stone (Her. ii. 111). It is also used of
the statues of Baal (2 K. iii. 2), whether of
stone (2 K. x. 27) or wood (c. 26), which stood
in the innermost recess of the temple at Samaria.
Movers (Phoen. i. 674) conjectures that the
latter were statues or columns distinct from
that of Baal, which was of stone and conical
(p. 673), like the " meta " of Paphos (Tac Hist.
ii. 3), and probably therefore belonging to other
deities who were his TapeSpot or avu^anot.
The Phoenicians consecrated and anointed stones
like that at Bethel, which were called, as some
think, from this circumstance Bactylia. Many
such are said to have been seen on the Lebanon,
near Heliopolis, dedicated to various gods, and
many prodigies are related of them (Damascius
in Photius, quoted by Bochart, Canaan, ii. 2).
The same authority describes them as aerolites,
of a whitish and sometimes purple colour, sphe-
rical in shape, and about a span in diameter.
The Palladium of Troy, the black stone in the
Kaaba at Mecca, said to have been brought from
heaven by the Angel Gabriel, the cone of Elaga-
balus at Emesa, and the stone at Ephesus " which
fell down from Jupiter" (Acts xix. 35), are
examples of the belief, anciently so common,
that the gods dwelt in the stone; and, at the
sanctuary, established stated relations with men
and accepted their service (Robertson Smith, i.
190). In the older worship of Greece, stones,
according to Pausanias (vii. 22, §4), occupied
the place of images. Those at Pharae, about
thirty in number and quadrangular in shape,
near the statue of Hermes, received divine
honours from the Pharians, and each had the
name of some god conferred upon it. The stone
in the temple of Jupiter Ammon (umbilico
maxime similis), enriched with emeralds and
gems (Curt. iv. 7, §31); that at Delphi, which
Saturn was said to have swallowed (Paus. Phoc.
24, § 6) ; the black stone of pyramidal shape in
the temple of Juggernaut, and the holy stone
at Pessinus in Galatia, sacred to Cybele, show
how widely spread and almost universal were
these ancient objects of worship (cp. Dillmann 1
and Delitzsch [1887] on Gen. xxviii. 18).
Closely connected with these " statues " of
Baal, whether in the form of obelisks or other-
wise, were
16. D'JOn, chammanlm, rendered in the mar-
gin of most passages sun-images. The word has
IDOL, IMAGE
1421
given rise to considerable discussion, much of
which is now obsolete (see 1st edit, of this work).
In the Vulgate it is translated thrice simulacra,
thrice delubra, and once /ana. The LXX. give
rtfUvv twice, ttSaKa twice, {vAira X f ip°*oir)ra,
03t\iynaTa, and ra tyijAd. With one ex-
ception (2 Ch. xxxiv. 4, which is evidently cor-
rupt) the Syriac has vaguely cither " fears," i.c.
objects of fear, or " idols." " The Targum in all
passages translates it by N^DJD'jn, chlnls-
nfsayyd, " houses for star-worship,'' a rendering
which Rosenmuller .supports. Chammdn is now
recognised as a title of Baal in the Phoenician and
Palmyrene inscriptions in the sense of " Dominus
Solaris," and* Chammanlm is the term descriptive
of the statues or columns erected for his worship
(cp. Spencer, de Legg. Hebr. ii. 25 ; Michaelis,
Suppl. ad Lex. Hebr. s. v.), like the pyramids or
obelisks of Egypt. Movers, in his discussion of
Chammanlm, says, "These images of the fire-god
were placed on foreign or non-Israelitish altars,
in conjunction with the symbols of the nature-
goddess Asherab, as o-iiifia/un (2 Ch. xiv. 3, 5,
xxxiv. 4, 7 ; Is. xvii. 9, xxvii. 9), as was other-
wise usual with Baal and Asherah " (Phoen. i.
441. Cp. Bathgen, p. 25 sq.). They are men-
tioned with the Asherim, and the latter are
coupled with the statues of Baal (1 K. xiv. 23 ;
2 K. xxiii. 17). The chammanim and statues are
used promiscuously (cp. 2 K. xxiii. 14, and 2 Ch.
xxiv. 4 ; 2 Ch. xiv. 3 and 5), but are never spoken
of together. He is supported by the Palmyrene
inscription at Oxford, alluded to above, which
has been thus rendered : " This column (N3Dn,
ChammanS), and thisjaltar, the sons of Malchu,
&c, have erected and dedicated to the Sun."
The Veneto-Greek Version leaves the word un-
translated in the strange form lutdParrts.
From the expressions in Ezek. vi. 4, 6, and Lev.
xxvi. 30, it may be inferred that these columns,
which perhaps represented a rising flame of fire
and stood near or upon the altar of Baal (2 Ch.
xxxiv. 4), were of wood or stone. Dillmann 1
(on Is. xvi. 22) defines the Chammanim as idola-
trous Masseboth (No. 15) specially connected
with Baal.
17. IV2&D, maskUh, occurs in Lev. xxvi. 1 ;
Num. xxiii. 52 ; Ezek. viii. 12 : " device " most
nearly suits all passages (cp. Ps. Ixxiii. 7 ; Prov.
xviii. 11, xxv. 11). This word has been the
fruitful cause of as much dispute as the pre-
ceding. The general opinion appears to be that
'D |^N, 'eben mashith, signifies a stone with
figures graven upon it. Ben Zeb explains it as
"a stone with figures or hieroglyphics carved
upon it," and so Michaelis ; and it is maintained
by Movers (Phoen. i. 105) that the baetylia or
columns with painted figures, the " lapides effi-
giati " of Minucius Felix (c. 3), are these " stones
of device," and that the characters engraven on
them are the hpa <rroix«">, or characters sacred to
the several deities The invention of these cha-
racters, which is ascribed to Taaut, he conjectures
originated with the Seres. Gesemus explains it
as a stone with the image of an idol, Baal or
Astarte, and refers to his lion. Phoen. 21-24 for
others of similar character (see MV." s. n.).
The Targum and Syr., Lev. xxvi. 1, give "stone
of devotion," and the former in Num. xxxiii. 52
has " house of their devotion," where the Syr.
only renders " their objects of devotion." For
Digitized by
Google
1422
IDOL, IMAGE
the fanner the LXX. have \l0os aanris (Vulg.
lapis insignisy, and for the latter t4i <tkowAs
aireiv (Vulg. tittdi), connecting the word with
the root DDE', " to look," a circumstance which
T T
has induced Saalschutz (Mos. Recht. pp. 382-
385) to conjecture that 'eben maskith was origin-
ally a smooth elevated stone employed for the
purpose of obtaining from it a freer prospect,
and of offering prayer in prostration upon it
to the deities of heaven. Hence, generally, he
conclndes that it signifies a stone of prayer or
devotion, and that the "chambers of imagery"
of Ezek. viii. 7 are " chambers of devotion."
The renderings of the last-mentioned passage in
the LXX. and Targum are curious, as pointing
to a variant reading inSE'D, or more probably
IDSWO. Saalschfitz's idea — if simplified to
suggest a stone visible from a distance, or a
stone which attracts attention (cp. Knobel-Dill-
mann on Lev. /. c.) — is preferred by some to
that of Gesenius.
18. D , B'1F1, teraphim. [Tebaphiji.]
The terms' which follow have regard to the
material and workmanship of the idol rather
than to its character as an object of worship.
19. $>DB, pisel, and 20. IP^DB, pesUfm,
usually translated in the A. V, "graven or
carved images." In two passages the latter is
ambiguously rendered "quarries" (Jndg. iii.
19, 26, A. V. and R. V.), following the Targum,
but there seems no reason for departing from
the ordinary signification. In the majority of
instances the LXX. have ■vAi/irroV, once yJii/ifia,
The verb is employed to denote the finishing
which the stone received at the hands of the
masons, after it had been rough-hewn from the
quarries (Ex. xxxiv. 4; 1 K. v. 32). It is
probably a later usage which has applied pisel*
to a figure cast in metal, as in Is. xl. 19, xliv.
10. These " sculptured " images were apparently
of wood, iron, or stone, covered with gold or
silver (Deut. vii. 25 ; Is. xxx. 22 ; Hab. ii. 19),
the more costly being of solid metal (Is. xl. 19).
They could be burnt (Deut. vii. 5 ; Is. xlv. 20 ;
2 Ch. xxxiv. 4), or cut down (Deut. xii. 3) and
pounded (2 Ch. xxxiv. 7), or broken in pieces
(Is. xxi. 9). In making them, the skill of the
wise iron-smith (Deut. xxvii. 15 ; Is. xl. 20) or
carpenter, and of the goldsmith, was employed
(Jndg. xvii. 3, 4 ; Is. xii. 7), the former sup-
plying the rough mass of iron beaten into shape
on his anvil (Is. xliv. 12), while the latter over-
laid it with plates of gold and silver, probably
from Tarshish (Jer. x. 9), and decorated it with
silver chains. The image thus formed received
the further adornment of embroidered robes
<Ezek. xvi. 18), to which possibly allusion may be
made in Is. iii. 19. Brass and clay were among
the materials employed for the same purpose
(Dan. ii. 33, v. 23)." A description of the three
great images of Babylon on the top of the
temple of Belus will be found in Diod. Sic ii. 9
<cp. Layard, Nin. ii. 433> The several stages
of the process by which the metal or wood
» Possibly pisd denotes by anticipation the molten
image in a later stage, alter it bad been trimmed Into
shape by the caster.
>> Images of glazed pottery have been found In Egypt
(Wilkinson, Anc. Eg. IB. »0 [large ed.]; cp. Wisd.
xv. 8).
IDOL, IMAGE
became the " graven image " are so midlt
described in Is. xliv. 10-20, that it is only
necessary to refer to that passage, and we art
at once introduced to the mysteries of idol
manufacture, which, as at Ephesns, " brought
no small gain unto the craftsmen."
21. "ijej, nesek, or 1\0), tiesek, and 22. fODB,
massekah, are evidently synonymous (Is. ill 29,
xlviii. 5 ; Jer. x. 14) in later Hebrew, anil de-
note a " molten " image. Massekah is frequently,
used in distinction from pesel or pcsilim (Dent.
xxvii. 15 ; Judg. xvii. 3, &c). The golden alf
which Aaron made was fashioned with "the
graver " (D*in, cheref), but it is not quite clear
for what purpose the graver was used (Ei.iirii
4). The cheref (cp. Gk. x a P^ Tra ) api*"* '°
have been a sharp-pointed instrument, used like
the styltts for a writing implement (Is. nil 1)
Whether then Aaron, by the help of the cfent,
gave to the molten mass the shape of a calf, or
whether he made use of the graver for the
purpose of carving hieroglyphics upon it, hu
been thought doubtful. The Syr. has |mov i^
tupss (TororX "the mould," for cheref. But
the expression 1V1, wayydsar, decides that it
was by the cheref, in whatever manner em-
ployed, that the shape of a calf was given to the
metal.
In N. T. tUiiy is the " image " or head of the
emperor on the coinage (Matt. xxii. 20).
Among the earliest objects of worship, re-
garded as symbols of deity, were, as has bes
said above, the meteoric stones which the
ancients believed to have been the images of the
gods fallen down from heaven (cp. Robertson
Smith, i. pp. 185-195). From these they trans-
ferred their regard to rough unhewn blocks, to
stone columns or pillars of wood, in which the
divinity worshipped was supposed to dwell, a*i
which were consecrated, like the sacred stone at
Delphi, by being anointed with oil, and crowned
with wool on solemn davs (Paus. /Vice. 24, § 6)
Tavernier (quoted by RosenmGller, Alt. i $■
Morgenland, i. § 89) mentions a black stow i»
the pagoda of Benares which was daily anointed
with perfumed oil, and snch are the "Lingims*
in daily use in the Siva worship of Bengal (cp.
Arnobius, i. 39 ; Min. Fel. c. 3). Such customs
are remarkable illustrations of the solemn con-
secration by Jacob of the stone at Bethel, a
showing the religious reverence with which
these memorials were regarded. And not only
were single stones thus honoured, but heaps ot
stone were, in later times at least, considered as
sacred to Hermes (Horn. Od. xvi. 471 ; cp. Vulg.
of Prov. xxvi. 8, " sicut qui mittit lapiden i»
acervum Mercurii "), and to these each pasrin?
traveller contributed his offering (Creuxer, 6>i*-
i. 24). The heap of stones which Laban erected
to commemorate the solemn compact between
himself and Jacob, and on which he invoked the
gods of his fathers, is an instance of the inter-
mediate stage in which snch heaps were as-
sociated with religious observances before they
became objects of worship. Jacob, for his part-
dedicated a single stone as his memorial, and
called Jehovah to witness, thus holding himself
aloof from the rites employed by Laban, which
may have partaken of his ancestral idolatry.
[Jeoab-Sahadutha.]
Digitized by
Google
IDOL, IMAGE
Of the forms assumed by the idolatrous images
we have not many traces in the Bible.' Ea,
the water-god of the Babylonians, was a human
figure terminating in a fish [Dagon] ; and that
the Syrian deities were represented in later
times in a symbolical human shape we know for
certainty. The Hebrews imitated their neigh-
bours in this respect as in others (Is. xliv. 13 ;
Wisd. xiii. 13), and from various allusions we
may infer that idols in human forms were not
uncommon among them, though they were more
anciently symbolised by animals (Wisd. xiii. 14),
as by the calves of Aaron and Jeroboam, and the
brazen serpent which was afterwards applied to
idolatrous uses (2 K. xviii. 4; Jjpm. i. 23).
When the image came from the hands of the
maker, it was decorated richly with silver and
gold, and sometimes crowned (Epist. Jer. 9) ;
clad in robes of blue and purple (Jer. x. 9), like
the draped images of Pallas and Hera (Miiller,
Hani. d. Arch. d. Kunst, § 69), and fastened in
the niche appropriated to it by means of chains
and rails (Wisd. xiii. 15), in order that the
influence of the deity which it represented
might be secured to the spot. So the Ephesians,
when besieged by Croesus, connected the wall
of their city by means of a rope to the temple
of Aphrodite, with the view of ensuring the aid
of the goddess (Her. i. 26) ; and for a similar
object the Tynans chained the stone image of
Apollo to the altar of Hercules (Curt. iv. 3, § 15).
Some images were painted red (Wisd. xiii. 14),
like those of Dionysus and the Bacchantes, of
Hermes, and the god Pan (Paus. ii. 2, § 5 ;
Miiller, Sand. d. Arch. d. Kunst, § 69). This
colour was formerly considered sacred. Pliny
relates, on the authority of Verrius, that it was
customary on festival days to colour with red-
lead the face of the image of Jupiter, and the
bodies of those who celebrated a triumph (xxxiii.
36). The figures of Priapas, the god of gardens,
were decorated in the same manner {"ruber
custos," Tibull. i. 1, 18> Among the objects
of worship enumerated by Arnobius (i. 39) are
bones of elephants, pictures, and garlands sus-
pended on trees, the ," rami coronati " of Apu-
leius (de Mag. c 56).
When the process of adorning the image was
completed, it was placed in a temple or shrine
appointed for it (olicla, Epist. Jer. 12, 19;
olicnua, Wisd. xiii. 15 ; (ISaKeTor, 1 Cor. viii. 10 ;
see Stanley's note on the latter passage), in
Wisd. xiii. 15, olicn/ia is thought to be used
contemptuously, as in Tibull. i. 10, 19, 20—
"cum paupere cultu stabat in exigiui ligneus
aede deus" (Fritzsche and Grimm, llandb. in
loco), but the passage quoted is by no means a
good illustration. From these temples the idols
were sometimes carried in procession (Epist.
Jer. 4, 26) on festival days. Their priests
were maintained from the idol treasury, and
feasted upon the meats which were appointed
for the idol's use (Bel and the Dragon, re. 3,
13 ; see Speaker's Comm. in loco). These sacri-
ficial feasts formed an important part of the
idolatrous ritual [Idolatrt], and were a great
stumbling-block to the early Christian converts.
They were to the heathen, as Dean Stanley has
• Some hideous forms are given In Biebm's BWB.
a. n. "OStsendlenste." See also Babelon, Manuel
et Arehiologie Oriental*, p. 2»i sq.
IDOLATRY
1423
well observed, what the observance of circumci-
sion and the Mosaic ritual were to the Jewish
converts, and it was for this reason that St.
Paul especially directed his attention to the
subject, and laid down the rules of conduct
contained in his First Letter to the Corinthians
(viii.-x.). [W. A. W.j [F.]
rDOLATRY (the A V. rendering of D'DTFI,
teraphim, R. V. "teraphim," in 1 Sam. xv. 23),
strictly speaking, denotes the worship of deity
in a visible form, whether the images to which
homage is paid are symbolical representations of
the true God, or of the false divinities which
have been made the objects of worship in His
stead. With its origin and progress the present
article is not concerned. The former is lost
amidst the dark mists of antiquity,* and the
latter is rather the subject of speculation than
of history. But under what aspect it is presented
to us in the Scriptures, how it affected the
Mosaic legislation, and what influence it had on
the history of the Israelites, are questions which
may be more properly discussed, with some hope
of arriving at a satisfactory conclusion. Whether,
therefore, the deification of the powers of nature,
and the representation of them under tangible
forms, preceded the worship of departed heroes,
who were regarded as the embodiment of some
virtue which distinguished their lives, is not in
this respect of much importance. Some Jewish
writers, indeed, grounding their theory on a
forced interpretation of Gen. iv. 26, assign to
Enos, the son of Seth, the unenviable notoriety
of having been the first to pay divine honours
to the host of heaven, and to lead others into
the like error (Maimon. de Idol. i. 1). R. Solo-
mon Jarchi, on the other hand, while admitting
the same verse to contain the first account oi
the origin of idolatry, understands it as implying
the deification of men and plants. Arabic tra-
dition, according to Sir W. Jones, connects the
people of Yemen with the same apostasy. The
third in descent from Joktan, and therefore a
contemporary of Nahor, took the surname of
'Abdu Shame, or " servant of the sun," whom he
and his family worshipped, while other tribes
honoured the planets and fixed stars (Hales,
Chronol. ii. 59, 4to ed.). Nimrod, again, to
whom is ascribed the introduction of Sabianism,
was after his death transferred to the con-
stellation Orion, and on the slender foundation
of the expression " Ur of the Chaldees " (Gen. xi.
31) is built the fabulous history of Abraham
and Nimrod, narrated in the legends of the
Jews and Mussulmans (Jellinek, Bet ha-Midrcali,
i. 23; Weil, BM. Leg. pp. 47-74; Hyde, Set.
Pert. c. 2).
1. But, descending from the regions of fiction
to sober historic narrative, the first undoubted
allusion to idolatry or idolatrous customs in the
Bible is in the account of Rachel's stealing her
father's teraphim (Gen. xxxi. 19), a relic of the
worship of other gods, whom the ancestors of
the Israelites served " on the other side of the
• Consult Tylor, Primitive Culture i Robertson Smith,
The Religion of Ok* Semites, I. ; Stade, Gttch. d. Voile.
Israel, pp. 406 sq., 428 sq. The last two writers adopt
the historic sequence and development of idolatry pre-
ferred by Kuenen and WeUhausen. See, on tbe other
hand, EBthgen, Beitr. ». Semit. Religionsgesckichte,
pp. 131 sq.
Digitized by
Google
1424
IDOLATBY
river, in old time " (Josh. xiir. 2). By these
household deities Laban was guided, and these
he consulted as oracles (obs. 'FIETU, Gen. xxx.
27, A. V. " learned by experience," E. V.
" divined "), though without entirely losing
sight of the God of Abraham and the God of
Nahor, to Whom he appealed when occasion
offered (Gen. xxxi. 53), while he was ready, in
the presence of Jacob, to acknowledge the
benefits conferred npon him by Jehovah (Gen.
xxx. 27). Such, indeed, was the character of
roost of the idolatrous worship of the Israelites.
Like the Cuthean colonists in Samaria, who
" feared Jehovah and served their own gods "
(2 K. xvii. 33), they blended in a strange
manner a theoretical belief in the true God
with the external reverence which, in different
stages of their history, they were led to pay to
the idols of the nations by whom they were
surrounded. For this species of false' worship
they seem, at all times, to have had an in-
credible propensity. On their journey from
Shechem to Bethel, the family of Jacob put
away from among them " the gods of the
foreigner : " not the teraphim of Laban, but the
gods of the'Canaanites through whose land they
passed, and the amulets and charms which were
worn as the appendages of their worship (Gen.
xxxv. 2, 4). And this marked feature of the
Hebrew character is traceable throughout the
entire history of the people. During their long
residence in Egypt, the country of symbolism,
they defiled themselves with the idols of the
land, and it was long before the taint was re-
moved (Josh. xxiv. 14 ; Ezek. xx. 7). To these
gods Moses, as the herald of Jehovah, flung
down the gauntlet of defiance (Kurtz, Oesch. d.
Alt. B. ii. 86), and the plagues of Egypt smote
their symbols (Num. xxxiii. 4). Yet, with the
memory of their deliverance fresh in their
minds, their leader absent, the Israelites cla-
moured for some visible shape in which they
might worship the God Who had brought them
up out of Egypt (Ex. xxxii.). Aaron lent him-
self to the popular cry, and chose as the symbol
of deity one with which they had long been
familiar — the calf — embodiment of Apis, and
emblem of the productive power of nature.
But, with a weakness of character to which his
greater brother was a stranger, he compromised
with his better impulses by proclaiming a
solemn feast to Jehovah (Ex. xxxii. 5). How
much of the true God was recognised by the
people in this brutish symbol it is impossible to
conceive; the festival was characterised by all
the shameless licentiousness with which idola-
trous worship was associated (v. 25), and which
seems to have constituted its chief attraction.
But on this occasion, as on all others, the trans-
gression was visited with swift vengeance, and
three thousand of the offenders were slain. For
a while the erection of the Tabernacle, and the
establishment of the worship which accompanied
it, satisfied that craving for an outward sign
which the Israelites constantly exhibited; and
for the remainder of their march through the
desert, with the dwelling-place of Jehovah in
the midst of them, they did not again degenerate
into open apostasy. But it was only so long as
their contact with the nations was of a hostile
character that this seeming orthodoxy was
maintained. The charms of the daughters of
IDOLATRY
Moab, as Balaam's bad genius foresaw, were
potent for evil : the Israelites were " yoked to
Baal-PeoT " in the trammels of his fair wor-
shippers, and the character of their devotions
is not obscurely hinted at (Mum. xiv.). The
great and terrible retribution which followed
left so deep an impress upon the hearts of toe
people that, after the conquest of the Promised
Land, they looked with an eye of terror npon
any indications of defection from the worship of
Jehovah, and denounced as idolatrous a memorial
so slight as the altar of the Reubenites at the
passage of Jordan (Josh. xxii. 16).
During the lives of Joshua and the elders
who outlived him, they kept true to their
allegiance ; but the generation following, who
knew not Jehovah, nor the works He had dose
for Israel, swerved from the plain path of their
fathers, and were caught in the toils of the
foreigner (Judg. ii.). From this time forth their
history becomes little more than a chronicle of
the inevitable sequence of offence and punish-
ment. " They provoked Jehovah to anger . . .
and the anger of Jehovah was hot against
Israel, and He delivered them into the hands of
spoilers that spoiled them " (Judg. ii. 12, 14)
The narratives of the Book of Judges, contempo-
raneous or successive, tell of the fierce struggle
maintained against their hated foes, and how
women forgot their tenderness and forsook their
retirement to sing the song of victory over the
oppressor. By turns each conquering nation
strove to establish the worship of its national
god. During the rule of Hidian, Joash the
father of Gideon had an altar to Baal, and so
Asherah (Judg. vi. 25), though he proved but
a lukewarm worshipper (v. 31). Even Gideon
himself gave occasion to idolatrous worship;
yet the ephod which he made from the spoils of
the Midianites was perhaps but a votive offering
to the true God (Judg. viii. 27). It is not im-
probable that the gold ornaments of which it
was composed were in some way connected with
idolatry (cp. Is. iii. 18-24) ; and that from their
having been worn as amulets, some superstitious
virtue was conceived to cling to them even in
their new form. But though in Gideon's life-
time no overt act of idolatry was practised, he
was no sooner dead than the Israelites again
returned to the service of the Baalim ; and, as
if in solemn mockery of the covenant made with
Jehovah, chose from among them Baal Benth,
"Baal of the Covenant" (cp. Z«k Uiuos), as
the object of their special adoration (Judg. viii.
33). Of this god we know only that his temple,
probably of wood (Judg. ix. 49), was a strong-
hold in time of need, and that his treasury was
filled with the silver of the worshippers (ix. +)•
Nor were the calamities of foreign oppression
confined to the land of Canaan. The tribes on
the east of Jordan went astray after the idols of
the land, and were delivered into the hands of
the children of Ammon (Judg. x. 8). But they
put away from among them " the gods of the
foreigner," and with the baseborn Jephthsh for
their leader gained a signal victory over their
oppressors. The exploits of Samson against the
Philistines, though achieved within a narrower
space and with less important results than those
of his predecessors, fill a brilliant page in his
country's history. But the tale of his mar-
vellous deeds is prefaced by that ever-recurring
Digitized by
Google
IDOLATRY
phrase, so mournfully familiar, " the children of
Israel did evil again in the eyes of Jehovah, and
Jehovah gave them into the hand of the Philis-
tines." Thus far idolatry is a national sin.
The episode of Micah, in Judg. xvii.-xviii., sheds
a lurid light on the secret practices of indi-
viduals, who without formally renouncing Jeho-
vah, though ceasing to recognise Him as the
theocratic King (xvii. 6), linked with His
worship the symbols of ancient idolatry. The
house of God, or sanctuary, which Micah made
in imitation of that at Shiloh, was decorated
with an ephod and teraphira dedicated to God,
and with a graven and molten image consecrated
to some inferior deities (Selden, de Dit Syria,
synt. i. c. 2). It is a significant fact, showing
how deeply rooted in the people was the ten-
dency to idolatry, that a Levite, who, of all
others, should have been most sedulous to main-
tain Jehovah's worship in its purity, was found
to assume the office of priest to the images of
Micah ; and that this Levite, priest afterwards
to the idols of Dan, was no other than Jonathan,
the son of Gershom, the son of Moses. Tradition
says that these idols were destroyed when the
Philistines defeated the army of Israel and took
from them the Ark of the covenant of Jehovah
(1 Sam. iv.). The Danites are supposed to have
carried them into the field, as the other tribes
bore the Ark, and the Philistines the images of
their gods, when they went forth to battle
(2 Sam. v. 21 ; Lewis, Orig. ffebr. v. 9). But
the Seder Olam Rabba (c. 24) interprets " the
captivity of the land " (Judg. xviii. 30) of the
captivity of Manasseh ; and Benjamin of Tudela
mistook the remains of later Gentile worship
for traces of the altar or statue which Micah
had dedicated, and which was worshipped by
the tribe of Dan (Selden, de IA$ Syr. synt. i.
c 2 ; Stanley, S. f P. p. 398). In later times
the practice of secret idolatry was carried to
greater lengths. Images were set up on the
corn-floors, in the wine-vats, and behind the
doors of private houses (Is. lvii. 8 ; Hos. ix. 1,
2) ; and to check this tendency the statute in
Deut. xxvii. 15 was originally promulgated.
Under Samuel's administration a fast was
held, and purificatory rites performed, to mark
the public renunciation of idolatry (1 Sam. vii.
3-6). But in the reign of Solomon all this was
forgotten. Each of his many foreign wires
brought with her the gods of her own nation ;
and the gods of Aromon, Moab, and Zidon were
openly worshipped. Three of the summits of
Olivet were crowned with the high-places of
Ashtoreth, Chemosh, and Molech (1 K. xi. 7 ;
2 K. xxiii. 13), and the fourth, in memory of
his great apostasy, was branded with the op-
probrious title of the " Mount of Corruption."
Rehoboam, the son of an Ammonite mother,
perpetuated the worst features of Solomon's
idolatry (1 K. xiv. 22-24); and in his reign
took place the great schism in the national
religion : when Jeroboam, fresh from his recol-
lections of the Apis worship of Egypt, erected
golden calves at Bethel and at Dan, and by this
crafty state-policy severed for ever the kingdoms
of Judah and Israel (1 K. xii. 26-33). To their
use temples were consecrated, and the service in
their honour was studiously copied from the
Mosaic ritual. High-priest himself, Jeroboam
ordained priests from the lowest ranks (2 Ch.
ltiDi.E Dier. — VOL. I.
IDOLATBY
1425
xi. 15) ; incense and sacrifices were offered, and
a solemn festival appointed, closely resembling
the Feast of Tabernacles (1 K. xii. 23, 33 ; cp.
Amos iv. 4, 5). [Jeroboam.] The worship of
the calves, " the sin of Israel " (Hos. x. 8),
which was apparently associated with the goat-
worship of Mendes (2 Ch. xi. 15 ; Herod, ii. 46)
or of the ancient Sabii (Lewis, Orig. Hebr. v. 3),
and the Asherim (1 K. xiv. 15; A. V. " groves"),
ultimately spread to the kingdom of Judah, and
centred in Beersheba (Amos v. 5, vii. 9). At
what precise period it was introduced into the
latter kingdom is not certain. The Chronicles
tell us how Abijah taunted Jeroboam with his
apostasy, while the less partial narrative in
1 Kings represents his own conduct as far from
exemplary (1 K. xv. 3). Asa's sweeping reform
spared not even the idol of his grandmother
Maachah, and, with the exception of the high-
places, he removed all relics of idolatrous wor-
ship (1 K. xv. 12-14), with its accompanying
impurities. His reformation was completed by
Jehoshaphat (2 Ch. xvii. 6).
The successors of Jeroboam followed in his
step, till Ahab, who married a Sidonian princess,
at her instigation (1 K. ni. 25) built a temple
and altar to Baal, and revived all the abomina-
tions of the Amorites (1 K. xxi. 26). For this
he attained the bad pre-eminence of having done
" more to provoke Jehovah, the God of Israel,
to anger than all the kings of Israel that were
before him" (1 K. xvi. 33). Compared with
the worship of Baal, the worship of the calves
was a venial offence, probably because it was
morally less detestable and also less anti-national
(1 K. xii. 28 ; 2 K. x. 28-31). [Elijah, p. 907.]
Henceforth Baal-worship became so completely
identified with the northern kingdom that it is
described as walking in the way or statutes of
the kings of Israel (2 K. xvi. 3; xvii. 8), as
distinguished from the sin of Jeroboam, which
ceased not till the Captivity (2 K. xvii. 23), and
the corruption of the ancient inhabitants of the
land. The idolatrous priests became a numerous
and important caste (1 K. xviii. 19), living under
the patronage of royalty, and fed at the royal
table. The extirpation of Baal's priests by
Elijah, and of his followers by Jehu (2 K. x.),
in which the royal family of Judah shared
(2 Ch. xxii. 7), was a deathblow to this form
of idolatry in Israel, though other systems still
remained (2 K. xiii. 6). But while Israel thus
sinned and was punished, Judah was more
morally guilty (Ezek. xvi. 51). The alliance of
Jehoshaphat with the family of Ahab transferred
to the southern kingdom, during the reigns of
his son and grandson, all the appurtenances of
Baal-worship (2 K. viii. 18, 27). In less than
ten years after the death of that king, in whose
praise it is recorded that he "sought not the
Baalim," nor walked " after the deed of Israel "
(2 Ch. xvii. 3, 4), a temple had been built for
the idol, statues and altars erected, and priests
appointed to minister in his service (2 K. xi. 18).
Jehoiada's vigorous measures checked the evil
for a time, but his reform was incomplete, and
the bigh-places still remained, as in the days of
Asa, a nucleus for any fresh system of idolatry
(2 K. xii. 3). Much of this might be due to the
influence of the king's mother, Zibiah of Beer-
sheba, a place intimately connected with the
idolatrous defection of Judah (Amos viii. 14).
4 y
Digitized by
Google
1426
IDOLATBY
After the death of Jehoiada, the prince* prevailed I
upon Joash to restore at least some portion of I
his father's idolatry (2 Ch. xxiv. 18). The con-
quest of the Edomites by Amaxiah introduced |
the worship of their gods, which had disappeared
since the days of Solomon (2 Ch. xxv. 14, 20).
After this period even the kings who did not
lend themselves to the encouragement of false
worship had to contend with the corruption
which still lingered in the heart* of the people
(2 K. xv. 35; 2 Ch. xxvii. 2). Hitherto the
Temple had been kept pure. The statues of
Baal and the other gods were worshipped in
their own shrines, but Ahaz, who "sacrificed
unto the gods of Damascus, which smote him "
(2 Ch. xxviii. 23), and built altars to them at
every corner of Jerusalem, and high-places in
every city of Judah, replaced the brazen Altar
of burnt-offering by one made after the model of
" the altar " of Damascus, and desecrated it to
his own uses (2 K. xvi. 10-15). b
The conquest of the ten tribes by Shalmaneser
was for them the last scene of the drama of
abominations which had been enacted unin-
terruptedly for upwards of 250 years. In the
northern kingdom no reformer arose to vary the
long line of royal apostates; whatever was
effected in the way of reformation, was done by
the hands of the people (2 Ch. xxxi. 1). But
even in their captivity they helped to perpetuate
the corruption. The colonists, whom the As-
syrian conquerors placed in their stead in the
cities of Samaria, brought with them their own
gods, and were taught at Bethel by a priest of
the captive nation " the manner of the God of
the land," the lessons thus learnt resulting in a
strange admixture of the calf-worship of Jero-
boam with the homage paid to their national
deities (2 K. xrii. 21-41). Their descendants
were in consequence regarded with suspicion by
the elders who returned from the Captivity
with Ezra, and their offers of assistance rejected
(Ezra iv. 3).
The first act of Hezekiah on ascending the
throne was the restoration and purification of
the Temple, which had been dismantled and
closed daring the latter part of his father's
life (2 Ch. xxviii. 24, xxix. 3). The multitudes
who flocked to Jerusalem to celebrate the Pass*
over, so long in abeyance, removed the idolatrous
altars of burnt-offering and incense erected by
Ahaz (2 Ch. xxx. 14). The iconoclastic spirit
was not confined to Judab and Benjamin, but
spread throughout Ephraim and Manaaseh (2 Ch.
xxxi. 1), and to all external appearance idolatry
was extirpated. But the reform extended little
below the surface (Is. xxix. 13). Among the
leaders of the people there were many in high
position who conformed, to the necessities of the
>> The Syr. supports the rendering of IRQ? In
v. 16, which the A. V. and K. V. have adopted— "to
enquire by " : but Keil translates the clause, " it will be
for n>e to consider," i.e. what shall be done with the
altar, in order to support his theory that this altar
erected by Abas was not directly Intended to profane
the Temple by idolatrous worship. But It is clear that
something of an idolatrous nature had been introduced
into the Temple, and wis afterwards removed by Heze-
kiah (2 Ch. xxix. 6; cp. Ezra vi. 21, be. 11). It la
possible that this might have reference to the brazen
serpent.
IDOLATRY
time (Is. xxviii. 14), and under Marasseh's
patronage the false worship, which had been
merely driven into obscurity, broke out with
tenfold virulence. Idolatry of every form, and
with all the accessories of enchantments, dirin-
tion, and witchcraft, was again rife; no place
was too sacred, no associations too hallowed, to
be spared the contamination. If the conduct of
Ahaz in erecting an altar in the Temple-court
is open to a charitable construction, MaaasKh's
was of no doubtful character. The two courts
of the Temple were profaned by altars dedicated
to the host of heaven, and the image of toe
Asherah polluted the holy place (2K.xxi.7;
2 Ch. xxxiii. 7, 15 ; cp. Jer. xxxii. 34). Erai in
his late repentance he did not entirely destroy
all traces of his former wrong. The people,
easily swayed, still burned incense on the hirh
places ; but Jehovah was the ostensible object of
their worship. The king's son sacrificed to his
father's idols, but was not associated with bin
in his repentance, and in his short reign of tm
years restored all the altars of the Baalim, aid
the images of the Asherah. With the death of
Josiah ended the last effort to revive among the
people a purer ritual, if not a purer faith. The
lamp of David, which had long shed but ■
struggling ray, flickered for a while and ton
went out in the darkness of Babylocitt
Captivity.
But foreign exile was powerless to eradicate
the deep inbred tendency to idolatry. One of
the first difficulties with which Ezra bad to
contend, and which brought him well-nigh to
despair, was the haste with which his country-
men took them foreign wives of the people"
the land, and followed them in all their abomi-
nations (Ezra iz.). The priests and rulers, u
whom he looked for assistance in his great
enterprise, were among the first to fall s«y
(Ezraix. 2, x. 18; Neb. iv. 17, 18, xiii. »r
Even during the Captivity the devotees of false
worship plied their craft as prophets and diviner'
(Jer. xxix. 8; Ezck. xiii.), and the Jews whofW
to Egypt carried with them recollections of the
material prosperity which attended their idola-
trous sacrifices in Judah, and to the neglect of
which they attributed their exiled condition
(Jer. xliv. 17, 18). The conquests of Alexander
in Asia caused Greek influence to be extensively
felt, and Greek idolatry to be first tolerated, and
then practised, by the Jews (1 Mace. i. 43-W,
54). The attempt of Antiochus to establish this
form of worship was vigorously resisted by
Mattathias (1 Mace ii. 23-26), who was joineJ
in his rebellion by the Assidaeans (r. 42), and
destroyed the altars at which the king com-
manded them to sacrifice (1 Mace ii. 25, 4.A
The erection of synagogues (cp. Schurer, <?*"*■
<t. jiid. Voltes im Zeitalt. J. Christi, ii. 358) has
been assigned as a reason for the comparative
purity of the Jewish worship after the Captivity
(Prideaux, Conn. i. 374), while another cause
has been discovered in the hatred for image*
acquired by the Jews in their intercourse wit"
the Persians.
It has been a question much debated whether
the Israelites were ever so far given up to idolatry
as to have lost all knowledge of the true God. It
would be hard to aasert this of anv nation, and
still more difficult to prove. That there slwavs
remained among them a faithful few, who in the
Digitized by
Google
IDOLATBY
face of every danger adhered to the worship of
Jehovah, may readily be believed, for even at a
time when Baal-worship . was most prevalent
there were found 7,000 in Israel who had
not bowed before his image (1 K. xix. 18). But
there is still room for grave suspicion that
among the masses of the people, though the
idea of a Supreme Being— of Whom the images
they worshipped were but the distorted repre-
sentatives — was not entirely lost, it was so
obscured as to be but dimly apprehended. And
not only were the ignorant multitude thus led
astray, but the priests, scribes, and prophets
became leaders of the apostasy (Jer. ii. 8).
Warburton, indeed, maintained that they never
formally renounced Jehovah, and that their
defection consisted " in joining foreign worship
and idolatrous ceremonies to the ritual of the
true God" {Din. Leg. B. v. § 3). But one
passage in their history, though confessedly
obscure, seems to point to a time when, under
the rule of the judges, " Israel for many days
had no true God, and no teaching priest, and no
law " (2 Ch. xv. 3). There can be no doubt
that much of the idolatry of the Hebrews con-
sisted in worshipping the true God under an
image, such as the calves at Bethel and Dan
(Jos. Ant. viii. 8, § 5 ; oofuUcts trorifiovi r<f
Oaf), and by associating His worship with
idolatrous rites (Jer. xli. 5) and places conse-
crated to idols (2 K. xviii. 22). From the
peculiarity of their position they were never
distinguished as the inventors of a new pan-
theon, nor did they adopt any one system of
idolatry so exclusively as ever to become
identified with it.* But they no sooner came
in contact with other nations than they readily
adapted themselves to their practices, the old
spirit of antagonism died rapidly away, and
intermarriage was one step to idolatry.
II. The old religion of the Semitic races con-
sisted, in the opinion of Movers (Phoen. i. c. 5),
in the deification of the powers and laws of
nature; these powers being considered either
as distinct and independent, or as manifestations
of one supreme and all-ruling being. In most
instances the two ideas were co-existent. The
deity, following human analogy, was conceived
as male and female: the one representing the
active, the other the passive principle of nature ;
the former 'the source of spiritual, the latter of
physical life. The transference of the attributes
of the one to the other resulted either in their
mystical conjunction in the hermaphrodite, as
the Persian Mithra and Phoenician Baal, or the
two combined to form a third, which symbolized
the essential unity of both.* With these two
supreme beings all other deities are identical;
so that in different nations the same nature-
worship appears under different forms, repre-
senting the various aspects nnder which the
« As the Moabites with the worship of Cbemosh
(Num. xxi. 29).
* This will explain the occurrence of the name of
Baal (see i . n.) with the masculine and feminine articles
in the LXX. : cp. Hos. xl. 2 ; Jer. xix. 6 ; Rom. xi. 4.
Phflochorus, quoted by MacrobiuB (Sat. lit. 8), says
that men and women sacrificed to Venus or the Moon,
with the garments of the sexes interchanged, because
she was regarded both as masculine and feminine
(see Selden, dc DU Syr. U. 2). Hence Lunut and
Luna.
IDOLATBY
1427
idea of the power of nature is presented. The
sun and moon were early selected as outward
symbols of this all-pervading power, and the
worship of the heavenly bodies was not only the
most ancient but the most prevalent system of
idolatry. Taking its rise, according to a probable
hypothesis, in the plains of Chaldea, it spread
through Egypt, Greece, Scythia, and even
Mexico and Ceylon. It was regarded as an
offence amenable to the civil authorities in the
days of Job (xxxi. 26-28), and one of the
statutes of the Mosaic Law was directed against
its observance (Deut. iv. 19; xvii. 3); the
former referring to the star-worship of Arabia,
the latter to the concrete form in which it
appeared among the Syrians and Phoenicians.
It is probable that the Israelites learnt their
first lessons in sun-worship from the Egyptians,
in whose religious system that luminary, as
Osiris, held a prominent place. The city of
On (Bethshemesh or Heliopolis) took its name
from his temple (Jer. xliii. 13), and the wife of
Joseph was the daughter of his priest (Gen. xli.
45). The Phoenicians worshipped him under
the title of "Lord of heaven," OJOB' bv2,
Ba'a!shama!tim(fc(\irAfitiv,iux. to Sanchoniatho
in Pbilo-Byblius ; cp. Bitthgen, p. 23, and Index,
s. ». " Sonnengottheit "), and Adon (cp. Bathgen.
p. 41), the Greek Adonis, and the Thammuz of
Ezekiel (viii. 14). [Thammcz.] Under the
form of appellatives the Sun was worshipped as
Molech or Milcom by the Ammonites, and as
Chemosh by the Moabites. The Hadad of the
Syrians is by some thought to be the same
deity [see Hadad], whose name is traceable in
Benhadad, Hadadezer, and Hadad or Adad, the
Edomite. The Assyrian Bel or Belus is another
form of Baal. According to Philo (de Vit. Cont.
§3; but see p. 998, col. 2), the Essenes
were wont to pray to the sun at morning and
evening (Joseph. B. J. ii. 8, § 5). By the later
kings of Judah, sacred horses and chariots were
dedicated to the sun-god, as by the Persians
(2 K. xxiii. 11 ; Bochart, Hicroz. pt. 1, b. ii.
c. xi. ; Selden, de Dis Syr. ii. 8), to march in
procession and greet his rising (K. Sol. Jarchi
on 2 K. xxiii. 11). The Masaagetae offered
horses in sacrifice to him (Strabo, xi. p. 513),
on the principle enunciated by Macrobius (Sat.
vii. 7), "like rejoiceth in like" ("similibus
similia gaudent;" cp. Her. i. 216), and the
custom was common to many nations.
The moon, worshipped by the Phoenicians
under the name of Astarte (Lucian, de Dea Syra,
c. 4. Cp. Bitthgen, p. 31, &c), or Baaltis, the
passive power of nature, as Baal was the active
(Movers, i. 149), and known to the Hebrews as
Ashtoreth (see s. n.), the tutelary goddess of the
Sidonians, appears early among the objects of
Israelitjsh idolatry. But this Syro-phoeniciau
worship of the sun and moon was of a grosser
character than the pure star-worship of the
Magi, which Movers distinguishes as Upper
Asiatic or Assyro-Persian, and was equally re-
moved from the Chaldean astrology and Sabianism
of later times. The former of these systems
tolerated no images or altars, and the contem-
plation of the heavenly bodies from elevated
spots constituted the greater part of its ritual.
But, though we have no positive historical
account of star-worship before the Assyrian
4 Y 2
Digitized by
Google
1428
IDOLATRY
period,* we mar infer that it was early practised
in a concrete form among the Israelites from the
allusions in Amos v. 26 and Acts vii. 42, 43.
Eren in the desert they are said to have been
given up to worship the host of heaven, while
Chiun and Remphan have on various grounds
been identified with the planet Saturn. It was
to counteract idolatry of this nature that the
stringent law of Dent. xvii. 3 was enacted ; and
with the view of withdrawing the Israelites
from undue contemplation of the material uni-
verse, Jehovah, the God of Israel, is constantly
placed before them as Jehovah Zebaoth, Jehovah
of Hosts, the King of Heaven (Dan. iv. 35, 37),
to Whom the heaven and heaven of heavens
belong (Deut. x. 14). However this may be,
Movers (Phoen. i. 65, 66) contends that the
later star-worship, introduced by Ahaz and
followed by Manasseh, was purer and more
spiritual in its nature than the Israelite-Phoe-
nician worship of the heavenly bodies under
symbolical forms, as Baal and Asherah ; and that
it was not idolatry in the same sense that the
latter was, but of a simply contemplative cha-
racter. He is supported, to some extent, by the
fact that we find no mention of any images of
the snn or moon or the host of heaven, but
merely of vessels devoted to their service (2 K.
xxiii. 4). But there is no reason to believe
that the divine honours paid to the "Queen of
Heaven," A. V. text and R. V. (or as others
render, " the frame " or " structure of the
heavens;" see A. V. marg.) r were equally dis-
sociated from image worship. Sir H. Layard
(Nm. ii. 451) discovered a bas-relief at Mimroud,
which represented four idols carried in pro-
cession by Assyrian warriors. One of these
figures he identifies with Hera, the Assyrian
Astarte, represented with a star on her head
(Amos v. 26), and with the " queen of heaven,"
who appears on the rock-tablets of Pterium
" standing erect on a lion, and crowned with a
tower, or mural coronet," as in the Syrian
temple of Hierapolis (Id. p. 456 ; Lucian, de Dea
Sjra, 31, 32). But, in his remarks upon a
figure which resembles the Rhea of Diodorus,
Sir H. Layard adds, "The representation in a
human form of the celestial bodies, themselves
originally but a type, was a corruption which
appears to have crept at a later period into the
mythology of Assyria ; for, in the more ancient
bas-reliefs, figures with caps surmounted by
stars do not occur, and the sun, moon, and planets
stand alone " (Id. pp. 457, 458).
The allusions in Job xxxviii. 31, 32 (see Dill-
mann * in loco) are too obscure to allow any
inference to be drawn as to the mysterious in-
fluences which were held by the old astrologers
to be exercised by the stars over human destiny,
• B&thgen, p. 107, points out the existence of star-
worship among tbe Nabataeans of Sinai.
< Jer. vii. 18 ; xlix. 19. In the former passage
some MSS. have n3K^D for rcbo («* Baer's text
of Jeremiah, p. 89), a reading supported by the I.XX.,
r jj o-rpnri), as well as by the Syr. "^ ng * pOUhdn,
its equivalent. But In tbe latter tbey both agree in
tbe rendering "queen." Tbe "queen of heaven" Is
Identified with Athar-Astnrle, which as Atar-Samaiu is '
frequently mentioned in tbe Inscriptions of Assurbani- {
pal, and was tbe goddess of the N. Arabian Kedareues
(cp. Schroder, KAT.,* p. 414 ; Bgthgen, p. 69). |
IDOLA.TBY
nor is there sufficient evideuoe to connect them
with anything more recondite than the astro-
nomical knowledge of the period. The same
may be said of tbe poetical figure in Deborah's
chant of triumph, " the stars from their high-
ways warred with Sisera" (Judg. v. 20). In
the later times of the monarchy, Mazzaloth, the
planets, or the zodiacal signs, received, next to
the sun and moon, their share of popular adora-
tion (2 K. xxiii. 5) ; and the history of idolatry
among the Hebrews shows at all times an
intimate connexion between the deification of
the heavenly bodies, and the superstition which
watched the clouds for signs, and used divination
and enchantments. It was but a step from
such culture of the sidereal powers to the wor-
ship of Gad and Meni, Babylonian divinities
(see B&thgen, pp. 79, 80), symbols of Venus or
the moon, as the goddess of luck or fortune.
Under the latter aspect, the moon was reverenced
by the Egyptians (Macrob. Sat. i. 19) ; and the
name Baal-gad has been thought to be an
example of the manner in which the worship of
the planet Jupiter as the bringer of luck was
grafted on the old faith of the Phoenicians.
The false gods of the colonists of Samaria were
sometimes connected with Eastern astrology:
Adrammelech, Movers regards as the sun-fire —
the Solar Mars — and Anammelech the Solar
Saturn (Phoen. i. 410, 411), but modern re-
search seems opposed to this identification (see
Pinches, s. fin. ApBAMMELECH, Anammelech).
The Vulgate rendering of Prov. xxvi. 8, " sicut
qui mittit lapidem in acervum Afercurii," follows
the Mid rash on the passage quoted by Rashi,
and requires merely a passing notice (see Seldcn,
de Dis Syris, ii. 15 ; Maim, de Idol. iii. 2 ;
Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. s. v. D^>1p1D).
Beast-worship, as exemplified in the calves of
Jeroboam and the dark hints which seem to
point to the goat of Mendes, has already been
alluded to (cp. Robertson Smith, i. 278 sq.).
There is no actual proof that the Israelites ever
joined in such worship,' though Ahaziah sent
stealthily to Banlzebub, the fly-god of Ekron
(2 K. i.), and in later times the brazen serpent
became the object of idolatrous homage (2 K.
xviii. 4). But whether the latter was regarded
with superstitious reverence as a memorial of
their early history, or whether incense was
offered to it as a symbol of some power of nature,
cannot now be exactly determined. The threaten-
ing in Lev. xxvi. 30, " I will put your carcases
upon the carcases of your idols " (cp. Knobel-
Dillmann in loco), may possibly be a protest
against the tendency to regard animals, as in
Egypt, as the symbols of deity (Robertson Smith,
i. pp. 208, 283). Certain it is that "all the
great deities of the Northern Semites had their
sacred animals, and were themselves worshipped
in animal form, or in association with animal
symbols, down to a late date " (Robertson Smith,
i. 270).
Of pure hero-worship among the Semitic races
• Some bave explained tbe allusion in Zeph. i. 9,
as referring to a practice connected with the worship
of Dagon ; cp. 1 Sam. v. 6. Tbe allusion Is more likely
a mere proverbial expression (see Orelll on Zeph. L c
in Strack u. Zuckler's Kgf. Aomin.). Tbe Syrians, on
tbe authority of Xenophou (Anab. I. 4, y 9), paid divine
honours to fish (see Robertson Smith, I. 160, n. 1).
Digitized by
Google
IDOLATRY
we find no trace. Moses, indeed, seems to hare
entertained some dim apprehension that his
countrymen might, after his death, pay him
more honours than were due to man ; and the
anticipation of this led him to review his own
conduct in terms of strong reprobation (Deut.
iv. 21, 22). The expression in Ps. cri. 28,
" they ate the sacrifices of the dead," is in all
probability metaphorical (see Delitzsch* in loco),
and Wisd. xiv. 15 refers to a later practice due
to Greek influence. The rabbinical commen-
tators discover in Gen. xlviii. 16 an allusion to
the worshipping of Angels (cp. Col. ii. 18), while
they defend their ancestors from the charge of
regarding them in any other light than mediators,
or intercessors with God (Lewis, Orig. Ilebr.
v. 3). It is needless to add that their inference
and apology are equally groundless. With like
probability has been advanced the theory of the
demon-worship of the Hebrews, the only founda-
tion for it being two highly poetical passages
(Deut. xxxii. 17 [see Dillmann* in loco] ; Ps. cvi.
37). It is possible that the Persian dualism is
hinted at in Is. xlv. 7 (Delitzsch 4 ), but not
probable (Dillmann s ).
But if the forms of the false gods were mani-
fold, the places devoted to their worship were
almost equally numerous. The singular reve-
rence with which trees have in all ages been
honoured (see Robertson Smith, i. Index, a. r.
Trees) is not without example in the history of
the Hebrews. The terebinth at Mature, beneath
which Abraham built an aitar (Gen. xii. 7, xiii.
18), and the memorial grove planted by him at
Beersheba (Gen. xxi. S3), were intimately con-
nected with patriarchal worship, though in
after-ages his descendants were forbidden to do
that which he did with impunity, in order to
avoid the contamination of idolatry , k As a
symptom of their rapidly degenerating spirit,
the oak of Shechem, which stood in the sanc-
tuary of Jehovah (Josh. xxiv. 26), and beneath
which Joshua set up the stone of witness, per-
haps appears in Judges (ix. 37 ; cp. Bertheau *)
as (K. V.) "the oak (not " plain," as in A. V.)
of Meonenim " (U. V. marg. augurs).' Mountains
and high places were chosen spots for offering
sacrifice and incense to idols (1 K. xi. 7, xiv.
23); and the retirement of gardens and the
thick shade of woods offered great attractions to
their worshippers (2 K. xvi. 4 ; Is. i. 29 ; Hos.
iv. 13). It was the ridge of Carmel which
Elijah selected as the scene of his contest with
the priests of Baal, fighting with them the
battle of Jehovah as it were on their own
ground. [CAimtL.] Carmel was regarded by
* Jerome (OS.* p. 148, 16, s. v. Dryt) mentions an oak
near Hebron which existed In his infancy, and wis
the traditional tree beneath which Abrabam dwelt. It
was regarded with great reverence, and was made an
object of worship by the heathen. Modem Palestine
abounds with sacred trees. They are found "all over
the land covered with bits of rags from the garments of
passing villagers, hnng op as acknowledgments or as
deprecatory signals and charms : and we find beautiful
clumps of oak trees sacred to a kind of beings called
Jacob's daughters " (Thomson, The Land and the Book,
11. 151). [See Gkoyx.]
> Unless this be a relic of the ancient Canaanltish
worship; an older name associated with idolatry, which
the conquering Hebrews were commanded and en-
deavoured to obliterate (Deut. xlL 3).
IDOLATRY
1429
the Roman historians as a sacred mountain of
the Jews (Tac. H. ii. 78 ; Suet. Vesp. 7). The
host of heaven was worshipped on the housetop
(2 K. xxiii. 12 ; Jer. xix. 3, xxxii. 29 ; Zeph. i.
5). In describing the sun-worship of the Naha-
taeans, Strabo (xvi. p. 784) mentions two charac-
teristics which strikingly illustrate the worship
of Baal. They built their altars on the roofs of
houses, and offered on them incense and libations
daily. On the wall of his city, in the sight of
the besieging armies of Israel and Edom, the
king of Moab offered his eldest son as a burnt-
offering. The Persians, who worshipped the
sun under the name of Mithra (Strabo, xv.
p. 732), sacrificed on as elevated spot, but built
no altars or images.
The priests of the false worship are some-
times designated Kemarim (D ,- 1D3 ; see MV."),
a word of Syriac origin, to which different
meanings have been assigned. It is applied to
the non-Levitical priests who burnt incense on
the high-places (2 K. xxiii. 5) as well as to the
priests of the calves (Hos. x. 5) ; and the corre-
sponding word is used in the Peshitto (Judg.
xviii. 30) of Jonathan and his descendants, priests
to the tribe of Dan, and in Targ. Onkelos (Gen.
xlrii. 22) of the priests of Egypt. The Rabbis,
followed by Gesenius, have derived it from a
root signifying " to be black," and without any
authority assert that the name was given to
idolatrous priests from the black vestments
which they wore. But white was the distinc-
tive colour in the priestly garments of all
nations from India to Gaul, and black was only
worn when they sacrificed to the subterranean
gods (Biihr, Symb. ii. 87, &c). That a special
dress was adopted by the Baal-worshippers, as
well as by the false prophets (Zech. xiii. 4), is
evident from 2 K. x. 22; the vestments were
kept in an apartment of the idol temple, under
the charge probably of one of the inferior
priests. Micah's Levite was provided with
appropriate robes (Judg. xvii. 11). The
"strange (R. V. "foreign") apparel" men-
tioned in Zeph. i. 8 refers doubtless to a similar
dress, adopted by the Israelites in defiance of
the sumptuary law in Num. xv. 37-40.
In addition to the priests there were other
persons intimately connected with idolatrous
rites, and the impurities from which they were
inseparable. Both men and women consecrated
themselves to the service of idols (Robertson
Smith, i. 133) : the former as D'Enp, qedeshim,
for which there is reason to believe the A. V.
(Deut. xxiii. 17 ; see the Heb. or R. V. marg.)
has not given too harsh an equivalent ; the
latter as TliEHp, gedeshoth, who wove shrines
for Astarte (2 K. xxiii. 7), and resembled the
iralpou of Corinth, of whom Strabo (viii. p. 378)
says there were more than a thousand attached
to the temple of Aphrodite. Egyptian prosti-
tutes consecrated themselves to Isis (Juv. vi.
489, ix. 22-24). The same class of women
existed among the Phoenicians, Armenians,
Lydians, and Babylonians (Her. i. 93, 199 ;
Strabo, xi. p. 532 ; Epist. of Jerem. v. 43).
They are distinguished from the public prosti-
tutes (Hos. iv. 14) and associated with the per-
formances of sacred rites, just as in Strabo (xii.
p. 559) we find the two classes co-existing at
Comana, the Corinth of Pontus, much frequented
Digitized by
Google
1430
IDOLATEY
by pilgrims to the shrine of Aphrodite. 1 The
wealth thus obtained flowed into the treasury of
the idol temple, and against such a practice the
injunction in Deut. xxiii. 18 is directed. The
class of persons alluded to was composed of
foreigners (Lucian, de Syra Dea, c. 5) ; and from
the juxtaposition of prostitution and the idol-
atrous rites against which the laws in Lev. xix.
are aimed, it is probable that, next to its im-
morality, one main reason why it was visited
with such stringency was its connexion with
idolatry (cp. 1 Cor. vi. 9).
But, besides these accessories, there were the
ordinary rites of worship which idolatrous
systems had in common with the religion of the
Hebrews. Offering burnt sacrifices to the idol
gods (2 K. v. 17), burning incense in their
honour (1 K. xi. 8), and bowing down in worship
before their images (1 K. xix. 18) were the
chief parts of their ritual; and from their
very analogy with the ceremonies of true wor-
ship were more seductive than the grosser forms.
Nothing can be stronger or more positive than
the language in which these ceremonies were
denounced by Hebrew Law. Every detail of
idol-worship was made the subject of a separate
enactment, and many of the laws, which in
themselves seem trivial and almost absurd,
receive from this point of view their true signi-
ficance. We are told by Maimonidea (ifor. Sfeb.
c. 12) that the prohibitions against sowing a
field with mingled seed, and wearing garments
of mixed material, were directed against the
practices of idolater*, who attributed a kind of
magical influence to the mixture (Lev. xix. 19;
Spencer, de Leg. Hcbr. ii. 18. Cp. Knobel-Dill-
mann in loco). Such, too, were the precepts
which forbade that the garments of the sexes
should be interchanged (Deut. xxiii. 5 ; Maimon.
De Idol. xii. 9). According to Macrobius (Sat.
iii. 8), other Asiatics when they sacrificed to
their Venus changed the dress of the sexes. The
priests of Cybele appeared in women's clothes,
and used to mutilate themselves (Creuzer, Symb.
ii. 34, 42) : the same custom was observed " by
the Ithyphalli in the rites of Bacchus, and by
the Athenians in their Ascophoria" (Young,
Idol. Cor. in Set. i. 105; cp. Lucian, de Dea
Syra, c. 15). The Israelites were prohibited
for three years after their conquest of Canaan
from eating of the fruit-trees of the land
(Lev. xix. 23). Some interpret this as a protec-
tion against contamination, the cultivation of
the trees having been attended with magical
rites ; others consider it and such prohibitions
as follow precautions to propitiate the Divine
powers (Robertson Smith, i. 148-9,444). They
were forbidden to "round the corner of the
head," and to " mar the corner of the beard "
(Lev. xix. 27), as the Arabians did in honour of
their gods (Her. iii. 8, iv. 175). Hence, the
phrase HK9 'XWp, qesiae phe'ah, (literally)
" shorn of the corner," is especially applied to
idolaters (Jer. ix. 26, xxv. 23 ; Robertson Smith,
i. 307). Spencer (do Leg. Hebr. ii. 9, § 2)
I An Illustration, though not an example, of this Is
found In the modern history of Europe. At a period
of great profligacy and corruption of morals, licentious-
ness was carried to such an excess in Strasburg that
Hie public prostitutes received the appellation of the
mcaltows of the cathedral (Hitler, rhil. of Hut. fl. 441).
IDOLATRY
explains the law forbidding the offering of bossy
(Lev. ii. 11; see Honey) as intended to oppo«
an idolatrons practice. Strabo describes 1st
Magi as offering in all their sacrifices Ubatioss
of oil mingled with honey and milk (it. p. 733} I
Offerings in which honey was an ingredient
were made to the inferior deities and the dad
(Horn. Od. x. 519; Porph. * Astr. Jfjfsap*.
c. 17). So also the practice of eating the flab
of sacrifices "over the blood" (Lev. xix, S;
Ezek. xxxiii. 25, 26) was, according to Miimo-
nidea, common among the Zabii (RobtrtsM
Smith, i. 324). Spencer gives a double raw*
for the prohibition : that it was a rite of drrhu-
tion, and divination of the worst kind, s specio
of necromancy by which they attempted to n*
the spirits of the dead (cp. Hor. Sat I 8)
There are supposed to be allusions to the prac-
tice of necromancy in Is. lxv. 4, or at any nte
to superstitious rites in connexion with the
dead (see Delitzsch * in loco). The grafting of
one tree upon another was forbidden, beaux
among idolaters the process was accompanied by
gross obscenity (Maim. ifor. Nth. c 12). Cut-
ting the flesh for the dead (Lev. xix. 28; 1 H\
xviii. 28), and making a baldness between fbt
eyes (Deut. xiv. 1), were associated with idola-
trous rites; the latter being a custom smca;
the Syrians (Sir G. Wilkinson in EawUW>
Herod, ii. 158, note. Cp. Robertson Smith, I
304). The thrice-repeated and mnch-veiei
passage, "Thou shalt not seethe a kid is hi>
mother's milk" (Ex. xxiii. 19, xxxiv. 26; Drat-
xiv. 21), interpreted by some as a precept of
humanity, but more probably a prohibition
against some ancient form of sacrifice (Robert-
son Smith, i. 204), is explained by Cudworth b;
means of a quotation from a Karaite commen-
tary which he had seen in MS. :— " It w» »
custom of the ancient heathens, when they bad
gathered in all their fruit, to take a kid and
boil it in the dam's milk, and then in a magical
way go about and besprinkle with it all the
trees and fields and gardens and orchards;
thinking by this means they should make then
fructify, and bring forth again more abundantly
the following year" (On the Lord's Stpp":
c. 2). k The law which regulated clean and un-
clean meats (Lev. xx. 23-26) may be considered
both as a sanitary regulation and also as baring
a tendency to separate the Israelites from the
surrounding idolatrons nations. It was with
the same object, in the opinion of Michaeht,
that while in the wilderness they were pro-
hibited from killing any animal for food without
first offering it to Jehovah (Lam of Mixes
trans. Smith, art. 203). The mouse, 1 one of the
unclean animals of Leviticus (xi. 29), was sacri-
ficed by the ancient Magi (Is. Ixvi. 17 ; Movers.
Phoen. i. 219). It may have been come such
reason as that assigned by Lewis (Orig. lldr-
v. 1), that the dog was the symbol of an
Egyptian deity, which gave rise to the prohibi-
tion in Deut. xxiii. 18. Movers says that the dog
was offered in sacrifice to Moloch (j. 404), *»
* Dr. Thomson mentions a favourite dish among the
Arabs called Icon immi, to which be conceives allorioo
is made ( The Land and the Book, I. 1st).
1 The swine, the dog, fish, the mouse, the bene, sod
the dove were unclean animals sacrificed among Semites
(Robertson Smith, i. 272 sq.).
Digitized by
Google
IDOLATBY
swine to the moon and Dionysus by the Egyp-
tians, who afterwards ate of the flesh (Her. iii.
47 ; Is. lzv. 4). Eating of the things offered
was a necessary appendage to the sacrifice (cp.
Ex. xviii. 12, xxxii. 6, xxxir. 15; Num. xxv. 2,
&c). Among the Persians the victim was eaten
by the worshippers, and the soul alone left for
the god (Strabo, xv. 732). " Hence it is that
the idolatry of the Jews in worshipping other
gods is so often described synecdochically under
the notion of feasting. Is. lvii. 7, 'Upon a
high and lofty mountain thou hast set thy bed,
and thither wentest thou up to offer sacrifice ; '
for in those ancient times they were not wont to
sit at feasts, but lie down on beds or couches.
Ezek. xxiii. 41 ; Amos ii. 8, 'They laid them-
selves down upon clothes laid to pledge by
every altar,' i.«. laid themselves down to eat of
the sacrifice that was offered on the altar : cp.
Ezek. xviii. 11 " (Cudworth, ut supra, c 1 ; cp.
1 Cor. viii. 10). The Israelites were forbidden
" to print any mark upon them " (Lev. xix. 28 ;
in symbol of self-dedication to a deity ; cp.
Robertson Smith, i. 316, n. 1), because it was a
custom of idolaters to brand upon their flesh
some symbol of the deity they worshipped, as
the ivy-leaf of Bacchus (3 Mace. ii. 29). Ac-
cording to Lucian (de Dca Syra, 59) all the
Syrians wore marks of this kind on their necks
and wrists (cp. Is. zliv. 5 ; Gal. vi. 17 ; Bev.
ziv. 1, 11). Many other practices of false wor-
ship are alluded to, and made the subjects of
rigorous prohibition, but none are more fre-
quently or more severely denounced than those
which peculiarly distinguished the worship of
Molech. The worship of this idol was polluted
by the foul stain of human sacrifice (Dent. zii.
31; 2 K. iii. 27; Jer. vii. 31; Ps. cvi. 37;
Ezek. xxiii. 39 : cp. Mic vi. 7). Nor was this
practice confined to the rites of Molech; it
extended to those of Baal (Jer. xix. 5), and the
king of Moab (2 K. iii. 27) offered his son as a
burnt-offering to his god Chemosh. The Phoe-
nicians, we are told by Porphyry (de Abstin. ii.
c. 56), on occasions of great national calamity
sacrificed to Kronos one of their dearest friends.
This custom cannot be denied, if it may be ex-
plained as a " straining the gift-theory of sacri-
fice to cover rites to which it had no legitimate
application" (Robertson Smith, i. 376).- Kissing
the images of the gods (1 K. xix. 18 ; Hos. xiii.
2), hanging votive offerings in their temples
(1 Sam. xxxi. 10), and carrying them to battle
(2 Sam. v. 21), as the Jews of Maccabaeus' army
did with the things consecrated to the idols of
the Jamnites (2 Mace. xii. 40), are usages con-
nected with idolatry which are casually men-
tioned, though not made the objects of express
legislation. But soothsaying, interpretation of
dreams, necromancy, witchcraft, magic, and
other forms of divination, are alike forbidden
(Deut. xviii. 9 ; 2 K. i. 2 ; Is. Ixv. 4 ; Ezek. xxi.
21). The history of other nations — and indeed
the too common practice of the lower class of
the population of Syria at the present day —
shows us that such a statute as that against
bestiality (Lev. xviii. 23) was not unnecessary
(cp. Her. ii. 46 ; Rom. i. 26). Purificatory rites
in connexion with idol-worship, and eating of
forbidden food, were visited with severe retribu-
tion (Is. lxvi. 17). It is evident, from the con-
text of Ezek. viii. 17, that the votaries of the
IDOLATBY
1431
sun, who worshipped with their faces to the
east (r. 16), and "put the branch to their nose,"
did so in observance of some idolatrous rite.
Movers (Phoea. i. 66) unhesitatingly affirms
that the allusion is to the branch Barsom, the
holy branch of the Magi (Strabo, xv. p. 733 ;
Spiegel, £ran. Alterthumskunde, iii. 571), and is
followed by most modern commentators. The
waving of a myrtle branch, says Maimonides
(dc Idol. vi. 2), accompanied the repetition of a
magical formula in incantations. An illustra-
tion of the usage of boughs in worship will be
found in the Greek Utrripia (Aesch. Eton. 43,
Suppl. 192; Schol. on Aristoph. Plut. 383;
Porphyr. de Ant. Nymph, c. 33). For detailed
accounts of idolatrous ceremonies, reference must
be made to the articles upon the several idols.
III. It remains now briefly to consider the
light in which idolatry was regarded in the
Mosaic code, and the penalties with which it
was visited. If one main object of the Hebrew
polity was to teach the unity of God, the ex-
termination of idolatry was out a subordinate
end. Jehovah, the God of the Israelites, was
the civil head of the State. He was the theo-
cratic King of the people, Who had delivered
them from bondage, and to Whom they had
taken a willing oath of allegiance. They had
entered into a solemn league and covenant with
Him as their chosen King (cp. 1 Sam. viii. 7), by
Whom obedience was requited with temporal
blessings, and rebellion with temporal punish-
ment. This original contract of the Hebrew
government, as it has been termed, is contained
in Ex. xix. 3-8, xx. 2-5 ; Deut. xxix. 10-xxx. ;
the blessings promised to obedience are enu-
merated in Deut. xxviii. 1-14, and the wither-
ing curses on disobedience in vv. 15-68. That
this covenant was faithfully observed it needs
but slight acquaintance with Hebrew history to
perceive. Often broken and often renewed on
the part of the people (Judg. x. 10; 2 Ch. xv.
12, 13 ; Neh. ix. 38), it was kept with unwaver-
ing constancy on the part of Jehovah. To
their kings He stood in the relation, so to speak,
of a feudal superior : they were His representa-
tives upon earth, and with them, as with the
people before. His covenant was made (1 K. iii.
14, vi. 11). Idolatry, therefore, to an Israelite
was a state offence (1 Sam. xv. 23),°* a political
crime of the gravest character, high treason
against the majesty of his King. It was a
transgression of the covenant (Deut. xvii. 2),
" the evil " pre-eminently in the eyes of Jehovah
(1 K. xxi. 25), opp. to irjn, " the right " (2 Ch.
xxvii. 2). But it was much more than all this.
While the idolatry of foreign nations is stig-
matised merely as an abomination in the sight
of God, which called for His vengeance, the sin
of the Israelites is regarded as of more glaring
enormity and greater moral guilt. In the
figurative language of the Prophets, the relation
between Jehovah and His people is represented
us a marriage bond (Is. liv. 5 ; Jer. iii. 14), and
■ The point of this verse is lost In the A. V. : It
should be " for the stn of witchcraft (Is) rebellion ; and
idolatry (Ut. vanity) and teraphhn (are) stubborn-
ness" (cp. R. V.). The Israelite*, contrary to com-
mand, had spared of the spoil of the Idolatrous Amale-
kites to offer to Jehovah, and thus associated His
worship with that of Idols.
Digitized by
Google
1432
IDOLATRY
the worship of false gods with all its accompani-
ments (Lev. xx. 56) becomes then the greatest
of social wrongs (Hog. ii. ; Jer. Hi., &c). This
is beautifully brought out in Hos. ii. 16, where
the heathen name Baali, " my master," which
the apostate Israel had been accustomed to
apply to her foreign possessor, is contrasted
with Ishi, "my man," ''my husband," the
native word which she is to nse when restored
to her rightful husband, Jehovah. Much of the
significance of this figure was unquestionably
due to the impurities of idolaters, with whom
such corruption was of no merely spiritual
character (Ex. xxxiv. 16 ; Num. xxv. 1, 2, &c),
but manifested itself in the grossest and most
revolting forms (Rom. i. 26-32).
Regarded in a moral aspect, false gods are
called " stumbling blocks " (Ezek. xiv. 3X " lies "
(Amos ii. 4 ; Rom. i. 25), " horrors " or " frights "
(1 K. xv. 13 ; Jer. 1. 38), " abominations " (Deut.
xxix. 17, xxxii. 16; 1 K. xi. 5; 2 K. xxiii. 13),
" guilt " (abstract for concrete, Amos via. 14,
■"IDC'S, 'ashmOh, cp. 2 Ch. xxix. 18, perhaps with
a play on As/uma, 2 K. xvii. 30. Cp. Schroder,
KA T. % p. 283) ; and with a profound sense of
the degradation consequent upon their worship,
they are characterised by the Prophets, whose
mission it was to warn the people against them
(Jer. xliv. 4), as " shame " (Jer. xi. 13 ; Hos. ix.
10). As considered with reference to Jehorah,
they are "other gods" (Josh. xxiv. 2, 16),
"strange gods "(Dent, xxxii. 16), "new gods"
(Judg. v. 8% " devils,— not God " (Deut. xxxii.
17; 1 Cor. x. 20, 21); and, as denoting their
foreign origin, " gods of the foreigner " (Josh,
xxiv. 14, 15).* Their powerlessness is indicated
by describing them as " gods that cannot save "
(Is. xlv. 20), " that made not the heavens " (Jer.
x. 11), " nothing " (Is. xli. 24; 1 Cor. viii. 4),
" wind and emptiness " (Is. xli. 29), " vanities
of the heathen " (Jer. xiv. 22 ; Acts xiv. 15) ;
and yet, while their deity is denied, their
personal existence seems to have been acknow-
ledged (Kurtz, Gesch. d. A. B. ii. 86, &c),
though not in the same manner in which the
pretensions of local deities were reciprocally
recognised by the heathen (1 K. xx. 23, 28;
2 K. xvii. 26). Other terms of contempt are
employed with reference to idols, Dv7{t| 'ititun
(Lev. xix. 4), and D'TlpJ, giilaltm (Dent. xxix.
17), to which different meanings have been
assigned, and many which indicate ceremonial
uncleanness. [Idol, pp. 1419, 1420.]
Idolatry, therefore, being from one point of
view a political offence, could be punished with-
out infringement of civil rights. No penalties
were attached to mere opinions. For aught we
know, theological speculation may have been as
rife among the Hebrews as in modern times,
though such was not the tendency of the Semitic
mind. It was not, however, such speculation.*,
heterodox though they might be, but overt acts
• In the A. V. toe terms "if, war, "strange," and
T
*13) or H3J, nlkar or noiri, •■ foreign," are not uni-
t" • : t
formly distinguished, and the point of a passage is
frequently last by the Interchange of one with the
other, or by rendering both by the same word. So
Pa. Ixxxt. 9 should be, " There shall not be in thee
a strange god, nor Shalt thou worship a foreign gA."
IDOLATRY
of idolatry, which were made the subjects of
legislation (Michaelis, Laws of Moses, art. 245,
246). The first and second commandments are
directed against idolatry of every form. In-
dividuals and communities were equally amen-
able to the rigorous code. The individual
offender was devoted to destruction (Ex. xxii.
20) ; his nearest relatives were not only bound
to denounce him and deliver him up to punish-
ment (Deut. xiii. 2-10), but their hands were to
strike the first blow when, on the evidence of
two witnesses at least, he was stoned (Deut.
xvii. 2-5). To attempt to seduce others to
false worship was a crime of equal enormity
(Deut. xiii. 6-10). An idolatrous nation shared
a similar fate. No facts are more strongly in-
sisted on in the O. T. than that the extermina-
tion of the Canaanites was the punishment of
their idolatry (Ex. xxxiv. 15, 16 ; Deut. vii., xii.
29-31, xx. 17), and that the calamities of the
Israelites were due to the same cause (Jer. ii.
17). A city guilty of idolatry was looked upon
as a cancer of the State ; it was considered to
be in rebellion, and treated according to the
laws of war. Its inhabitants and all their
cattle were put to death. No spoil was taken,
but everything it contained was burnt with it ;
nor was it allowed to be rebuilt (Deut. xiii
13-18; Josh. vi. 26). Saul lost his kingdom,
Achan his life, and Kiel his family, for trans-
gressing this Law (1 Sam. xv. ; Josh. vii. ; 1 K.
xvi. 34). The silver and gold with which the
idols were covered were accursed (Deut. vii. 25,
27). And not only were the Israelites for-
bidden to serve the gods of Canaan (Ex. xxiii.
24), but even to mention their names ; that is,
to call upon them in prayer or any form of
worship (Ex. xxiii. 13 ; Josh, xxiii. 7). On
taking possession of the land, they were to
obliterate all traces of the existing idolatry ;
statues, altars, pillars, idol-temples, every per-
son and everything connected with it, were to
be swept away (Ex. xxiii. 24, 32, xxxiv. 13;
Deut. vii. 5, 25, xii. 1-3, xx. 17), and the name
and worship of the idols blotted ont. Such were
the precautions taken by the frnmer of the
Mosaic code to preserve the worship of Jehovah,
the true God, in its purity. Of the manner in
which his descendants have " put a fence " about
"the Law" with reference to idolatry, many
instances will be found in Maimonides (de Idol.).
They were prohibited from using vessels, scarlet
garments, bracelets, or rings, marked with the
sign of the sun, moon, or dragon (vii. 10);
trees planted or stones erected for idol-worship
were forbidden (viii. 5, 10); and, to guard
against the possibility of contamination, if the
image of an idol were found among other images
intended for ornament, they were all to be cast
into the Dead Sea (vii. 11).
IV. Much indirect evidence on this subject
might be supplied by an investigation of proper
names. Sir H. Layard has remarked, " Accord-
ing to a custom existing from time immemorial
iu the East, the name of the Supreme Deity was
introduced into the names of men. This custom
prevailed from the banks of the Tigris to the
Phoenician colonies beyond the Pillars of Her-
cules ; and we recognise in the Sardanapalus of
the Assyrians, and the Hannibal of the Cartha-
ginians, the identity of the religious system of
the two nations, as widely distinct in the time
Digitized by
Google
IDOLATBY
of their existence as in their geographical posi-
tion" (Nin. ii. 450). The hint which he has
given can be but briefly followed out here.
Traces of the sun-worship of the ancient Ca-
naanites remain in the nomenclature of their
country. Beth-Shemesh, " house of the sun,"
En-Shemesh, "spring of the sun," and Ir-
Shemesh, " city of the sun," whether they be
the original Canaanitish names or their He-
brew renderings, attest the reverence paid to
the source of light and heat, the symbol of
the fertilising power of nature. Samson, the
Hebrew national hero, took his name from the
same luminary, and was born in a mountain-
village above' the modern 'Ain Shems (En-
Shemesh : Thomson, The Land and the Book, ii.
361). The name of Baal, the sun-god, is one of
the most common occurrence in compound words,
and is often associated with places consecrated
to his worship, and of which perhaps he was
the tutelary deity. Bamoth-Baal, " the high-
places of Baal ;" Baal-Hermon, Beth-Baal-Meon,
Baal-Gad, Baal-Hamon, in which compound the
names of the sun-god of Phoenicia and Egypt
are associated; Baal-Tamar, and many others,
are instances of this." Nor was the practice
confined to the names of places : proper names
are found with the same element. Esh-baal, Ish-
baal, &c, are examples. The Amorites, whom
Joshua did not drive out, dwelt on Mount Heres,
in Aijalon, " the mountain of the sun " [Tim-
nath-Heres]. Here and there we find traces
of the attempt made by the Hebrews, on their
conquest of the country, to extirpate idolatry.
Thus Baalah or Kirjath-Baal, "the town of
Baal," became Kirjath-Jearim, "the town of
forests " (Josh. xv. 60). The Moon, Astarte or
Ashtaroth, gave her name to a city of Bashan
(Josh. xiii. 12, 31), and it is not improbable that
the name Jericho may have been derived from
being associated with the worship of this god-
dess. [Jebicho.] Nebo, whether it be the
name under which the Chaldeans worshipped
the Moon or the planet Mercury, enters into
many compounds: Nebn-zaradan, Samgar-nebo,
and the like. Bel is found in Belshazzar, Belte-
shazzar, and others. Baladan, in Merodach-
Baladan, is simply the Babylonian abO-iddina,
" gave a son." The father of Merodach-
Baladan, whose name was probably the same,
is called Baladan, as in Heb. El-nathan
might be called Nathan (see KATS, p. 330).
Hadad, Hadadezer, Benhadad, are derived
from the tutelar deity of the Syrians, and in
Nergalsharezer we recognise the god of the
Cushites. Chemosh, the fire-god of Moab,
appears in Carchemish, and Peor in Beth-Peor.
Malcam, a name which occurs but once, and
then of a Moabite by birth, may have been
connected with Molech and Milcom, the abomi-
nation of the Ammonites. A glimpse of star-
worship may be seen in the name of the city
IGEAL
1433
• That temples in Syria, dedicated to the several
divinities, did transfer their names to the places where
the; stood, is evident from the testimony of Luclan,
an Assyrian himself. Bis derivation of Hiera from
the temple of the Assyrian Hera shows that he was
familiar with the circumstance (<fe Dea Syr. c. 1).
Bai&sa (= Bethshemesh), a town of Arabia, de-
rived its name from the sun-worship (Vosalus, <fe
Thiol. Cent. ii. c 8), like Kir Heres (Jer. xlvlll. 31)
In Moab.
Chesil, the Semitic Orion, and the month Chisleu,
without recognising in Kahab "the glittering
fragments of the sea-snake trailing across the
northern sky." It would perhaps be going too
far to trace in Engedi, "spring of the kid,"
any connexion with the goat-worship of Mendes,
or any relics of the wars of the giants in Kapha
and Rephaim. But there are fragments of an-
cient idolatry in other names in which it is not
so impalpable. Ishbosheth is identical with Esh-
baal, and Jerubbesheth with Jerubbaal, and
Mephibosheth and Meribbaal are but two names
for one person (cp. Jer. xi. 13). The worship of
the Syrian Rimmon appears in the names Hadad-
Rimmon and Tabrimmon; and if, as some
suppose, it be derived from |1B"1, SimmBn, "a
pomegranate-tree," we may connect it with
the towns of the same name in Judah and
Benjamin, with En-Rimmon and the prevailing
tree-worship. It is impossible to pursue here
this investigation: the hints which have been
thrown out may prove suggestive (cp. Robertson
Smith, i. Index, s. v. '• Theophorous proper
names ; " B8thgen, p. 140> [W. A. W.] [F.]
EDU'EL ('ISowjAoj ! Eccelon), 1 Esd. viii. 43.
[Ariel, 1.]
IDUM.EA (Mark iii. 8), or
IDUME'A, R. V., in each case, Edom (Bhgt ;
q 'ISovfiaia ; Idumaea, Edom), Is. xxxiv. 5, 6 ;
Ezek. xxxv. 15, xxxvi. 5 ; 1 Mace. iv. 15, 29,
61, v. 3, vi. 31 ; 2 Mace xii. 32. [Edom.]
IDTJME'ANS (pi 'lSoviuuoi; Xiumaei),
2 Mace x. 15, 16. [Edom.]
IG-AX (fyo* = IGod] redeem*). 1. (LXX.
[c. 8], B. 'IAodA, AF. 'lyik; Igal, Igaal.) Son
of Joseph, of the tribe of Issachar; chosen by
Moses to represent that tribe among the spies
who went up from Kadesh to search the Promised
Laud (Num. xiii. 7).
2. One of the heroes of David's guard, son of
Nathan of Zobah (2 Sam. xxiii. 36, TadA). In
the parallel list of 1 Ch. the name is given as
"Joel the brother of Nathan " (xi. 38, 'Ionj*.).
Kennicott, after a minute examination of the
passage both in the original and in the ancient
Versions, decides in favour of the latter as most
like the genuine text (Dissertation, pp. 212-214).
This name is really identical with lOEAL.
IGDALI'AH (IfrW. = Jehovah is great;
roooAicu ; Jegedclias), a prophet or holy man —
" the man of God " — named once only (Jer.
xxxv. 4), as the father of Hanan, in the chamber
of whose sons, the Bene-Hanan, in the house of
Jehovah, Jeremiah had that remarkable inter-
view with the Rechnbites which is recorded in
that chapter.
IG-EAL, R. V. IGAL (^£ ; 'Ma. ; Jegaal),
a son of Shemaiah ; a descendant of the royal
house of Judah (1 Ch. iii. 22). According to
the present state of the text of this difficult
genealogy, he is fourth in descent from Zerub-
babel; but, according to Lord A. Hervey's
plausible alteration, he is the son of Shimei,
brother to Zerubbabel, and therefore but one
generation distant from the latter (Genealogy of
our Lord, pp. 107-109). The name is identical
Digitized by
Google
1434
I1M
with Ioal; and, as in 1 Ch. xi. 38, the LXX.
give it as Joel.
I'M, R. V. IYIM (D'jr = stone heaps).
1. (Cai ; Iieabarim.) The partial or contracted
form of the name Ije-Abakim, one of the later
stations of the Israelites on their journey to
Palestine (Num. xxxiii. 45). In the Samaritan
Version lim is rendered by Caphrani, " villages ;"
and in the Targum Pseudojon. by Megizatha,
"narrow passes" (die Engpassc). But in no
way do we gain any clue to the situation of
the place.
2. (LXX. v. 29, B. Bomfc, A. Abtiu ; lim.)
A town in the extreme south of Judah, named
in the same group with Ucersheba, Hormah, &c.
(Josh. xv. 28). The Peshitto Syriac Version
has Klin, »\* No trace of the name has yet
been discovered in this direction. [G.J [W.]
IJE-ABA1UM, R. V. IYE-ABA'EIM
(D'lagn \% with the definite article, lye ha-
Abarim = the heaps, or ruins, of the further
regions [as distinct from the Ijim of Judah, Josh,
xv. 29]; Jerome ad Fabiolam, aeercos lapidum
transeuntium ; in xxi. B. Xa\yhti, AF* M . 'AxeA-
yai, in xxxiii. BA. Tai ; Jeabarim and Iieabarim),
one of the later halting-places of the children of
Israel as they were approaching Palestine (Num.
xxi. 11, xxxiii. 44). It was next beyond Oboth,
and the station beyond it again was the Wady
Zared — tho torrent of the willows— probably one
of the streams which run into the S.E. angle of
the Dead Sea. Between Ije-abarim and Dibon-
gad, which succeeds it in Num. xxxiii., the Zared
and the Arnon have to be inserted from the
parallel accounts of xxi. and Deut. ii. ; Dibon-
gad and Almon-Diblathaim, which lay above
the Arnon, having in their turn escaped from
the two last-named narratives. Ije-abarim was
on the boundary — the E. or S.E. bouudnry — of
tho territory of Moab ; not on the posture-downs
of the Mishor, the modern Iiclka, but in the
midbar, the waste uncultivated " wilderness " on
its skirts (xxi. 1 1). Moab they were expressly
forbidden to molest (Deut. ii. 9-12) ; but we may
perhaps be allowed to conclude from the terms
of v. 13, " now rise up " (3D!?), that they had
remained on his frontier in Ije-abarim for some
length of time. Nothing more than a general
identification of its situation has been attempted
(cp. Dillmann* on Num. xxi. 11, "somewhere
near the Widy el Ahsa"), nor has the name
been found lingering in the locality, which,
however, has yet to be explored. If there is any
counexion between the Ije-abarim and the Har-
abarim, the mountain-range opposite Jericho,
then Abarim is doubtless a general appellation
for the whole of the highland east of the Dead
Sea. [Abarim.]
The rendering given by the LXX. is remark-
able, rol is no doubt a version of lye (see this
developed in OS.' p. 241, 57) — the Ain being
converted into Q : but whence does the 'Ax*A
come? Can it be the vestige of a naclial —
" torrent " or " wady "—once attached to the
name? The Targum Pseudojon. has AiegUatlt
'IbSri'i, " the narrow pass of Abarim."
In Num. xxxiii. 45 it is given in the shorter
form of Int. [G.] [W.]
IMMANUEL
I'JON (f\*tt=ruin; in 1 and 2 K.,B. 'Kir, A.
tialv; in 2 Ch., B. '14 A. Aliiv ; Ahion, Aim), a
town in the north of Palestine, belonging to the
tribe of Naphtali. It was taken and plundered
by the captains of Benhadad, along with Dan
and other store-cities of Naphtali (1 K. xv. 20 ;
2 Ch. xvi. 4). It was plundered a second time
by Tiglath-pileser (2 K. xv. 29). We find no
farther mention of it in history. At the base of
the mountains of Naphtali, a few miles N.W. of
the site of Dan, is a fertile and beautiful little
plain called Merj 'Ayun (yaJkP _j* ; the
Arabic word ^yifi; though different in mean-
ing, is radically identical with the Heb. JVJ?) ;
and near its northern end is a large mound
called Tell Dibbin. This, in all probability, is
the site of the long-lost Ijon (Robinson's Pa-
lestine, iii. 375; Porter, Hbk. to 8. and P.;
Guerin, Galilee, ii. 280 ; Riehm, UWB. s. v.).
Conder (Hbk. p. 415) suggests el-Khiam, a village
N.E. of the Merj 'Ayun. [J. L. P.] [W.]
IK'KESH (&&}= perverse; in 2 Sam. B.
Elo-xd, A. *E«Kir, in 1 Ch. xi. LXX. om.. in
xxvii. BA. 'EkkJis ; Acces), the father of Ira the
Tekoite, one of the heroes of David's guard
(2 Sam. xxiii. 26 ; 1 Ch. xi. 28, xxvii. 9).
I'LAI O^y = ? most high; BK. 'HAef ; llai),
an Ahohite, one of the heroes of David's guard
(1 Ch. xi. 29). In the list of 2 Sam. xxiii. the
name is given as Zalmon (Luc 'AAtpoV).
Keunicott (Dissertation, pp. 187-9) examines
the variations at length, and decides in favour
of llai as the original name.
ILLYRICUM ('IWvpuciy), an extensive
district lying along the eastern coast of the
Adriatic from the boundary of Italy on the
north to Epirus on the south, and contiguous to
Moesia and Macedonia on the east: it was
divided by the river Drilo into two portions, —
Ulyris Barbara, the northern, and Illyris Graeca,
the southern. Within these limits was in-
cluded Dalmatia, which appears to have been
used indifferently with Illyricum for a portion,
and ultimately for the whole of the district.
St. Paul records that he preached the Gospel
" round about unto Illyricum " (Rom. xv. 19) :
he probably uses the term in its most extensive
sense, and the part visited (if indeed he crossed
the boundary at all) would have been about
Dyrrachium. (Did. of Or. and Rom. Geog. s, v.)
[W.L.B.] [W.]
IMAGE. [Idol.]
IM'LA (vtyp = fulness; B. 'Ufuis (t. 1\
-i (». 8), A. 'Un\d ; Jemla), father or progenitor
of Micaiah, the prophet of Jehovah, who was
consulted by Ahab and Jehoshaphat before their
fatal expedition to Ramoth-gilead (2 Ch. xviii.
7, 8). The form
IM'LAH (rbt)\ ; B. 'Ie^ot [r. 8], -a [c. 9],
A. 'I«uaa ; Jemla) is employed in the parallel
narrative (1 K. xxii. 8, 9).
IMMANUEL (^SHSP, or in two words ia
many MSS. and editions, ?K XilSO; 'EprWiripK ;
Digitized by
Google
IMMANUEL
Emmanuel), the symbolical Dame given by the
prophet Isaiah to the child who was announced
to Ahaz and the people of Judah, as the sign
which God would give of their deliverance from
their enemies (Is. vii. 14). It is applied by the
Apostle St. Matthew to the Messiah, born of
the Virgin (Matt. i. 23). By the LXX. in one
passage (Is. vii. 14), and in both passages by
the Vulg., Syr., and Targ., it is rendered as a
proper name ; but in It. viii. 8 the LXX. trans-
late it literally fuff yum t 8tis. The verses
in question have been the battle-field of critics
for centuries, and in their discussions there has
been no lack of the odium theologiaun. As
early as the times of Justin Martyr the Christian
interpretation was attacked by the Jews, and
the position which they occupied has of late j
years been assumed by many continental theo- I
logians. Before proceeding to a discussion, or i
rather to a classification, of the numerous I
theories fit which this subject has been the j
fruitful source, the circumstances under which |
the prophecy was delivered claim especial con-
sideration.
In the early part of the reign of Ahaz the
kingdom of Judah was threatened with anni-
hilation by the combined armies of Syria and
Israel. A hundred and twenty thousand of the
choice warriors of Judah, all " sons of might,"
had fallen in one day's battle. The Edomites
and Philistines had thrown off the yoke (2 Ch.
xsiii.). Jerusalem was menaced with a siege;
the hearts of the king and of the people " shook,
us the trees of a forest shake before the wind "
(Is. vii. 2). The king had gone to " the conduit
of the upper pool," probably to take measures
for preventing the supply of water from being
cut off or falling into the enemy's hand, when
the Prophet met him with the message of con-
solation. Not only were the designs of the
hostile armies to fail, but within sixty-live years
the kingdom of Israel would be overthrown. In
confirmation of his words, the Prophet bids
Ahaz ask a sign of Jehovah, which the king,
with pretended humility, refused to do. After
administering a severe rebuke to Ahaz for his
obstinacy, Isaiah announces the sign which
Jehovah Himself would give unasked : " Behold !
the virgin (TOpVn, hd-'almdh)' is with child
and beareth a son, and she shall call his name
Immanuel."
The interpreters of this passage are naturally
divided into three classes, each of which admits
of subdivisions, as the differences in detail are
numerous. The first class consists of those who
refer the fulfilment of the prophecy to a
historical event, which followed immediately
upon its delivery. The majority of Christian
writers, till within the last fifty years, form a
second class, and apply the prophecy exclusively
» 'AlmSk denotes a girl of marriageable age, bat not
married, and therefore a virgin by implication. It is
never even used, as 1171113. bethaUh, which more
directly expresses virginity, of a bride or betrothed wife
(Joel i. 8). • Almah and ietluMh are both applied to
ltebekah (Gen. xxlv. 16, 43), as apparently convertible
terms ; and in addition to the evidence from the cognate
languages, Arabic and Syrlac, we have the testimony of
Jerome (on Is. vii. 14) that In Punic Alma denoted a
virgin.
IMMANUEL
1435
to the Messiah; while a third class, almost
equally numerous, agree in considering both
these explanations true, and hold that the
prophecy had an immediate and literal fulfil-
ment, but was completely accomplished in the
miraculous conception and birth of Christ.
Among the first are numbered the Jewish
writers of all ages, without exception. Jerome
refutes, on chronological grounds, a theory
which was current in his day amongst the Jews
that the prophecy had reference to Hezekiah,
the son of Ahaz, who, from a comparison of 2 K.
xvi. 2 with xviii. 2, must have been nine years
old at the time it was delivered. The force of
his argument is somewhat weakened by the
evident obscurity of the numbers in the passages
in question, from which we must infer that
Ahaz was eleven years old at the time of
Hezekiah's birth. By the Jews in the Middle
Ages this explanation was abandoned as un-
tenable, and in consequence some, as Knshi and
Aben Ezra, refer the prophecy to a son of Isaiah
himself and others to a son of Ahaz by another
wife, as Kimchi and Abarbanel. In this case,
the 'almah is explained as the wife or betrothed
wife of the Prophet, or as a later wife of Ahaz.
Kelle (Ges. Comm. iibcr den Jesaia) degrades her
to the third rank of ladies in the harem (cp.
Cant. vi. 28). Hitzig (Der Proph. Jesaia)
rejects Gesenius' application of 'almah to a
second wife of the Prophet, and interprets it of
the prophetess mentioned in viii. 3. Hendewerk
(De* Proph. Jesaia Weissag.) follows Gesenius.
In either case the Prophet is made to fulfil his
own prophecy. Isenbiehl, a pnpil of Michaelis,
defended the historical sense with considerable
learning, and suffered unworthy persecution for
expressing his opinions. The 'almah in his view
was some Hebrew girl who was present at the
colloquy between Isaiah and Ahaz, and to whom
the Prophet pointed as he spoke. This opinion
was held by Bauer, Cube, and Rosenmiiller
(1st ed.). Michaelis, Eichhorn, Paulus, and
Ammon, give her a merely ideal existence;
whilst Umbreit allows her to be among the by-
standers, but explains the pregnancy and birth
as imaginary only. Interpreters of the second
class, who refer the prophecy solely to the
Messiah, of course understand by the 'almah
the Virgin Mary. Among these, Vitringa (Obs.
Sacr. v. c. 1) vigorously opposes those who, like
Grotius, Pellicanus, and Tirinus, conceded to
the Jews that the reference to Christ Jesus was
not direct and immediate, but by way of typical
allusion. For, he maintains, a young married
woman of the time of Ahaz and Isaiah could not
be a type of the Virgin, nor could her issue by
her husband be a figure of the child to be born
of the Virgin by the operation of the Holy
Ghost. Against this hypothesis of a solely
Messianic reference, it is objected that the birth
of the Messiah could not be a sign of deliverance
to the people of Judah in the time of Ahaz.
In reply to this, Theodoret advances the opinion
that the birth of the Messiah involved the
conservation of the family of Jesse, and therefore
by implication of the Jewish state. Cocceius
argues on the same side, that the sign of the
Messiah's birth would intimate that in the
interval the kingdom and state of the Jews
could not be alienated from God, and besides it
confirms v. 8, indicating that before the birth
Digitized by
Google
1436
IMMANUEL
of Christ Judaea should not be subject to Syria,
as it was when Archelaus was removed, and it
was reduced to the form of a Roman province.
Of all these explanations Vitringa disapproves
and states his own conclusion, which is also that
of Calvin and Piscator, to be the following : —
In vv. 14-16, the Prophet gives a sign to the
pious in Israel of their deliverance from the
impending danger, and in v. 17, &c. announces
the evils which the Assyrians, not the Syrians,
should inflict upon Ahaz and such of his people
as resembled him. As surely as Messiah would
be born of the Virgin, so surely would God
deliver the Jews from the threatened evil. The
principle of interpretation here made use of is
founded by Calvin on the custom of the Prophets,
who confirmed special promises by the assurance
that God would send a redeemer. But this
explanation involves another difficulty, besides
that which arises from the distance of the event
predicted. Before the child eball arrive at
years of discretion the Prophet announces the
desolation of the land whose kings threatened
Ahaz. By this Vitringa understands that no
more time would elapse before the former event
was accomplished than would intervene between
the birth aud youth of lmmanuel, an argument
too far-fetched to have much weight. Heng-
stenberg (Chriatology, ii. 44-66, ling, trans.)
supports to the full the Messianic interpretation,
and closely connects vii. 14 with ix. 6. He
admits frankly that the older explanation of
to. 15, 16 has exposed itself to the charge of
being arbitrary, and confidently propounds his
own method of removing the stumbling-block.
" In v. 14 the Prophet had seen the birth of the
Messiah as present. Holding fast this idea and
expanding it, the Prophet makes him who has
been born accompany the people through all the
stages of its existence. We have here an ideal
anticipation of the real incarnation .... What
the Prophet means, and intends to say here is,
that, m the apace of about a twelvemonth, the
overthrow of the hostile kingdoms would already
have token-place. As the representative of the
contemporaries, he brings forward the wonderful
child who, as it were, formed the soul of the
popular life. ... In the subsequent prophecy,
the same wonderful child, grown up into a
warlike hero, brings the deliverance from Asshur,
and the world's power represented by it." The
learned Professor thus admits the double sense
in the case of Asshur, but denies its application
to lmmanuel. It would be hard to say whether
text or commentary be the more obscure.
In view of the difficulties which attend these
explanations of the prophecy, the third class of
interpreters above alluded to have recourse to a
theory which combines the two preceding, viz.
the hypothesis of the double sense. They
suppose that the immediate reference of the
Prophet was to some contemporary occurrence,
but that his words received their true and full
accomplishment in the birth of the Messiah.
Jerome (Comm. in Esaiam, vii. 14) mentions an
interpretation of some Judaizers that lmmanuel
was the son of Isaiah, born of the prophetess,
as a type of the Saviour, and that his name
indicates the calling of the nations after the
Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Some-
thing of the same kind is proposed by Dathe ;
in his opinion "the miracle, while it immedi-
EMMEB
ateiy respected the times of the Prophet, was a
type of the birth of Christ of the Virgin Mary."
Dr. Pye-Smith conjectured that it had an im-
mediate reference to Hezekiah, "the virgin"
being the queen of Ahaz ; but, like some other
prophetic testimonies, had another and a de-
signed reference to some remoter circumstance,
which when it occurred would be the rtai
fulfilment, answering every feature and nlliof,
up the entire extent of the original delineation
{Script. Test, to the Messiah, i. 357, 3rd ed.)
A serious objection to the application of the
prophecy of Hezekiah has already been men-
tioned. Kennicott separates v. 16 from the
three preceding, applying the latter to Christ,
the former to the son of Isaiah (Sermon »
Is. vii. 13-16).
Such in brief are some of the principal opinions
which have been held on this important ques-
tion [see also the summary in Delitzsch' ami
Dillmann' on Is. vii. 14 ; cp. 1sa.iah,ji. 1457].
From the manner in which the quotation occuri
in Matt. i. 23, there can be no doubt that the
Evangelist did not use it by way of accom-
modation, but as having in view its actual
accomplishment. Whatever may have been his
opinion as to any contemporary or immediate
reference it might contain, this was completely
obscured by the full conviction that burst upon
him when he realised its completion in the
Messiah. What may have been the light in
which the promise was regarded by the Prophet's
contemporaries, we are not in a position to
judge ; the hypothesis of the double sense
satisfies most of the requirements of the problem,
and as it does less violence to the text than the
others which have been proposed, and is at the
same time supported by the analogy of the
Apostle's quotations from the O. T. (Matt. ii. 15,
18, 23 ; iv. 15), we accept it as approximating
most nearly to the true solution. [Mjssuh;
Pbophecy.] [W. A. W.]
IM'MBB. 1. (TBI*, ? = eloquent : in 1 Ch. ii.
1 2, B. 'EtrtS|>, A. 'EitM«V> ; in N'eh. xi. 13, BA. omit:
Emmery, apparently the founder of an important
family of priests, although the name does not
occur in any genealogy which allows us to dis-
cover his descent from Aaron (1 Ch. ix. 12;
Neh. xi. 13). This family had charge of; and
gave its name to, the sixteenth course of the
service (1 Ch. xxiv. 14). From them came
Pashur, chief governor of the Temple in Jere-
miah's time, and his persecutor (Jer. xx. 1)
They returned from Babylon with Zerubbsbel
and Jeshua (Ezra ii. 37 ; Neh. vii. 40). Zsdok
ben-Immer repaired his own house (Neh. iii. 29)-
and two other priests of the family put away
their foreign wives (Ezra x. 20). But it i*
remarkable that the name is omitted from the
list of those who sealed the covenant with
Nehemiah, and also of those who came up with
Zerubbabel and Jeshua, and who are stated
to have had descendants surviving in the nert
generation — the days of Joiakim (see Neh. xii. 1,
10, 12-21). [Emmer.] Different from the
foregoing must be
a (In Ezra B. "EsMjp, A. 'Efipif, '"» "eh-
B. 'l«t»V. A. 'Et»<p : Enter, Emmer), apparently
the name of a place in Babylonia from which
certain persons returned to Jerusalem with the
first caravan, who could not satisfactorily pro"
Digitized by
Google
IMNA
their genealogy (Ezra ii. 59 ; Keh. vii. 61). In
1 Esdras the name is given as 'hah&p.
IM'NA Q)yO\=holding back; 'Ifuwl; Jemnd),
a descendant ot Asher, son of Helen), and one of
the " chief princes " of the tribe (1 Ch. vii. 35 ;
cp. r. 40).
IJTNAH (TOD'., ? = good fortune; A. 'Utad,
B. 'lyo>i; Jemna). 1. The first-born of Asher
(1 Ch. vii. 30). In the Pentateuch the name
(identical with the present) is given in the A. V.
as Jimnaii.
2. (B. Atp&r, A. 'If/tML) Kore ben-Imnah,
the Levite, assisted in the reforms of Hezekiah
(2 Ch. xxxi. 14).
IMPLEAD (Acts xix. 38), a technical term
(like the iyita\tiy of the Greek text), replaced
in the R. V. and explained by " accuse." [F.]
IM'BAH (nnp» = obstinacy; B. 'l/iapi), A.
'Ufxpd; Jamra), a descendant of Asher, of the
family of Zophah (1 Ch. vii. 36), and named as
one of the chiefs of the tribe.
IM'BI 0"tt?t< = eloquent). 1. (B. 'Afiptl,
A. -pi ; Omrai.) A man of Judah of the great
family of Pharez (1 Ch. ix. 4).
2. (BN. 'Apofwi, A. Mtapt; Atari.) Father
or progenitor of Zaccur, who assisted Nehemiah
in the rebuilding of the wall of Jerusalem
(Neh. iii. 2>
INCENSE, fntoi? (qettrah), Dent, xxxiii.
10 ; nnlD? (qetireth), Ex. xiv. 6, xxx. 1, &c. ;
7\yd? (lebihiah), Is. xlui. 23, lx. 6, &c. The
incense employed in the service of the Taber-
nacle was distinguished as O'EDH JlTbp
(qetbreth haasammUn, Ex. xxv. 6), from being
compounded of the perfumes stacte, onycha,
galbanum, and pure frankincense. All incense
which was not made of these ingredients was
called mi miOp (qetirah zarah, Ex. xix. 9),
and was forbidden to be offered. According to
Rashi on Ex. xxx. 34, the above-mentioned per-
fumes were mixed in eqnal proportions, seventy
manehs being taken of each. They were com-
pounded by the skill of the apothecary, to
whose use, according to Rabbinical tradition,
was devoted a portion of the Temple, called,
from the name of the family whose especial
duty it was to prepare the incense, " the house
of Abtines." So in the large temples of India
" is retained a man whose chief business it is to
distil sweet waters from flowers, and to extract
oil from wood, flowers, and other substances"
(Roberts, Orient. Iilus. p. 82). The priest or
Levite to whose care the incense was entrusted,
was one of the fifteen D'JIDD (memunnlm),
or prefects of the Temple. Constant watch was
kept in the honse of Abtines that the incense
might always be in readiness (Buxtorf, Lex.
Talm. s. v. DrtD3K).
In addition to the four ingredients already
mentioned Jarchi enumerates seven others, thus
making eleven, which the Jewish doctors affirm
were communicated to Moses on Mount Sinai.
Josephus (B. /. v. 5, § 5) mentions thirteen.
The proportions of the additional spices are
given by Maimonides (A'eli hammiqdash, ii. 2,
INCENSE
1437
§ 3) as follows : — Of myrrh, cassia, spikenard,
and saffron, sixteen manehs each ; of costus
twelve manehs, cinnamon nine manehs, sweet
bark three manehs. The weight of the whole
confection was 368 manehs. To these was
added the fourth part of a cab of salt of
Sodom, with amber of Jordan, and a herb called
" the smoke-raiser " (pV r6tfD, ma'Mth 'ashan),
known only to the cunning in such matters, to
whom the secret descended by tradition. In the
ordinary daily service one maneh was used, half
in the morning and half in the evening. Al-
lowing then one muneh of incense for each day
of the solar year, the three manehs which re-
mained were again pounded, and used by the
high-priest on the Day of Atonement (Lev. xvi.
12). A store of it was constantly kept in the
Temple (Jos. B. J. vi. 8, § 3).
The incense possessed the threefold character-
istic of being salted (not tempered as in A. V.),
pure, and holy. Salt was the symbol of incor-
ruptness, and nothing, says Maimonides, was
offered without it, except the wine of the drink-
offerings, the blood, and the wood (cp. Lev. ii.
13). The expression 133 13 (bad bibad, Ex.
xxx. 34) is interpreted by the Chaldee " weight
by weight," — that is, an equal weight of each
(cp. Jarchi in loco); and this rendering is
adopted by our Versions (A. V. and R. V. " like
weight." Cp. Knobel-Dillmann in loco). Others
however, and among them Aben Ezra and
Maimonides, consider it as signifying that each
of the spices was separately prepared, and that
all were afterwards mixed. The incense thus
compounded was specially set apart for the ser-
vice of the sanctuary : its desecration was
punished with death (Ex. xxx. 37, 38); as in
some part of India, according to Michaelis
(Mosaisch. Redd, art. 249), it was considered
high treason for any person to make use of the
best sort of Calambak, which was for the service
of the king alone.
Aaron, as high-priest, was originally ap-
pointed to offer incense, but in the daily sen-ice
of the second Temple the office devolved upon
the inferior priests, from among whom one was
chosen by lot (Mishna, l'oma, ii. 4 ; Luke i. 9),
each morning and evening (Abarbanel on Lev.
x. 1). A peculiar blessing was supposed to be
attached to this service ; and in order that all
might share in it, the lot was cast among those
who were "new to the incense," if any re-
mained (Mishna, Yoma, 1. c. ; Bartenora on
Tamid, v. 2). Uzziah was punished for his
presumption in attempting to infringe the
prerogatives of the descendants of Aaron, who
were consecrated to burn incense (2 Ch. xxvi.
16-21 ; Joseph. Ant. ix. 10, § 4). The officiating
priest appointed another, whose office it was to
take the fire from the brazen Altar. Ac-
cording to Maimonides (Tmid. Umus. ii. 8, iii.
5), this fire was taken from the second pile,
which was over against the S.E. corner of the
Altar of burnt-offering, and was of fig-tree
wood. A silver shovel (HPinC, machtdh) was
first filled with the live coais, and afterwards
emptied into a golden one, smaller than the
former, so that some of the coals were spilled
(Mishna, Tamid, v. 5, Yoma, iv. 4; cp. Rev.
viii. 5). Another priest cleared the golden
Altar from the cinders which had been left at
Digitized by
Google
1438
INCENSE
the previous offering of incense (Mishna, Tamid,
iii. 6, 9 ; vi. 1).
The times of offering incense were specified
in the instructions first given to Moses (Ex.
xxx. 7, 8). The morning incense was offered
when the lamps were trimmed in the Holy
place, and before the sacrifice, when the watch-
men set for the purpose announced the break
of day (Mishna, Yoma, iii. 1, 5). When the
lamps were lighted "between the evenings,"
after the evening sacrifice and before the drink-
offerings were offered, incense was again burnt
on the golden Altar, which "belonged to the
oracle " (1 K. vi. 22), and stood before the veil
which separated the Holy place from the Holy
of Holies, the Throne of God (Rev. viii. 4;
Philo, de Anim. Idon. § 3).
When the priest entered the Holy place with
the incense, all the people were removed from
the Temple, and from between the porch and
the Altar (Maimon. Tmid. Umut. iii. 3 ; cp.
Luke i. 10). The incense was then brought
from the hsuse of Abtines in a large vessel of
gold called (p (iaph), in which was a phial
("]'T3, bdzli, properly "a salver") containing
the incense (Mishna, Tamid, v. 4). The assis-
tant priests who attended to the lamps, the
clearing of the golden Altar from the cinders,
and the fetching fire from the Altar of Burnt-
offering, performed their offices singly, bowed
towards the Ark of the covenant, and left the
Holy place before the priest, whose lot it was
to offer incense, entered. Profound silence
was observed among the congregation who
were praying without (cp. Rev. viii. 1), and
at a signal from the prelect the priest cast the
incense on the fire (Mishna, Tamid, vi. 3), and
bowing reverently towards the Holy of Holies
retired slowly backwards, not prolonging his
prayer that he might not alarm the congrega-
tion, or cause them to fear that he had been
struck dead for offering unworthily (Lev. xvi.
13; Luke i. 21; Mishna, Yoma, v. 1). When
he came out, he pronounced the blessing in
Num. vi. 24-26, the " magrephah " sounded,
and the Lcvites burst forth into song, accom-
panied by the full swell of the Temple-music,
the sound of which, say the Rabbins, could
be heard as far as Jericho (Mishna, Tamid, iii.
8). It is possible that this may be alluded to
in Rev. viii. 5. The priest then emptied the
censer in a clean place, and hung it on one of
the horns of the Altar of Burnt-offering.
On the Day of Atonement the service was
different. The high-priest, after sacrificing the
bullock as a sin-offering for himself and his
family, took incense in his left hand and a
golden shovel filled with live coals from the
west side of the brazen Altar (Jarchi on Lev.
xvi. 12) in his right, and went into the Holy of
Holies. He then placed the shovel upon the
Ark between the two bars. In the second
Temple, where there was no Ark, a stone was
substituted. Then sprinkling the incense upon
the coals, he stayed till the house was filled
with smoke, and walking slowly backwards
came without the veil, where he prayed for a
short time (Maimonides, Yarn hakkippw, quoted
by Ainsworth on Lev. xvi. ; Outram, de Sacri-
jiciia, i. 8, § 11).
The offering of incense has formed a part of
the religious ceremonies of most ancient nations
INCENSE
(see the useful note in Knobel-Dillmann on
Ex. xxx. 34). The Egyptians burnt resin in
honour of the sun at its rising, myrrh when in
its meridian, and a mixture called Kuphi at its
setting (cp. Wilkinson, Anc. Eg. i. 265). Pin-
tarch (de Is. et Ot. cc. 52, 80) describes Kuphi
as a mixture of sixteen ingredients. " in the
temple of Sira incense is offered to the Lingam
six times in twenty-four hours " (Roberts, Orient.
IUus. p. 468). It was an element in the ido-
latrous worship of the Israelites (Jer. xi. 12, 17,
xlviii. 35 ; 2 Ch. xxxiv. 25).
With regard to the symbolical meaning of
incense, opinions have been many and widely
differing. While Maimonides regarded it
merely as a perfume designed to counteract
the effluvia arising from the beasts which were
slaughtered for the daily sacrifice, other inter-
preters have allowed their imaginations to run
riot, and vied with the wildest speculations of
the Midrashim. Philo {Quit rer. die. hoar. tit.
§ 41, p. 501) conceives the stacte and onycha to
be symbolical of water and earth ; galbanum
and frankincense of air and fire. Josephus,
following the traditions of his time, believed
that the ingredients of the incense were chosen
from the products of the sea, the inhabited and
the uninhabited parts of the earth, to indicate that
all things are of God and for God (B. J. v. 5,
§ 5). As the Temple or Tabernacle was the
palace of Jehovah, the theocratic King of Israel,
and the Ark of the covenant His throne, so the
incense, in the opinion of some, corresponded to
the perfumes in which the luxurious monarch*
of the East delighted. It may mean all this,
but it must mean much more. Grotius, on
Ex. xxx. 1, says the mystical signification is
" sursum habenda corda." Cornelius a Lapide,
on Ex. xxx. 34, considers it as an apt emblem of
propitiation, and finds a symbolical meaning in
the several ingredients. Fair bairn (Typology of
Scripttuv, ii. 320), with many others, looks
upon prayer as the reality of which incense U
the symbol, founding bis conclusion upon Ps.
cxli. 2; Rev. v. 8, viii. 3, 4. Bahr (Symfj. d.
Mos. Cult. vol. i., c. vi. § 4) opposes this view of
the subject, on the ground that the chief thing
in offering incense is not the proSucing of the
smoke, which presses like prayer towards
heaven, but the spreading of the fragrance.
His own exposition may be summed up as
follows. Prayer, among all Oriental nations,
signifies calling upon the name of God. The
oldest prayers consisted in the mere enumera-
tion of the several titles of God. The Scripture
places incense in close relationship to prayer, so
that offering incense is synonymous with wor-
ship. Hence incense itself is a symbol of the
name of God. The ingredients of the incense
correspond severally to the perfections of God,
though it is impossible to decide to which of the
four names of God each belongs. Perhaps
stacte corresponds to nilV (Jehovah), onycha to
n»r6|< ('Eldhim), galbanum to *PI (chal), and
frankincense to Vnip (ooctosA). Such is Bahr's
exposition of the symbolism of incense, rather
ingenious than logical. Looking upon incense
in connexion with the other ceremonial observ-
ances of the Mosaic ritual, it would rather seem
to be symbolical, not of prayer itself, but of
that which makes prayer acceptable, the inter-
Digitized by
Google
INDIA
cession of Christ. In Rev. viii. 3, 4, the incense
is spoken of as something distinct from, though
offered with, the prayers of all the saints (cp.
Luke i. 10) ; and in Rev. r. 8 it is the golden
vials, and not the odours or incense, which are
said to be the prayers of saints. Ps. cxli. 2, at
first sight, appears to militate against this con-
clusion ; but if it be argued from this passage
that incense is an emblem of prayer, it must
also be allowed that the evening sacrifice has
the same symbolical meaning. [W. A. W.] [F.]
INDIA (lib, i.e. Hoddii ; y 'IrSurij ; India).
The name of India does not occur in the Bible
before the Book of Esther, where it is noticed as
the limit of the territories of Ahasuerus in the
east, as Ethiopia was in the west (i. 1 ; viii. 9) ;
the names are similarly connected by Herodotus
(vii. 9). The Hebrew form "Hoddu" is an
abbreviation of Hondo, which is identical with
the indigenous names of the river Indus," Hindu "
or " Sindhu," and again with the ancient name
of the country as it appears in the Vendidad,
" Hapta Hendu " (see MV."). The native form
"Sindus" is noticed by Pliny (vi. 23). The
India of the Book of Esther is not the peninsula
of Hindostan, but the country surrounding the
Indus — the Punjab, and perhaps Scinde— the
India which Herodotus describes (iii. 98) as
forming part of the Persian empire under Darius,
and the India which at a later period was con-
quered by Alexander the Great. The name
occurs in the inscriptions of Persepolis and
Kakhsh-i-Rustam, but not in those of Behistun
(Rawlinson, Herod, ii. 485). In 1 Mace. viii. 8
India is reckoned among the countries which
Eumenes, king of Pergamus, received out of the
former possessions of Antiochus the Great. It
is clear that India proper cannot be understood,
inasmuch as this never belonged either to
Antiochus or Eumenes. Rawlinson (Speaker's
Comin. in loco) and Zockler (Kgf. Konun. in
loco) consider the expression a mistake due to
the ignorance of the writer or historically in-
correct. Other explanations offered are not
satisfactory : the Eneti of Paphlagonia have been
suggested, but these people had disappeared long
before (Strab. xii. 534) : the India of Xenophon
(Cijrop. i. 5, § 3; iii. 2, § 25), which may hare
been above the Carian stream named Indus
(Plin. v. 29, probably the Calbis), is more likely ;
and the emendation "Mysia and Ionia" for
Media and India is but a guess. [Ionia.] A
more authentic notice of the country occurs
in 1 Mace. vi. 37, where Indians are noticed as
the drivers of the war-elephants introduced into
the army of the Syrian king (see also 1 Esd.
iii. 2 ; Esth. xiii. 1, xvi. 1).
But though the name of India occurs so seldom,
tiie people and productions of that country must
have been tolerably well known to the Jews.
There is undoubted evidence that an active trade
was carried on between India and Western Asia :
the Tyrians established their depots on the shores
of the Persian Gulf, and procured " horns of
ivory and ebony," "broidered work and rich
apparel " (Ezck. xxvi.. 15, 24), by a route which
crossed the Arabian desert by land, and then
followed the coasts of the Indian Ocean by
sea. The trade opened by Solomon with Ophir
through the Red Sea chiefly consisted of Indian
articles, and some of the names even of the
INN
1439
articles — 'atgummhn, " sandal wood ; " gSphUn,
"apes;" tukkitfim, "peacocks" (1 K. x. 22) —
are of Tamul origin (Humboldt, Kosmos, it
133) ; to which we may add the Hebrew name
of the " topaz," pitdah, derived from the
Sanscrit pita. There is a strong probability
that productions of yet greater utility were
furnished by India through Syria to the
shores of Europe, and that the Greeks derived
both the term Katrairtpos (cp. the Sanscrit
iastira), and the article it represents, "tin,"
from the coasts of India, or of the Malayan
Peninsula. (For many notices relating to
trade routes between the E. and W., see Yule,
Cathay and the Way thither.) The connexion
thus established with India led to the opinion
that the Indians were included under the ethno-
logical title of Cush (Gen. x. 6), and hence the
Syrian, Chaldaean, and Arabic Versions fre-
quently render that term by India or Indiana, as
in 2 Ch. xxi. 16 ; Is. xi. 11, xviii. 1 ; Jer. xiii.
23; t Zeph. iii. 10. For the connexion which
some have sought to establish between India
and Paradise, see Edeh. [W. L. B.] [W.]
INFIDEL. The word occurs in the A. V.
of 2 Cor. vi. 15 and 1 Tim. v. 8. The R. V.
replaces it in both cases by "unbeliever," a
term which is more correct, and in the passage
in 2 Cor. preserves the alliteration. [F.]
INHERITANCE. [Heir.]
INK.INKHOBN. [Whiting.]
INN (JITD, malm; Karikv/ia, xavSoKtior).
The Hebrew word thus rendered literally signi-
fies " a lodging-place for the night." * Inns, in
our sense of the term, were, as they still are,
unknown in the East, where hospitality is re-
ligiously practised. The khans, or caravanserais,
are the representatives of European inns, and
these were established but gradually. It is
doubtful whether there is any allusion to them
in the O. T. The halting-place of a caravan was
selected originally on account of its proximity
to water or pasture, by which the travellers
pitched their tents and passed the night. Such
was undoubtedly the " inn " (R. V. " lodging-
place") at which occurred the incident in the
life of Moses, narrated in Ex. iv. 24. It was
probably one of the halting-places of the Ishmael-
itish merchants who traded to Egypt with their
camel-loads of spices. Moses was on his journey
from the land of Midian, and the merchants in
Gen. xxxvii. are called indiscriminately Ishmael-
ites and Midianites. At one of these stations,
too, the first which they reached after leaving
the city, and no doubt within a short distance
from it, Joseph's brethren discovered that their
money had been replaced in their wallets (Gen.
xiii. 27).
Increased commercial intercourse, and in later
times religions enthusiasm for pilgrimages," gave
» In the language of the A. V. " to lodge " has the
force of remaining far the night. The word ]'? Is
rendered In 1 K. xbc. 9 •' lodge ; " m Qen. xix. 2 " terry
all night; " cp. also Jer. xiv. 8, &c.
•> The erection of hospitals in the Middle Ages was
due to the same cause. Paula, the friend of Jerome,
built several on the road to Bethlehem ; and the Scotch
and Irish residents in France erected hospitals for the
Digitized by
Google
1440
INN
rise to the establishment of more permanent
accommodation for travellers. On the more
frequented routes, remote from towns (Jer. ix.
2), caravanserais were in course of time erected,
often at the expense of the wealthy. The
following description of one of those on the
road from Baghdad to Babylon will suffice for
all: — "It is a large and substantial square
building, in the distance resembling a fortress,
being surrounded with a lofty wall, and flanked
by round towers to defend the inmates in case
of attack. Passing through a strong gateway,
the guest enters a large court, the sides of which
are divided into numerous arched compartments,
open in front, for the accommodation of separate
parties and for the reception of goods. In the
centre is a spacious raised platform, used for
sleeping upon at night, or for the devotions of
the faithful during the day. Between the outer
wall and the compartments are wide vaulted
arcades, extending round the entire building,
where the beasts of burden are placed. Upon
the roof of the arcades is an excellent terrace,
and over the gateway an elevated tower con-
taining two rooms— one of which is open at the
sides, permitting the occupants to enjoy every
breath of air that passes across the heated plain.
The terrace is tolerably clean; but the court
and stabling below are ankle-deep in chopped
straw and filth " (Loftus, Chaldea, p. 13). The
great khans established by the Persian kings
and great men, at intervals of about six miles
on the roads from Baghdad to the sacred places,
are provided with stables for the horses of the
pilgrims. " Within these stables, on both sides,
are other cells for travellers " (Layard, Nin. and
Bab. p. 478, note). The "stall " or " manger,"
mentioned in Luke ii. 7, was probably in a
stable of this kind (see Edersheim, Life and
Times of Jesus the Messiah, i. 184; Farrar, Life
of Christ, p. 2 [pop. ed.J). Such khans are
sometimes situated near running streams, or
have a supply of water of some kind, but the
traveller must carry all his provisions with him
(Ouseley, Trav. in Persia, i. 261, note). At
Damascus the khans are, many of them, sub-
stantial buildings; the small rooms which
surround the court, as well as those above them
which are entered from a gallery, are used by
the merchants of the city for depositing their
goods (Porter's Damascus, i. 33). The xcekdlehs
of modern Egypt are of a similar description
(Lane, Mod. Eg. ii. 10).
" The house of paths " (Prov. viii. 2, ir ottetp
ttiSuv, Vers. Ven.), where Wisdom took her
stand, is understood by some to refer appropri-
ately to a khan built where many ways met
and frequented by many travellers. A similar
meaning has been attached to DJ1D3 ni"l3,
giruth KimhOm, " the hostel of Chimham " (Jer.
xli. 17) beside Bethlehem, built by the liberality
of the son of Barzillai for the benefit of those
who were going down to Egypt (Stanley, S. <$- P.
p. 163; App. § 90). The Targum says, "which
David gave to Chimham, son of Barzillai the
Gileadite " (cp. 2 Sam. xix. 37, 38). With re-
gard to this passage in Jer., the ancient Versions
are strangely at variance. The LXX. (xlviii. 17)
use of pilgrims of their own nation, on their way to Rome
(BeckmauD, But. of /no. 11. 467). Hence hotpital,
hostel, and finally hotel.
INSTANT, INSTANTLY
had evidently another reading with 3 and 3
transposed, which they left untranslated, T.'
Xaixi. The Vulgate, if intended to be literal,
must hare read '333 ,- }?> peregrinantes in
Chanaam. The Arabic, following the Alexan-
drian MS., read it in 75 BTipuSxafiia/t, " in the
land of Berothchamaam." The Syriac has
Pj(0, b'edri, " in the threshing-floors," as if
ni3"133, begorn/tth. Joseph us had a reading
different from all, niTlJ3, begidroth, "in the
folds of " Chimham ; for he says the fugitives
went "to a certain place called Maudra"
(MdrSpa Ktyi/uror, Ant. x. 9, § 5), and in this
he was followed by Aquila and the Hexaplar
Syriac.
The waptoKttor (Luke x. 34) probably differed
from the KcrriXv/ta (Luke ii. 7) in having a
" host " or " innkeeper " (tovSokci/t, Luke x. 35),
who supplied some few of the necessary pro-
visions, and attended to the wants of travellers
left to his charge. The word has been adopted
in the later Hebrew, and appears in the M Ub.ua
( Yebamoth, xvi. 7) under the form PH31D, pun-
dak, and the host is 'p"U1D, punddti. The Jews
were forbidden to put up their beasts at estab-
lishments of this kind kept by idolaters (Abaia
Zara, ii. 1). It appears that houses of enter-
tainment were sometimes, as in Egypt (Her. ii.
35), kept by women, whose character was such
that their evidence was regarded with suspicion.
In the Mishna ( Yebamoth, xvi. 7) a tale is told
of a company of Levites who were travelling to
Zoar, the City of Palms, when one of them fell
ill on the road and was left by his comrades at
an inn, under the charge of the hostess (JVplJIB,
pundekith = ■waytoKtvrpla). On their return to
enquire for their friend, the hostess told them
he was dead and buried, but they refused to
believe her till she produced his staff, wallet,
and roll of the Law. In Josh. ii. 1, no'lT, zdnah,
the term applied to Rahab, is taken by Josephus
{Ant. v. 1, § 2) to mean an innkeeper, and it is
rendered in the Targum of Jonathan KJVplJlE,
pundekithS, a term both for the zdnah and " a
woman who keeps an inn " (according to Dill-
mann*). So in Judg. xi. 1, of the mother of
Jephthah ; of Delilah (Judg. xvi. 1) and the
two women who appealed to Solomon (IK. iii.
16). The words, in the opinion of Kimchi on
Josh. ii. 1, appear to have been synonymous.
In some parts of modern Syria a nearer ap-
proach has been made to the European system.
In all villages not provided with a khan, the
Sheikh's house (tnenzoul) becomes the place of
entertainment of all strangers who are not
visiting at the house of friends. The stranger
is supplied with provisions and fodder if required,
which he pays for at the usual rates (see B. D.,
Amer. ed.). [W. A. W.] [F.]
INSTANT, INSTANTLY. A word em-
ployed by our translators in the N. T. with the
force of urgency or earnestness, to render five
distinct Greek words. We still say "at the
instance of ; " but as that sense is no longer
attached to " instant " — though it is still to the
verb "insist," and to other compounds of the
same root, such as " persist," " constant "—it
has been thought advisable to notice its occur-
rences. They afford an interesting example, if
Digitized by
Google
IONIA
an additional one be needed, of the close con-
nexion which there is between the Authorised
Version and the Vulgate ; the Vulgate having,
as will be seen, suggested the word in three out
of its five occurrences.
1. a-rouialas — " they besought Him in-
stantly " (Luke vii. 4). This word is elsewhere
commonly rendered " earnestly," and is so ren-
dered here by R. V.
2. itixtivro, from twlxttfuu, to lie upon : —
" they were instant with loud voices " (Vulg.
inetabant), Luke xxiii. 23. This might be ren-
dered " they were pressing " (as in c. 1).
3. cV iiertrtltf, " instantly (R. V. ' earnestly ')
serving God " (Acts xxvi. 7). The metaphor at
the root of this word is that of stretching — on
the stretch. Elsewhere in the A. V. it is repre-
sented by " fervently."
4. TpoaKaprtpovm-ts, "continuing instant"
(Rom. xii. 12) ; Vulg. instantes. Here the ad-
jective is hardly necessary, the word being else-
where rendered by " continuing," or, to preserve
the rhythm of so familiar a sentence, " con-
tinuing stedfastly " (as Acts ii. 42), and so R. V.
in Rom.
5. bilanfii, from tQtordvat, to stand by or
upon — " be instant in season, out of season "
(2 Tim. iv. 2) ; Vulg. insta. Four verses further
on it is rendered " is at hand." The sense is
" stand ready " — " be alert " for whatever may
happen. Oi the five words this is the only one
which contains the same metaphor as " instant."
In Luke ii. 38, " that instant " is literally, as
in R. V., " that very hour," — alrrS rv &pa.
[G.] [W.]
ICNIA Qluvla). The substitution of this
word for 4 'Much in 1 Mace. viii. 8 (E. V.
" India ") is a conjecture of Grotius without any
authority of MSS. It must be acknowledged,
however, that the change removes a great diffi-
culty, especially if, as the same commentator
suggests, Vivaria [Mysia] be substituted for
MTjScio or Vlrfiia in the same context. The
passage refers to the cession of territory which
the Romans forced Antiochus the Great to make ;
and it is evident that India and Media are
nothing to the purpose, whereas Ionia and Mysia
were among the districts cis Taurum, which
were given up to Eumenes.
As to the term Ionia, the name was given in
early times to that part of the western coast of
Asia Minor which lay between Aeolis on the
north and Doris on the south. These were pro-
perly ethnological terms, and had reference to
the tribes of Greek settlers along this shore.
Ionia, with its islands, was celebrated for its
twelve, afterwards thirteen, cities ; five of which,
Ephesus, Smyrna, Miletus, Chios, and Samos,
are conspicuous in the N. T. In Roman times
Ionia ceased to have any political significance,
being absorbed in the province of Asia. The
term, however, was still occasionally used, as in
Joseph. Ant. xvi. 2, § 3, from which passage we
learn that the Jews were numerous in this district.
This whole chapter in Josephus is very interest-
ing, as a geographical illustration of that part of
the coast. TJavan.] [J. S. H.] [W.]
IPHEDEI'AH (n«IS» = ( whom) Jehovah
frees ; B. 'Itiptpeid, A. 'U<paiia ; Jephdaia),
a descendant of Benjamin, one of the Bene-
Shashak (1 Ch. viii. 25) ; specially named as a
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
IB-HA-HEBE3
1441
chief of the tribe, and as residing in Jerusalem
(cp. v. 28).
IB (TJ>, (?) = city, town ; B. 'Po^m, A. ? 'Cipi
Hh-% 1 Ch. vii. 12. [Iai.]
I'EA (KTIJ = watchful; Ira). 1. (BA.
Efpas.) " The Jairite," named in the catalogue
of David's great officers (2 Sam. xx. 26) as
"priest to David" (Jflb ; and so in R. V.;
A. V. " a chief ruler "). The Peshitto Versiot
for "Jairite" has "from Jathir," ij. probably
Jattib, where David had fonnd friends during
his troubles with Saul. [Jairite."] If this can
be maintained, and it certainly has an air of
probability, then this Ira is identical with *
2. (In Sam. BA. Etpas ; in Ch. B. 'Ipd, A. -as,
K. 'Ii.) « Ira the Ithrite " (as in R. V., '"Wil ;
A.V. omits the article), that is, the Jattirite,
one of the heroes of David's guard (2 Sam. xxiii.
38 ; 1 Ch. xi. 40). [Ithbite ; Jattib ; Jetheb.1
8. (In Sam. BA. Etpas ; in 1 Ch. xi. BKA. '{Ipoi,
in 1 Cb. xxvii. B. 'OSovlas, A. Klpa ; Hira.)
Another member of David's guard, a Tekoite,
son of Ikkesh (2 Sam. xxiii. 26 ; 1 Ch. xi. 28).
Ira was leader of the sixth monthly course of
24,000, as appointed by David (1 Ch. xxvii. 9).
I'BAD pyV, Q)=swift [see MV."] ; TmSat
in both MSS.; Joseph, 'lapittit', Syr. Idar;
Irad), son of Enoch ; grandson of Cain, and
father of Mehujael (Gen. iv. 18).
I'BAM (BTB; A ZooW, DE. Zcuptttly in
Gen. 1. c. ; but B. Zupwtlv, A. 'Hpa/i in Ch. 1. c. ;
Hiram), an Edomite "duke," or rather emir
or tribal prince (Gen. xxxvi. 43 ; 1 Ch. i. 54).
The list of eleven (originally doubtless twelve*)
tribal princes of Esau in Gen. xxxvi. 40-43, a
section assigned to P, is expressly stated to give
the names " according to their clans," and
*« their places" or "seats." Thus Iram, for
instance, is the designation at once of the emir,
of his clan or tribe, and of 'their territory in the
land of Edom.
The name of Iram, as the present writer
believes, is identical with that of the king of
Edom, who paid tribute to Sennacherib, and
whom he calls Ai-ram-mu mat U-du-um-ma-ai,
" Airam the Edomite " (Taylor Cylinder, 2, 54).
See Bab. and Or. Record, 1889, p. 55. [C. J. B.]
lB-HA-HE'BES (DVjn f>V, 0~mn T»;
x<Sa<j hrttix; Oivilaa Solis), an appellation or
name of a city in Egypt (Is. xix. 18). The
reading Q~)jV} TV, " City of destruction,"
has the weight of manuscript authority ; the
reading DiriiT "TO, " City of the Sun," is not
without manuscript support besides that of
the Vulgate and Talmud. [The LXX., in fact,
supports it; for its reading a<r«8«K is only an
inversion of D^ffi!, which the translator read
mon (for n = k, cp. noD, ^ao-««).]
The prophecy in which lr-ha-heres is men-
• As Ewald has pointed out, the Septuagint Zapboi or
ZaphoTn is not really the equivalent of Iram, but pre-
serves the name of the missing twelfth chieftain and his
clan, vis. Zepho (Heb. lQ^, tm. 11, 16), Iram being
accidentally omitted.
4 Z
Digitized by
Google
1442
IR-HA-HERES
IRON
tioned is the close of "the harden of Egypt,"
or is a separate prediction ; the separate part
or new prophecy being contained in m. 16 or
18-25. It has even been held to be of the
Maccabaean period, in consequence of the sup-
pose! reference to the temple of Onias. This
view requires the assumption that in this period
there was a reasonable prospect of the religions
harmony of Israel, Egypt, and Syria, by which
we are to understand the Assyria of the
prophecy. The party of Onias may have had
some hopes of proselytism in Egypt, but there
is not a trace of any such idea as to Syria. The
prediction is clearly Messianic, and did not
receive its fulfilment in a Jewish sense. The
critioal questions that have arisen being how-
ever due to the building of the temple of
Onias, the history of that event must be noticed
in brief. During the Syrian oppression, a
certain Onias, of the stock of the high-priests,
tied to Egypt. He had been prevented from
holding the high-priesthood by Antiochus Epi-
phanes, and Ptolemy Philometor kindly received
him, and granted him permission to build a
temple for the Egyptian Jews at a place in the
east of the Delta. No doubt a large emigration
had taken place in B.C. 170 and for a short time
after, as the settlement of a colony and the
consequent building of a temple must have
preceded the cleansing and dedication of the
Temple at Jerusalem by Judas Maccabaeus in
B.C. 165, and must certainly have followed its
desecration in B.C. 168. The Jewish establish-
ment in the west of the Delta was manifestly
schismatic, and there is no trace of any relation
with the powerful and learned community of
Alexandria, which was always anxious that the
central authority of Jerusalem should regard it
as orthodox, in order that its freedom in philo-
sophy might not be limited. Our knowledge of
the colony of Onias is derived from Josephus,
who evidently uses traditionary material in the
narrative of the foundation of the temple,
evidently it produced no literature : all that
has survived has been discovered by Mr. Naville
in the inscriptions in the necropolis of the city
of Onias. Pending their publication, more cannot
he ventured on than this, that the names seem
rather Palestinian than Alexandrian, but that
the use of jt/otis and x*V"*> both •" ">* Alexan-
drian sense, point to the influence of the great
Egyptian colony.
According to the tradition reported by Jose-
phus, Onias pointed to the prophecy of Isaiah as
a prediction and justification of his project,
lireat use has been made of this in the criticism
as to the origin of the different names of the
city spoken of by the Prophet. According to
Ceiger, the LXX. retains the true reading,
"righteousness," altered into "destruction" in
disparagement, and again changed to " sun " by
the Egyptian Jews. Cheyne remarks on this:
"To me the Sept. reading looks more like a
retort upon the Palestine Jews for expounding
lr-ha-heres in a manner uncomplimentary to
Onias." He adds this bold remark: "Very
possibly the ISook of Isaiah was translated into
Greek at Leontopolis" {The Prophecies of Isaiah,
ii. 4th ed. p. 152). It must be remarked that
we have no evidence of literary activity in this
colony, and that it is impossible that the same
translator should have rendered the same Hebrew
appellation by ri\it tutaxovirns of Jerusalem in
i. 26, and by wiKis icttim of the Egyptian chy
in xix. 18, when he had changed the text to
introduce the epithet he thus left untranslated.
It is possible that the more liberal views which
prevailed after the fall of the Jewish polity
induced some editors to see a fulfilment of the
prophecy in the settlement of the colony of
Onias, and even in its temple : hence perhaps the
alternative reading, supported by the nearness
of the city of Onias to Heliopolis. [R. S. P.]
I'M (B. Olpeul, A. Ob ft; Jona). I Esd.
viii. 62. This name answers to Uriah in Ezra
(viii. 33).
IM'JAH (n»K"V = Jehovah seeth ; Sapovla,
A. Sapoviis ; Jerias), son of Shelemiah, a
" captain of the ward " (IVTpB 7V3), who met
Jeremiah in the gate of Jerusalem called the
"gate of Benjamin," accused him of being about
to desert to the Chaldeans, and led him back to
the princes (Jer. xxxvii. 13, 14).
IR-NA'HASH (CrO-TD = serpent-city; wi-
Air Nut; Urbs Naas ; R. V. tnarg., the c%
of Nahash), a name which, like many other
names of places, occurs in the genealogical lists
of Judah (1 Ch. iv. 12). Tehinnah Abi Ir-
nahash — " father of Ir-nahash " — was one of
the sons of Eshton, all of them being descendants
of Chelub (t>. 11). But it seems impossible to
connect this special genealogy with the general
genealogies of Judah, and it has the air of being
a fragment of the records of some other family,
related, of course, or it would not be here, but
not the same. May not "Shuah, the brother
of Chelub " (t>. 11), be Shuah the Canaanite, by
whose daughter Judah had his three eldest sons
(Gen. xxxviii. 2, &c.), and these verses be a
fragment of Canaanite record preserved amongst
those of the great Israelite family, who then
became so closely related to the Canaanites?
True, the two Shuabs are written differently in
Hebrew — VW and nPOG'; but considering the
early date of the one passage and the corrupt
and incomplete state of the other, this is
perhaps not irreconcilable.
No trace of the name of Ir-nahash attached
to any site has been discovered. Jerome's in-
terpretation (C«. Hebr. ad loc.)— whether bis
own or a tradition, he does not say — is that Ir-
nahash is Bethlehem, Nahash being another
name for Jesse. Conder (Hbk. p. 415) suggests
as a possible identification Deir Nakhkhds, near
BeitJilrSn. [Nahash.] [G.] [W.]
IB-ON fllNT; B. Ktpof, A. 'lapuir; Jeron\
one of the cities of Naphtali, named between
En-hazor and Migdal-el (Josh. xix. 38); it is
now I'aran (P£F . Mem. i. 258). [G.] [\V.]
IRON (^"13, barzel; Ch. JtVnB, parSli;
alSripos), mentioned with brass as the earliest
of known metals (Gen. iv. 22). As it is rarely
found in its native state, but generally in com-
bination with oxygen, the knowledge of the art
of forging iron, which is attributed to Tubal
Cain, argues an acquaintance with the difficulties
which attend the smelting of this metal. Iron
Digitized by
Google
IKON
melts at a temperature of about 3000° Fahren-
heit, and to produce this heat large furnaces
supplied by a strong blast of air are necessary.
But, however difficult it may be to imagine a
knowledge of such appliances at so early a
period, it is perfectly certain that the use of
iron is of extreme antiquity, and that therefore
some means of overcoming the obstacles in ques-
tion mnst have been discovered. What the pro-
cess may have been is left entirely to conjectnre ;
a method is employed by the natives of India,
extremely simple and of great antiquity, which,
though ru le. is very effective, and suggests the
possibility of similar knowledge in an early
age of civilization (lire, Diet. Arts and Sciences,
art. Steel). The smelting furnaces of Aethalia,
described by Diodorus (v. 13), correspond roughly
with the modern bloomeries, remains of which
still exist in this country (Napier, Metallurgy
of the Bible, p. 140). Malleable iron was in com-
mon use, but it is doubtful whether the ancients
were acquainted with cast-iron. The allusions
in the Bible supply the following facts : —
The natural wealth of the soil of Canaan is
indicated by describing it as "a land whose
stones are iron," i.e. iron-stones (Deut. viii. 9).
By this Winer (RWB. art. JEisen), followed by
modern critics (see Dillmann ' in loco), under-
stands the basalt which predominates in the
Hauran. It was the material of which Og's
bedstead (Dent. iii. 11) was made, and contains
a large percentage of iron. Some consider
that the expression is a poetical figure. Pliny
(xxxvi. 11), who is quoted as an authority, says
indeed, that basalt is " ferrei colons atque duri-
tiae," but does not hint that iron was ever ex-
tracted from it. The Book of Job contains
passages which indicate that iron was a metal
well known. Of the manner of procuring it,
we learn that " iron is taken from dust "
(xxviii. 2). It does not follow from Job xix. 24,
that it was used for a writing implement,
though such may have been the case, any more
than that adamant was employed for the same
purpose (Jer. xvii. 1), or that shoes were
shod with iron and brass (Deut. xxxiii. 25).
Indeed, iron so frequently occurs in poetic
figures, that it is difficult to discriminate be-
tween its literal and metaphorical sense. In
such passages as the following, in which a
** yoke of iron " (Deut. xxviii. 48) denotes hard
service ; " a rod of iron " (Ps. ii. 9), a stern
government; "a pillar of iron" (Jer. i. 18), a
strong support ; " and threshing instruments of
iron " (Amos i. 3), the means of cruel oppression,
— the hardness and heaviness (Ecclus. xxii. 15) of
iron are so clearly the prominent ideas, that
though it may have been used for the instru-
ments in question, such usage is not of necessity
indicated. The"/urnaceof iron" (Deut. iv. 28 j
1 K. viii. 51) is a figure which vividly expresses
hard bondage, as represented by the severe
labour which attended the operation of smelt-
ing. Iron was used for chisels (Deut. xxvii. 5),
or something of the kind ; for axes (Deut. xix. 5 ;
2 K. vi. 5, 6 ; Is. x. 34 ; Horn. II. iv. 485) ; for
harrows and saws (2 Sam. xii. 31 ; 1 Ch. xx. 3) ;
for nails (1 Ch. xxii. 3), and the fastenings of
the Temple ; for weapons of war (1 Sam. xvii. 7 ;
Jab xx. 24), and for war chariots (Josh. xvii. 16,
18; Judg. i. 19, iv. 3, 13). The latter were
plated or studded with it. Its usage in defen-
IBON
1443
sive armour is implied in 2 Sam. xxiii. 7 (cp.
Rev. ix. 9), and as a safeguard in peace
it appears in fetters (Ps. cv. 18), prison-gates
(Acts xii. 10), and bars of gates or doors (Ps.
cvii. 16; Is. xlv. 2), as well as for surgical pur-
poses (1 Tim. iv. 2). Sheet-iron was used for
cooking utensils (Ezek. iv. 3 * ; cp. Lev. vii. 9),
and bars of hammered iron are mentioned in
Job xl. 18, though here the LXX. perversely
render altiipos x vr ^i " cast-iron." That it was
plentiful in the time of David appears from
1 Ch. xxii. 3. It was used by Solomon, accord-
ing to Josephus, to clamp the large rocks with
which he built up the Temple mount (Ant.
xv. 11, § 3); and by Hezekiah's workmen to
hew out the conduits of Gihon (Ecclus. xl viii.
17). Images were fastened in their niches in
later times by iron brackets or clamps (Wisd.
xiii. 15). Agricultural implements were early
made of the same material. In the treaty made
by Porsena was inserted a condition like that
imposed on the Hebrews by the Philistines, that
no iron should be used except for agricultural
purposes (Plin. xxxiv. 39).
The market of Tyre was supplied with bright
or polished iron by the merchants of Dan and
Javan (Ezek. 'xxvii. 19). Some, as the LXX.
and Vulg., render this " wrought iron : " so De
Wette, " geschmiedetes Eisen." The Targum
has "bars of iron," which would correspond
with the stricturae of Pliny (xxxiv. 41). But
Eimchi (Lex. s. v.) expounds mCtf, 'ashoth, as
" pure and polished " (= Span, actro, steel), in
which he is supported by R. Sol. Parchon, and
by Ben Zeb, who gives "glanzend" as the
equivalent (cp. the Homeric aWay o-ttripos, II.
vii. 473). If the Javan alluded to were Greece,
and not, as Bochart (I'haleg, ii. 21) seems to
think, some place in Arabia (so Orelli in loco, in
Strack u. Zikkler's Kgf. Komm. z. A. T.), there
might be reference to the iron mines of Mace-
donia, spoken of in the decree of Aemilius Paulus
(Liv. xlv. 29) ; but Bochart urges as a very
strong argument in support of his theory that,
at the time of Ezekiel's prophecy, the Tyrians
did not depend upon Greece for a supply of
cassia and cinnamon, which are associated with
iron in the merchandise of Dan and Javan, but
that rather the contrary was the case. Pliny
(xxxiv. 41) awards the palm to the iron of
Series, that of Parthia being next in excellence.
The Chalybes of the Pontus were celebrated as
workers in iron in very ancient times (Aesch.
Prom. 733). They were identified by Strabo
with the Chaldaei of his day (xii. 549), and the
mines which they worked were in the mountains
skirting the sea-coast. The produce of their
labour is supposed to be alluded to in Jer. xv. 12,
as being of superior quality. Iron mines are
still in existence on the same coast, and the ore
is found "in small nodular masses in a dark
yellow clay which overlies a limestone rock "
(Smith's Qeog. Diet., art. Chalybes).
It was for a long time supposed that the
Egyptians were ignorant of the use of iron, and
that the allusions in the Pentateuch were ana-
chronisms, as no traces of it have been found in
their monuments; but in the sepulchres at
■ The passage of Ezekiel is Illustrated by the screens
behind which the archers stand In the representations of
a siege on the Hlmroud sculptures.
4 Z 2
Digitized by
Google
1444
ieon
Thebes botchers are represented as sharpening
their knives on a round bar of metal attached
to their aprons, which from its blue colour is
presumed to be steel. The steel weapons on the
tomb of Rameses HI. are also painted blue ; those
of bronze being red (Wilkinson, Arte. Eg. ii. 155
[1878]). One iron mine only has been dis-
covered in Egypt, which was worked by the
ancients. It is at Hammami between the Nile
and the Red Sea ; the iron found by Mr. Burton
was in the form of specular and red ore {Id.
iii. 246). That no articles of iron should have
been found is easily accounted for by the fact
that it is easily destroyed by exposure to the air
and moisture. According to Pliny (xzxiv. 43),
it was preserved by a coating of white lead,
gypsum, and liquid pitch. Bitumen was pro-
bably employed for the same purpose (xxxv. 52).
The Egyptians obtained their iron almost exclu-
sively from Assyria Proper in the form of bricks
or pigs (Layard, Nin. ii. 415). Specimens of
Assyrian iron-work overlaid with bronze were
discovered by Sir H. Layard, and are now in
the British Museum {Nin. and Bab. p. 191).
Iron weapons of various kinds were found at
Nimroud, but fell to pieces on exposure to the
air. Some portions of shields and arrow-heads
{Id. pp. 194, 596) were rescued, and are now in
England. A pick of the same metal {Id. p. 194)
was also found, as well as part of a saw
(p. 195), and the head of an axe (p. 357), and
remains of scale-armour and helmets inlaid with
copper {Sin. i. 340). It was used by the
Etruscans for offensive weapons, as bronze for
defensive armour. The Assyrians had daggers
and arrow-heads of copper mixed with iron, and
hardened with an alloy of tin (Layard, Nin.
ii. 418). So in the days of Homer war-clubs
were shod with iron {Ii. vii. 141) ; arrows were
tipped with it (//. iv. 123) ; it was used for the
axles of chariots (//. v. 723), for fetters {Od.
i. 204), for axes and bills (//. iv. 485 ; Od.
xxi. 3, 81). Adrastns (//. vi. 48) and Ulysses
{Od. xxi. 10) reckoned it among their treasures,
the iron weapons being kept in a chest in the
treasury with the gold and brass {Od. xxi. 61).
In Od. i. 184, Mentes tells Telemachus that he
is travelling from Tapbos to Tamese to procure
brass in exchange for iron, which Eustathius
says was not obtained from the mines of the
island, but was the produce of piratical excur-
sions (Millin, Mineral. Horn. p. 115, 2nd ed.).
Pliny (xxxiv. 40) mentions iron as used sym-
bolically for a statue of Hercules at Thebes (cp.
Dan. ii. 33, v. 4), and goblets of iron as among
the offerings in the temple of Mars the Avenger,
at Rome. Alyattes the Lydian dedicated to
the oracle at Delphi a small goblet of iron, the
workmanship of Glaucus of Chios, to whom the
discovery of the art of soldering this metal is
attributed (Her. i. 25). The goblet is described
by Pausanias (x. 16). From the fact that such
offerings were made to the temples, and that
Achilles gave as a prize of contest a rudely-
shaped mass of the same metal {II. xxiii. 826),
it has been argued that in early times iron was
so little known as to be greatly esteemed for its
rarity. That this was not the case in the time
of Lycurgus is evident, and Homer attaches to it
no epithet which would denote its preciousness
(Millin, p. 106). There is reason to suppose
that the discovery of brass preceded that of iron
ISAAC
(Lncr. v. 1292), though little weight can be
attached to the line of Hesiod often quoted as
decisive on this point {Op. et Diet, 150). The
Dactyli Idaei of Crete were supposed by the
ancients to have the merit of being the first to
discover the properties of iron (Plin. vii. 57;
Diod. Sic. v. 64), as the Cyclopes were said to
have invented the iron-smith's forge (Plin.
vii. 57). According to the Arondelian Marbles,
iron was known B.C. 1370, while Larcher
{Chronol. d 'Herod. 570) assigns a still earlier
date, B.O. 1537. Enough has been said to prove
that the allusions to iron in the Pentateuch and
other parts of the O. T. are not anachronisms.
There is considerable doubt whether the
ancients were acquainted with cast-iron. The
rendering given by the LXX. of Job xl. 18, as
quoted above, seems to imply that some method
nearly like that of casting was known, and is
supported by a passage in Diodorus (v. 13). The
inhabitants of Aethalia traded with pig-iron in
masses like large sponges to Dicaearchia and
other marts, where it was bought by the smiths
and fashioned into various moulded forms (wAxdr-
parra xavToSard).
In Ecclus. xxxviii. 28, we have a picture of
the interior of an iron-smith's (Is. xliv. 12)
workshop. The smith, parched with the smoke
and heat of the furnace, sits beside his anvil
and contemplates the nnwrought iron, his ears
are deafened with the din of the heavy hammer,
his eyes are fixed on his model, and he
never sleeps till he has accomplished his task.
[Steel.] [W. A. W.]
IR-PE-EL &<BT = Jehovah heals; Kwpiw,
A. 'Uptpa^K; Jarephel), one of the cities of Ben-
jamin (Josh, xviii. 27), occurring in the list
between Rekem and Taralah. No certain trace
has yet been discovered of its situation, but
Major Conder has suggested the village of Rdfdt,
north of el-Jtb, Gibeon {PEF. Mem. iii. 13, 154).
It will be observed that the Ir in this name is
radically different from that in the names Ir-
nahash, Ir-shemesh, &c. [G.] [W.]
IB-SHETHESH (Eta? "TO = city of ike
sun ; B. *A\tis Zzappais, A. rifA.it Sapcs ; Ber-
semes, id est, (Sottas Solis), a city of the Danites
(Josh. xix. 41), probably identical with Beth-
SHEMEsn, 'Am Shems, and, possibly, connected
with Mount Hebes (Judg. i. 35), the " mount
of the sun." Beth-shemesh is probably the
later form of the name. In other cases Beth
appears to have been substituted for other older
terms [see Baal-meon, &c], such as Ir or Ar,
a very ancient word. [G.] [W.]
I'BU (W»; B.*Hp,A."Hpo; Mir), the eldest
son of the great Caleb son of Jephunneh (1 Ch.
iv. 15.) The name is probably Ir, the vowel
at the end .being merely the conjunction
" and," properly belonging to the following
name.
ISAAC (pny., or pnfe?;* 'ttrtuU; Isaac;
" the Laugher," i.e. the Joyous or Happy One),
* Cp. the Syrlac form tjOfctXTXtf. fs-USq. The
corresponding Hebrew form occurs only in Amos vii.
», 16 ; Jer. xxxill. 26 ; Ps. cv. 9.
Digitized by
Google
ISAAC
the son born to Abraham and Sarah in their
old age, to be the " Heir of the Promises," to
the exclusion of Hagar's son Ishmael (Gen. it.
1-6 ; xviii. 9 sqq. ; xxi. 12).
The Biblical recollections of Isaac are far less
lively and copious than those of Abraham
and of Jacob. The life is comprised in Gen.
xxi.-xxxT. 29 ; but the greater part of these
chapters is concerned less with Isaac's own
fortunes than with those of his parents and
progeny. The narratives relating to this
patriarch are, as usual, of a composite cha-
racter [Genesis] ; and though the hand of
the compiler has pruned away some of the
discrepancies between the various traditions,
others have been suffered to survive in ■ the
ultimate form of the story. Let us first con-
sider the reasons assigned or suggested for the
name of Isaac, "the Laugher," or "he who
laughs" (pnv\ from pflV, "to laugh").
According to P (Gen. xvii. 17), " Abraham fell
on his face and laughed," when he heard that
a son was to be born to him ; whence, as the
story implies (o. 19), the child was to be called
Isaac (Heb. Yic-haq), qs. "Laughter." Ac-
cording to J (Gen. xviii. 12), Sarah toughed to
herself when she overheard the promise to her
husband, and then denied the fact through fear.
According to E (Gen. xxi. 6), Sarah exclaimed
at the birth of her son: "Laughter (pIPIV)
hath Elohim made for me " (= perhaps, " Elohim
hath made me to laugh," as A. V. ; or else,
" Elohim hath caused laughter at me " ; cp.
the next clause, which Budde with some reason
assigns to J, assuming that it originally fol-
lowed v. 7 : " whoever beareth of it will laugh
at me," KaTaytXietral pov, LXX.). But pre-
sently E gives another glance at the meaning
of the name. In c. 9, Sarah sees ishmael
pnVO, either " laughing " (Kautzsch) or
" jesting "(xix. 14), or "playing" (add, "with
Isaac her son," LXX. wai(oyra peri 'laaiuc
toO vlov iavrijt).
These divergences, which are characteristic
enough of the Oriental indifference to verbal
consistency of statement so long as picturesque
allusions are secured, troubled the mind of St.
Jerome in the fourth century, who argues man-
fully for the suggestion of P (Quaest. Heb. in
Gen.), while Josephus in the first had affirmed
that of J {Ant. i. 12, § 2).
It is doubtful whether Isaac, which does not
occur as the name of any other individual in
either Testament, although like Abraham,
Jacob, David, and other great names of the
heroic past, it was revived in the later period
of Judaism, was originally a theophoric name,
as Jacob appears to have been [Jacob]. No
trace of a proper name formed by composition
of the root pTIV with either El or Jah (Jeho-,
or -jahu, -jah) is to be found. Not that such a
combination of ideas would necessarily have
been repugnant to the ancient Hebrew mind.
Indeed an approach to it is seen in the words of
Ps. ii. 4: pny Q'DB'a 3B*, "He that sitteth
in the heavens laugheth." Goldziher, who
cites this line, supposes that Isaac was origin-
ally the smiling sun of myths and poetry
{Myth. Heb. pp. 92 sqq., E. Tr.). The name,
however, may very well have had an original
mythical reference, and yet be that of a
historical personage or people, or of a famous
ISAAC
1445
chief and his tribe. And it must be said that
the learned Arabist's attempts to explain or
claim as mythical features such very natural
details as Isaac's marriage with Rebekah, b his
preference for Esau, his blindness in old age, are
far from striking one as inevitable or con-
vincing {op. tit. pp. 106 sqq.). In any case,
little is gained in the way of insight into the
Biblical narratives or illustration of their
sources, by a precarious comparison of these
old national and tribal designations' and
reminiscences with the meagre and monotonous
conceptions of solar mythology.
Other grounds have been alleged for recog-
nising in the story of Isaac a sort of Euhemer-
istic treatment of primitive legends about the
gods and heroes, and thus resolving the Hebrew
patriarch into a metamorphosed deity. An
original identity has been assumed of the
Biblical relation of the sacrifice of Isaac with
a somewhat apocryphal Phoenician counterpart.
The legend of "El offering his only son Jend
upon the mountains of Canaan" (Sayce; cp.
Selden, de die Syria, Syntagma i. 97) has been
supposed to supply the primitive basis of the
narrative which in Gen. xxii. has been brought
down from the world of gods to that of men.
The Phoenician legend is given by Eusebius
{Proep. Emng. iv. 16; i. 10) as an extract
from Sanchoniathon ; and without committing
ourselves to the questionable assertion that it is
only " a singular and inaccurate version of the
offering of Isaac," we may at least mention that
the work of Sanchoniathon was a late forgery
by Philo of Byblus (see Von Gutschmid,
Encyc. Brit. art. Phoenicia, Religion). The
mere fact that a myth was current in Byblus,
to the effect that the divine founder of the
town was the first to sacrifice " an only son or
a virgin daughter to the supreme god," does
not seem to carry us far on the road to a
positive identification of the much older narra-
tive in Genesis with a local Phoenician legend
obviously intended to lend a religious sanction
to child-sacrifice. The moral of the Hebrew
story is the exact contrary {vid. infr.).
Prof. Robertson Smith thinks there is a
sacrificial air about the scene in which Jacob
approaches his father with the dish of young
goats' flesh in order to win his blessing. In
particular, the wearing of the skins of the
slaughtered kids recalls a similar feature of
heathen ritual. The Assyrian Dagon-wor-
shipper offered the mystic fish-sacrifice to the
Fish-god draped in a fish-skin, and the Cypriotes
wore sheep-skins when offering a sheep to the
* Explained as the marriage of the Son with " the
fruitful, rich ear**," after C. P. Tiele.
* Isaac appears as a national designation in Amos,
who calls the people of the northern kingdom " House
of Isaac/' and their sanctuaries "the high places of
Isaac " (Amos vil. 9, 16). Isolated as these expressions
are, they are important as Implying a nomenclature
which may have been familiar in the days of Amos (8th
cent. B.C.)- The passages Amoe v. 6, vlij. 14, Indicate a
reference to Bethel, OUgal, Samaria, Dan, as well as
Beerohcba, in the latter phrase.
That Isaac was something more than a private
Individual Is evident from his alliance on equal terms
with the king of Oerar. It Is remarkable that, save In
the single passage Jer. xxxlii. 26, Isaac Is not named
again In the whole volume of the Prophets.
Digitized by
Google
1446
ISAAC
Sheep-goddess. According to Philo Byblius
(Euseb. Praep. Evang. i. 10, 10), it was the god
Usoiis (that is, Esau, as Scaliger suggested)
who first taught men to clothe themselves in
the skins of beasts taken in hunting, and to
pour out their blood sacrificially before sacred
stones (Robertson Smith, Religion of the Semites,
pp. 417, 448).*
If, however, we are te recognise in these
traits of the story glimpses of some old myth
about the Father of Israel and Edom, it must
be admitted that neither of the two old Hebrew
writers (J, E) whose accounts are so curiously
interwoven in Gen. xxvii., appears to have had
any perception of the true significance of the
story. It is, in fact, evident that their inten-
tion was to illustrate, as in the subsequent
account of the shepherd tricks by which Jacob
contrived to transfer to himself the ownership
of Laban's flocks and herds, the supreme craft
of Jacob's character, which on this occasion
secured the blessing of a reluctant father.
The broad fact of history which lay before
these Israelite chroniclers was the former great-
ness (Gen. xxxvi.) and subsequent decline of
Edom, Israel's elder brother; in other words,
the transfer of Divine favour from the elder
to the younger people : and what they have
given ns is apparently the traditional expla-
nation of the fact current and popular in
their day.
To return to the narrative : after Isaac's birth
we are told of his weaning feast, and of the
dismissal of Hagar and Iahmael at Sarah's
bidding, sanctioned by Elohim on the ground
that Isaac was to be the father of Abraham's
true offspring (Gen. xxi. 8-12, E). At the
time, Abraham was living at Beer-sheba (e. 33,
J ; cp. xxii. 19, E). Then follows immedi-
ately* what may be called the one distinctive
event in the otherwise somewhat colourless life
of Isaac ; the sacrifice begun but not consum-
mated on the unnamed mountain in " the land
of Moriah " (xxii. 1-14, E ; 15-18, J, perhaps
expanded or recast by the compiler of JE;
v. 19, E. So Driver, LOT. ; see note' ro/r.).
The beautiful narrative of the obedience of
Abraham, the childlike submission of Isaac,
the sudden arrest of the bloody rite at the
moment of execution by the Angel of Jahvah,
and the substitution of a ram for the human
victim, has naturally been a favourite with
Christian writers of all ages, many of whom
have seen in Isaac a type of our Lord (for the
Apostolic use of the incident, see Heb. xi. 17-
19). Here, it seems necessary to ask what the
narrative signified to the original narrator; a
question on which there is, happily, little or no
difference of opinion among scholars. The
d In this case. Isaac's fondness for *• savoury meat " —
which as a man and a pastoral chief he would share with
most nomads — becomes an Instanco not of a human
falling (" Schwachhelt elnnllcher Wohlschmeckerei."
HWB.), but of the liking of gods for the Kvlo-a or
nn'3 rn. the reek and savour of the sacrifice; a
conception common to ancient relk-ions. Cp. Hani
ifinu iriia Hani ieinu iriia tiiba, " The gods snuffed In
the savour. The gods snuffed In tin- sweet savour" ,
(Chaldean Legend of the Flood, 1. 161). j
• Josephus, probably from a Haggadic source, says
that Isaac was twenty-five years old at this time J
(.Ant. . 13, J 2). I
ISAAC
intervention of JahtaH at the crisis of Isaac's
fate (xxii. 11), whereas Elohim who had in-
stigated the sacrifice is alone mentioned up to
that point (m. 1, 3, 8, 9), can hardly be
accidental. It is, in fact, quite clear that the
intention is to reveal Jahvah, the God of Israel,
as opposed to the dreadful rites of human
sacrifice which were commonly rendered to
the elohim of Canaan, and which the bens
Israel were from time to time tempted to copy.
With this agrees the memorial name which
Abraham gives to the high place, Jahtah-ju'eh
(in contrast with, e.g., El-eWhe- Israel, xxxiii.
20), which is evidently the author's resolution
of Moriah (Mori-jah = Mor'I-Jah, as if, " Pro-
vided of Jah ").'
It was, perhaps, hardly possible in the writer's
time to represent the conflict of religious ideas
in any more direct way. The impulse to sacri-
fice children was not a thing of mere antiquarian
speculation even in the time of the literary pro-
phets and the later monarchy (Mic vi. 7 ; 2 K.
iii. 27, xvi. 3, xvii. 17, xxiii. 10; cp. Lev. xviii.
21 ; Judg. xi. 31, 39). And if in some perilous
' The LXX. renders CI'IDfl fXt. "the land of
Moriah," by •' the lofty land," t)|» yi» ri|» vtln»Xqr: cp.
Gen. ill. 6, where for miD \hvt- " oak of Mono," it
gives iV ipiy vi|t> inlinkqv. Hence Week, Tnch, and
other critics would restore miDn V")N. " the laod of
Moreh," in Gen. xxii. 2. Moreh was the name of a bill
at Shechem (Judg. vli. 1) ; and hence it Is supposed that
ha-Morth was altered In the Hebrew text to ka-Moriyak.
in the interest of the Jerusalem Temple as against the
Samaritan one. The Samaritan Pentateuch, however,
reads nj01Di"l> which is interpreted by the Samaritan
Targum as meaning HfVTn. "vision." Moreover, the
Chronicler calls the Temple Mount " toe hill of Moriah "
(2 Cb. 111. 1); cp. Jos. Ant. 1. 13, }} 1, 2. The Targ.
Jems, agrees with this ; while the rendering of Onkekx
Wr6lB 1HK. "the land of worship," obvtoosly takes
rPID *» equivalent to K")1t3. "fear," perhaps reading
■Tib Or- !"•• **• s °)- The rarity or rather the
T
total absence of local names compounded with Jah is a
fact which militates strongly against the traditional
form of the name. The Syriac " land of the Amoritee "
may be right.
Kautzsch and Socin think iTTDn is due to R (either
of JE or of P), ascribing the etymology in v. 14 to K,
and w. 14-18 to the same hand. But the explanation
n , TD=n , KTD '• quite in the manner of J ; in (act. if
iVIDn be omitted, a characteristic feature of the
narrative will be eliminated, and the point of the allu-
sions (v. s) "God will provide aim the lamb"
oVtIN'V). * nd ("• H ) "Abraham called the name of
that place Jahvah-jir'eh," will be quite lost. It would
seem, therefore, that Driver's analysis is preferable.
Perhaps the proverb current In the writer's day
(e. 14) should rather be pointed inKT ItiiT iri3."In
the mountain Jahvah will provide ; " the mountain
being a metaphorical designation of a difficulty which
can only be overcome by Divine intervention (Zecb.
iv. 7 ; Matt. xxi. 21). Otherwise, keeping the traditional
pointing of the verb as a reflexive, we might render. - In
the mouutaln Jahvah Is seen " (or, " letteth Himself be
seen "), i.e. revealeth His Will, as in the matter ol
child-sacrifice on this occasion ; as if Moriah meant
" vision of Jah." So the LXX. has iy rw opct Kvptoc
Perhaps, however, the true sense of r. 14 b Is " which
name Is still given to (*) for 3) the bill where Jahvah
appeareth " (cp. 2 Ch. ill. 1) ; a glass on the preceding
words.
Digitized by
Google
ISAAC
juncture of public affairs a zealot for the honour
of Jahvah, in advocating such an extreme proof
of devotion, could appeal to an oracle of Klohira,
could cite some ancient law prescribing these
dreadful rites,' could even relate a tradition
that in the remote past the great father of
Israel had been moved to offer his only son for
a burnt-offering at a well-known high place,
and had only been stayed from his purpose by
the direct interposition of the satisfied Deity ; a
more enlightened teacher, putting a different
construction on the facts, might affirm that this
very tradition proved that the God of Israel,
the Merciful and Compassionate, had by that
intervention once for all dispensed his people
from such an inhuman obligation, and, as in the
case of Abraham, would always accept the will
for the deed.
It is difficult to read the narrative of Gen.
xxii. without recalling a famous passage of the
prophet Micah (vi. 1-8), which, although refer-
ring to another historical episode, may yet be
held to include the present one in its outlook.
As Abraham is directed by Elohim — that is to
say, either by an oracle in His Name, or by an
inward impulse — to offer his son *' upon one of
the mountains " ; so Micah apostrophizes the
mountains (vi. 1, 2), which were the scene of
the popular sacrifices, calling upon them to hear
an old prophetic declaration of the futility of
that worship with its rites of blood. A ram is
accepted in the stead of Isaac : but the Prophet
affirms that no burnt offerings, whether of
thousands of rams, or even of the first-born son,
can avail to atone for sin. What Jahvah really
requires of man is not these, but doing justice
and loving mercy and walking humbly with
God.
To resume the thread of the story of Isaac.
Abraham " while he yet lives " dismisses the
sons of his inferior wives, to settle in " the east
country " at a distance from Isaac his heir.
Isaac dwells by the well Lahni-roi, in the
vicinity of Beershcba (Gen. xxv. 1-6, 11 b; J). h
Then, in his extreme age, Abraham sends his
principal slave to Aram-Xaharalm, to the city
of Nachor, to take a wife for Isaac of his own
Aramean kindred. The man successfully
accomplishes his mission, and returns with
Rebekah, or rather Ribkah, bath Bethuel ben
Nachor. There is nothing in the whole idyllic
story of the servant's journey and its incidents
and results, which can be fairly said to contra-
dict the truth of Oriental ways and ideas, nor
the facts of pious experience (ch. xxiv., J). 1
ISAAC
1447
< See Ex. xxii. 29, " The firstborn of tby sons shalt
tbou give unto Me/' and compare the commutation of
the ruthless demind of the older Law, Ex. xlli. 2, 13.
See also Kuenen, RI. 1. 237-240; Oeiger, Dat Juden-
thum, 1. 61 ; Goldzltwr, Mt/lk. Hcbr. pp. 45 sqq.
* We assume, with Driver (cp. Wellhausen, and
Kaatzscb and Socio), that an accidental transposition has
occurred in Gen. xxlv.-xxvi. The original order is thus
restored: xxv. 1-6, lib; xxiv. (for xxiv. 36 presupposes
xxv. 6); xxvi. 1-33; xxv. 21-26 a, 27-34, upon which
xxvii. naturally follows.
> The Heb. text at the close of the narrative has
unfortunately suffered some degree of corruption (cer-
tainly in v. 62 a; cp. the LXX. and Sam.). Some
critics, as Wellhausen, Kaut&tch and Soctn, suppose a
gap at the end of '•. 61, after tbe words, "and the servant
took Rebekah and went . . . . " It is sugg steJ tlmt K
We pass on to the story of the famine and
Isaac's sojourn in Gerar (xxvi. 1-33, mostly
J). k The statement of r. 2 that Jahvah ajj-
peared unto Isaac may best be understood of a
dream or " vision of the night " (cp. r. 24). In
Gerar Isaac imitates the timid ruse which his
father is said to have practised on two similar
occasions, once in Egypt (Gen. xii.) and again
in Gerar (Gen. xx.), and evasively declares that
Rebekah is his "sister." He is found out by
Abimelech the king of Gerar, who rebukes him
for the deceit, and then charges his people not
to molest him. It is needless to attempt to
palliate Isaac's conduct, which does not seem
to have greatly shocked the old narrators
of Genesis (E and J). We will only observe
that it would be a moral and theological ana-
chronism to assume in the case of Isaac or of
Abraham that strict sense of the obligation of
veracity which belongs to a far more advanced
stage of religious culture. Indeed, there are
many indications that throughout the 0. T.
period verbal deceit was not looked upon with
any high degree of reprobation (e.g. Josh. ii. 4,
sqq.; Judg. iv. 18, v. 24; 1 Sam. xvi. 2, xx. 5,
6, 28; Jer. xxxviii. 26, 27).
The truth of the incident itself has been
doubted, because of the similarity of the three
narratives (Gen. xii., xx., xxvi.). Kuenen, how-
ever, asks, " Why should there be no historical
fact at the foundation of the threefold tradition
of the violation [sfc] of Abraham's or Isaac's
wife ? " (£f. i. 113). And Ewald, who considers
that the narrative " as it stands in Gen. xx. is
Canaanitish aud primeval" (///. i. 293, Eng.
Tr.), sees nothing unsuited to the times in the
story ; though he holds that Gen. xii. is merely
a modification of the passage in Gen. xx., and
Gen. xxvi. 7-11 "an application by others of
the same story to Rebekah also." Wellhausen
remarks: "The stories about Abraham and
those about Isaac are so similar that they
cannot possibly be held to be independent of
each other. The stories about Isaac, however,
are more original, as may be seen in a striking
way on comparing Gen. xx. 2-16 with xxvi.
6-12. The short and profane (?) version, of
which Isaac is the hero, is more lively and
pointed ; the long and edifying version in which
Abraham replaces Isaac, makes the danger not
possible but actual, thus necessitating the inter-
vention of the Deity and so bringing about a
glorification of the patriarch, which he little
deserved " (HI. p. 320, n. 1). To us, this contrast
of E with J appears to be somewhat subjective.
omitted J's account of the death of Abraham, because be
wished to Insert P*s account of tbe same event a little
further on In the narrative (xxv. 7-lla, P). The
obscure term rOEv ("• 63 ) ta rendered "to lament,"
i.e. for At» father"! death (correcting V3X- "his
father," for lOK- " his mother," in v. 67) ; a sense which
it may bear (cp Job vli. 11, 1*8. lv. 17), and which
appears, upon the whole, preferable (Ewald, Knobel,
Dlllmann) to the "meditate" of LXX., Vulgate, and
A. V.
* Ascribed to J, with a few insertions by R ; e.g. tbe
Redactor has added a note to v. 1, to tbe effect that this
famine was not tbe same as the one which happened in
Abraham's time : nee xii. 10 sqq. The preliminary
Divine Promise to Isaac, xxvi. 3 b-6, would also appear
to have been "expanded or recast" by tbe same
hand.
Digitized by
Google
1448
ISAAC
The Divine care of Iaaac is certainly implied in
the second narrative (xxvi. 12; cp. m. 2a, 3a,
10), and it is difficult to see the relevance of the
epithet " profane," or that the one account is
more lively and pointed than the other. Why,
moreover, may not the same or a similar tradi-
tion have been preserved about the behaviour
of both patriarchs under similar or identical
circumstances ? ' The narrative further tells of
Isaac's sowing and reaping in the land of Gerar,
and growing so rich in Hocks and herds and
slaves as to stir the envy of the Philistines. The
statements (or. 15, 18) that they had stopped up
the wells dug by Abraham, and that Isaac dug
these wells again, and gave them the names that
his father bad given them, are thought to have
been added by R, for the sake of harmony with
the previous account of Abraham's digging the
wells (xzi. 25 sqq. See Driver, LOT.; Kautzsch
and Socin, ad loc.). The ill-feeling culminates in
Abimelech's request that Isaac would depart;
and Isaac removes his camp to a distance. His
camping-grounds are marked by the successive
digging of the wells Esek (Strife), Sitnah
(Enmity), and Rehoboth (Room), which he so
names because the men of Gerar quarrelled for
possession of the former two, but not for the
third. The patriarch finally removes to Beer-
sheba. Jahvah appears to him " in that night "
(the night of his arrival), and promises him
numerous offspring for Abraham's sake. He
builds an altar, pitches tent, and digs a well
there. (Perhaps xxi. 33 originally belonged
here.) Abimelech and his wazir Achuzzath and
his general Pikol now pay him a visit, and make
a treaty with him (against Egypt ?). The same
day Isaac's slaves tell him, "We have found
water." Isaac names the new well Sheba (an
allusion to the shebu'oth or oaths with which the
treaty was ratified) ; whence the place gets its
name, Beer-sheba (Gen. xxvi. 1 ac, 2 a, 3 a, 6-33 ;
J). With this should be compared E's account
of the origin of the name (xxi. 22-32).™ Upon
the entire narrative (Gen. xxvi. ; cp. xii. 10 sqq.,
xx., xxi. 22 sqq.) Riehm observes that it, for the
most part, consists only of side-pieces to tradi-
tions about Abraham ; showing " how the special
relation into which God had entered with
Abraham and his posterity manifested itself
plainly in the life of Isaac, and how the promises
were, in a measure, already fulfilled to him, so
that even envious and quarrelsome neighbours
recognised in him the blessed of Jehovah, and
had to seek his alliance (cp. especially xxvi.
28 sq., as the beginning of the fulfilment of the
promise given in xii. 2 sq., and appropriated to
Isaac in xxvi. 4)."
There follows a brief mention of Isaac's inter-
> Wellhaosen holds that Abraham is " perhaps the
youngest figure In the company " of the three patriarchs.
But although Amos does mention Isaac and does not
mention Abraham, we have an early mention of
Abraham In Micab (vll. 20), which cannot be said with
certainty " to belong to the Exile " (see Driver, LOT.
Micab). And as to Is. xxix. 22, see Ewald, HI. 3181.
Must every ^wigm* be an interpolation in these ancient
texts?
» Sheba, " seven," was perhaps the designation of a
Rod, as In Babylonian (3 R 68, 12 d). So Arba, "four,"
denoted a god, la the name Arlxi-Uu, Arbela (cp. Kirjath-
Arba) ; and " six " denoted Rimmon, " fifteen " Ishtar,
and so on.
ISAAC
cession for his barren wife, and of the pre-
monitory struggle of the twin babes within her;
of the oracle about their future, and the circum-
stances of their birth (xxv. 21-26 a, J> In the
anecdote of Jacob's purchase of the birthright
(oe. 27-34, J), the only reference to Isaac is the
statement that he preferred the elder twin Esau,
for venison was to his taste (r. 28). Then we
have, in a graphic narrative, compounded from
J and E, the account of Jacob's winning by fraud
the blessing of Isaac (xxvii. 1-45), who was now
old and blind with age, and whose death was
expected in the near future (m. 2, 10, 41).
Because of Esau's anger, Rebekah, who had
planned the deception, bids Jacob fly to her
brother Lnban at Charran, who, according to
Oriental ideas, would be bound to give him an
asylum.
From this point, the composite narrative of
Genesis is mainly occupied with the fortune* of
Jacob. In the older sections (J, E) the name of
Isaac occurs only in such expressions as "the
God of Isaac" (xxviii. 13; cp. xxxii. 10; J),
" the Dread' of Isaac " (xxxi. 53 ; cp. v. 42 ; E>
It would seem to have been taken for granted
by the older accounts that Isaac had died during
the long interval of Jacob's sojourn in Paddan-
Aram ; perhaps, indeed, soon after the Blessing
of Jacob, which gives the impression of the
closing scene of Isaac's lite (cp. the parallel,
ch. xlviii.). On the other hand, the narrative of
P represents Isaac himself as sending Jacob to
Paddan - Aram, through apprehension not of
Esau's vengeance but of a Canaanitish marriage
(xxviii. 1 sqq., P). This account appears to
be wholly independent of JE's episode of the
Blessing of Jacob in the previous chapter. The
author knows nothing of the wiles by which
Jacob secured it, to the indignation, one would
hare supposed, of Isaac, whose good intentions
towards his favourite Esau were thus thwarted
for ever. At this time, according to P, Isaac
was a hundred years old (cp. xxvi. 34 sq. with
xxv. 26 b). According to the same source, when
Jacob left Paddan-Aram, his purpose was " to go
to Isaac his father in the land of Canaan " (xxxi.
18) ; and the life of Isaac is concluded in the
following terms (xxxv. 27-29): "And Jacob
came unto Isaac his father, unto Mamre, unto
Kirjath-Arba, which is Hebron, where Abraham
aud Isaac sojourned. And the days of Isaac
were an hundred and fourscore years. And
Isaac gave up the ghost, and died, and was
gathered unto his fellow tribesmen, being old
and full of days : aud his sons Esau and Jacob
buried him." Now, according to E (xxxi. 38,
41), Jacob had served Laban " full twenty
years." Even after allowing a period of several
years for the homeward journey of Jacob's by no
means inconsiderable following, there is still a
wide difference between the numbers of P and
E. The former makes Isaac a hundred years
old when Jacob goes to Paddan-Aram, and a
hundred and eighty when he dies, immediately,
as it would seem, after Jacob's return. Thus
Jacob's absence covers some eighty years instead
of the twenty of E. And further, the long
n An unique phrase, not occurring elsewhere. Cp. Is.
vlll. 12, 13; and the Aramean Nfl^m. "Fear"=
" g"d."
Digitized by
Google
ISAAC
period (whether of eighty or of twenty years)
during which Isaac survives after Jacob's
departure, though nothing is said of him or his
doings throughout the entire interval, is hardly
consistent with the indications of ch. xxvii.,
where Isaac in old age and blindness lies expect-
ing his death (v. 2 : " I know not the day of my
death "), and desires, as was the custom, to give
the last blessing to his elder son before he dies
(v. 4 : " that my soul may bless thee before I
die " ; cp. also m. 7, 10, 41). Here again there
is evident a conflict of tradition. Some have
thought to get rid of the difficulty by the idea
of Isaac's unexpected recovery from a dangerous
illness. But his extreme age and blindness and
general decrepitude, and the survival of his
appetite for venison and wine (v. 25), are cir-
cumstances which do not seem to agree very
well with such a view ; while the entire absence
of any statement either of his having fallen sick,
or of his recovery, or of the incidents of his
renewed existence during the twenty (or eighty)
years that followed, is decidedly against it.
Eighty, or, for that matter, twenty years, is a
long time even in a comparatively uneventful
life ; and must surely have been marked by some
incidents as worthy of notice as those previously
recorded of Isaac. But it is perfectly evident
that the traditions left us are only the stray
relics of far more opulent treasures of ancient
story.
If it is necessary to indicate the general
impression left upon the mind by the figure of
Isaac, so far as it is possible to realize his
personality without drawing too much upon
imagination or upon the expanding and har-
monizing work of later ages, we may borrow
Wellhausen's language so far as to say that he
is a peace-loving shepherd, inclined to live
quietly beside his tents, anxious to steer clear of
strife and clamour, and to avoid appeals to force.
He serves Jehovah in essentially the same way
as his descendants in historical times; religion
with him does not consist of sacrifice alone, but
also of an upright conversation and trustful
resignation to God's Providence (HI. p. 320 sq.).
As Kiehm has observed, Isaac is "Jehovah's
servant" (Ex. xxxii. 13; Deut. ix. 27), who
stands continually under God's guidance, and
follows it with willing faithfulness (xxvi. 2);
who receives revelations and promises (xxvi.
24), whose prayers are answered (xxv. 21),
and who remains the prophetic mouth-
piece of the counsels of God, not only in the
blessing which he utters knowingly and in-
tentionally (xxvii. 39 sqq.), but also and even
in that which he pronounces involuntarily
(xxvii. 27 sqq. ; cp. John xi. 51). He evinces a
tender attachment, outlasting death, for the
mother (xxiv. 67, if the reading be sound) who
had been so zealous for his rights and welfare
(xxi. 10), and a pious memory of his father
Abraham (xxvi. 18). He is an example of single
ISAAC
1449
° If Isaac lived to a hundred and eighty, he must,
according to the chronological data of Genesis, have
outlived the sale of Joseph by some twelve or thirteen
years, and have survived pretty nearly If not quite to
the time of his grandson's elevation in Egypt ! As
Kiehm observe?, the figures belong to different sources,
and therefore must not be combined as If they belonged
to one and the same account.
wedlock, in marked contrast with his father and
his sons (see Riehm, HWB.). The unconscious
irony of the episode in which against his will he
is made to execute the Divine Purpose by
blessing his younger son, is remarkable. Like
the story of Joseph, the narrative seems to
enforce the moral of many another Oriental tale ;
the moral that human opposition is powerless to
thwart the decrees of Heaven, and is, in fact,
made use of to accomplish them.
The following remarks from the former edition
of this work are valuable, as illustrating the
various modes in which the religious thought of
the past has laboured to find prophetic types
and allegories in the incidents recorded of Isaac :
— " The typical view of Isaac is barely referred
to in the N. T. ; but it is drawn out with minute
particularity by Philo and those interpreters of
Scripture who were influenced by Alexandrian
philosophy. Thus in Philo, Isaac = laughter =
the most exquisite enjoyment = the soother and
cheerer of peace-loving souls, is foreshadowed in
the facts that his father had attained 100 years
(the perfect number) when he was born, and that
he is specially designated as given to his parents
by God. His birth from the mistress of Abra-
ham's household symbolizes happiness proceeding
from predominant wisdom. His attachment to
one wife (Rebekah = perseverance) is contrasted
with Abraham's multiplied connexions and with
Jacob's toil-won wives, as showing the superiority
of Isaac's heaven-born, self-sufficing wisdom, to
the accumulated knowledge of Abraham and the
painful experience of Jacob. In the intended
sacrifice of Isaac Philo sees only a sign that
laughter = rejoicing is the prerogative of God,
and is a fit offering to Him, and that He gives
back to obedient man as much happiness as is
good for him. Clement of Rome (ch. 31), with
characteristic soberness, merely refers to Isaac
as an example of faith in God. In Tertullian he
is a pattern of monogamy and a type of Christ
bearing the cross. But Clement of Alexandria
finds an allegorical meaning in the incidents
which connect Abimelech with Isaac and Rebekah
(Gen. xxvi. 8) as well as in the offering of Isaac.
In this latter view he is followed by Origen, and
by Augustine, and by Christian expositors gene-
rally. The most minute particulars of that
transaction are invested with a spiritual meaning
by such writers as Rabanns Maurus, in Gen.
§ iii. Abraham is made a type of the First
Person in the blessed Trinity, Isaac of the
Second ; the two servants dismissed are the
Jewish sects who did not attain to a perception
of Christ in His humiliation ; the ass bearing
the wood is the Jewish nation, to whom were
committed the oracles of God which they failed
to understand ; the three days are the Patriar-
chal, Mosaic, and Christian dispensations; the
ram is Christ on the Cross; the thicket they
who placed Him there. Modern English writers
hold firmly the typical significance of the trans-
action, without extending it into such detail (see
Pearson on the Creed, i. 243, 251, ed. 1843;
Fairbairn's Typology, i. 332). A recent writer
(A. Jukes, lypes of Genesis), who has shown
much ingenuity in attaching a spiritual meaning
to the characters and incidents in the Book of
Genesis, regards Isaac as representing the spirit
of sonship, in a series in which Adam represents
human nature, Cain the carnal mind, Abel the
Digitized by
Google
1450
ISAAC
ISAIAH
spiritual, Noah regeneration, Abraham the spirit
of faith, Jacob the spirit of service, Joseph
suffering or glory. With this series may bo
compared the view of Ewald (Gesch. i. 387-400),
in which the whole patriarchal family is a
prefigurative group, comprising twelve members
with seven distinct modes of relation : 1. Abra-
ham, Isaac, and Jacob are three fathers, re-
spectively personifying active power, quiet en-
joyment, success after struggles, distinguished
from the rest as Agamemnon, Achilles, and
Ulysses among the heroes of the Iliad, or as
the Trojan Aiichises, Aeneas, and Ascanius,
and mutually related as Romulus, Remus, and
Numa; 2. Sarah, with Hagar, as mother and
mistress of the household ; 3. Isaac as child ;
4. Isaac with Rebekah as the type of wedlock
(cp. Alterthiimcr, p. 233) ; 5. Leah and Rachel
the plurality of coequal wires; 6. Deborah as
nurse (cp. Anna and Caieta, Am. iv. 654, and
vii. 1); 7. Eliezer as steward, whose office is
compared to that of the messenger of the
Olympic deities."— [W. T. B.]
Upon a review of the whole account of Isaac
preserved in Genesis, it is clear (i) that it
supplies but a fragmentary and episodical
narrative, — a mosaic composed of unequal pieces
collected from independent sources ; (ii) that
the data of the various sources sometimes con-
flict with each other in a remarkable manner.
The facts certainly suggest that, while fuller
accounts relating to Isaac must have once been
known to popular tradition, 11 the historians of
Israel only thought it to the purpose to give a
few reminiscences by way of introduction to the
life of Jacob, their own special ancestor. Isaac
was the father of Edom as well as of Israel : he
represents a stage of national development when
the two brother stocks had not yet separated
into distinct and rival peoples. Perhaps, there-
fore, if the lost " wisdom " of Edom had sur-
vived, we might have been able to fill up the
blanks in the Biblical story of the common
Father of the two nations. That wisdom can
hardly have been entirely of the gnomic order ;
nor is it likely that it was exhibited only in the
concerns of statecraft. The kingdom of Edom
doubtless had its patriotic poets and annalists,
as had the vounger kingdom of Israel (Gen.
xxxvi. 31-39; Jer. xlix. 7; Obad. v. 8; Job
iv. 1).
p Ewald thinks not ; ou tbe ground that " if Isaac
was in truth what bis name — *tbe Laughing/ that is
the kind and gentle — implies ; if he, among the three
Patriarchs, passed pre-eminently for tbe type of that
kindly and quiet nature which preserves the possession
of its inherited share of worldly goods through unpre-
tending goodness and constant fidelity, the old legends
could hardly have anything very remarkable or varied
to relate of him. As rightful sou and heir, he bad no
need by great deeds or great qualities to win for himself
what was already his " (///. i. 339). But, we may ask,
whence then tbe long relations of the sacrifice, and of the
servant's Journey to Churraii to woo a wife for Isaac?
And whence tbe metrical oracle to Kebekah concerning
ber unborn babes? These things certainly resemble
extracts from older and fuller traditional histories. Tbe
casual mention of Deborah, Rebekah's nurse, who dies
in Jacob's camp (xxxv. 8, E), and whose memory is
perpetrated by tbe Allvn-bakdth near Bethel, points in
the same direction. How came she to be in Jacob's
company? and why is she mentioned at all, unless more
were once known and told about her ?
As Isaac represents the stage before the part-
ing of the two peoples, it seems worthy of note
that the narratives of Genesis place the patriarch
exactly where this fact would lead us to look
for him. Isaac dwells not in the north nor in
middle Palestine, but always in the Negeb or
south country ; a dry parched region in which a
few oases and wells made life possible for a
pastoral chief and his tribe. From the neigh-
bourhood of the well Lahai-ro! he moves west-
ward to Gerar; then follows the course of the
Wady in a south-eastern direction ; then pro-
ceeds to Rehoboth, and thence NE. to Beeksheba,
whose ancient sanctuary is the only one which
tradition ascribed to his special foundation (xxv.
lib; xxvi. 1, 6, 17, 22-25; xxiv. 62, cp. xxi.
33 ; J). There are, moreover, certain indications
of an advance from the purely pastoral and
nomadic stage of life. Isaac is not, indeed,
represented as permanently settled in any one of
his southern haunts; but he practises husbandry
with profit where occasion serves (xxvi. 12), and
he is a wiue-drinker (xxvii. 25, with which
contrast the milk, curdled and sweet, of xviii.
8), and used to daintier fare than is customary
with the mere wandering shepherd (xxvii. 3; 4,
9, 14). * [C. J. B.]
ISAIAH. The name Isaiah (WW?) signifies
either Jahu saves (K5", hat, for hiphil, as in
fl'JJBnn, 4c), or nirT J7B*, <rwrnpia Kvplov.
the saltation or help of Jahveh. A reference to
the meaning of the name is probably found in
Is. viii. 18. The name itself was common
(1 Ch. xxv. 3, 15 ; xxvi. 25). The shortened
form, tVVtfa, is employed in 1 Ch. iii. 21 ; Ezra
viii. 7, 19 ; Neh. xi. 7. In the latter passages
the R. V. gives the name Jeshaiah. The LXX.
usually transliterate it 'Hcrafut, occasionally also
'loias, '\alas, 'Ualas, 'Imrla, 'law/at, 'fto-afat.
The Vulg. write Isaias, or in various editions
Esaias, and Osaias. According to Klostermann.
the analogies of such names as Jaazaniah
(?rV3tN?), Ishmael, and Ishmaiak, Jahaziet
(/*\NV) and Jahteiah (fVTIT), with others,
which names are prayers for children so named,
point rather to a derivation from riift?, to behold,
to have respect to (Gen. iv. 4). In that case the
name should be pointed liTr/CK irPBC", or
shortened ■TKJ''. Isaiah corresponds in signifi-
cation with 1^7!*, Elisha, although the latter
fact is no proof that it was compounded of TOJC;
the JR? in Elisha being probably derived from
WC or 17C". Hence the traditional vocalisation
is preferable.
Isaiah the prophet was son of Atnoz (^lON),
which signifies strong. The latter is not to be
identified with Amos (D1DI?, burden-bearer), who
lived much earlier. The LXX. transliterated
both names 'Autfc, and hence the confusion.
Nothing is knowu of Isaiah's father. The Rabbis
maintained that he was a prophet, on the assump-
tion that whenever the name of a prophet's
father occurs in Scripture, that father was also
a prophet. The notion that Amoz and Amaziah
(JTVOK) tbe king of Judah were brothers was
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
suggested by the 'similarity of name, bat is
unsupported by any evidence.
Isaiah's house was situated in the lower part
of Jerusalem (see 2 K. xx. 4, K. V.). Hence
Ewald and Knobel supposed the name " valley
of vision " was given to that quarter of the city,
where probably other prophets also lived. It
is, however, more likely the name refers to the
" valley " in which the final struggle of ch. xxii.
is depicted. JlVn K'i, " valley of vision," is
analogous to the pVin PQD, "talley of de-
cision " (Joel iv. 14), although the meaning of
decision is not, with Bredenkamp, to be extracted
from fun.
The wife of Isaiah is termed a prophetess
(viii. 3), although it is not clear whether she was
so called merely because her husband was a
prophet, or because she herself was endowed with
the gift of prophecy, like Huldah (2 K. xxii. 14)
and other women. Isaiah's two sons, who were
regarded as gifts from God, were given names
which contained a summary of Isaiah's mission.
These were Shear-jashub, " a remnant shall re-
turn" (vii. 3), and Maher-shalal-hash-baz,
" haste spoil, speed booty " (viii. 3). Some
maintain that Isaiah had a third son, named
Immanuel (vii. 14), the child of a second
wife, in which case that son must have been
born before Maher-shalal-hash-baz. But there
are weighty reasons .against that conjecture.
In i. 1 it is stated that Isaiah " saw " his
visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the
days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Uezekiah.
An account is given in ch. vi. of the " vision "
by which Isaiah was called to the prophetic
office. The vision was "seen" "in the year
that king Uzziah died." The year in question
has been variously reckoned as B.c. 758 or 740,
the latter being the more probable, for Isaiah
was probably not an old man at the time of the
invasion of Sennacherib (B.C. 701). As no men-
tion is made of " the days of Manasseh," it has
often been maintained that Isaiah died prior to
the close of Hezekiah's reign. All, however,
that can be affirmed from the superscription
in Is. i. 1, assuming its correctness, is that the
Book to which it was affixed contains no vision
later than the reign of Hezekiah. The tradition
concerning his death, referred to in the Talmud,
and current in the Christian Church, is that be
was slain during the bloody persecution in the
early days of Manasseh (2 K. xxi. 16 ; xxiv. 4),
having been " sawn asunder." Heb. xi. 37 pro-
bably refers to that tradition, for no other
instance of such a death is recounted in legend.
The story of Isaiah's martyrdom has been
highly embellished by later tradition. It was
known to Jnstin Martyr (Dial. c. Tryph. 120),
Tertullian (De patientia, 14), and other early
Christian writers. The wooden saw (wployi
fi/Xfey) of Justin Martyr may be a legendary
embellishment of a woodman's saw. The apocry-
phal work, The Ascension of Isaiah, which
narrates the whole story, is, as Dillmann has
satisfactorily proved, a pseudepigraph written
in Christian times. The legend has been still
further improved on in fragments of Targums
(cp. that given in Lagarde's Proph. Chald.,
1872, p. xxxiii.).
Chapter vi. is the only chapter of Isaiah which
can with any degree of probability be assigned
ISAIAH
1451
to the reign of Uzziah. The bulk of his pro-
phecies in their present shape belong to Heze-
kiah's reign. Several were composed in the
reign of Ahaz, notably chs. vii.-ix., and possibly
chs. ii.-v. None of the prophecies contained in
the Book bear the impress of Jotham's reign.
It is, however, possible that several prophecies
delivered in Jotham's reign may have been
revised at a later time by the Prophet. Such re-
edited' prophecies would naturally bear the im-
press of the later, not that of the earlier, period.
In the Jewish canon the Books of Isaiah,
Jeremiah, and Ezekiel are arranged in the order
of historical sequence. The same order is fol-
lowed in the LXX., save that the Book of the
Twelve Minor Prophets is placed before the
three great Prophets; the Books of Baruch,
Lamentations, and the Epistle of Jeremiah being
put between Jeremiah and Ezekiel in their sup-
posed historical order. The historical arrange-
ment is as old as the days of Ben Sira (see Ecclus.
xlviii. 22-25, xlix. 6-10). Another order is
mentioned in Baba Bathra, 14 a; namely, Jere-
miah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, and the Minor Prophets.
But, as Klostermann has pointed out, the latter
arrangement is simply based on the principle
of placing the longer Books before the shorter
Isaiah exceeds Jeremiah in the number of chap-
ters (having 66 chapters in place of the 52
of the latter), although, if the number of the
verses or pages be considered, the Book of
Jeremiah exceeds Isaiah. Jeremiah (exclusive
of Lamentations) contains 1365 verses, Isaiah
1295, Ezekiel 1273, and the Book of the Twelve
1050. Thus calculated, Isaiah stands second.
If, however, the actual size of the first three
Books be computed by pages, Isaiah ranks third,
and the list would stand in the order given in
Baba Bathra. The number of the Sedarim, into
which the Books are divided in the Hebrew,
corresponds with the result drawn from pagina-
tion. Jeremiah contains 31 Sedarim, Ezekiel 29,
Isaiah 26, and the Book of the Twelve 21 . Hence
the order of Baba Bathra is that of length or
size. Other more artificial reasons have, how-
ever, been assigned. The passage of Baba Bathra
will be found translated and commented on in
the Excursus on The Talmud and the Old Test.
Canon, appended to my commentary on the
Book of Koheleth.
Lightfoot and others have unsuccessfully made
use of the order in Baba Bathra to get over the
difficulty connected with the quotation from
Jeremiah in Matt, xxvii. 9. Equally mistaken
are the attempts of Gesenius, &c, to construct
thereon an argument for the post-exilian redac-
tion of Isaiah.
Three portions of 2 Kings — namely, chs. xviii.
13, 17-37, xix., xx. — are quoted almost verbatim
from Is. xxxvi.-xxxix. The psalm of Heze-
kiah is peculiar to the Book of Isaiah. Reference
is made to Isaiah in 2 Ch. xxvi. 22 and xxxii. 32.
In the former Isaiah is said to have written
" the acts of Uzziah, first and last." The read-
ing of that passage is uncertain (see LXX. and
Vulg.). In 2 Ch. xxxii., " the vision of Isaiah,
the son of Amoz the prophet," is evidently the
Book of Isaiah's prophecies. The difficulty in
the second part of that verse, connected with
the reading '131 "IfiD 7V, does not affect the
statement of the first part.
Digitized by
Google
1452
ISAIAH
The superscription in Is. i. 1 presents serious
difficulties. it does not adequately describe
even the prophecies of the first portion (chs. i.-
iiit.). Those chapters contain not only prophe-
cies "concerning Judah and Jerusalem," bnt
prophecies also concerning Ephraim or Israel
and the surrounding nations, with others of
wider scope. Nor does the title suit even the
first chapter (the second chapter has a title of
its own) ; for the words - in the days of Uzziah,
Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah " prove that that
superscription was designed to be the title of
the entire Book. It cannot, therefore, be re-
garded in its present shape as genuine.
The opening chapter is well characterised by
Ewald as "ttie great Arraignment." Heaven
and earth are called npon to judge the cause
between Jehovah and His people. The chapter
vividly describes Israel's sin, and announces the
Divine vengeance, which was however to lead to
the purification of Israel and the transformation
of Zion into a city of righteousness. The storm
described had already burst forth. All Judah,
with the exception of Jerusalem, was in the hands
of the enemy. Hence the original composition of
the chapter can scarcely (as Caspari and Kay sup-
pose) be assigned to the times of Jotham and
L'zziah when Judah was in a state of prosperity.
At such a time the prophecy, even as a vision of
coming judgment, would scarcely have been
intelligible. According to Gesenius, Knobel,
Delitzsch, and Dillmann, the vision was composed
in the days of Ahaz, during the invasion of
Judah by the united Syrian and Israelite army.
Vitringa, Hitzig, Ewald, NSgelsbach, and Well-
hausen preferably assign the chapter to the
time of Hezekiah. It cannot hare been com-
posed after the invasion of Sennacherib. The
chapter expresses only a general hope of de-
liverance, and contains no reference to the
victorious overthrow of the Assyrians. Not-
withstanding the arguments adduced by Cheyne,
the prophecy cannot well be assigned to the
time of Sargon's invasion, but must have been
composed when the fenced cities of Judah had
all successively fallen before the foe, and when
the city of Jerusalem was the last remaining
bulwark of the land.
We are therefore disposed, with Breden-
kamp, to regard the prophecy as composed
when Sennacherib, as stated in his own inscrip-
tion, had shut up Hezekiah "as a bird in
a cage at Jerusalem," and had even given part
of Jewish territory to the kings of the Philis-
tines. But, though originally composed at that
period, there is no difficulty in regarding the
chapter as placed in its present position by
Isaiah himself as a suitable introduction to his
collected prophecies. Alterations may have been
made in its phraseology when thus re-edited.
The picture is too vivid to be regarded as an
ideal sketch painted in the prosperous days of
Uzziah or Jotham. It is natural to suppose
that Isaiah put forth a collection of his prophe-
cies after the overthrow of the Assyrian foe,
which was the grandest victory vouchsafed
since the deliverance of Israel from Egyptian
bondage. Isaiah's subsequent prophecies derive
no small portion of their imagery from that
wondrous manifestation of the "God of judg-
ment" (Is. xxx. 18) in aid of His people. We
are indisposed, therefore, to lay stress on every
ISAIAH
' expression, or to argue on the assumption that
the prophecies were necessarily preserved even
i by the Prophet himself in the exact form in
which they were originally delivered.
In the historical notices of the Book of Kings
no mention is made of the fenced cities of Judah
having been burned with fire. Such an ad-
ditional detail, however, presents no difficulty.
The description in Is. i. of the deeds of murder
and villainy practised by judges and nobles, and
of the prevalent idolatry, has often been regarded
as inconsistent with the composition of the
piece in the reign of Hezekiah. But though
generally suppressed, such malpractices may
have even then been common, and Isaiah would
naturally regard the Assyrian invasion as a
judgment for such trangression, whether past or
present. The public practice of idolatry in
gardens and groves dedicated to Asherah was
put an end to by Hezekiah. But idolatry must
have been still practised in private, and have
been popular with the nobility, if we are to
account for the fearful outbreak which took
place in the beginning of Manasseh's reign.
The second chapter of Isaiah has no connexion
with ch. i. It commences with a superscription
of its own, which was probably intended to in-
clude chs. ii.-iv. inclusive. The vision must have
been originally composed at a period of prospe-
rity. The land of Judah is described as full of
silver and gold. Horses and chariots were in
abundance everywhere. The daughters of Zion,
proud and haughty, revelled in all kinds of
luxury and display. Idolatry was rife among
both rich and poor ; magic and divination were
largely practised. The nation still owned its
" ships of Tarshish." Consequently Elath, the
sea-port on the north end of the Gulf of Akaba
which had been recovered by Uzziah (2 K. xiv.
22), had not then ceased to belong to the kingdom
of Judah, as related in 2 K. xvi. 6. The reading
in that passage is, however, to be corrected as
in the margin of the R. V. The prophecy must
therefore have been delivered in the early part
of the reign of Ahaz, prior to the reverses which
befel the nation in the latter years of that
monarch. It cannot have been delivered during
the reigns of Uzziah or Jotham, who discouraged
idolatry ; for the idolatry denounced was not
idolatry practised in secret by the few, but
idolatry common among the nation.
The opening verses of ch. ii., namely verses
2-4, are almost identical with Micah iv. 1-3.
As Micah and Isaiah were contemporary Prophets,
the phenomenon has been variously explained.
Critics have maintained that Isaiah quoted from
Micah, not only because the passage harmonizes
better with the context of Micah, but also be-
cause of certain peculiarities of expression in
the original which tend to show that it is a
quotation. Micah's prophecy was, however,
delivered in " the days of Hezekiah, king of
Judah" (Jer. xxvi. 18; Micah Hi. 12); and as
Is. ii. cannot (from the reasons already set forth)
have been composed later than the early part of
the reign of Ahaz, Isaiah could not have quoted
the passage from that special prophecy of Micah.
Similar instances of quotations occur in other
parts of Scripture (cp. Obad. rr. 5, 6 with Jer.
xlix. 9, 10 ; 1 Pet. v. 5-9 with Jas. ir. 6-10; or
2 Pet. ii. with the Epistle of Jude). It is probable
that the view defended by Cheyne and others
Digitized by VjOOQlC
ISAIAH
is correct; namely, that Isaiah and Micah made
use of the words of an earlier prophet, whose
closing words (Micah iv. 4) were omitted by
Isaiah as unstated to the solemn denunciations
he had to tack on to the quotation. If. as
Bredenkamp observes, ch. i. begins with what
may be regarded almost as a quotation from
Moses (cp. i. 2 with Deut. xxxii. IX why
should not ch. ii. similarly commence with a
prediction of one of the older prophets ?
No objection can be made to Cheyne's transla-
tion, " the mountain of Jehovah's house shall be
fixed at the head of the mountains," so far as
the rendering of the preposition in tJ*ti"13 is
concerned (cp. 1 Sam. ix. 22 ; Amos vi. 7). but
that translation presents too realistic a picture,
and suggests an allusion to heathen mythology
which is wholly unnecessary. The picture, like
these in v. 26, xi. 10, is purely poetical. The
Prophets Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Zechariah use lan-
guage in their ideal descriptions of the future,
which, if taken literally, would predict the actual
elevation of the temple mountain above all the
other mountains. Such language, however, was
only used figuratively.
The future predicted by Isaiah and Micah was
a future which must have appeared to " the men
of the world " at that time as the veriest day-
dream. It was that "a law would go forth
from Zion, and the word of Jehovah from Jeru-
salem ;" that Israel and the Nations would ulti-
mately form one united community, of which
Jehovah would be the Judge and King ; that
under His rule and arbitration wars would ulti-
mately cease, and universal peace prevail. The
marvellous fulfilment of the first portion of this
prophecy in the salvation which has come from
the Jews to the Gentile world needs here only
to be referred to.
In his further discourse, the Prophet con-
trasts the fallen state of Israel with its glorious
future, and urges the house of Jacob to walk
themselves " in the light " vouchsafed to them
by Jehovah. He describes how Israel had fallen
short of the ideal presented in the Law. In
place of being a hardy agricultural race, satis-
fied with the riches provided by nature, Israel
had become " like all the nations " (1 Sam. viii.
20), and had followed them on the way to ruin.
Luxury had overspread the land. Wealth pro-
duced love of display. Magic and divination
were introduced from " the east." " The land
was full of idols," to be seen alike in the houses
of the poor and in the palaces of the rich.
The wicked walked on every side, and vileness
was exalted among the sons of men (Ps. xii. 8).
Men, high and low, basely prostrated themselves
before the works of their own hands, and thus
dragged down upon themselves heavy chastise-
ment. Jehovah would, therefore, arise to shake
terribly the land. Nature and art, both alike
made subservient to idolatry, would be given
over to destruction. Lofty mountains would be
abased, trees felled, high towers overthrown.
Strong walls, ships of Tarshiah, treasures of
art, would all alike perish, levelled in the dust
or otherwise destroyed, in the universal ruin
brought about by " the day of Jehovah."
The ejaculation "Cease ye from man in whose
nostrils is (only) a breath, for at what ought he
to be accounted?" is suitably interposed be-
ISAIAH
1453
tween two portions of this prophecy. What-
ever earthly riches or glory man may have,
without God, apart from God, man is of no
account. The verse is omitted in the LXX.,
and Diestel and Cheyne regard it as an inter-
polation, harmonizing badly with the descrip-
tion of the day of Jehovah. Dillmann, how-
ever, observes that there is no object for an
interpolation in the passage, while the thought
expressed in the verse is striking and fully
worthy of Isaiah. Dillmann compares ii. 9,
11; v. 35; xxxi. 3.
The details of the judgment of " the day of
Jehovah " are given in ch. iii. The common-
wealth would be overthrown, every "stay and
staff" broken. The leaders of the people in the
field and in the council-chamber would be cut
off. Among the latter the prophets and diviners
are mentioned. Children become princes, babes
bear rule. Anarchy and confusion follow, until
any decently-attired man begged to act as ruler
of the ruined land would be forced to decline
the task, inasmuch as even such a person
wonld be forced to confess that in spite of out-
ward appearance, his house, too, would be found
equally destitute of bread or clothing. For the
abrupt manner in which the illustration is in-
troduced, compare Zech. xiii. 3-6.
" The day of Jehovah " would affect not only
men, but also women. Delicately brought-up
women experience then in full measure the de-
scent of Jehovah's retributive justice. Their
pride and haughtiness are abased to the dust,
their ornaments stripped off, their bodies afflicted
with disease. As the men are described looking
vainly about for a ruler, so the women are
depicted as looking out eagerly for merely
nominal husbands.
" The day of Jehovah " would thus be ter-
rible to all. Yet, to use the expression of
Zechariah, "in the eventide there would be
light." Mercy would succeed judgment, a day of
building up would follow a day of casting down.
A remnant would be saved, who would trust in
Jehovah, and not in carved images, who would
return to the simplicity commended in the Law,
and at last reap the blessing from above. The
barren and devastated land would yield its in-
crease, the hills and valleys be covered with
beauteous shoots, "the fruit of the land be
excellent and comely for the escaped of Israel."
The old signs of Jehovah's Presence would be
again vouchsafed. Guilt removed, sin washed
away, there would be a new creation ; the
cloudy pillar by day and the shining of flaming
fire by night would again be seen ; and over all
the glory an abiding canopy.
The exposition of " the branch of Jehovah "
in iv. 2, as the personal Messiah, in accord-
ance with the later usage of Jeremiah and
Zechariah, cannot be proved to be the original
signification of the prophecy. The parallel ex-
pression " the fruit of the land " shows that the
passage in Isaiah really refers to vegetation.
The human nature of our Lord is not pointed
at under the expression " the fruit of the land,"
nor can that interpretation be justified by a
reference to Ezek. xvii. 5. But though not in
accordance with Isaiah's mode of thought, the
use of similar phraseology in a metaphorical
sense by the later prophets justifies such an
allegorical accommodation of the passage, inas-
Digitized by
Google
1454
ISAIAH
much as similar language is employed in Rev.
xxii. 2.
The fifth chapter is an independent prophecy,
unconnected, save in the expression of somewhat
similar ideas, with those which precede or follow.
The closing sentence of v. 25 is, however, em-
ployed afterwards as the refrain of a later
prophecy (ix. 12, 21 ; x. 4, 12, 17, 21).
Chapter v. is a vision of judgment, in which
no ray of promise appears. It opens with a
striking parable in the form of a love-song.
That song of unrequited love is succeeded by
six woes pronounced against national sins.
(1) Against covetous land-grabbers, tr. 8-10.
(2) Against drunkards and revellers, vv. 11-17.
The first two woes are described in detail.
The great mansions built by avaricious land-
owners will become a desolation ; the curse of
barrenness is to rest upon the ill-gotten fields.
The revellers are to be carried off into cap-
tivity ; starvation follows after gluttony ; in
place of a multitude of drunkards are seen
crowds of persons parched with thirst. Sheol,
or the Under-world, opens her mouth without
measure for an ungodly people, and into its
yawning abyss descend their splendour and
multitude and joy. (3) The third woe is against
ungodly scoffers, vv. 18, 19. (4) The fourth
woe is pronounced on those who dare impiously
to confound the distinction between good and
evil, v. 20. (5) The fifth is directed against
those who are wise in their own eyes, and whose
" folly " becomes " evident unto all men " (see
v. 21). (6) The sixth and last is directed against
corrupt judges, and men of might whose strength
was exhibited only in their ability to imbibe
strong drink, and who shamelessly sold justice
for bribes, vv. 22, 23. The fire of the Divine
indignation burns up as stubble all such un-
righteous jndges. They are " left neither root
nor branch ; " the roaring flame consumes the
branches above, and rottenness destroys the roots
below (cp. Mai. Hi. 19).
The closing verses (vv. 25-30) describing
the hurricane of wrath sweeping over the nation
are particularly fine. Jehovah lifts up a banner
to marshal the avengers, to draw together
nations from far against His degenerate people.
Like a bee-master with his pipe, the Lord col-
lects the foes in swarms against His land. No
warrior is missing in those hostile ranks, no one
stumbles in the way. The anxiety of the foe
for battle is so intense that they do not slumber
or sleep ; no one looses the girdle from his loins,
or unbinds his sandals. With arrows sharpened,
bows bent, horses' hoofs hard as flint, the adver-
saries of Israel enter the land, the noise of their
chariot-wheels like the whirlwind. The roar of
the approaching enemies is like the roaring of
lions, — like the thundering roar of the waves of
the sea dashing over the land. The sun of Judah
and Israel sinks in blood below the horizon.
Everywhere are darkness and sorrow ; the light
is darkened above, by means of the thick clouds
which cover the heavens with a darkness which
can be felt.
Isaiah's call to the prophetic office forms the
subject of ch. vi., although that chapter has
been less fitly explained as only describing
Isaiah's call to a particular mission. The
vision was beheld in the year that king Uzziah
died, probably before the death of that monarch.
ISAIAH
If the reading of 2 Ch. xxvi. 22 be correct,
Isaiah wrote a history of the events of Uzziah's
reign. Uzziah reigned fifty years, and during
his reign the kingdom of Judah flourished, while
the kingdom of Israel for a great portion of
the same period was the scene of anarchy and
confusion. Uzziah succeeded in the wars which
he undertook, and so powerfully strengthened
the defences of Judah that "his name spread
far abroad."
Although young, Isaiah appears to have been
a person of some importance during the reign of
Uzziah, and probably regarded the condition of
Judah with pride and satisfaction. The vision
recorded in ch. vi. showed him that God " seeth
not as man seeth." In spite of its outward
prosperity the Jewish state was honeycombed
with corruption, and tottering to ruin.
The incidents recorded in the chapter were
presented not in a dream, but in an ecstatic
vision, during which the prophet was " in the
spirit " («V wvtinart), and " saw " and " heard "
what could not have been perceived with the
natural senses. It is probable that the Hebrew
prophets "saw" in visions much concerning
which they afterwards " spoke," and their pro-
phetic discourses may in many cases have been
but the interpretation of what was " seen " in
the ecstatic state.
In the vision of ch. vi. Isaiah was transported
to the Temple above, of which the Temple in
Jerusalem was but a representation. The scene
presented was not that of an Oriental monarch
on his throne, attended by courtiers. There is
no trace in the vision of reports being pre-
sented from different countries (as in Zechariah's
vision of the angelic riders), nor is it necessary
to explain t. Sua consultation of the king
with his trusted servants. Such a view is
wholly inadequate. In the heavenly Temple
the symbols of the Ark of the covenant and
its mercy-seat were not seen, but " the things
signified " thereby — namely, the throne of Je-
hovah " high and lifted up "—were " beheld " by
the prophet. Seraphim took the place of
Cherubim. The latter were probably the em-
blems of creation in its highest form, and cor-
responded with " the four living creatures " of
Ezekiel, and -rh riaaapa ($a of the Apocalypse.
Seraphim are nowhere else mentioned; but in
the vision they acted as " ministering spirits "
attending on Jehovah's commands, and for that
purpose hovered over and below the throne.
Friedr. Delitzsch connects the D'DIC' of Isaiah
with the D'BiS'ri D'E'TOH, fiery serpents, of
Num. xxi. 6, and Cheyne regards the prophet as
making use of the symbol of seraphim, which,
in the " popular mythic " form of speech, re-
presented "the serpent-like lightning." But
Isaiah's opening vision suggests a contrast be-
tween the earthly and the heavenly Temples.
In the Holy of Holies on earth Jehovah was
supposed to be throned above or upon the
Cherubim, whose eyes were directed toward the
mercy-seat, which covered the tables of the
covenant. In the Temple of Isaiah's vision there
was no distinction between the Holy place and
the most Holy. There was but one 73'H or
yais, which was completely filled with the train
of Jehovah's robe. In the sanctuary above the
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
Altar of Incense was the sole furniture ; while
the golden Altar of Incense was the most con-
spicuous piece which belonged to the 72'S1 of
the Temple in Jerusalem. Hence we adhere to
the view which connects the name seraphim
*• is
with the Arabic ■ * jZ%. to be high, to be noble,
and would compare with Bredenkamp the
D'Q"!, or high ones, mentioned Job xxi. 22, or
the princes, D'^tPn, spoken of in Dan. x. 13.
The cry of the seraphim, " Holy, holy, holy
is Jahveh Tzebaoth, the whole earth is full of
His glory," corresponds in its first clause with
that of " the four living beings," in Rev. iv. 8,
" who have no rest day and night, saying, Holy,
holy, holy is the Lord God, the Almighty." For
Kipios in the latter passage U the rendering of
niiT ; 6 ©cot is the TI7S understood in the
Isaianic phrase ; and i vavroKpdrap, the Almighty,
is the LXX. rendering of JlltOV (cp. Amos
iv. 13; Jev. v. 14, xv. 16, &c). The close con-
nexion of Is. vi. 3 with Ps. xxix. 10 is also not
to be lost sight of.
In whatever manner the expression " hosts "
may be explained, it is clear that the phrase
niN3V mil' is an abbreviation of the fuller
niK3V »rfo{ mil», Jehovah the God of hosts.
The full phrase occurs in 2 Sam. v. 10 ; 1 K. xix.
10, 14; Jer. v. 14, xv. 16, xxxv. 17, xliv. 7;
Hosea xii. 6 ; Amos v. 15, vi. 8 ; Ps. lxxxix. 9.
Writers who use the full phrase also make use
of abbreviated forms. Thus niJOV flirT fre-
quently occurs in Jeremiah, while niK2¥ 'iTJK,
with the omission of Jehovah, occurs in Amos
iv. 13, v. 14, 27 ; Jer. xxxviii. 17. A still
fuller phraseology is found in Amos v. 16, iTlfP
'JTK mtOV »n^«, Jehovah, the God of hosts,
the Lord ;*nd in Amos iii. 13, iim* ']*1K~DtO
nitOVn Tl^K, The utterance of the Lord
Jehovah, the God of hosts. The same phrase
occurs in Amos vi. 14 with the omission of '3*TK
{Lord); and, with 'iTK {Lord) at the begin-
ning, and the omission of TOtt (God) in the
middle, in Amos ix. 5. Other phrases into
which Jehovah Tzebaoth enters are niSO V TftTC
bvmfi bv DTlta, Jehovah of hosts is God over
/sraei, 2 Sam. vii. 26 ; or »nfo niK3V nW
^K"IB", Jehovah of hosts is the God of Israel, 1 Ch.
xvii. 24 ; and in several passages of Jeremiah,
e.g. xlii. 15, 18. Isaiah uses J11N3X HliT »31K,
the Lord Jehovah of hosts, in ch. iii. 15, x. 23, 24,
&c, which also occurs in Jer. xlvi. 10. Unique
is niN3¥ <:iN JHKfl in Is. x. 16. In the
Psalms we find nitOX D>il^K mn\ Pss. lix. 6,
lxxx. 5, 20, Ixxxiv. 9 ; and in Ps. lxxx. 8, 15,
mtOY D'il^K- These instances in the Psalter
are the only passages which tell in favour of
Luzzatto's view ; namely, that Tzebaoth in pro-
cess of time was regarded as a proper name, as
it is notably in the LXX. The " hosts " have
been variously explained to mean (1) the angels,
(2) the armies of Israel, and (3) the stars of
heaven, the last being perhaps the most pro-
bable view, in which case the formula " Jehovah
ISAIAH
1455
the God of hosts " is like " the God of heaven,"
an affirmation that the stars and all other powers
are entirely under the control of God as their
Creator.
At the cry of the Seraphim (Xlipn, either
collective, or as Cheyne explains it, " of each
one that cried "), the foundations of the thresh-
olds were moved, and the house (fl'Sn, i.q.
73'nn) was filled with smoke (]B>I?, similar in
some respects, though not identical with the
pun mentioned in Ex. xl. 34, 35, and 1 K. viii.
10). The smoke may have come from the Altar
of Incense, although that is somewhat uncertain.
It must not be identified with the smoke men-
tioned in Rev. viii. 3, 4, which was occasioned
by the petitions of saints below. The " smoke "
in Isaiah's vision accompanied the songs of
praise of the Seraphim. Cheyne compares Rev.
xv. 8, where it should be noted that the language
of Ex. xl. 34 is partly quoted.
The proclamation of Jehovah's holiness con-
vinced Isaiah of his own sin and of that of his
people. The conviction found expression in the
cry of v. 5. The Targum considers that Isaiah
had contracted the guilt referred to by not
reproving Uzziah for the sin recorded in 2 Ch.
xxvi. 16-21. This exegesis is founded upon an
erroneous connexion of the verb ('TVDIJ, " I
am undone ") with the idea of dumbness, silence
(as if, " / teas dumb "). Isaiah's cry of " woe "
was immediately followed by the Divine exhibi-
tion of mercy. One of the Seraphim flew
straightway to the Prophet with a live coal
taken with the tongs from the Altar of Incense.
The application of the coal of fire (cp. Jer. i. 9)
had a purifying effect (similar to that caused by
the "iSa lilT, the spirit of burning, mentioned
in iv. 4). " Lo this hath touched thy lips, and
thine iniquity is taken away and thy sin is
covered." The load of guilt being thus removed,
Isaiah, when invited, boldly accepted the Divine
commission, and became the Prophet of Jehovah.
The word HBV"), generally translated coal, is
a noun of unity, indicating a single hot stone,
from IV*?.- The two Hebrew words have their
corresponding equivalents in Arabic; namely,
a o • 3 s o •
i? and -!! . nByi, save as the proper
name of Sanl's concubine (Rizpah), is found only
in this passage; and *|VT, the name of an As-
syrian city, Sezeph, occurs as an ordinary noun
only in the plural in the expression D'QV") nil?
(1 K. xix. 6), a cake baked upon hot stones. The
Rabbinical authorities explain both words to
mean coals (cp. iy9paKtd, John xxi. 9), and so
the LXX. But the other Greek translators in
Isaiah have more precisely \jirj<pos (Vulg. calculus).
As the fire in the heavenly Temple was a Divine
emanation, whence its purifying power, the
word seems deliberately used in Isaiah in the
technical signification hot-stone. In which it ix
commonly employed in Arabic. There is no
allusion, as Ewald and Cheyne suppose, to the
unhewn stones of which altars were originally
built (Ex. xx. 25). For although flBV"], with
raphe, is used in Ezekiel and elsewhere in the
sense of a patemeiti composed of stones, the nBV"l
of Isaiah was not any part of the Altnr itself,
Digitized by
Google
1456
ISAIAH
bat a hot-stone which took the place of coals,
and which is distinctly stated to hare been
taken with the tongs "from off (717D) the
altar."
The section of Isaiah's prophecies which com-
prises chs. vii.-xii. has been suitably designated
" the Book of Immanuel." The first portion of
these, including chs. vii.-ix. 6, probably belongs
to the time of the Syro-Ephraimitic war. It
commences with an historical introduction, which,
owing to the employment of the third person,
has been by some critics considered not to hare
been the work of Isaiah. Op., however, Is. xx. ;
Hos. i. 2 ; Amos vii. 12, 14, &c. On account of
the fragmentary character belonging to these
prophecies, and their looseness in style, Guthe,
Stade, Cheyne, and others, suppose them to hare
been collected by Isaiah's disciples, and thus to
lack the arrangement of the master. The force
of such critical arguments is, however, justly
denied by Dillmann. Ewald conjectures that
the historical notices met with in these chapters
were originally fuller.
The Syro-Ephraimitish war took place B.C.
737-734. According to the Assyrian inscrip-
tion (see Schrader, Die Keilinschriften u. A. T.,
English translation by Whitehouse, on 2 K. xv.),
Tiglath-pileser commenced his campaign against
Palestine with the capture of Gaza in 734, after
which he overran the land of Israel. Pekah
king of Israel, an enemy of Assyria, was slain
by Hoshea, who, placing himself at the head of a
party favourably disposed to Assyria, succeeded
to the throne of Israel and became a nominal
vassal of Tiglath-pileser. In the following years
the Assyrian monarch crushed Rezin king of
Syria, and put an end to the kingdom of which
Damascus was the capital. The alliance, there-
fore, between Pekah king of Israel and Rezin
king of Syria, and the war which they jointly
waged against Judah, must have occurred prior
to 734.
The coalition between the kings of Syria and
Israel had for its primary object the conquest of
Judah. The allied monarchs conspired together
to overthrow the Davidic dynasty, and intended
to place on the throne of Judah an obscure
chieftain, known as the Son of Tabeel. They
appear also to have designed to throw off the
yoke of Assyria, of which empire, according to
Assyrian inscriptpns, both were nominal vassals.
Rezin assisted in the capture of Elath, the Jewish
port on the Gulf of Akaba, which was restored
by him to Edom ; for it is tolerably clear that
in 2 K. xvi. 6 the reading DIN (Edom) is to be
preferred to that of DTK (Aram or Syria). The
probable object, therefore, of the coalition was
to weld together the Philistines, Edomites, and
possibly Egypt also (cp. vii. 18), into a strong
confederacy against the advance of Assyria.
In endeavouring as a king of Northern Israel,
for the first time since the great disruption, to
root out the Davidic dynasty in Judah, Pekah
may have sought to give a deathblow to the
Messianic expectations cherished more or less in
the sister-kingdom. It is not a little significant
that, notwithstanding the idolatry re-established
by Ahaz, Isaiah should have been bidden at that
crisis to proffer the help of Jehovah. He was
accompanied on the occasion by his son Shear-ja-
shub, whose name (a-Bemnani-shali-retwrn) was
ISAIAH
a standing prediction of combined judgment and
mercy.
The Prophet boldly informed the Jewish
monarch that the alliance between Syria and
Israel would not stand. He described Rezin tad
Pekah as "two tails of smoking firebrands,"
destined soon to die out, however brightly titer
might blaze up for a moment. " Within sixty
and five years " Ephraim, strangely leagued with
an idolatrous nation for the extinction of the
Messianic hope, would be " broken in pieces that
it be not a people." This denunciation has
often presented a difficulty to critics. What,
under such circumstances, was Ahaz likely to
care for what might happen in sixty-five yean?
But the prophecy was not given with the object
of winning over Ahaz. It was a solemn de-
claration that the kingdom of Israel had filled
up the measure of its iniquity. The words with
which the Prophet concluded the announcement
(see v. 9) contained a solemn warning to the
Divinely-established House of David. Sixty and
five years from 736, the second year of Ahaz'i
reign (14 of Ahaz + 29 of Hezekiah + 22 of
Manasseh = 65), span the period up to the timet
of Esarhaddon (2 K. xvii. 24 ; Ezra iv. 2) and
of Assurbanipal (identical with Asnapper, Ezra
iv. 10), his co-regent and successor, when the
kingdom of Samaria was colonised with a mii-
ture of Gentile nations, and Ephraim ceased to
be a people. It is needless to mention that the
passage has been rejected by some critics as an
interpolation, and adduced by others as a proof
that the whole prophecy must have been com-
posed after that exile.
Ahaz gave little heed to the Prophet. It it
possible that, although greatly alarmed at the
confederacy, he had some reliance on the miliurj
strength of the kingdom, which aa organized by
Uzziah had been so strong as to deter Tiglath-
pileser from assailing Judah (see Schrader, p. 253,
Eng. trans., vol. i. p. 245). Moreover Ahai h id
already probably opened communciations with
the great king of Assyria. Whatever were his
expectations, the opening of the campaign was
disastrous. The account given in Chronicles
(2 Ch. xxviii.) is not generally relied on, al-
though, due allowance being made for the mis-
takes in numbers, Caspari in his monograph
gives strong arguments in support of its credi-
bility. The Chronicler states that the Jewish
army was almost annihilated, one of the king's
sons was slain on the field, and a huge number
of prisoners were taken captive. A subsequent
siege of Jerusalem proved, however, unsuc-
cessful (2 K. xvi. 5). Hence the Syrians sad
Israelites, who appear to have carried on sepa-
rate warlike operations, retired for a short time
from Jewish territory. Their southern allies,
however, the Edomites and Philistines (2 Ch.
xxviii. 17, 18), invaded the land, and Judah was
greatly distressed.
Under such national trials, Isaiah seems a
second time to have sought an interview with
Ahaz, when he offered to adduce a sign of his
Divine commission " either in the depth or in
the height above." According to the narrative,
Ahaz never doubted the possibility of the sign
being afforded, but feared to behold it (J. D-
Michaelis). Already in league with the king
of Assyria, whose armies were on the march
to his assistance, he "dealt wantonly in Judah,
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
ISAIAH
1457
and trespassed sore against the Lord" (2 Ch.
xxviii. 19). He refused the Prophet's offer,
hypocritically pretending that he would not
commit the sin for which Israel in early days
had been punished so severely (Ex. xvii. 7;
Deut. vi. 16). Notwithstanding the idolatries
of that monarch, Isaiah had spoken to him of
" Jehovah thy God." The worship of Jehovah
never seems to have been abandoned during all
the apostasies of Israel and Judah. They, like
the colonists of Samaria, were eclectics in religion
(2 K. xvii. 33). The Prophet now addressed him
and the royal family in different language:
" Hear ye now, House of David ! Is it a small
thing that ye should weary men " (alluding to
the gross acts of injustice committed in the land)
"that ye will weary my God also? Therefore
Jehovah Himself shall give yon a sign : Behold
the maiden shall conceive and bear a son, and
shall call his name lmmanuel."
The "sign from heaven'' once rejected was
offered no more. Another " sign," attended not
with " outward show," would in due season be
vouchsafed to those that waited for redemption
in Israel (cp. viii. 16-18). Even the iniquity
of the House of David would not keep back the
" gift " from being bestowed in its season, " for
the gifts and calling of God are without repent-
ance " (Rom. xi. 29). Messiah, the Child of the
House of David, and the Child of Israel, also, in
consequence of the sin both of the family of
David and of the people of Israel, would be
revealed in troublous times. The " salvation of
Jehovah " would be granted in a day of dire
affliction. A day of darkness would come upon
the land, more gloomy than that of the great
schism which rent the twelve tribes of Israel
into two antagonistic kingdoms. Ere a day of
grace would dawn, the land would be treated
like a leper covered with leprosy (Lev. xiv. 9).
Before the day of its recovery, Jehovah would
shave it clean with " the razor " of the king of
Assyria, " hired " by Ahaz in his infatuation. The
armies of Egypt and Assyria would both cover the
land, numerous as flies and bees, until it would
be wasted and its cities destroyed. lmmanuel
would be born in a day of adversity ; and when
old enough to discern between good and evil,
that royal Child, the long-expected One, would,
in a wasted land, be forced to subsist on sour
milk and honey. Made like in all things to His
people, He would learn, like them, obedience in
the school of suffering. Messiah's advent to an
unbelieving people would be preceded by, and
accompanied with, bitter sorrows. A day of
wrath would precede the day of mercy.
The prophecy was thus an ideal description.
The picture of the future was painted upon the
lines of the Prophet's own present. The Mes-
sianic character of the prophecy, often denied, is
now generally acknowledged. The supposed
reference to the Virgin-birth in Is. vii. 14 was
long regarded as the main point of the prophecy.
That point is not now considered to possess the
importance assigned to it by the older commenta-
tors. The significance of the prophecy does not
rest upon the translation of nDpVD as "the
virgin." With the glorious light cast upon
our Lord's history after His Resurrection by the
fact of His miraculous Incarnation, then only
made known to the disciples in general, it was
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
natural to see a deeper meaning in the terms of
the 0. T. prediction. But the Hebrew student
must admit that the idea of virginity is not con-
veyed by the word made use of ; and there are
other weighty reasons which lead to the conclu-
sion that such could not have been the " sign "
referred to. Like the Hebrew prophets in general,
and the Apostles in later days, Isaiah cherished
the hope of witnessing himself the dawn of the
Messianic day. All attempts, however, to ex-
plain " the maiden " as the consort of Ahaz, or as
a second wife of the Prophet, are now generally
discarded. The most satisfactory view is that
which considers the mother of the Messiah to
be distinctly pointed to, and hence the article is
used, although the particular individual signified
was unknown. She whose Son, as " the seed of the
woman," was to bruise the serpent's head, was
fitly designated " the Maiden," as the link by
which the blessing was to descend. The Book
of lmmanuel describes in ideal terms the Messiah
as born in adversity, the predestined Child of
the maiden of the House of David (ch. vii.), and
the Child too of the people of Israel born for
adversity. The Child Himself is therefore ad-
dressed as He to Whom the land rightfully
belonged; for Isaiah's ejaculation (ch. viii. 8)
may well be regarded in one aspect as a Divinely
inspired cry to lmmanuel, that He would look
in pity upon the sorrows of His own country
(cp. John i. 11, R. V.; see Westcott).
God would not cast off His people. Deliverance
would be vouchsafed, for the sake of the Child
who was to be born, the Son that was to be
given. The Assyrian invader, after a time of
success, would be overthrown suddenly, as in
" the day of Midian " (ch. ix.). A vivid descrip-
tion is next drawn of the victorious march of
the Assyrian through the land to his grave in
sight of Jerusalem (ch. x.). For from the stump
of Jesse's tree, felled though it was on account
of long-continued sins, a Shoot would come forth,
and a Branch out of its roots would bear glorious
fruit (ch. xi.). The redemption would be in due
season complete and final; the long-looked-for
King would redeem Israel from all their ene-
mies, and unite in one the scattered people.
The world would be subject to His sway,
and universal peace brought in. The redemp-
tion when completed would cast into the shade
the great deliverance vouchsafed to Israel at
the Red Sea, and in praise thereof the Book
of lmmanuel closes with a song of salvation
(ch. xii-)-
It must not be forgotten that Micah, the con-
temporary of Isaiah, represents the Messiah as
the Child of Israel. The trivailing woman of
Micah iv. 9, 10, is the community or Church of
Israel, also described in Is. Ixvi. 7, 8, as bringing
forth children. Hence there is much to be said
in favour of the view adopted by von Hofmann,
K8hler, and Weir, that "the maiden " of Is. vii.
is Israel viewed as the bride of Jehovah. Oheyne's
objection that " this figure of speech is reserved
for the higher style of prophecy," is of little
weight when it is remembered that Micah and
Isaiah were fellow-Prophets, and that the
imagery of the one might well be employed
by the other, even in comparatively prosaic
passages. It may also be questioned whether
such an ideal description of the future as that
in Is. vii. 14, viewed in connexion with the
5 A
Digitized by
Google
1458
ISAIAH
subsequent context, is not itself an instance of
" the higher style."
The prophecies in chs. xiii.-xxiii. treat chiefly
of the Gentile nations. Isaiah's prophecies con-
cerning the nations, like the similar predictions
in Jeremiah (xlvi.-li.) and Ezekiel (xxv.-xxxii.),
are grouped together. The prophecy of ch. xxii.
is exceptional in its character. Such an arrange-
ment of prophecies according to subject-matter,
and not in chronological order, is snggestire of
the hand of an editor.
Several of the prophecies in this group are
assigned by critics of eminence to a post-exilian
date. It has been plausibly argued that in the
time of Isaiah the power hostile to Judah was
Assyria, and not Babylon. It is, therefore,
somewhat strange that Isaiah should denounce
Babylon (chs. xiii., xiv.) as the oppressor and
ruler of all the kingdoms of the earth, when
Babylon never attained each a position in his life-
time. It is still more strange that the Prophet
should speak of Babylon as a power actually keep-
ing the Jews in exile, at a time when the people
of Judah had not yet been carried into captivity.
Reference is unquestionably made in ch. xi. to
a wholesale deportation of Israel from Palestine,
and among the countries mentioned from whence
the exiles were to be restored the land of
Shinar or Babylonia is not forgotten. Critics,
however, like Stade and Giesebrecht, have main-
tained that chs. xi. 10-xii. 6 are not Isaianic.
Among the points unfavourable to its genuine-
ness Giesebrecht adduces the "combination of
the idea of the Messiah and of the idea of uni-
versalism " in v. 11 ; the sense in which the
expression " remnant of the people " is em-
ployed in rm. 11 and 16 ; the countries in " the
four corners of the earth " from whence the
Israelites were to be restored; together with
the union of contradictory ideas, such as the
universal monarchy of the prophetic Son of
David with the notion of a narrow Israelitish
kingdom, described in o. 14. Hence Giesebrecht
assigns the passage to an imitator of Isaiah in
post-exilian days.
On the other hand it may be argued that the
whole passage bears the impress of pre-exilian
times. Shinar, though mentioned, occupies a
subordinate place to Assyria. Assyria and
Egypt are spoken of as the chief foes of Israel ;
the name of Babylon does not occur in the
prophecy; while the Philistines, with Edom
and Moab, are brought into a prominence which
a writer of post-exilian times could not have
dreamed of assigning to them.
That Isaiah foresaw the wholesale deportation
of Israel is plain from passages admittedly
genuine, such as vi. 11, 12, vii. 17, viii. 4-7.
The Babylonian Captivity is alluded to distinctly
in the historical appendix to the first part of
Isaiah at ch. xxxix. Hence it is not after all
so strange that the Prophet, in a collected
edition of his prophecies put forth probably
some time after the deliverance from Senna-
cherib, should have also predicted Babylon's
overthrow. If the captivity of Judah was fore-
seen by him, it was necessary that he should
also speak of a restoration. That Jehovah
would not for ever forsake His people was a
truth enunciated by Samuel (1 Sam. xii. 22),
and never lost sight of by the subsequent pro-
phets. It was an article of Israel's faith.
ISAIAH
Isaiah's prophecies concerning the nations
deal mainly with the nations mentioned in the
close of ch. xi. — although the order in which
they are mentioned is not the same as in that
chapter. Thns Assyria is spoken of in xiv.
24-27; Philistia in xiv. 28-32; Moab in
chs. xv., xvi. ; Cush or Ethiopia in ch. xviii. ;
Egypt in chs. xix., xx. In the later chapter* of
the group Elam is mentioned in combination
with Media (xxi. 2, xxii. 6 ; cp. xiii. 17),
and Edom in xxi. 11, 12. The prophecy
against Damascus in ch. xvii. is one which very
naturally follows the Book of Immanuel, where
Syria comes so prominently on the scene ; and
Tyre, against which the prophecy of ch. xxiii. is
directed, may be regarded as included in " the
coast lands " referred to in xi. 1 1.
Babylon was not in Isaiah's time regarded as
a different empire from that of Assyria, although,
like many other provinces of the Assyrian
empire, Babylon might be restive under the
Assyrian yoke. Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria,
after his campaign against Chaldea, assumed
the title of " king of Snmir and Akkad," i.t.
of Babylonia (Schrader, KAT* p. 249). Con-
sequently it is not strange that after the pre-
diction of the overthrow of Assyria in the Book
of Immanuel, the Book of the Nations should
begin with the prediction of Babylon's downfall
(ch. xiii.), or even' that the dirge over Babylon
(xiv. 3 23) should immediately be followed
by an utterance concerning the overthrow of
the Assyrian upon the holy mountains (xiv.
24-27).
It is easy to assert that those passages are bnt
instances in which prophecies, widely differing
in date, have been pieced together by a post-
exilian editor. But the Jews of .post-exilian
days clearly distinguished between the empires
of Assyria and Babylon. It was very different
in the time of Isaiah. It mattered little to
a Jew of that period whether the centre of
the great Eastern empire — which, like a huge
boa constrictor, was strangling the Jewish na-
tionality — were fixed at Nineveh on the Tigris
or at Babylon on the Euphrates.
It has been argued that Isaiah predicted only
the overthrow of a particular Assyrian king,
and not the overthrow of the Eastern empire.
If however, as we maintain, the second half of
ch. xi. be genuine, the overthrow of both the
Assyrian and Egyptian powers is predicted as
among the results connected with the coming
forth of the Shoot out of the stem of Jesse.
Micah, Isaiah's contemporary, similarly predicts
the overthrow of Assyria as brought about by
Messiah (Micah v. 4-6). And alongside of that
prophecy, Micah further speaks of the poor
daughter of Zion forced in her pains of travail
to go forth out of the city of Jerusalem, com-
pelled to dwell in the field, carried off as a
captive to Babylon, and there Anally rescued
and redeemed from the hands of her enemies
(Micah iv. 10).
Consequently, according to the evidence of
the received texts of Isaiah and Micah, no
marked distinction was drawn in the days of
Hezekiah between Assyria and Babylon. A
critic is not justified in tampering with the
prophetic text, on the ground of a theoretical
assumption of interpolations, so as to force it
into harmony with his theories. On the other
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
hand, if the general integrity of the prophetical
books is to be upheld, attention must be
called to the fact that the prophecies of the Old
Testament contain more of the ideal element
than popularly imagined. The reader of the
Bible must be trained to observe that literal
predictions are the exception and not the rule.
The glowing prophecy of Isaiah which depicts
Sennacherib's march upon Jerusalem (Is. z. 28-
34), and his equally grand description of the
overthrow of the Assyrian king before its walls
(Is. xxii. 27-33), were not literally fulfilled.
Sennacherib probably did not march against
Jerusalem by the route described in ch. x., while
all the details of the latter passage (ch. xxxi.)
did not actually take place (see Driver's
Isaiah, Life and limes, pp. 61, 73). No attempt
was ever mode in later days to " touch up "
those prophecies of Isaiah, in order to make
them coincide bettor with the actual facts of
history, which fact speaks volumes for the
general integrity of the text. Such details
were regarded by the Prophet and his disciples
as but the pictorial filling up of the picture
"seen" in prophetic "vision." These ideal
portions are of the utmost importance, because
they are evidences that the prophecies were
delivered prior to tho events predicted. The
" supernatural " element in each prophecy is to
be looked for in the prophecy viewed as a
whole, and not in its mere descriptive details,
which are, more or less, simply pictorial.
It would, if space permitted, be easy to
show that the prophecies concerning Babylon in
chs. xiii. and xiv. present marked characteristics
of Isaiah's diction. Although some weight is to
be assigned to arguments drawn from such
peculiarities, the critic must be on his guard
against the attempt so constantly made to assign
"to each prophet his own Lexicon" (Breden-
kamp). It is therefore more important to
observe that this prophecy about Babylon is not
deficient in the purely ideal element. When
Cyrus captured Babylon with his army of Medes
and Persians, he did not destroy that city. The
prophecy of ch. xiii. was not fulfilled in the
letter, but fully accomplished in the spirit. If
written prior to Babylon's capture, it exhibits all
the marks of supernatural inspiration. Babylon
after its capture by Cyrus sank to rise no more.
That city never regained the position of being
the capital of an empire. Strabo describes it as
lying waste in the century prior to the Christian
era, although centuries later it became a seat
of Jewish learning. Bredenkamp calls attention
to the fact that in the predictions of Babylon's
downfall by Isaiah or Jeremiah, the union of
Elam and Media is not spoken of, although Cyrus
was a Persian (Elamite). The fact is a strong
argument in favour of the composition of those
predictions prior to the Exile. For it is scarcely
necessary to observe that the prediction in Is.
xxi. 2 does not refer to the final successful
coalition against Babylon.
The ideas presented in the opening of ch. xiv.
are peculiar, and scarcely harmonize with those
of cb. xiii. They may, however, have been
written by the Prophet at a later period to form
a kind of framework in which to insert his
dirge over Babylon. That dirge is assigned by
many critics to the time of Nebuchadnezzar,
but there is no serious difficulty in the way
ISAIAH
1459
of regarding it as Isaianic. The details given
in xiv. 19, 20, are purely ideal. The king
of Babylon is only a personification of the em-
pire over which that king ruled. There is no
evidence to show that the scene pourtrayed of
the royal corpse cast forth from its grave was
realised as a fact of history.
The superscription assigns the prophecy
against Philistia (xiv. 28-32) to the year of
Ahaz's death. " The rod " (Bat?) which smote
the Philistines is often interpreted of Ahaz, who
with the aid of Assyria repelled the Philistine
invasion. It is, however, preferably explained
as a prophecy not of any particular king but of
the House of David. The Davidic family for
centuries (2 Ch. xxvi. 6, 7) kept the Philistines
in subjection. The rod or sceptre of David was
"broken " by the " serpent " of Assyria (Tiglath-
pileeer, or Shalmaneser), although Assyria had
been " hired " (cp. vii. 20) to uphold the
Davidic throne. Judah had become an Assyrian
vassal. The "adder" and "the fiery-flying
serpent " are best explained (with Cheyne and
Driver) as referring to Sargon (see Schrader,
KAT? p. 396), or even Sennacherib, for those
Assyrian monarchs crushed the Philistines under
foot. In the expressions "from the root"
(E>TB>p) and also "and hie fruit" f>"1W), dis-
tinct allusions seem made to xi. 1, though
not altogether identical in meaning. The " rod "
(I33C) and its smiting are mentioned in xi.
4. Delitzsch, after the Targum, explains the
" fiery-flying serpent " of Messiah. The " rod "
in the hand of the Assyrian, wherewith he
"smote" the Philistines, was "Jehovah's in-
dignation" (see x. 5, cp. tt>. 24-26); and the
Messiah, whether recognised or not, was the
real source of all deliverances vouchsafed to the
Lord's people, and hence was appealed to by the
Prophet in the day of calamity (viii. 8) as one
able to deliver His land, or one for whose sake
Jehovah might grant deliverance.
Chs. xv., xvi. contain a prophecy against
Moab. The prophecy in xvi. 13, 14 is gene-
rally admitted to be Isaianic. Most critics,
however, think that the rest of chs. xv., xvi. is
the work of an earlier prophet re-edited by
Isaiah (cp. the R. V. xvi. 13). The prophecy
is later than the time of Mesha, although seven
of the proper names here mentioned are found
on the Mesha-stone. Ch. xvi. 1 refers to the
tribute once paid by Mesha to Judah (2 K. iii. 4),
which Moab is now advised again to pay. The
Moabites according to the prophecy were in
possession of territory north of the Anion which
formerly belonged to the tribes of Reuben and
Gad. This fact is, as Bredenkamp remarks, in
favour of the Isaianic composition. For the
tribes of Reuben and Gad had been carried away
captive by Tiglath-pileser, and Moab was after-
wards free to extend her territories in that
direction. Sennacherib boasts (Schrader, KA T*
p. 291) that Camosnadab king of Moab paid him
tribute. Nothing has yet been discovered which
casts light upon the events predicted in xvi. 14.
Ch. xvii. 1-11 depicts "the burden upon
Damascus." That title only describes part of
the prediction, which is mainly occupied with a
description of the overthrow of the kingdom of
Israel, united with Syria against Judah (ch. vii.).
The prophecy was probably composed about the
5 A 3
Digitized by
Google
1460
ISAIAH
time of Tiglath-pileser's campaign against Syria
and Israel. Israel's ruin is predicted, but notes
of mercy mingle with those of judgment in
vv. 6-8.
The passage that follows (xvii. 12-14) is
one of considerable beauty. It does not seem to
be connected with the prophecy which precedes,
and does not belong to that which follows. It
is one of Isaiah's striking miniatures of the
overthrow of Sennacherib's army. There is no
necessity to regard it as a fragment of some
larger prophecy. The Prophet probably inserted
the piece in this place of his gallery to mark
the contrast between the fates of Israel and of
Jndah when they severally came into collision
with the might of Assyria. The moral of the
lesson is too evident to need comment.
The following chapter (ch. xviii.) contains a
reference to the same grand event. The picture
describes Ethiopia with its swarms of flies.
Isaiah appears well acquainted with the land
and its inhabitants: for v. 2 in a few master-
strokes delineates the appearance of the Ethi-
opians, the general features of their land, and
their fleet of papyrus canoes. Shabataka, then
monarch of Egypt, was more of an Ethiopian
than an Egyptian prince (Cheyne). The Prophet
represents the king of Ethiopia in the act of
collecting an army to co-operate against the
king of Assyria when startled by the news of
the disaster before Jerusalem. The victory of
Jehovah is described as announced by an ensign
lifted up on the mountain, and by the blowing
of the trumpet in the land. In consequence of
that overthrow many nations brought gifts unto
Jerusalem (2 Ch. xxxii. 23), and among them
were probably the representatives of Ethiopia.
The next prophecy concerns Egypt : xix.
1-15 describes the judgment; xix. 16-25 its
results. The former is regarded by most critics
as Isaianic, although some dispute that point.
The Egyptian and Assyrian inscriptions have
thrown considerable light upon the historical
references of the chapter (Cheyne), although the
points of contact cannot here be noticed. The
drying up of the Nile is not a literal prediction ;
but a symbolical description of the wasting
away of that once mighty empire. Egypt was
symbolised by the Nile, while the Euphrates in
viii. 7, 8 is the symbol of Assyria.
The authorship of the second part (xix.
16-25) is called in question by many critics.
The commendatory manner in which t>. 19 speaks '
of " an altar " in the land of Egypt, and of the
erection of a sacred " pillar " (rO-VD), notwith-
standing the prohibitions as to pillars in Lev.
xrii. and Deut. xii. 3, 4, has occasioned no little
difficulty. It must, however, be observed that
the Prophet regards the "pillar" only as "a
sign," or pillar of remembrance, and by no
means as the mark of "a high place." The
" altar " he speaks of was in like manner only
an altar of " witness," like that of 'Ed. The
reference to Josh. xxii. is unmistakable. Both
the " altar" and "pillar " in the prophetic picture
were " signs " that Egypt would in future days
be a centre of pure worship. By the " pillar at
the border thereof," Egypt was ecclesiastically
annexed to Canaan ; as were the territories across
the Jordan by the altar of 'Ed (Josh. xxii.).
Hence the prediction of five cities speaking the
language of Canaan (cp. Zeph. iii. 9) is simply
ISAIAH
an illustration of that spiritual annexation. It
must not be viewed as a literal prediction. The
reading of v. 18 seems corrupt. The prophecy,
though purely symbolical, was no doubt mule
use of in later times to support the erection of
a Jewish temple in Egypt in B.O. 160. The
LXX. referred the prophecy to that event, and
accordingly altered the phrase " city of destruc-
tion " in v. 18 into flin "TO, "city of right-
eousness." The manner in which Assyria and
Egypt are spoken of in m. 23-25 forcibly recalls
the picture in xir. 2. They are not, however,
identical. The reference to Assyria would have
been an anachronism in B.C. 160.
Ch. xx., though following ch. xix., contains an
earlier prophecy of Isaiah concerning the con-
quest of Egypt by Assyria. The Tartan, or
Assyrian commander-in-chief, is not to be identi-
fied with the Tartan mentioned in 2 K. xviii. 17.
The title " the Tartan " does not occur in the
parallel passage in Is. xxxvi. 2. " The Tartan''
of ch. xx. was sent by Sargon, the predecessor of
Sennacherib, against the Philistines prior to toe
Assyrian operations against Egypt. An influ-
ential party in Jerusalem relied on an alliance
with Egypt and Ethiopia as the strongest bul-
wark against Assyria. To indicate the downfall
of Egypt and Ethiopia, Isaiah for three yean
walked up and down in the garb of a captive in
the streets of Jerusalem, having laid aside both
his outer rough garment of sackcloth (" nvifed,"
cp. 1 Sam. xix. 24, Amos ii. 16, Hicah i. 8) and his
sandals. On the difficulties connected with the
reading " three years," and on the attempts to
obviate them, whether by the Hebrew punctua-
tors, who disconnect the word " barefoot " from
the " three years " following, or by critics who
conjecturally read " three days " in the place of
" three years," see Cheyne's Commentary.
The prophecy against Babylon (xxi. 1-10)
probably refers to the siege which happened in
Isaiah's lifetime, when Sargon captured that
city and defeated Merodach-baladan. The latter
monarch afterwards recovered much of his former
power, and was formidable in the reign of Sen-
nacherib (Is. xxxix.). At the time of this pro-
phecy many Jewish statesmen longed for the
success of Merodach-baladan, as a check to the
growing power of Assyria. Isaiah, however,
predicted the failure of that monarch's attempts
against Assyria. The language used by Isaiah
shows his sympathy with the natural sentiments
of his nation, though from a higher standpoint
he recognised the need of Judah s being taught
by bitter experience to lean only on her God.
The superscription (xxi. 1) is somewhat
enigmatical, though picturesque like the pro-
phecy itself. The Euphrates, like the Kile
(xviii. 2; xix. 5), was sometimes styled "a
sea." The land of Chaldea was termed the
"sea-land" (mat tidm-tiv, DiriTI, Schrader,
KAT.* p. 353). Few prophecies so distinctly
convey the impression that what is described
was actually " seen " In prophetic vision, and
afterwards recalled to mind and expounded.
The pictures presented to the Prophet's view
did not represent what actually took place at
the conquest of Babylon. The details, I"*'
similar details in the Apocalypse, are ideal;
the prophecy true, but symbolical.
Ch. xxi. 11-17 contains two prophecies, the
first of Edom under the symbolical appellation
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
of Dumah, tiknee; the second concerning Arabia,
ix. Tema and Kedar. The answer to inquiring
Edomites was to the effect that their day of
prosperity wonld soon close in night, but that
a day of grace was not yet over, if they were
disposed to make use of it. Nothing definite is
known as to the events noted in the second pre-
diction as shortly to come to pass.
Ch. xzii. is also concerned with the nations
who suffered bitterly from the "overwhelming
scourge " which passed through them, and then
descended upon Jerusalem. This is probably
the reason why the prophecy occupies its special
position in the Book. It is, however, strictly
speaking.a "domestic prediction." "The valley of
vision " has sometimes been explained to signify
the low-lying quarter of the city in which the
Prophet beheld his " visions," or some "valley "
in prophetic " vision " where the contest here
described seemed to take place. The prophecy
depicts Jerusalem. It may refer to some event
which occurred during the invasion of Sen-
nacherib, or (as Cheyne supposes) during the
earlier invasion of Sargon. That monarch styles
himself " he who subdued the land of Judah
whose position is remote" (Schrader, p. 188).
The history, however, of that campaign is not
given in the Kings, and all details are wanting.
Ch. xzii. 15-25 contains a denunciation of
Shebna, who was then over the treasury. That
i>tatesman"s deposition is predicted, and the pro-
motion of Eliakim to office. While the personal
integrity of the latter is praised, he was solemnly
warned that his partiality for his relations would
iu turn bring about his own downfall. There,
are no means of tracing the accomplishment of
these particular prophecies.
The "Book of the Nations" closes with a
description of the fate of Tyre (ch. xxiii.). The
authorship of this highly-finished piece is much
disputed, chiefly because of the mention made of
the Chaldeans in v. 13. The language is, how-
ever, decidedly Isaianic, and no convincing argu-
ments have been adduced against the traditional
view. The date of the prophecy cannot be
absolutely determined, nor can the fulfilment
of the prediction in all its details be pointed
out. No light has yet been cast upon the pre-
dictions of the closing verses. It may, however,
safely be affirmed (even against Ewald and
Cheyne) that the seventy years of Tyre's desola-
tion (to. 15-17) have no connexion with the
seventy years of Judah's exile predicted by
Jeremiah.
The next section of the Book, comprising
chs. xxiv.-xxvii. inclusive, might almost be styled
the Apocalypse of Isaiah. It has, as Delitzsch
justly remarks, no counterpart in the 0. T.,
except Zech. ix.-xiv., and that only to a partial
extent. Though admirably suited to the place
it occupies in the Book, it is not placed in its
chronological order, whether as regards its
composition or subject-matter. The Isaiauic
authorship of the portion has been disputed,
because the historical situation depicted does not
correspond with the events of Isaiah's time.
Moreover the character of the section, although
confessedly abounding with phrases peculiar to
Isaiah, ■ wholly diners from the other Isaianic
prophecies.
These arguments, however, are not conclusive.
The prominence given to Moab (xxv. 10-12)
ISAIAH
1461
is in favour of Isaiah's authorship. If Isaiah
really predicted the Babylonish Captivity, the
reference to Israel's three great enemies — Egypt,
Assyria, and Babylon — in xxvii. 1 agrees with
his historical standpoint, and xxv. 6 proves
that the writer lived at Jerusalem. Wellhausen
maintains that the ideal of the older prophets
was the establishment of the Davidic kingdom
and monarchy on a grander scale, and that the
Prophets only dreamed Apocalyptic dreams
when they lost hold of that historical environ-
ment (Proieg,, pp. 444-5). If Wellhausen's
canon be accepted, the genuineness of the pro-
phecy is indefensible. But that canon is purely
arbitrary. Wellhausen summarily rejects as
interpolations all the passages which can be
adduced as evidence against his theory. There
is, however, nothing really opposed to the admis-
sion of the Isaianic authorship of the prophecy,
unless it be assumed that whatever savours of
" the supernatural " is necessarily spurious.
The prophecy is, however, not literal. It is
in the grandest sense ideal. It does not describe
the devastation only of " the land " of Israel
or Judah. That " land," indeed, is not for-
gotten; it is prominently before the Prophet's
mind. But the thought which filled his soul
was that of a world (?3J"I) collapsing into ruin.
The days of Noah are recalled to mind : " the
windows on high are opened " (xxiv. 18), " the
everlasting covenant " then made is now " dis-
solved " (xxiv. 5), and the cnrse devours the
earth once more (t>. 6), chaos O'TI) coming again
into view (e. 10).
The catastrophe being thus world-wide, "the
remnant " of ct. 13-15 is not exclusively that
of the Jewish nation. " Few are left " among
the peoples (D'OKI), cv. 6, 13 (cp. Matt. xxiv.
22). Hence the voices of the remnant that
escape arise from the western sea and from the
lands of the rising sun (Delitzsch). The city of
confusion (IDn) is neither Babylon nor Jerusa-
lem, but the idealised "capital of the God-
estranged world " (Delitzsch), distinguished only
for pictorial effect from the world with which in
many aspects it may be identified. A world
estranged from God has ever a tendency to
relapse into the chaos from whence it arose.
The final victory described by the Prophet is
delineated by him as achieved both in heaven
above and in earth beneath. Angels and kings
are described as hurled together into the prison,
from whence they are to be brought forth to
judgment, when order and beauty are re-esta-
blished, and Jehovah "shall reign before His
ancients gloriously."
This picture of " the last things " is unique.
There is, however, nothing improbable in such
a vision of final victory being revealed to
the Prophet for his consolation after the Assy-
rian deliverance, when led to contemplate the
dark storm-clouds which soon began again" to
gather over the horizon.
The hymn of praise which follows (xxv.
1-5) describes Jehovah's mercy in the midst of
trouble, and the feast made for all peoples on
Mount Zion. Zion is not always to be a stone
of stumbling, but a source of rejoicing. All
peoples are to rejoice in her. Death will be
swallowed up, and the veil of ignorance and
sorrow drawn off from all eyes.
Digitized by
Google
1462
ISAIAH
Beneath the mountain on which the joyous
feast is held, a striking contrast is depicted. At
the close of ch. xxz. " tabrets and harps " are
represented as sending forth melody on the
mountain above, while at its foot the funeral
pile is made ready for the Assyrian king. It
is kindled by the breath of Jehovah "like a
stream of brimstone." Similarly in ch. xxv.,
Moab, Israel's haughty foe, is seen trodden
down, at the foot of the mountain, like straw in
the water of earth's dung-pit. In vain Moab
spreads forth his hands to swim, for he is
trampled under, and stifled beneath the fetid
water.
A third hymn of praise follows (xxvi. 1-
7). Zion is described as surrounded by the
walls and bulwarks of salvation. The ideas
presented under other phraseology in xxxiii.
20, 21, are repeated almost in identical lan-
guage in lx. 18. Through the gates and
doors of the city, stream in "the righteous
nation which keepeth truth." Vv. 8-11
describe either the Prophet's past or present
trials, the thoughts of which dimmed awhile
the view of future glory. Faith, however,
bursts forth victoriously from v. 12 onwards,
rising almost to the level of New Testament
revelation. "The dead" of v. 14 are not
merely Israel's oppressors. The Prophet's 'gaze
is fixed on the distant future. The faith that
believes in Jehovah bringing His people down to
Sheol is compelled to affirm a bringing up from
Hades (1 Sam. ii. 6), in the same way that the
faith that foresaw the national captivity pro-
phesied a glorious Return. Hofmann rightly
maintains (Schriftbetoeis, ii. 4G1) that a belief
in the resurrection of the dead is no mere pro-
duct of exilian days. It is no light borrowed
from Zoroaster. The revivification of the dead
was often obscured by the clouds that shut out
the world beyond. The awakening of the dead to
consciousness and life was, perhaps, thought of
in Old Testament days as limited to Israel, and
the resurrection of all men was not clearly
revealed. But the fact of a life beyond the
grave, and of deliverance from Sheol, was
surely, though slowly, recognised as a necessity
of faith.
The language in which Old Testament Psalm-
ists and Prophets speak of the state of the dead
in the Under-world is not, indeed, to be regarded
as literal. The Church of Hades is described
in Is. xxvi. as a woman travailing with child,
awaiting the time of her delivery. Bredenkamp
calls attention to the fact that Isaiah's simili-
tude is expanded in 4 Ezra (2 Esdras) iv. 35-42.
As Daniel looked forward, after a period of
rest, to stand in his lot at the end of the
days (Dan. xii. 13), so in an ecstasy of believing
rapture, Isaiah cries out to the longing Church
of Hades (cp. I Thess. iv. 14-18): "Thy dead
shall live, my dead body " (there is no necessity
to view the expression as collective) " shall
arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in the
dust, for thy dew (the dew of Jehovah) is as
a dew of herbs!" It is a dew which falls
upon the grass, and makes it spring up
luxuriously, or " a dew of lights " (cp. Jas.
i. 17), " so full of the light of life that it draws
forth the shades even from the dark womb of
the Under-world " (Cheyne). " The earth shall
cast forth the dead," aiso from its womb (cp.
ISAIAH
Kev. xx. 13). Numerous as the dew-drops from
the womb of the morning, are the youths that
range themselves under the banner of Messiah
(Ps. ex. 3). So the dew of Jehovah, in the
morning of Resurrection, shall bring forth a
mighty army from the womb of Earth and
Hades.
The burst of rapture is succeeded (vv. 20, 21)
by an exhortation to the people of Jehovah. A
further descent in the sobriety of language
marks ch. xxvii., the Prophet being actuated by
the principle enunciated by St. Paul in 2 Cor. v.
13. Ch. xxvii., however, possesses beauties of
its own, and the fourth song of thanksgiving
(contained in ce. 2-5) is not a little striking.
The rest of the chapter is devoted to setting
forth practical lessons, and is finally brought to
an end by another picture, not so apocalyptic in
its colouring, of the day of deliverance.
The next group of prophecies comprises chs.
xxvlii.-xxxv. Delitzsch terms xxviii.-xxxiii.
" the book of woes," owing to the five woes with
which each of these five chapters severally
begins; these prophecies were delivered at
various times, but were placed together owing
to the similarity in their contents. The internal
evidence of xxviii. 1-6 proves, as Driver re-
marks, the chapter to " have been written prior
to the fall of Samaria in 722, and therefore
during the reign of Shalmaneser IV." Jerusa-
lem is warned of Samaria's sin and of her
approaching ruin. The words of mockery and
scorn with which the prophet's messages were
received by the people of Jerusalem are re-
-echoed, and turned back upon those mockers
"with a new and terrible significance." The
exact significance of the monosyllabic words
used in v. 10, and repeated in r. 13, is a matter
of some uncertainty. Their general meaning
is clear. The Jews were warned that, if they
despised the repetition of Jehovah's message as
monotonous, they would as captives in a strange
land and in a strange tongue be compelled to
hearken to the harsh monotones of commands
from the lips of foreign taskmakers. Judah
relied on the help of Egypt in her struggle
against Assyria. That hope, the Prophet pointed
out, was a delusion. She had, however, if she
only knew it, surer ground of confidence. Je-
hovah had laid in Zion " for a foundation a
stone, a tried stone, a precious corner-stone of
sure foundation." This was not Zion itself, or
her Temple, but the Davidic house, from whence
Messiah was to arise. The N. T. interpretation
gives the true explanation of v. 16 (Rom. ix.
33; 1 Pet. ii. 6). The nation of Israel was
eternal, the Davidic throne indestructible, if the
nation only relied on her God. If not, she
would be compelled to learn in days of sorrow
the lessons which might have been learned in
days of prosperity. Prophetic lessons of wisdom
for the present and of consolation for the future
are presented by the common operations of
husbandry, for what seems the severest treat-
ment of the grain tends to provide bread for the
use of man. Similarly " the holy seed," purified
by affliction and taught in adversity, will one
day be perfected, and become a blessing to the
nations (er. 23-29). The Apostle Paul's ex-
clamation (Rom. xi. 33-36) is a fitting parallel
to, and commentary upon, r. 29.
Ch. xxix., though referring also to the As-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
ISAIAH
Syrian invasion, was written at a later period,
and predicts the desolation which Sennacherib's
invasion wonld bring on the land. Ariel, which
more probably signifies "hearth of Quid" (cp.
xxxi. 9) than " lion of Ood," is used to designate
Jerusalem, which, thongh highly favoured, wonld
be brought down by sin, and afterwards redeemed
by God's mercy. The Prophet denounces the
secret plottings with Egypt (v. 15), which were
bringing the country to the verge of ruin ;
though he predicts a marvellous deliverance
within the course of a year (xxxix. 1), which
would be accompanied with blessed results. In
ch. xxx. the embassy sent to Egypt is derided by
the Prophet, who points out the disobedient cha-
racter of the people who desired to have " smooth
things" spoken to them. The consequence of
their folly would be, that they would be com-
pelled to experience God's heavy chastisements
before the day of repentance and of mercy. At
the close of the chapter, Isaiah's finest imagery
is employed to sketch the path along which the
nations were to be lured to destruction, when
Jahveh would go forth for the redemption of
His people. He is described as an indignant hero
striding forth to the battle-field, a mightier
than Samson, whose arms would bring salvation.
Amid the storm stroke upon stroke descends
upon the mighty foe. And as those mighty
blows break the enemy in pieces, tabrets and
harps resound with melody from the walls of
Jerusalem, where the afflicted people recognise
that their Lord has gone forth to the battle.
The funeral pile is depicted as already con-
structed for the reception of the carcases of the
fallen foes, for the king and his glorious host.
In the valley of Tophet beneath the holy city,
the pile is lighted to consume the relics of the
enemy. The prophecy is highly figurative and
not literal, though in very essence fulfilled : " The
Assyrian soldiers, cut down in their ranks like
sheaves of corn, were gathered in that spot into
the threshing-floor (Micah iv. 12), and laid in
their last earthly beds along the sides of that
deep valley. Sennacherib's death at Nineveh
was the direct result of his discomfiture before
Jerusalem " (Wright's Biblical Essays, p. 126).
The same thoughts under different imagery
form the subject of ch. xxxi., while ch. xxxii.
depicts the salutary result of this judgment and
deliverance upon both king and people. The
opening verses of ch. xxxii. were by the older
commentators generally regarded as Messianic,
but they are not Messianic in their primary sig-
nification, although some of the features charac-
teristic of Messianic times (ch. xi.) reappear
here. All temporal deliverances, however,
more or less distinctly foreshadow that final
salvation. Some critics, like Stade, regard the
chapter as post-exilian, but there is no real
necessity for snch a supposition. Although we
have do historical narrative to guide us, we may
fairly assume that Hezekiah was, after that
" crowning mercy," enabled to rule with a
firmer hand, and suppressed many of the oppres-
sions whereby the nobles of Jerusalem unjustly
and ignobly oppressed their poorer brethren.
True nobility for a season at least was seen to
consist in executing righteousness. The rebukes
administered to the careless women of Jerusalem
at the close of the chapter (vv. 9-20), and the
manner in which Isaiah insists on the necessity
ISAIAH
1463
of an outpouring of the Spirit from on high on
all the people, all show plainly that, although
he could vividly paint the ideal, the Prophet
was not forgetful of the low spiritual character
of the people in general.
Ch. xxxiii. presents another grand pictnre of
the same period. The fresh details here depicted
upon the prophetic canvas are interesting. The
scorn with which Hezekiah's messengers of peace
were received by the Assyrian king, and the
lamentation of the people when all attempts at
negotiations with the cruel toe proved to be in
vain, are vividly set forth. In v. 14 the dejec-
tion caused by the sight of the perpetual burn-
ings of cities and villages is well pourtrayed.
Never was a grander illustration afforded of
the truth that man's day of adversity is God's
day of opportunity (cp. xxx. 18, xxxiii. 10,
11). The closing verses of the chapter, with
the description of Jahveh as the judge, the
general, the king, and deliverer of His people,
are peculiarly fine.
The next two chapters (xxxiv. and xxxv.)
differ considerably from the preceding, and are
in many respects of an apocalyptic character.
They are, therefore, assigned by critics who
follow Wellhausen's dictum to the post-exilian
age. There are no doubt "striking parallels
between chs. xxxiv., xxxv. and Zephaniah, and
between ch. xxxiv. and parts of Jeremiah (xlvi.
3-12, xxv., 1. and li.), which are of great critical
importance" (Cheyne). But as Caspari has
pointed out, and others before and after him.
not a few eschatological points are to be found
in the previous chapters of Isaiah. Cp. the
healing of the deaf and blind (xxix. 18 ; xxxii.
3, 4), the transformation of the wilderness
(xxxii. 15), the springing up of water (xxx.
25). Cp. also the marvellous pictures in chs.
xxiv.-xxvii., and especially the contrasted pic-
tnre in ch. xxvi. The favourite style of criti-
cism is a kind of reasoning in a circle. It is
assumed, first of all, as an axiom, that the
second portion of Isaiah is post-exilian; and
next that every part of the first portion of
the Book which presents any similarities to the
second is also non-Isaianic. The argument fre-
quently proceeds upon a number of unproved
assertions, while those who ask for proofs are
accused of the lack of "sound judgment," and
informed that the question has been finally
decided.
Many wrongs committed by the Edomites
against Judah were fresh in the memory of the
men of Isaiah's time. This makes it easy to
understand why Edom is used in ch. xxxiv. to
designate the foes of Jahveh's people, and why
the different fates of the two kindred peoples
are so often contrasted. The story of Gen. xix.
and the Song of Moses in Deut. xxxii. (cp.
especially vv. 41-43) were distinctly in the
Prophet's mind. The ideal character of chs.
xxxiv. and xxxv. must be insisted on. It is
impossible to regard such statements as designed
to be understood literally.
Chs. xxxvi.-xxxix. are an historical supplement
to the first part of the Book of Isaiah. This
appendix presents not a few difficulties. Its
outlines may have been drawn up by the Pro-
phet ; but if so, it has certainly been added to by
later writers. The murder of Sennacherib,
recorded in ch. xxxvii., took place in B.C. 682-1,
Digitized by
Google
1464
ISAIAH
ISAIAH
after the death of Isaiah. The narrative is in
the main identical even in verbiage with that
in the Kings. There are, however, notable
differences. The three verses 2 K. xviii. 14-16
do not occnr in Isaiah, and are different in style,
the name of Hezekiah himself being there
spelled in a peculiar manner. The psalm of
Hezekiah (Is. xxxviii. 9-20) is peculiar to Isaiah,
while the account of Hezekiah's sickness is
shorter than that in the Kings. The prophecy
(xxxix. 22-35) is certainly baianic. The nar-
rative in the Kings appears to be the original,
that in Isaiah the copy. The latter, however
admirably suited it may be to the place it
occupies, dates in its present shape from post-
exilian days.
The account of Sennacherib's campaign pre-
sented in the Assyrian inscriptions differs in
some respects from the Biblical. Driver regards
both accounts as imperfect, though in substantial
agreement. The Assyrian inscriptions deal with
the entire campaign; the Biblical account is
mainly concerned with the expedition against
.ludah. It is not improbable that the Assyrian
account has, as Schrader supposes, transposed
the order of events so as to gloss over the disaster
before Jerusalem.
The chief difficulty is in reference to the time
when the invasion occurred. The Bible places it
in the fourteenth year of Hezekiah ; that monarch
reigned only twenty-nine years. His life was,
according to ch. xxxviii., prolonged for fifteen
years after the overthrow of Sennacherib. But
the Assyrian account places the invasion in the
spring of 701 ; that is, in the very last year of
Hezekiah. Consequently Hezekiah must have
reigned considerably longer, and Manasseh's
reign (stated at fifty-five years) must be reduced,
or the events recorded in chs. xxxviii., xxxix. as
having occurred after Sennacherib's defeat must
have preceded that event. There is much to be
said in favour of the former hypothesis, though
the latter is adopted by Delitzsch, v. Orelli, and
others. Cheyne, too, considers Merodach-bala-
dan's embassy from Babylon to have preceded
the invasion of Sennacherib. Following up the
hints originally given by Hincks, Cheyne sup-
poses the events of 2 K. xviii. 14-16 to refer to
an invasion in the reign of Sargon. There are as
yet scarcely sufficient data on which to base auy
definite conclusion on these points. The embassy
of Merodaoh-baladan, so far as the history of
that remarkable antagonist of Assyria is known
to us, may just as well have followed as preceded
the defeat of Sennacherib.
The second part of the Book of Isaiah, con-
taining chs. xl.-lxvi., is generally regarded by
modern critics as the work of another writer.
This is the view now almost universally adopted.
Scholars of unimpeachable orthodoxy, who firmly
believe in the Divine inspiration of the Book (as
Delitzsch, Oehler, v. Orelli, and Bredenkamp),
and some who long defended the genuineness of
this portion, have at last yielded to the preva-
lent opinion. The arguments in support of the
theory are in themselves cumulative, and derived
from three distinct lines of evidence: namely,
(1) the subject-matter of the prophecy, (2) its
literary style, and (3) the theological ideas which
characterise it.
1. The theme of the chapters is the restora-
tion of Israel from Babylon. In these chapters
no reference is made to the existence of the
Assyrian empire, which was so powerful in the
days of Isaiah. The Babylonian empire is spoken
of as bearing rale over Israel. The Assyrian
empire is, however, in one place referred to u
having oppressed Israel in days gone by (lii.
4). The " old waste places " of Jerusalem are
repeatedly mentioned (lviii. 12), along with
" the waste cities and the desolations of former
generations " (lxi. 4). In a prayer addressed
to Jahveh, the lamentation is put into the lips
of the nation: "The holy and beautiful house
where our fathers praised Thee is burned with
fire, and all oar pleasant things are laid waste "
(lxiv. 10). Israel is throughout depicted as
actually in captivity, while there is no prophecy
of the Exile as an event still future. The op-
pression of the Chaldaeana is so keenly felt
that Zion exclaims, "The Lord hath forgotten
me" (xlix. 14). The very days of exile are
described as almost over; the destined deli-
verer, Cyrus, is at hand, whom the Almighty
had been leading on in a wondrous career
of victory (xli. 1-7), in order that he
might burst open Babylon's gates of brae
(xlv. 1-4), overturn her idola (ch. xlvi.),
and dash to the ground the " virgin daugh-
ter of Babylon." All those events, too, ate
stated to have been pre-arranged with the object
of Jacob's deliverance (xlv. 4), and of the
restoration of Israel "not for price, nor for
reward." The coming deliverer was even to
build the walls of Jerusalem, and to lay the
foundations of the temple. Cyrus and Babylon,
however, entirely disappear from view after
ch. xlix. Grander and loftier visions then float
before the Prophet's eye, who winds up bis pre-
dictions with a picture of the future Zion,
thoughts of which again and again have crossed
his mind at various portions of the earlier
chapters.
To ascribe a prophecy possessing such pecn-
liarities to Isaiah, who lived in the Assyrian
period, is, it is argned, contrary to all analogy.
Prophets do, indeed, occasionally throw them-
selves forwards to an ideal standpoint, and from
it depict the future. Such transferences are, how-
ever, only transient. « No such sustained trans-
ference to the future " can be pointed out * as
would be implied if these chapters were by
Isaiah, or for the detailed and definite description
of the circumstances of a distant age " (Driver).
If other Prophets predict the Restoration, they
predict also the Exile, as in the cases of Jeremiah
and Ezekiel. But in the second part of Isaiah
the Captivity is spoken of as something present
nnder which Israel was then suffering.
On the other hand, it may be fairly asked, If
the second portion be supposed to have been
written by the writer of the first portion of the
Book, what need was there for that Prophet to
repeat again and again his predictions of a
coming exile ? If, as is abundantly proved from
passages in the first portion, the Prophet was
able to transfer himself for a " transient " period
to the standpoint of the future, what improba-
bility is implied in the supposition that, after
long pondering over the subject, he should have
composed prophecies written entirely from that
standpoint ? It must be borne in mind, whatever
theory of anthorship be adopted, the second
portion of Isaiah is a work jut" generis. It is not
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
a work which would have been expected from
a writer at Babylon prior to the Restoration, and
still less one who lived after that event. To
this point we shall presently allude.
There are many passages in the first portion
of the Book which predict a coming exile and a
future restoration. Such thoughts underlie
portions of the introductory chapters (cp. iii.
25, 26). The Captivity is distinctly spoken of
at the end of the song of the vineyard (v.
5 sq.) and in the verses which follow after
(v. 13-17). It is referred to in Isaiah's open-
ing vision (vi. 11, 12). Captivity and restora-
tion are mentioned in ii. 11 sq. We do not
refer to the sayings in xxx. 12 or xxxii. 14,
because they have probably a different force.
If ch. xiii. be Isaianic, the judgment on Baby-
lon is there distinctly predicted; and Israel's
Captivitv in Babylon must have been prophesied
by Isaiah, if xxxix. 6, 7 be regarded as his-
torically true.
There are, moreover, portions in the second
part of the Book which have distinctly a pre-
exilian stamp. Ewald and Bleek regard ch. Ivi.
and a portion of ch. lvii. as predictions of an age
prior to the Exile. Ch. lix. and most of ch. lxv.
nave also been assigned by other critics to the
same period. The phenomena of the second
part of the Book (if that portion be regarded
as a whole) are not so very distinct from those
of the other Prophets. The writer does occasion-
ally refer to the circumstances of his age, and
permits as now and then to see that, though
generally writing from the standpoint of the
Exile, he was himself living before the event had
actually taken place, which he yet foresaw to
be certain.
The fact must also be borne in mind, to
which Bredenkamp and others have called
attention, that the anthor of the second part,
amid all his denunciations against idolatry,
does not show that acquaintance with the land
or religion of Babylon which an exile in Baby-
lon would naturally have displayed, and which
is actually shown by Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and
other Prophets.
If moreover we compare these chapters of
Isaiah with the prophecies of Micah, the con-
temporary of Isaiah, the substance of their
prophecies appears to be the same. Micah gives
the same vivid picture of the future glory (iv.
1-6), found in the early part of Isaiah. He
then transfers himself to the days of gloom and
captivity, speaks of a coming; restoration (iv.
6-7), predicts the recovery by Zion of her former
dominion forfeited because of sin (iv. 8), depicts
Zion in sorrow and travail (iv. 9), which bitter
" pains " were to be the birth-throes of a glorious
future (iv. 10) — a picture somewhat similar to
that in Isaiah lxvi. 5-9. The nation, however,
must go to Babylon, and in that place its re-
demption would take place (iv. 10). The
designs of Israel's foes are sketched out (Micah
iv. 11), which they in their blindness fancy they
can carry out (Micah iv. 12 ; cp. Is. Ii. 17-23).
Then follows a prediction of the sudden and
unexpected victory of Zion (cp. Is. Ivi. 5, 6 with
Micah iv. 12. 13 and v. 18). Zion would be
victorious, though brought into great ex-
tremities — the Deliverer would come at last
(Micah iv. 13 — v. 5). Later on in the prophecy,
the ruin of Israel, then actually impending, is
ISAIAH
1465
spoken of (Micah v. 10-15). And it is worthy
of note that if Isaiah does not forget to allude
to the oppression of the Assyrian (in lii, 4),
the thoughts of Isaiah's contemporary also recur
to that Assyrian foe, as an enemy which would
only be completely vanquished by the Messiah
(Micah v. 5, 6).
The fact is that in both the first and second
portions of Isaiah, and in Micah, the same
apocalyptic " dreams " are to be found. Visions
of mercy and] judgment strangely commingle,—
visions which come and go, and again reappear,
but by no means always in chronological order.
This argument is, of course, based on the text
of the Prophet Micah as handed down to us ;
not on that Prophet's writings as revised by
critics. We are aware that critics would erase
from the page of Micah the clause that speaks
of the Babylonish Captivity, on the ground
of its want of harmony with the immediate
context. We cannot coincide with that opinion.
We look with suspicion on the plan of revising
old texts with the view of bringing them into
harmony with modern critical conjectures, and
thus unduly tampering with documentary evi-
dence. There is too great a tendency to treat
the Books of the Prophets as heaps of broken
fragments, thrown to a great extent promis-
cuously together, out of which the critic has to
select according to fancy those " remains " which
appear to him to be genuine. Such is the
position taken up by no less a critic than
Giesebrecht in his BeitrSge zur Jetaiahitik (cp.
p. 86). One may confidently predict that
criticism will return at no distant time to safer
and surer principles.
2. Another independent line of argument
which, it is affirmed, leads also to a conclusion
fatal to the Isaianic authorship of this portion,
is drawn from its literary style. It ought,
however, to be clearly understood that the
critics of to-day do not affirm that the Hebrew
of the second portion of Isaiah belongs necessarily
to a later period. From a purely linguistic point
of view, it may now safely be affirmed that the
Hebrew of both portions as we have it belongs
substantially to one and the same era. The
difference in literary style between the first
and the second portions is, however, undeni-
able, and that difference can be well under-
stood by students of the Bible who may be
acquainted only with English. Isaiah's style
exhibits certain marked peculiarities. He makes
use of allusions and illustrations found in no
other 0. T. writer. It can be shown tbat a
number of these occur in the first part of the
book, and are conspicuously absent from the
second, in which portion " new images and
phrases are found instead." A list of these
phenomena will be found in Driver's Introduc-
tion. Some of them may be fairly accounted for
by the change of both subject and standpoint ;
but the force of the argument of course lies in
its cumulative character.
We admit the fact of the existence of such
phenomena, but question the conclusions drawn
therefrom. In the earlier portion of his life,
Isaiah had to denounce prevalent sins, especially
that of idolatry, and to predict coming judg-
ment. The Prophet was then one of the fore-
most counsellors of the state. He spoke of
" the judge standing at the door," of the execu-
Digitized by
Google
1466
ISAIAH
ISAIAH
tors of God's wrath as having already begun
their fatal work. Denunciation was the staple
theme then of his discourses. Terse, sharp, and
compact sentences were well fitted to such a
mission. Force and power had to be called into
play. But, on the hypothesis of the Isaianic
composition of the second part, the circum-
stances were completely altered when the Pro-
phet in his old age penned those predictions.
He was no longer a leader of the people. Though
in or about Jerusalem, he had retired from
public life, to some spiritual " Patmos," where
he brooded over the future, and on the mount
of vision dreamed apocalyptic dreams and jotted
down those musings. Transported in thought
to the distant future, he sat down " in spirit "
among the exiles of Israel, and, the storm
having already spent its violence, consoles them
with bright hopes of the future. It was quite
natural for the Prophet then to speak of
Jahveh's majesty in opposition to the vain gods
of the heathen. Like Paul in the shipwreck,
he reminds the people of the future of Jahveh's
faithfulness to His ancient covenant, which was
not forgotten notwithstanding that He had " hid
for a moment His face " from His people. The
theme of the Prophet at that time was of the
days of restoration which he had previously
predicted, but which were now to be set forth as
close at hand. In such descriptions a " warm
and impassioned rhetoric," a "flowing style,"
" pathos " in all its depth and winsomeness, were
what was essentially required.
3. It is further argued, that " the theological
ideas " presented in the second part of the
Book, " in so far as they are not of that funda-
mental kind common to the Prophets generally,"
when compared with those of the former por-
tion are " much larger and fuller ; " and further,
that those truths are not merely "affirmed,"
but are "made the subject of reflexion and
argument " (Driver). But such phenomena are
not opposed to the traditional hypothesis. If a
nation, which it was foreseen would be driven
into captivity because of aggravated offences,
was at last to be raised from the position of
slaves to that of free men, would it not be
necessary to dilate somewhat ' fully on the
absolute vanity of the gods of their conquerors,
and on the might, majesty, and infinity of the
Most High ? It was not the Divine plan when
rescuing His people from captivity "a second
time" to do so by a display of miraculous
power. The comparatively brief period during
which the nation was in captivity in Baby-
lon, compared with the centuries of Egyptian
bondage, and the comparative liberty enjoyed
under that second period of serfdom, may have
rendered external miracles unnecessary in the
day of " glorious Return." But if the Most
High was to work by stirring "the hearts of
His faithful people," it was necessary that some
Prophet, in anticipation of that day of liberty,
should draw out from the admitted principles of
revelation the lessons likely to awaken, elevate,
comfort, and console the exiles of Israel at the
great foreseen crisis. It mattered not for that
special purpose whether the work were performed
by an Isaiah of Jerusalem or an Isaiah of Baby-
lon. But we object to inventing a new prophet,
of whose existence history and tradition are
alike silent, and to dub the new creature of
critical invention by the name of "the great
Unknown," or even by that of "Isaiah of
Babylon.!'
If Isaiah could project himself, as it were,
into the future, and under Divine inspiration
lay up store for the coming days of spiritual
dearth, there is little difficulty to be found in
the fact that the picture of the Messianic King,
so often presented before, should be let to drop
out of sight ; and that he should be led on to
paint for those in servitude that masterpiece of
" the suffering Servant," wounded for offences
not His own, Who was to " moke intercession for
the transgressors." The second part of Isaiah
moves unquestionably " in a different region of
thought ; " but this phenomenon, often dwelt
upon as if it were a discovery of modern times,
has at all times been more or less observed, and
is quite consistent with the hypothesis that
Isaiah was the author also of the second part.
Certain characteristics common to both por-
tions have induced critics who have abandoned
the idea of Isaiah's authorship to maintain that
the writer of the second portion was one of the
later scholars of Isaiah. The following list,
which might considerably be added to, is given
by Bredenkamp : — " The commencement of
en. xl. sounds almost like a continuation of the
close of the first part (xxxv. 3 sq.). The
close of both portions presents a judgment upon
Edom (cp. ch. xxxiv. with ch. lxiii.). Two
sentences, almost word for word, are found
in both parts: cp. Ixv. 25 with xl 9,
and lv. 11 with xxxv. 1(X Many thoughts
peculiar to Isaiah found in the first portion
recur in the second^ and expressions such as the
Holy One of Israel 6«"^ BHpX King Q^O),
used of God ; the figure anadiplosis (cp. rii.
9, xviii. 2, 7, xxi. 11, xxviii. 10, 13, Tax. 1,
xl. 1, xli. 24, xliii. 11, 25, xlviii. ll r &c) are
met with in both parts." The second portion
does not present the appearance of being one
continuous prophecy, although the prophecies
which it contains run mainly on one grand
theme. Those prophecies are most certainly not
mticinia post event am. For no one who had
witnessed the scenes of the Return, as narrated
in the pages of Ezra and Nehemiah, could have
indulged in the gorgeous ideal pictures of the
second part of Isaiah. And although we admit
that glosses pointing out fulfilments are occa-
sionally to be found in the text, and on such a
principle would explain the mention of Cyrus
by name, we cannot regard the second portion
as non-Isaianic.
The difficulties which beset the theory that
the name of a prophet of the very foremost
rank (like the author of these chapters) could
have entirely vanished from the memory of the
people who were awakened and aroused to
action by his songs ore much more serious than
those which attend on the traditional view.
The second part of Isaiah falls into three
divisions : — (1) chs. xl.-xlviii. treat of the
Return, the mission of "the Servant of Jah-
veh " in general, the mission of Cyras in
particular, Babylon's downfall, and the folly
of idolatry. (2) chs. xlii.-lv., the Servant and
His mission in more detail, with Israel's weak-
ness and sin. To this are added several chapters
(lvi.-lix.) loosely connected together. (3) chs.
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
lx.-lxvi. describe the Hon of the future, its
light and glory — the inner and the outer re-
storation and purification.
(1) The mission of comfort— ch. xl. Con-
trast the ideas with those in Lam. L 2, 9, 16,
17, 21, &c. Jahveh returns to His people ;
hence days of mourning are at an end. A way
is made for Him in the wilderness. Valleys are
exalted, mountains levelled, crooked paths made
straight. The glory of the Lord is revealed,
and all flesh together behold it. A voice cries :
Israel's foes are mortal, while Jahveh's word
stands fast. His promises are irrevocable. His
messengers on the maintains proclaim to Jeru-
salem and her sister cities, " Behold thy God."
The arm of the Mighty has wrought salvation.
Israel is brought back as the reward of victory.
Jahveh leads them along gently, as a shepherd
does sheep, not to be overdriven (Gen. xxxiii.
13). He is wise and strong, though the idols to
which men liken Him are very vanity. He
gives strength to the faint, and to those that
wait on Him.
Ch. xli. 1-7 depicts a judgment scene. Jah-
veh commands silence. The nations are sum-
moned ,to reply. Who stirred up Cyrus, the
conqueror from the East ? Who prepared him
for his work and led him on to victory? The
answer is: "I Jahveh, the first and the last,
I am He." The terrified nations made "new
gods" (cp. Judg. v. 8), but Cyrus' course of
conquest and victory was arrested by no such
devices.
While the nations are alarmed, Israel is com-
forted. Israel, Jahveh's servant (v. 8), is not
forgotten. His Redeemer remembers the "worm
Jacob;"and, while nations are trodden like straw
(up. xiv. 10), Zion is " a sharp threshing instru-
ment, which shall thresh the mountains and
beat them small " (e. 15 ; cp. Micah iv. U-13).
Israel is apparently victorious on a battle-field,
but the scene is rapidly transformed : caravans
of exiles, poor and needy, traverse a wilderness,
seeking water but finding none, when suddenly
springs burst forth, and along their path plants
and trees appear with grateful shade. Israel
once more recognises that it is Jahveh Who is
leading them through the wilderness.
But the judgment scene reappears (xli.
21 sq.). The nations and their gods arc sum-
moned: "Jahveh judgeth among the gods"
(Ps. lxxxii. 2 ; cp. Ps. xcv. 3, xcvi. 4, 5, xcvii.
6-9). But those " things of nothing " cannot
speak. Their work is nought, they cannot show
that they are gods (v. 23). Jahveh as Judge
answers (re. 23-29): "I have raised up one
from the north, and he is come." Cyrus is
represented (v. 25) as already present. His
victories were foreknown and predicted by
Jahveh, Who is the first that gives to Zion (so
Dillmann) a "behold, behold them (i'.c. thy
children, xlix. 18; lx. 4), and to Jerusalem
one that brings good tidings " (see xl. 9).
Of all the gods of the nations not one can utter
a word. ,
" The Servant of Jahveh " (spoken of in xli.
8, 9) now appears on the scene (xlii. 1 sq.).
The same appellation is applied to Israel
(xli. 8, 9; xlii. 19; xliv.1,2,21; xlv.4; xlviii.
20), but the Personal Servant is a distinct cha-
racter. Israel and "the Servant" are the two
witnesses (xliii. 10) adduced to give evidence.
ISAIAH
1467
Verses 1-7 reveal "the Servant" as distinct
from the nation. His mission concerned Israel
and the nations. Israel was, indeed, chosen as
Jahveh's servant, to be a blessing to all the
nations. But Israel failed to perform that
mission, fainted, and was weary (xl. 27 sq.). The
personal " Servant " wonld not tail nor be dis-
couraged until His work was done (xlii. 4).
Israel longed to destroy her adversaries (Num.
xxiv. 8); this Servant would bless them alto-
gether (xlii. 1-3, 6, 7), for He teaches the
Gentiles religion and restores Israel (cp. xlix.
6). Such are the point! referred to, and " the
far-reaching prevision of the prophet deserves
notice " (Driver). The Servant is called, upheld
and kept by Jahveh "to be a covenant of the
people" (v. 6> Jahveh will not give His
glory to another, nor His praise unto graven
images (v. 8).
"The former things " (xlii. 9) are the Divine
prophecies fulfilled in former days, and not pre-
dictions concerning Cyrus' early victories. God's
prophecies were fulfilled in the past, and the
fresh predictions now uttered would be accom-
plished in their season (Bredenkamp). Cp.
xliii. 12, 13, 18, 19.
The "new song" in xlii. 10-12 reminds
one of xxiv. 14-16. Verses 13-17 depict
Jahveh going forth as "the mighty man"
013J3) to execute vengeance. Before Him
mountains are laid waste, all herbage withers,
rivers become islands, pools are dried up, that
He may bring the blind by a way they know
not, and lead back His people. The expression
" I will not forsake thee " (v. 16) is a quotation
from Josh. i. 6. A comparison is mentally
drawn between the deliverance out of Egypt
and that from Babylon (cp. xi. 11 sq.). The
pictures presented in re. 22-25 recall incidents
of the days of the Jndges.
The description of the blindness and perverse-
ness of Israel in the character of Jahveh's
servant harmonises with its context. The
"deaf" and "blind" servant of m. 19, 20 is
not Messiah, but the nation which had promised
obedience at Sinai, and is consequently described
as " he who is at peace with Me " (R. V. Cp.
xxvii. 5). The part, pual, DTE'D (v. 19,
found there only), is explained by Ewald,
Cheyne, &c, as synonymous with Moslem, sur-
rendered (to God's service). But the verb, as
Dillmann notes, occurs in that meaning only in
Arab, and Aram. ; and in those languages only
in hiphil. Hence the translation of the B. V.
(" he that is at peace with Me") is better, and
is that of Gesenius, Delitzsch, and Dillmann.
The Personal Servant of Jahveh opens blind
eyes, but the nation is blind ; the nation is hid
in prison houses (». 22), but the Servant leads
prisoners out of captivity. He is the Deliverer,
Israel the delivered. The " practical incompe-
tence" of Israel to perform such duties necessi-
tated His mission.
But however blind and weak Israel is, although
punished (rt>. 24, 25) for her offences, Divine
mercy begins with her. Ch. xliii. describes
Jahveh leading forth His people. According to
the Divine plan, the Persian must set them free,
even though Egypt, Ethiopia, and Seba (Meroe
in Ethiopia) be granted as Cyrus' reward (cp.
Ezek. xxix. 20). The blind must see, the deaf
Digitized by
Google
1468
ISAIAH
hear (v. 8). Another judgment session is pic-
tured (to. 8-13). Nations and peoples assemble.
They are called on to produce their witnesses of
similar fulfilments, "that they may be justi-
fied" by the witnesses listening to the state-
ments and affirming their truth. No witnesses
can be adduced. Jahveh's two witnesses, Israel
and His Servant, are again produced, that by
comparison of prophecy and accomplishment
men may acknowledge that Jahveh is "the
same " (Kin 'IN, " I am He "), present " yester-
day" in prophecy, "to-day" (QVD, xliii. 13)
in redemption, "for ever" working for His
people. Heb. xiii. 8 seems an imitation of this
passage.
The march from Babylon to Jerusalem is
again (xl. 14-21) described in words which re-
call Israel's ancient history. The transforma-
tion scenes, before depicted in ch. xxxv., xli.
17-20, reappear. The closing verses (22-28)
are not a polemic against the sacrificial ritual,
but prove that the neglect of God's outward
worship shows that the redemption granted is
an act of grace. The absence of all reference
to the fact that sacrifices could not be offered to
Jahveh in Babylon is in favour of the Isaianic
authorship.
Ch. xliv. shows that notwithstanding Israel's
sin the Unchangeable did not forget His chosen.
Blessings were in store for them. Water would
be poured upon the thirsty, streams upon the
dry ground, language which is explained of a
pouring out of the Spirit of God. Hence Israel's
young men (cp. Ps. ex. 3) range themselves on
the side of Jahveh (v. 5). Israel need not fear.
Her King and Redeemer promises prosperity, and
Israel is witness that there is no god beside Him
(to. 6-8). Idols are nothing ; they cannot aid
their votaries. The folly of idolatry is again
dwelt on, more fully than in xl. 18 sq., or in
xli. 5-7. God's forgiving grace is set forth
in magnificent language in m. 21-23, and the
chapter closes with the Divine commission given
to Cyrus as Jahveh's Shepherd to lead home His
flock. Cyrus is here first mentioned by name
(rp. 24-28).
While we admit the possibility of the revela-
tion to the Prophet of the name of Cyrus, an
examination of the passages in which it occurs
favours the view that not only the name Cyrus
but some of the details in those prophecies are
later insertions belonging to a time when text
and comments were interwoven together. The
"calling by name" spoken of in xlv. 3, 4,
means more than a prediction of the name of
the conqueror, as the use of that expression in
reference both to Israel and the Personal Servant
might suffice to prove (cp. xliii. 1 ; xlix. 1).
The commission to Cyrus is given in xlv.
1-8. To the title of honour, " my shepherd," is
there added \TW?Q (xlv. 1), "his anointed."
This is the only place in Isaiah where Messiah
occurs, and the only passage where a heathen
king is called by that term. Cyrus was prob-
ably a mouotheist, although for political reasons
represented in his cylinder as a worshipper of
Bel, Nebo, and Merodach, the gods of Babylon.
In the light of recent discovery it is questionable
whether the older interpreters were correct in
expounding xliv. 27 of the literal drying up
of the Euphrates (cp. the figurative use of that
ISAIAH
expression in Zech. x. 11% or whether xlrL
1, 2 can be regarded as predicting literally toe
carrying of the gods of Babylon into captirity.
The expression " though thou hast not known
Me," repeated twice for emphasis (xlv. 4, 5),
ought to have warned commentators against
supposing that Cyrus was a worshipper of
Jahveh. His employment of the sacred Name ii
the proclamation (set forth Ezra i. 2 sq.), if so
exact copy of Cyrus' edict be there given, wis
but another case of political expediency. The
expressions used in r. 7, interpreted in the light
of Lam. iii. 38 and Amos iii. 6, contain no
reference to the Persian theological dualism.
Verse 8 is a short hymn of great beauty.
Fu. 9-17 condemn those who murmur against
the Divine method of Israel's redemption by the
instrumentality of a heathen monarch (see Dill-
mann's Commentary). It is absurd for a potsherd
to dictate to the potter how to perform his work.
The simile is common to both parts of Isaiah
(xxix. 16, lxiv. 7), and occurs in Jer. xviii. 6, xii.
1 sq., Rom. ix. 20 sq. Jahveh chose His ewn
instrument, and through Cyrus He accomplished
Israel's deliverance.
Cyrus did not, however, himself rebuild Jeru-
salem or the Temple. Bald literal exposition
would ruin all Hebrew prophecy. The state-
ments respecting the Sabeans (v. 14) also cannot
be understood literally. The Sabeans, as repre-
sentatives of the Gentiles, are described u
voluntarily becoming Israel's slaves by adopting
her religion, and thus recognising that there i)
no other God and that Israel is His people. So
correctly Hitzig, Delitzsch, Cheyne, and Dillmun.
The references to the history of creation i»
Genesis in xlv. 18-20 are noteworthy. If
creation began with chaos (inh, f. 18) earth was
not left in that condition or in darkness (t^TI,
Gen. i. 2). Jahveh's creative word said not to
"the seed of Jacob . . . seek Me in a watte
(inn)." Creation and redemption reveal a God
Who speaks and it is done, Who commands and it
stands fast. Israel's redemption is eternal, " an
everlasting salvation " (v. 17), and consequently,
as Cheyne observes, is "spiritual as well »
temporal." Hence the salvation that comes
from the Jews, and is designed for " all the ends
of the earth " (v. 22), is applied by St, Psnl
(Rom. xiv. 9-12) to the eternal kingdom of the
Lord's Christ. The Pauline comparison of
creation and redemption (2 Cor. iv. 5, 6) is
perhaps borrowed from Isaiah..
Tdolatry has, indeed, reduced earth to chaos
and darkness, for there can be no deliverance se
long as men " pray to a god that cannot save
(xlv. 20), to idols which can be carried on the
backs of beasts of burden (xlvi. 1), and f>
themselves into captivity (see before on ilvi.
1). Idolaters carry their idols, but Jahveh
carries His people (ra. 3 sq.). He can carry, aye
He can deliver them. Cp. Num. xi. 12 ; Dent-
i. 31, xxxii. 11 ; Hos. xi. 3.
The folly of idolaters is depicted again in
r». 6, 7. These remarks are closely connected
with the subject treated of. Idolatry is con-
demned not so dissimilarly in i. 29-31; ■>■
18-21 ; xvii. 7-11 ; xxi. 9; xxx. 22; ixii.6,7-
The play upon words in xlvi. 1, the express'' 11
" house of Jacob and all the remnant of the
house of Israel," the irony that pervades the
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
whole passage — all these are indicative of Isaiah's
pen. To him the land of the Persian conqueror
was "a far country" (v. 11, cp. xiii. 5). A
post-exilian prophet would hardly thus hare ex-
pressed himself. The use of "IV^ to indicate the
Divine purpose, and its combination with the
other verbs in that verse, are Isaianic touches
(cp., with Delitzsch, xxu. 11 ; xxxvii. 26). It
would have been strange if the text had not
been interlarded with post-exilian comments —
comments so frequently repeated for the con-
solation of the exiles that they were regarded
at last as part of the original. Cyrus is forcibly
described as a ravenous bird or vulture from
the east descending upon the Babylonian carcase,
though it may be fanciful to see any reference
here to the standard of Cyrus, the golden spread
eagle on the lofty spear (Xenoph. Cyropaed. vii.
cap. i. 4).
The song (ch. xlvii.) on the downfall of Baby-
lon is particularly fine. The proud daughter of
the Chaldeans is commanded by Jahveh to
descend from her throne, and take the place of
the meanest slave. Stripped of her veil and
train, she is compelled to grind the meal, to bare
her legs, to wade through waters, and to endure
dishonour. Verse 4 is no doubt a later insertion
from "a marginal note" (Cheyne), for the
speaker throughout ch. xlvii. is Jahveh. The
song is Isaianic; v. 4, and probably v. 6, later
insertions. Verse 5 may be compared with
xiii. 19; and v. 14 recalls v. 24 and other
passages. Verse 8 is quoted by Zephaniah ii.
15 — not the only quotation which that Prophet
makes from Isaiah. No enchantments can avert
the Divine judgment ; not even the world-wide
commerce of Babylon can rescue her from her
doom (vv. 12-15).
Ch. xlviii. is a comment on the previous
prophecies. The phraseology is Isaianic, worked
over by a later hand, prophetic text and prophetic
comment being so intermixed that they cannot
be separated. Verse 1 does not distinguish
between Israel and Judah, but claims for Judah
the title and inheritance of Israel. Such ex-
pressions need not indicate a pre-exilian author.
The idea of "the ten lost tribes" is purely
mythical. All Israelites after the Exile were
termed "Jews," and one-fourth of the first
returning exiles were not members of the two
tribes (see my Hampton Lectures, p. 278 sq.).
The expression " holy city " (Dan. ix. 24 ; Neh.
xi. 1) occurs in v. 2, lii. 1, and in plur. in
lxiv. 10 (cp. Zech. ii. 16). The " former things "
(v. 3) need not be limited to the prophecies
concerning the Assyrian invasion (Klost., Bre-
denkamp). The "new things" (v. 6) refer to
the deliverance through Cyrus. Idolatry was
rife enough among Israel in Babylon (t>. 5 ; cp.
Ezek. xx. 30 sq.). The accomplishment of the
" former things " should lead Israel to trust in
the " new things " promised (v. 6). According
to v. 7, the fulfilment had already begun.
Hence the use of K"13. Israel did not hear or
know of such things before ; it did not compre-
hend the meaning of the events then transpiring.
The nation was still unfaithful. Captivity had
not purified it. God melted the nation in that
furnace, " but not for silver " produced thereby.
Ewald and Dillmann regard t)D33 (v. 10) as
the 3 pretii; Delitzsch, Cheyne, and R. V., less
ISAIAH
1469
suitably, as 3 essentiae (" not as sitter "). See
i. 22, 25, and cp. Jer. vi. 29, 30. The restora-
tion was an act of grace performed for the
glory of God, and not for the merit of Israel.
The hand of the post-exilian enlarger is seen
in the exhortations vv. 12-22. But the thoughts
and verbiage are still mainly Isaianic The ex-
pression concerning Cyrus, " Jahveh hath loved
him " (v. 14), is striking. Cyrus would execute
Jahveh's purposes upon Babylon, and the arm
of the Almighty judgment would descend on the
Chaldeans. We can touch but lightly on much
that is remarkable. Dillmann is right in main-
taining that, notwithstanding o. 16 b, Jahveh is
throughout the speaker. If Jahveh rained
down brimstone and fire out of heaven from
Jahveh (Gen. xix. 24), why should not Jahveh
be represented as sending Jahveh and His
Spirit on a mission of mercy to teach and to
redeem His people ? Prophetic poetry often
expresses profound theology. The path of
peace is that of obedience (v. 18), and " there
is no peace, saith Jahveh, unto the wicked."
(2) In the second portion, chs. xlix.-lix., the
names of Babylon, Israel's oppressor, and that of
Cyrus, her Gentile deliverer, completely vanish.
A greater than Cyrus and a grander mission are
there depicted. The Servant of Jahveh is
described as a polished shaft from the Divine
quiver, called, like Jeremiah (i. 5), from the
womb to be a prophet to the isles and peoples ;
his mouth is a sharp sword (vv. 1, 2) to slay
the wicked (cp. xi. 4). The coming Prophet is
distinguished from Israel (vv. 6, 8, 9), and yet
addressed as " My servant Israel " (v. 3). That
appellation, though unique, presents no diffi-
culty. Why should not Messiah be called by
the name of Israel as well as by that of Adam
or of David? The title Servant of Jahveh is
bestowed alike on prophet and people ; and the
name Israel may well be given to one described
in this prophecy as having "power with God
and prevailing " (Gen. xxxii. 28).
The Servant is the Restorer of Israel
(xlix. 5). But that is not large enough for His
powers. He is to be the Light of the Gentiles,
the Saviour of the world (v. 6). Despised by
man, abhorred by Israel, a servant of rulers,
kings and princes yet fall down before Him
(v. 7). Described (xiii. 4) as never failing
nor discouraged, He complains (xlix. 4) that
His labour is in vain. The " crying " is heard
and answered (v. 8), for the Servant's work
cannot be unsuccessful. Notice how early those
dark shadows appear which envelope the Ser-
vant in ch. liii. The delineation is throughout
a strange blending of humiliation and glory.
The Servant was given " as a covenant to-
the people " (xlix. 8). This is repeated from
xiii. 6. The Restoration of Israel is described
(vv. 9-12) in language like that of ch. xxxv.
The multitude of rescued Israelites gathered
from all quarters (as in xi. 10-16) is exhibited
to Zion's astonishment, who imagined that the
Lord had forgotten her. Here also is a strange
blending of opposites. The nations carry back
in their bosoms or on their shoulders the sons
and daughters of Israel (vv. 22, 23) ; but the
captives are also spoken of (to. 24-26) as torn
by the arm of the Mighty One of Israel from
the grasp of their foes.
Jahveh had not cast off His people. The
Digitized by
Google
1470
ISAIAH
temporary divorce was Israel's act (1. 1, 2).
Though when called back Israel did not hearken,
the Unchangeable was still omnipotent to save
(os. 3, 4). The Servant is re-introduced again
(in ss. 4, 5). ' He speaks and explains His
actions. Divine inspiration was imparted to
Him, not only in night visions, bnt in daily
open intercourse with Jahveh. Bitter were
His sorrows, disgraceful His treatment by men
(ss. 6, 7). Undismayed, however, by sufferings,
the Servant knows that Jahveh will help and
justify, and therefore boldly defies all His ad-
versaries (ss. 7-9). The note of defiance sounded
by the Master was caught up by the great
disciple (Rom. viii. 31 sq.). Both the ecclesia
presta of the Old and New Testament days have
similar experiences, and therefore their sorrows
and joys may be expressed in the same language.
The Servant of s. 10 is not, as Cheyne suggests,
the writer of the prophecy, but the speaker of
os. 4-5. To His speech, however, the writer
utters an Amen in the exhortation (en. 10, 11),
in which, like the Psalmist (ii. 10-12), he
urges to faith and obedience. Those who gird
themselves with fire-brands to destroy God's
people (Ps. vii. 13) shall be driven into the
destruction they deserve.
Ch. Ii. is addressed to Israel a-wri intvpa.
Jahveh, or the Servant as His Representative,
is the speaker. Vs. 7, 8 are an echo of the
Servant's words in 1. 9. The analogy of Heb. i.
10 sq. would justify a similar explanation of
so. 4-6. In o. 5 the phraseology employed in
reference to the Servant in xlii. 4 recurs, and
in o. 16 that found before in xlix. 2, 3. The
stories of Eden (s. 3), of Abraham and Sarah
(o. 2), of the Law (o. 4), Egypt's overthrow
(s. 9) and of the passage of the Red Sea
(or. 10-15), are all alluded to as reasons for
comfort. Heaven and earth pass away (s. 6),
God's words stand fast (cp. Luke xxi. 33). The
ideas of s. 11 are a repetition of xxxv. 10.
The passage is Isaianic, though portions are
like Jeremiah. Cp. s. 15 with Jer. xxxi. 35;
and the scenes presented in Jer. xxv. 15—18,
27, 28, with os. 17, 21-23. Jeremiah may have
quoted from Isaiah.
In lii. 1-12 Zion is aroused by a new cry
to awake, for salvation is nigh at hand. The
day of liberty has dawned. No compensation
will be made to her oppressor for releasing her
from bondage. Egypt and Assyria both op-
pressed her without cause, and so did Babylon.
God's Name was blasphemed ; that Name would
now be honoured. Part of the scene is ideally
laid in Palestine. Zion in ruins is the slum-
bering Jerusalem awakened by watchers on the
mountains surrounding her, who announce,
" Thy God reigneth." These are not, as
Cheyne suggests, " ideal supersensible beings,"
" angelic remembrancers." It may be well to
caution some that Dan. iv. 17 (in Heb. o. 14) is
not analogous, for " watchers " there is a very
different word. A part of the scene is laid in
Babylon. The Israelites are bidden to go forth
from thence, and carry back "the vessels of
Jahveh " to Jerusalem. The Levitical ritual
is alluded to in o. 11; the march from Babylon
being there contrasted with, and compared to,
the memorable march out of Egypt (s. 12).
With the H31? S'SB* T\ih of lii. 13 a
new sub-section commences, which ends with
ISAIAH
liii. 12. The passage is theologically connected
with the preceding, but otherwise marked off
from it. The subject is different. The linguistic
peculiarities of the piece are so striking that
some critics have regarded it as an interpolation.
The style is " obscure and awkward " (DeliUsch),
notwithstanding that several phrases already
used of the Servant reappear. The passage
breaks the connexion between lii. 12 and ch.
liv. It was probably composed by the Prophet
after some vision which he " saw," bnt which,
however, he does not describe bnt expound.
Believers in the N. T. revelation may well
imagine that the Prophet himself did not
understand its full import (1 Pet. i. 11, 12).
The enigma could not be solved until seen in
the light of the Cross.
It is impossible to attempt a satisfactory
sketch of the exegesis of the passage. We
agree with those (1) who view it as a distinct
Messianic prophecy. It may, perhaps (as
Ewald suggests), contain reminiscences of a
martyr scene in the days of Manasseh. The
marked individuality of the description has led
(2) able commentators to expound it of indi-
vidual kings or prophets. Of such explanation*
the only one really worthy of mention is that
of R. Saadiah, who considered Jeremiah its
subject. Parallel passages in Jeremiah can be
adduced which correspond strikingly with
its expressions. Grotius upheld this view,
and afterwards Bunsen, whose exposition is
commended though not entirely endorsed
by Rowland Williams (Es$ay$ and -fiecistej).
(3) The attempt to explain the section of
the Hebrew prophets is now abandoned.
(4) Equally hopeless is the attempt to interpret
it of Israel in general, as the guiltless martyr-
nation of the world. The idea is opposed to
the view of Israel as the "sinful nation"
given in both parts of the Book. (5) Some
critics still, however, maintain that the picture
drawn is that of the righteous in Israel, the
Israel Kara m/tipa. The doctrine of s. 6 is, as
Cheyne observes, fatal to that theory. (6) The
opinion generally held by modern critics is that
the ideal and not the actual Israel is here
depicted, purified by afflictions and made an
instrument of blessing to the world. This ideal
Israel, amid all national apostasies or disasters, is
regarded as always present before God and con-
templated by Him with pleasure. This view is
substantially that of Wellhausen, Cheyne, and
Dillmann, though with modifications of detail.
Bredenkamp remarks well that this picture of a
mere abstraction "corresponds well with the
meditation of a philosopher, bnt not with that
of a Prophet."
Against the Messianic interpretation it is
maintained that Messiah is not mentioned in the
second part of Isaiah (1 v. 4 is questionable), and
that there is no passage which distinctly iden-
tifies Messiah with the Servant. It must be
remembered, however, that a victorious King
and an afflicted sin-bearing Sufferer could not
be depicted in one view. The identification of
the two ex hypothesi was not possible prior to
the Resurrection of our Lord. It is further
urged that the Servant is represented not as
a future individual but as one actually present.
That, however, does not hinder the passage
from being a prophecy of future days. For both
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
the sufferings and exaltation are represented
as simultaneously present to the prophetic eye.
The Prophet saw in the one picture the
sufferings borne, the work done, the reward
bestowed, the portion assigned, the spoil
divided. This does not prove that the Prophet
depicted events of his own time. The passage
can in no wise represent the state of Israel in
the day of the Restoration from Babylon.
Much may be said in favour of each of the
views defended by critics. The Messianic
interpretation unites all those points together.
The Prophet evidently describes what he
" saw." Every description of Messiah's suf-
ferings must to some extent describe the
sufferings of His nation, or of those individual
followers who follow in His steps, as the
Messiah does in theirs. The passages from
Jeremiah adduced by Bunsen might be utilised
in favour of the Isaianic authorship. Although
the passage as a whole cannot be explained
of the sufferings of the righteous, the Book
of Daniel (xii. 3) apparently refers to liii.
11 as illustrating their work. The sporadic
references to the Isaianic prophecy of the
Servant in the Book of Wisdom (chs. ii. iii. iv.
v.) show that the prophecy was then explained
of the righteous in Israel. The LXX. trans-
lation of the prophecy follows in the same
track, and modifies passages accordingly. Such
was the natural line of exegesis prior to Christ.
The perplexed inquiry of every deep thinker is,
however, summed up in the question of the
eunuch, who reading the passage with the
comment of the LXX. asked, " Of whom speaketh
the Prophet this? of himself, or of some
other?" (Acts vii. 34). That earnest student
saw clearly that the sufferings of an individual,
and of an individual only, were ponrtrayed upon
the sacred page.
All the men of the N. T. expound the passage
of Messiah. John the Baptist refers to it in his
exclamation recorded in John i. 29 ; St. Matthew
regards it as a prediction of Christ, the healer
of disease (Matt. viii. 17). Our Lord alludes to
the prophecy on several occasions (Mark ix. 12 ;
Luke xxii. 37 ; prob. also Luke xxiv. 26). Both
.St. Paul (Rom. iv. 25) and St. Peter (1 Ep. ii.
•Jl-25) quote it. See also the references in
Acts iii. 13, 26 (" His Servant," B. V.), iv. 27 ;
1 Cor. xv. 3, &c.
The section depicts a stricken leper, disfigured
so as to be scarcely human. Hence the Baby-
lonian Talmud gives "the Leprous One" as a
name of Messiah (Sanh. 98 6). But the wisdom
of the " stricken " Sufferer followed by His exal-
tation " startles many nations." The translation
" sprinkle," despite its difficulties, has much to
commend it. Kings shut their mouths in
astonishment at what they see and hear ; while
penitent Israel mourns its ill-treatment of the
Sufferer. Including himself among his people
(cp. vi. 5), the Prophet breaks into lamenta-
tions (liii. 1-3) : " Who among ns believed that
which we heard" in the prophecies concern-
ing this Righteous One? To whom was the
arm of the Lord revealed in His exaltation?
" For He grew up before Him (Jahveh) as a
(slender) twig." The Servant was under Jah-
veh's protection in both His humiliation and
glory. The statement is not " strangely incon-
sistent " (Cheyne) ; although if purely conjectu-
ISAIAH
1471
ral emendations were admissible, and in such a
prophecy they are scarcely so, the emendation
suggested by Ewald and Cheyne, " before us,"
i.e. in our streets, is perhaps more natural. The
description "ass root out of a dry ground " is
peculiarly Isaianic (cp. on the " root " xi. 1,
10, and Rev. v. 5, xxii. 6). The dry ground
corresponds to the stump of Jesse's tree. " He
hath no form nor comeliness, and when we see Him
there is no beauty that we should desire Him."
This historic present may be also rendered as a
past, for the ill-treatment in v. 3 is described as
something already past. " He was despised and
rejected of men," or rather " deserted of men "
(Cheyne), as Job xix. 14 explains the passage.
The use of D'B"M shows that the reference is
to the conduct of the great ones in Israel
(Delitzsch). "A man of sorrows and acquainted
with grief;" or rather, "a man of pains and
familiar with sickness" (Cheyne). The objec-
tions of the Jewish controversialists against the
Christian interpretation are easily met. Luke
vi. 19, viii. 46, with Matt. viii. 17, show that
our Lord's exertion of His healing power was
not without having an effect on His own bodily
frame. Moreover, " familiar with sickness " is
part of the picture of the stricken leper from
whom men averted their faces (cp. Job xxx.
10, xix. 13-19; Lam. iv. 15). The "mystery"
is partly explained in »o. 4-6. The Servant's
sufferings were vicarious, endured for His people.
Wiinsche enumerates the twelve distinct asser-
tions contained in the chapter " of the vicarious
character of the sufferings of the Servant "
(Cheyne). Such language proves the prophecy
to depict an individual.
The lamentation of Israel closes with the
recognition that the Servant's sufferings were
endured for her sake. The Prophet then nar-
rates at length the Servant's sinlessness and the
indignities He endured (pc. 7-9). " He was op-
pressed," as if by slave-drivers (CM ; cp. Exod.
iii. 7; Job iii. 18), "yet he humbled himself"
(Niphal tolerativum ; see Delitzsch, Cheyne),
"and opened not his mouth" (cp. Ps. xxxviii. 14;
xxxix. 9). " As a lamb that is led to the
slaughter, and as a sheep that before her shearers
is dumb ; yea, He opened not His mouth " (R. V.).
Jeremiah in xi. 9 seems to refer to this passage.
But the conclusion of that verse forbids us to see
in him the accomplishment of the prophecy. The
Servant's humiliation was voluntary ; there was
a restraint of " power," a restraint of love (cp.
Matt. xxvi. 53). "Through oppression, and
through a judgment" — a judicial sentence —
" He was taken away," condemned to death ;
" and as for His generation," or those who lived
in His day (cp. Jer. ii. 31), " who among them
considered that He was cut off from the land of
the living ? For the transgression of My people
was He stricken ! " The Messianic interpretation
is quite unaffected whether ID? in the last
clause be viewed as singular or plural. If the
translation " who shall declare His generation "
be preferred, Ps. xxii. 30 supplies a sufficient
commentary. The prophecy is too striking to
be regarded only as " a presentiment of the his-
torical Redeemer."
With our present text, v. 9 must be rendered,
"and one assigned His grave with the wicked
Digitized by
Google
1472
ISAIAH
(plural), and with a rich (man) in his deaths
(emphatic plural, of violent death), because (or
'although') He had done no violence, neither
was any deceit in His mouth." Rich is not,
indeed, a suitable parallel to tricked, while
the form of the sentence does not admit of its
being explained as containing a contrast. The
clause simply connects the two statements,
which coincide remarkably with the Gospel his-
tory, and ought not to be tampered with by
critical conjectures.
The concluding verses unfold the Divine pur-
pose in such sufferings. The Sen-ant is mysti-
cally identified with Israel, and therefore can
offer Himself as a sin-offering. His vicarious
sin-offering (flttOn) expiates their guilt; His
trespass-offering (OtTK, t>. 10) makes satisfaction
(see Delitzsch). Cheyne well compares t>. 10
with the phrase nsed by onr Lord, ntfcVai tJ)i>
'fyoxb" (John x. 1 1). Mediaeval Jewish contro-
versialists argued from v. 10, that Messiah would
have children. The original, however, is "a
seed," not "his 'seed" (cp. Ps. xxii. 30). The
closing verses speak of the Servant's exaltation
anticipated in lii. 13, 14. D'3"l, many, ought
to be uniformly translated throughout. It is
anarthous in lii. 14, and liii. 12 at end. It has
the article in liii. 11, and in the beginning of
v. 12; and qualifies "nations" in lii. 15.
The Pauline use of ol s-cAAol in Rom. vi. 15-19
is the key to its meaning. The Servant's con-
tinued intercession (1PJ0\ t>. 12; cp. Jer. xv. 11)
is affirmed. Cp. Luke xxiii. 34; Acts v. 31.
The Hebrew Prophets were not restrained by
modern ideas of literary harmony ; and if clauses
occur in such a prophecy more suitable to
priest than victim, they should be left intact,
for the Redeemer is pourtrayed under both
characters.
The six chapters which follow (ch. liv.-lix.)
are not closely connected. Ch. liv. would
suitably follow lii. 12. The ideal or spiritual
Zion is addressed throughout. "The Servant
of Jahveh " occurs no more, though " servants
of Jahveh " are spoken of (v. 17 ; cp. lxv.
13 sq.). " The suffering and glory of the Ser-
vant and the servants are similar, but not iden-
tical" (Bredenkamp). Wellhausen regards ch.
liv. to lvi, 8 " to some extent as a sermon
on the text lii. 13 — liii. 12;" but this is, as
Cheyne observes, in the interests of his theory
that the Servant is not an individual. There
is nothing in ch. liv. opposed to the Isaianic
authorship.
Chapter lv. is complete in itself. It is a
discourse designed to stir up faith in coming
deliverance. God's purposes are sure, and the
exiles shall return (ot>. 8-13). It may have also
a higher meaning. The similarity to ch. xxxv.
is in favour of the authorship of Isaiah. Critics
differ whether Dav.d or Messiah is the subject of
v. 3. The former is the better view (cp. 2 Sam.
vii. 12-16). Ps. lxxxvi. may serve as com-
mentary. The Davidic covenant is, however,
only fulfilled in Messiah. By virtue of his
religion (Ps. xviii. 43) David was a witness as
well as a ruler. Rev. i. 5, iii. 14 refer to this
passage, and Hengstenberg has properly called
attention to Christ's words before Pilate (John
xviii. 37).
Chapter lvi. 1-8 refers to the Israelites in
ISAIAH
Babylon, where some of them were forcibly
made eunuchs. Isaiah's prophecy (ch. xxxix. 7)
makes it natural for him to drop some words of
comfort for those that would be so cruelly treated.
Eunuchs were shut out from the congregation of
Israel (Deut. xxiii. 1). But the restrictions of
the Mosaic law, both as to eunuchs and foreigners,
are represented as abolished for those who keep
the Lord's sabbaths. The advent of the day is
predicted when Israel's outcasts, with "the
nations," would worship in the Temple. The
conceptions of the Prophet are identical with
those in ii. 2, 3.
Very different in character is lvi. 9 —
lvii. 21. It seems out of place here. Ewald,
with other critics, regard it as decidedly pre-
exilian, if not Isaianic It speaks of Israel's
watchmen as dumb dogs. The wild beasts are
invited to devour the flock. The righteous
perish, and idolatry in its vilest and most cruel
form erects its head. Verse 14 seems an in-
terpolation ; but lvii. 45-21 is a prophecy of
final salvation, probably Isaianic, and inserted
here in order that Israel, after contemplating
her sin, might yet have hope in God.
Chapter lviii. is a penitential discourse wholly
different. Formality in religion, trust in ex-
ternal fasts, combined with neglect of the poor
and afflicted, is here denounced. The subject-
matter harmonizes with i. 10-20. If the
chapter be Isaianic, v. 12 must be a later in-
sertion. The need of Sptitricfla xaBapb aal
ifilarrot (Jas. i. 27) is a doctrine not peculiarly
suggestive of a time of exile.
Many critics regard ch. lix. as a continuation
of ch. lviii. But this is scarcely possible. The
sins described are crimes of violence, murder,
and robbery. Ewald long ago maintained the
colouring to be pre-exilic The correspondence
with Isaianic portions is very marked. Breden-
kamp notes that e. 18 re-echoes i. 24 b, and
v. 20 reminds of i. 27. Vv. 19, 20 recall
xxx. 27, 28, 33. The mention of serpents,
bears, doves, &c., and . the description of armour
are all Isaianic. The section speaks no doubt of
judgment, leading to repentance, and v. 12 sq.
is a penitential confession of sin. But the same
mention of mercy and judgment, of the destruc-
tion of sinners, and of the salvation of the
penitent, is exhibited in i. 27, 28. Verse 20
is regarded as Messianic in Rom. xi. 26, and
referred to the Second Advent. A Redeemer
(?N13) is to come to Zion, to a repentant people,
for, as Cheyne observes, " the Messianic promises
to Israel are only meant for a converted and
regenerated people."
The last seven chapters of Isaiah (chs. Ix.-
lxvi.) describe the renovated Jerusalem. As
Babylon was commanded to descend from the
throne to the dungeon (ch. xlvii.X Zion is
bidden to arise from slavery, and behold light
and glory streaming in upon her. There is
more predicted than the return of Solomonic
prosperity (cp. v. 17 with 1 K. x. 21). The
vision is of the last things seen in Old Test,
light. Zion's walls are rebuilt by the nations
who once demolished them in anger. For the
nations with their kings, willing or unwilling
(v. 10), bring back to Jerusalem Israel's exiles,
with silver and gold, and sacrifices innumerable.
Vv. 18-20 describe, however, more thar earthly
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
glory, and the Seer of Patmos has, therefore,
employed Isaiah's language in relating his
N. T. vision* (Key. xxi. 23-26 ; ixii. 5). The
similitudes of tic. 6, 7 are pre-exilian, though
some have imagined a reference (in t>. 8) to the
names of the walls of Babylon (cp. Schrader,
KAT.' on 1 K. vii. 21). The actual appears
amid the ideal ; for amid strains of peace there
are notes of war (see v. 12 and* cp. Zech. xiv.
17, 18).
The speaker in ch. lxi. is probably the
Prophet himself, although the words suit the
Servant who is also Prophet ; and consequently
were suitably quoted as fulfilled in the syna-
gogue of Nazareth (Luke iv. 16-22. Cp. Heb. i.
1 sq.). The statement in reference to the Gentiles
in v. 5 is in a lower strain than in other places
(cp. lxvi 21). The reference to the old ruins
in v. 4 is not necessarily post-Babylonian.
Tue Prophet is also speaker in lxii, 1-5, the
language of which is Isaianic and highly figu-
rative. The name Hephzibah, mentioned v. 4,
was that of Hezekiah's queen (2 K. xxi. 1).
The " watchers " in v. 6 are not Angels (Ewald
and Cheyne). It is, as Bredenkamp observes,
not ruins which are there spoken of, but the
walls of a city actually standing. In the name
" Forsaken One " (t>. 40 ; cp. c. 12) there may
lurk a reference to some lost tale concerning
Jehoshaphat's mother (1 K. xxi. 42). Note
the recurrence in v. 11 of the words of xl. 10,
and in v. 12 of the ideas presented in ir. 3,
xxxv. 10.
Ch. lxiii. 1-6 is a fitting parallel to ch. xxxiv.
Its Isaianic character is confessed even by
some modern critics. A post-exilian author
would scarcely express himself thus. There are
several of the plays upon words so characteristic
of Isaiah. Calvin long ago protested against the
idea that these verses were prophetical of Calvary.
It is a prophecy of a day of vengeance on bdom '
and on the nations (v. 6). Their downfall must
precede Israel's revival. The language and
phraseology reappear in Rev. xix. It is prob-
able that lxiii. 7-14 with lxiv. is a post-
exilian meditation. Vv. 18, 19, with lxiv.
9-12, must have been composed at the close
of the Babylonian Captivity. The references
in the prayer to Israel's ancient history are
most interesting.
Ch. lxv. 1-7 is not, properly speaking, an
answer to the prayer of the preceding chapter,
though possibly inserted by the editor with
that intent. The whole style of thought is
pre-exilian. The sins described are those so
common in the last days of Israel's common-
wealth. Ezekiel speaks of such as then
practised in Jerusalem. Judgments are de-
nounced upon the guilty idolaters, though
God's " servants " are remembered in mercy,
and " the remnant " protected. For the
righteous days of blessing are predicted — new
heavens and a new earth (vv. 17, 18). The
scenery of ch. xi. is repeated. No mention is
made here of exiles, of rebuilding the walls of
Jerusalem. A fairer vision floats before the
Prophet's view, that of a world with the curse
removed.
It is not easy to assign a satisfactory date to
ch. lxvi., or to summarize it in a few sentences.
If composed after the Return, its statements
would have been too glaringly opposed to what
I1IBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
ISAIAH
1473
men's eyes then beheld. It appears to us
Isaianic, though probably " worked over " by a
later hand. It describes the glories of the
Return, and the exclusion of the sinners from
the congregation of the holy. The destruction
of these ungodly is represented as taking place
on earth. But the visions, though connected
with the real, are concerned with matters
beyond those of earth. Both in describing
blessings and judgments there is no fixed line
of demarcation between the things seen and
those not seen.
Literature. — It is impossible here to give
anything like a complete survey of the ex-
tensive literature of the Book. Passing over
the Patristic commentaries, among the Jewish
may be mentioned those of Abarbanel (Lot.
transl. 1520), Rashi (Lat. transl. by Breithaupt,
1713), Kimchi (Lat. transl. 1774), lbn Ezra
(transl. into Engl, by Friedlander, 1873-1877).
Calvin's Comm. is still of value ; Vitringa's,
2 vols, fol., 1714, 1720, and 1715, 1722. Bp.
Lowth's Comm. is antiquated ; Gesenius, Comm.
1821; Hitzig, 1833; Drechsler, began 1845,
compl. 1857; P. Schegg, 2 vols, 1850; Hen-
derson (English), 1857 ; and still better J. A.
Alexander, 2 vols. 1846, and edit, by Eadie,
1865; S. D. Luzzato (Italian), 1855-1866;
Ewald's Propheten, 1867, 1868, translated into
English, and published by Williams & Norgate ;
A. Knobel, 1861, revised by Diestel, 1872, and
re-written as an independent work by Dillmann,
1890. This latter is most important. NBgels-
b&ch's Comm. in Lunge's B&eltcerk, 1877, con-
tains much that is important; it has been
translated into English. Kay wrote in the
Speaker's Comm., and T. R. Birks independently.
Franz Delitzsch's great Comm. has been often
revised ; the 4th edit, appeared in 1889, and
has been transl. and edited in English with a
preface by S. R. Driver, 1890, 1891. The ablest
English Comm. is that of T. K. Cheyne, 2 vols.,
5th edit., 1889. Bredenkamp's Comm., short but
suggestive, appeared in 1887. The Comm. of
von Orelli in 1887, transl. into English, and
publ. by T. & T. Clark. Myrberg, in Swedish,
1888. Canon Rawlinson has written on Isaiah
in the Pulp. Comm. Fresh and interesting are
the vols, of G. A. Smith, 1889. Important, too,
in this matter, is the new translation of the
Bible by distinguished scholars (Die Heilige
Schrift des A. T., 1890-2), edited by KauUsch,
with critical notes on the dates of each portion.
The student should consult all the various
Introductions, especially that of Driver, 1891,
4th edit., 1892; and though brief, that of
Cornill, 1891, if its conclusions are far too
negative : also Driver's Isaiah, Life and Times,
1888; A. H. Sayce, with similar title,
1889; Sir E. Strachey, Jeveish Hist, and
Politics, 2nd edit. 1874; Klosterman's article
in Herzog-Plitt ; Cornill, in Stade's Zeitschrift,
1884. Among the most important monographs
are the 2 vols, on Isniah liii. according to the
Jewish Interpreters, Text by A. Neubauer,
transl. bv Driver and Neubauer, edit, by Pusey,
1876, 1877; Urwick, The Sertant of Jehovah,
1877 ; Prof. Forbes of Aberdeen, On the Servant
of the Lord, in Isniah xl.-lxvi., 1890; J. Barth,
Beitrage, 1885, and K. Gicsebrecht's Beitrage,
1890; H. Guthe, Das ZukunfUbild des Jes.,
1885; Gratz in Monatscttrift, 1886, and in
5 B
Digitized by
Google
1474
ISCAH
Jewish Quarterly, 1891 (on Is. xxxiv., xxxt.);
T. K. Cheyne in same Review, on the Critical
Problems of Second Part ; LBhr on I». xl.-xlvi.,
1878-1H80. A. Wfinsche,Tici<feB des Messias,
1870, and G. F. Dalman,' Isaiah liii., 1890,
are highly important. C. P. Caipari, Beitrage,
1848, and his Syr. Eph. Krieg, 1849, are still
valuable ; Beinke's Mess. Weissagungen, von
Uofmann's works, and Hengstenberg's Christ-
ology contain much that is still worth study.
[C. H. H. W.]
IS-CAH(n3D»; 'I«<rx<f; Jesca% daughter of
Haran the brother of Abram, and sister of
Milcah and of Lot (Gen. xi. 29). In the Jewish
traditions as preserved by Josephos (Ant. i. 6,
§ 5), Jerome (Quaest. in Qenesim), and the
Targum Pseudo-jonathan — not to mention later
writers — she is identified with Sarai ; an iden-
tification not now maintained (see Dillmann*
in loco).
ISCAR10T. [Judas Iscabiot.]
IS'DAEL Clo-MA.; Oaddahel), 1 Esd. v.
33. [Giddel, 2.]
ISH-BAH (na^ = praising; A. 'Uaafid,
B. MapiB ; lesba), a man in the line of Judah,
commemorated as the " father of Eshtemoa "
(1 Ch. iv. 17) ; but from whom he was im-
mediately descended is, in the very confused
state of this part of the genealogy, not to be as-
certained. The most plausible conjecture is that
he was one of the sons of Mered by his Egyptian
wife Bithiah (see Bertheau, Chronik, in loco ;
accepted by Keil, Oettli, &c).
ISH-BAK (p3B»; A. 1«<t0ok, D. Iterfav*,
B. So$Jlk ; Jesboc), a people of Northern Arabia,
whose origin is attributed to the marriage of
Abraham with Keturah (fniOp, "incense"); Gen.
xxv. 2 ; 1 Ch. i. 32. An Assyrian inscription en-
ables us to identify Ishbak. In his first year
(859 B.C.) Shalmaneser II. crossed the Orontes in
Northern Syria, to operate against Sapalulme,
king of the Patinai, amongst whose allies he
names Sa(n)gara (Shamgar) of Carchemish, Pi-
chirim of Cilicia, and Bur-anate (perhaps =
11317*13, " son of Anath ; " cp. " Shamgar, son
of Anath," Judg. v. 6) of the land of Iasbuk •
(mat la-as-bu-qa-ai : 3 R. 7, 54). Ishbak
probably adjoined Shuah (the Assyrian Suhu),
his brother tribe, whose seats lay along the
west bank of the Euphrates between the
Balich and the Habor, on the confines of Coele-
Syria, and near the caravan route from Damas-
cus through Palmyra to the Great River (see
Friedrich Delitzsch, Assyriologische Notizen
zum alter. Testament, ZK. ii. 92). [C. J. B.J
ISHBI-BENO'B (353 13t>, Qeri =*3Bh =
my duelling is in Nob ; B. 'Unfit i, A. 'Ua&i iv
N<i/3 ; Jesbi-benob), son of Rapha, one of the race
of Philistine giants, who attacked David in
* The spelling agrees with the LXX. variants
'IecrftovK, 'I«<rSo'«, and indicates that the Hebrew point-
ing should rather be p*3B". In the same way the
spelling BirSm (1 K. vil. 40) Instead of Hiram Is con-
firmed by the Assyrian HirQm (gi-ru-um-mu), as well
as by the EYpwpoc of Josephos.
ISHBOSHETH
battle, but was slain by Abishai (2 Sam. iii.
16, 17). The words 333 130*1 are now, how-
ever, usually read not as a man's name, but
(= 3j3 13B^1) "they dwelt in Gob," and are
placed after 1D17 (" with him ") in r. 15 (cp.
Wellhausen and Driver, Notes on the ffeb. Tat
of the BB. of Sam. in loco). [F.]
ISH-BO'SHETH (flfa B»*t; "Ie/Jorti;
Isboseth), the youngest of Saul's four sons, and
his legitimate successor. His name appears
(1 Ch. viii. 33, ix. 39) to have been originally
Esh-baal, Sm-CN, "the man] of Baal."
Whether this indicates that Baal was used ai
equivalent to Jehovah, or that the reverence
for Baal still lingered in Israelitish families, is
uncertain; but it can hardly be doubted that
the name (Ish-bosheth, "the man of shame")
by which he is commonly known must hare
been substituted for the original word, with a
view of removing the scandalous sound of Baal
from the name of an Israelitish king, and super-
seding it by the contemptuous word (Bosheth=
" shame ") which was sometimes used as its
equivalent in later times (Jer. iii. 24, xi. 13;
Hos. ix. 10). A similar process appears in the
alteration of Jerubbaal (Judg. viii. 35) into
Jerubbesheth (2 Sam. xi. 21); Meri-bsal (2
Sam. iv. 4) into Mephibosheth (1 Ch. viii. 34,
ix. 40). The last three cases all occur in Saul's
family. He was thirty-five years of age at the time
of the battle of Gilboa, in which his father and
three eldest brothers perished; and therefore,
according to the law of Oriental though not of
European succession, ascended the throne, as the
eldest of the royal family, rather than Mephi-
bosheth, son of his elder brother Jonathan, who
was a child of five years old. He was imme-
diately taken under the care of Abner, his
powerful kinsman, who brought him to the
ancient sanctuary of Mahanaim on the east ol
the Jordan, beyond the reach of the victorious
Philistines (2 Sam. ii. 8). There was a mo-
mentary donbt even in those remote tribes
whether they should not close with the offer
of David to be their king (2 Sam. ii. 7, iii. 17).
But this was overruled in favour of Ishbosheth
by Abner (2 Sam. iii. 17), who then for fire
years slowly but effectually restored the do-
minion of the house of Saul over the Trans-
jordanic territory, the plain of Esdraelon, the
central mountains of Ephraim, the frontier tribe
of Benjamin, and eventually "over all Israel"
(except the tribe of Judah, 2 Sam. iii. 9). hA-
bosheth was then " forty years old when he bega»
to reign over Israel, and reigned two years"
(2 Sam. iii. 10). This form of expression is
used only for the accession of a fully recognised
sovereign (cp. in the case of David, 2 Sam. it
4 and v. 4).
During these two years he reigned at
Mahanaim, though only in name. The wars
and negotiations with David were entirely
carried on by Abner (2 Sam. ii. 12 ; iii. 6, 12>
At length Ishbosheth accused Abner (whether
rightly or wrongly does not appear) of so
attempt on his father's concubine, Biipsh;
which, according to Oriental usage, amounted
to treason (2 Sam. iii. 7 : cp. 1 K. ii. 13 ; 2 Sam.
xvi. 21, xx. 3). Abner resented this suspicion
in a burst of passion, which vented itself in *
Digitized by
Google
ISHI
ISHMAEL
1475
solemn tow to transfer the kingdom from the
bonse of Saul to the house of David. Ish-
bosheth was too much cowed to answer; and
when, shortly afterwards, through Abner's nego-
tiation, David demanded the restoration of his
former wife, Michal, he at once tore his sister
from her reluctant hnsband, and committed
her to Abner's charge (2 Sam. Hi. 14, 15).
The death of Abner deprived the honse of
Sanl of their last remaining support. When
Ishbosheth heard of it, " his hands were feeble
and all the Israelites were troubled " (2 Sam.
iv. 1).
In this extremity of weakness he fell a
victim to a revenge, probably, for a crime of
his father. The gnard of Ishbosheth, as of
Saul, was taken from their own royal tribe of
Benjamin (1 Ch. xii. 29). But amongst the
sons of Benjamin were reckoned the descendants
of the old Canaanitish inhabitants of Beeroth,
one of the cities in league with Gibeon (2 Sam.
iv. 2, 3). Two of the Beerothites, Baana and
Rechab, in remembrance, it has been conjec-
tured, of Saul's slaughter of their kinsmen
the Gibeonites, determined to take advantage of
the helplessness of the royal house to destroy
the only representative that was left, ex-
cepting the child Mephibosheth (2 Sam. iv. 4).
They were " chiefs of the marauding troops "
which used from time to time to attack
the territory of Judah (cp. 2 Sam. iv. 2,
iii. 22 ; where the same word "HT8 is used ;
Vulg. principes latronum). [BENJAMIN; Grr-
TAJM.] They knew the habits of the king and
court, and acted accordingly. In the stillness
of an Eastern noon they entered the palace, as
if to carry off the wheat which was piled up
near the entrance. The female slave, who, as
usual in Eastern houses, kept the door, and was
herself sifting the wheat, had, in the heat of the
day, fallen asleep at her task (2 Sam. iv. 5, 6,
in LXX. and Vulg.). They stole in, and passed
into the royal bedchamber, where Ishbosheth
was asleep on his couch. They stabbed him in
the stomach, cut off his head, made their
escape, all that afternoon, all that night, down
the valley of the Jordan (Arabah, A. V.
" plain ; " 2 Sam. iv. 7), and presented the head
to David as a welcome present. They met
with a stern reception. David rebuked them
for the cold-blooded murder of an inno-
cent man, and ordered them to be executed ;
their hands and feet were cut off, and their
bodies suspended over the tank at Hebron.
The head of Ishbosheth was carefully buried in
the sepulchre of his great kinsman Abner, at
the same place (2 Sam. iv. 9-12).* [A. P. S.]
ISH-I ('BE* = my help ; Jest). 1. (B. 1<r«-
/iojA; A. 'Ie«f.) A man of the descendants
of Judah, son of Appaim (1 Ch. ii. 31) ; one of
the great honse of Hezron, and therefore a near
connexion of the family of Jesse (cp. tv. 9-13).
The only son here attributed to Ishi is Sheshan.
2. (B. 2««I; A. "Et.) In a subsequent
genealogy of Judah we find another Ishi, with a
son Zoheth (I Ch. iv. 20). There does not
appear to be any connexion between the two.
• In Dryden'a Absalom and Ahilhophel, "foolish
Iabboeheth " is ingeniously taken to represent Blcbard
■Cromwell.
8. (B. 'I«rfi0«V; A. 'I«r«f.) Four men of
the Bene-lshi, of the tribe of Simeon, are
named in 1 Ch. iv. 42 as having headed an
expedition of 500 of their brethren, who took
Mount Seir from the Amalekites, and made it
their own abode.
4. (B. 2«(; A. 'UiTil.) One of the heads
of the tribe of Manasseh on the east of Jordan
(1 Ch. v. 24).
I-SHI 0?*N'; « i»4p P>»\ Tvr ™u>)- This
word has no connexion whatever with the fore-
going. It occurs in Hos. ii. 16, and signifies
" my man," " my husband." It is the Israelite
term, in opposition to Baali, the Canaanite
term, with the same meaning, though with a
significance of its own. See p. 1399, where
the nature of the difference between the two
appellations is connected with the general
teaching.
ISHI'AH, K. V. ISSHIAH (n»B*. i.e. Is-
shiyah — Jehovah lends; B. F.ieriet, A. 'Ito-i'o),
the fifth of the five sons of Izrahiah ; one of
the heads of the tribe of Issachar in the time
of David (ICh. vii. 3).
The name is identical with that elsewhere
given as Isbijaii, Isshiah, Jesiah.
ISHI' J AH, R. V. ISSHIJAH <JV&; B.
'I«<r<reid, A. 'Uatrla ; Josve), a lay Israelite of
the Bene-Harim, who had married a foreign
wife, and was compelled to relinquish her (Ezra
x. 31). In Esdras the name is Aseas.
This name appears in the A. V. under the
various forms of Isuiah, Isshiah, Jesiah.
ISH-MA(ttt3t£=««J«te, desert, Ges. ; 'I«r/id>,
B. 'fvyiiii, A 'I«r^4 ; Jesema), a name in the
genealogy of Judah (1 Ch. iv. 3). The passage
is very obscure, and in many cases it is difficult
to know whether the names are the names of
persons or of places. Ishma and his companions
appear to be closely connected with Bethlehem
(see o. 4).
ISHMAEL (^KTOE«= God heareth; '\a-
jta^jA ; Ismael ; cp. Gen. xvi. 11), the son of
Abraham by Hagar, his concubine, the Egyptian ;
born, according to P, when Abraham was four-
score and six years old (Gen. xvi. 15, 16). Ish-
mael was the first-born of his father: of whom
(ch. xv.) we read that he was then childless, and
there is no apparent interval for the birth of
any other child; nor does the teaching of the
narrative, besides the precise enumeration of the
sons of Abraham as the father of the faithful,
admit of the supposition. The saying of Sarah,
also, when she gave him Hagar, supports the
inference that until then he was without
children. When we are told that Abraham
" again took a wife " (xxv. 1, J), viz. Keturah,
no note of time is added ; but it appears to be
implied that it was after the death of Sarah.
The conception of Ishmael led to the flight of
Hagar [Haoakj ; and it was during her wander-
ing in the wilderness that the Angel of the Lord
commanded her to return to her mistress, and
gave her the promises, " I will multiply thy seed
exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for
multitude " (Gen. xvi. 10. R); " Behold, thou art
5 B 2
Digitized by
Google
1476
ISHMAEL
with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call
his name Ishmael, because the Lord hath beard
thy affliction. And he will be a wild man ; his
hand will be against every man, and every man's
hand against him ; and he shall dwell in the pre-
sence of all his brethren" (xvi. 11, 12, J). The
well Lahai-rol is said to have got its name from
Uagar's vision, as though the name Beer lahai
rot meant " Well of the Living One that seeth
me," or " Well of living after seeing (God)." It
is not, however, necessary to regard such sug-
gestions as more than illustrative plays on
similar-sounding words. It has been con-
jectured that Lahai-rol really means " Jawbone
of the antelope " ; rot being perhaps an obsolete
term akin to the Arabic 'ariciyya (cp. Reh,
roe): see Judg. xv. 17 sqq. ; Wellhausen, HI.
p. 326.
Ishmael was born in Abraham's house, when
he dwelt "by the oaks (or terebinths) of
Mamre " (xiii. 18 ; xviii. 1, J) ; and was circum-
cised at the age of thirteen (xvii. 25, P). With
the institution of the covenant, God renewed His
promise respecting Ishmael. In answer to
Abraham's entreaty, when he cried, "Oh that
Ishmael might live before Thee ! " God assured
him of the birth of Isaac, and said, "As for
Ishmael, I have heard thee: behold, I have
blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and
will multiply him exceedingly ; twelve princes
(or emirs, tribal chiefs) shall he beget, and I will
make him a great nation" (xvii. 18,20. The
whole chapter belongs to P). Before this time,
Abraham seems to have regarded his first-bora
child as the heir of the promise, his belief in
which was counted unto him for righteousness
(xv. 6, J) ; and although that faith shone yet
more brightly after his passiag weakness when
Isaac was first promised, his love for Ishmael is
recorded in the narrative of Sarah's expulsion of
the latter : " And the thing was very grievous
in Abraham's sight because of his son" (xxi.
11, E).
Ishmael does not again appear in the narrative
until the weaning of Isaac The latter was born,
according to P, when Abraham was a hundred
years old (xxi. 5) ; and as the weaning, accord-
ing to Eastern usage, would take place when the
child was between two and three years old,
Ishmael must be supposed to have been then
between fifteen and sixteen years of age. This
necessary inference from the chronological data
of P does not, however, agree very well with the
statement of E (xxi. 14), which according to
the LXX. should be read as follows: "Aud
Abraham rose early in the morning, and took
bread and a skin of water, and gave them to
Hagar ; and the boy he set upon her shoulder,
and sent her away." The present Hebrew text
is obviously faulty, and appears to be due to
some transcriber who felt the difficulty of
putting a lad of sixteen upon his mother's
shoulder. But the subsequent statement that
" she threw the boy under one of the shrubs "
(e. 15), seems to imply that she was carrying
him ; and the language of v. 20 hardly allows
us to suppose that Ishmael was already a young
man. When the difference of sources is recog-
nised, such discrepancies of statement cease to
embarrass us [Isaac].
At the " great feast " made in celebration of
the weaning, Sarah had seen Ishmael " laugh-
ISHMAEL
ing " (A. V. " mocking " ; R. V. marg. " pUy-
ing ").* Thereupon, she urged Abraham to cut
out him and his mother. The patriarch, com-
forted by God's renewed promise that of Ishmael
He would make a nation, sent them both away,
and they departed and wandered in the wilder-
ness of Beersheba. Here the water being spent
in the bottle, Hagar cast her son under one of
the desert shrubs, and went away a Utile
distance, " for she said, Let me not see the death
of the child," and wept. " And God heard the
voice of the lad, and the Angel of the Lord called
to Hagar out of heaven," renewed the promise
already thrice given, " 1 will make him a great
nation," and " opened her eyes, and she saw a
well of water." Thus miraculously saved from
perishing by thirst, " God was with the lad ; and
he grew, and dwelt in the wilderness; and
became an archer." It is doubtful whether the
wanderers halted by the well, or at once con-
tinued their way to the " wilderness of Paran,"
where, we are told in the next verse to that jut
quoted, he dwelt, and where " his mother took
him a wife out of the land of Egypt " (Geo. xxi
9-21, E). This wife of Ishmael is not elsewhere
mentioned ; she was, we must infer, an Egyptian :
and this second infusion of Hamitic blood into
the progenitors of the Arab nation, Ishmael's
sons, is a fact that has been generally overlooked.
No record is made of any other wife of Ishmael,
and failing such record, the Egyptian would
seem to have been the mother of his twelve sont,
and one daughter (cp. the twelve sons and one
daughter assigned to Israel also). This daughter,
however, is called the " sister of Nebsjoth "
(Gen. xx viii. 9) ; a limitation of the parentage
of the brother and sister which probably points
to a different mother for Ishmael's other sons'
It must not be forgotten that terms denoting
various degrees of blood-relationship are used in
these narratives to express the local and political
relations of kindred tribes and their subdivisions.
In 0. T. language, the founder of a town, or the
eponymous chief of the tribe that was settled
there, is called the "father" of the place; and the
outlying dependencies are called its "daughters.
A newer or otherwise inferior clan or tribe in a
confederacy is regarded as sprung from the
common ancestor through a foreign wife or a
"concubine." The old Arab writers use a
similar terminology.
Of the later life of Ishmael nothing is related
in the older sections of Genesis (J, E). Accord-
ing to P, he was present with Isaac at the
burial of Abraham (Gen. xxv. 9) ; and Esau con-
tracted an alliance with him when he "took
unto the wives which he had Mahalath, the
daughter of Ishmael Abraham's son, the sister of
Ncbajoth, to be his wife ; " and this did Eon
because the daughters of Canaan pleased not
Isaac and Rebekah, and Jacob in obedience to
» St. Paul appears to follow Jewish tradition or
exegesis, when be speaks of Ishmael as •'persecuting
Isaac (Gal. iv. 29). Sarah's motive was pertar* »
mother's Jealousy.
•> According to Rabbinical tradition, Ishmael put away
his wife and took a secoud ; and the Arabs, proW?
borrowing from the above, assert that be twice marriei;
the first wife being an Amaleklte, bv whom he b*li»
Issue ; and the second, a Joktanite, of the tribe of Jw-
Iram (Jfir-at 'at-ZamSn, MS., quoting a tradition J
Muhammad Ibn-Is-hak.)
Digitized by
Google
ISHMAEL
their wishes had gone to Laban to obtain of his
daughters a wife (xxviii. 6-9, P). The death of
Ishmael is recorded in a previous chapter, after
the enumeration of his sons, as baring taken
place at the age of a hundred and thirty-seven
years (xxr. 17, P).
It remains for us to consider, 1, the place of
Ishmael's dwelling ; and, 2, the names of his
children, with their settlements, and the nation
sprung from them.
1. From the narrative of his expulsion, we
learn that Ishmael first went into the wilderness
of Beersheba, and thence, but at what interval
of time is uncertain, removed to that of Paran.
His continuance in these or the neighbouring
places seems to be proved by his having been
present at the burial of Abraham — for it must
be remembered that in the East sepulture
follows death after a few hours' space — and by
Esau's marrying his daughter at a time when he
(Esau) dwelt at Beersheba: the tenor of the
narrative of both these events favouring the
inference that Ishmael settled not far from the
neighbourhood of Abraham and Isaac. There
are, however, other passages which must be
taken into account. It is prophesied of him
(xvi. 12, J) that " he shall dwell in face of all his
breth/cn " (»'.«. near them, but independent of
them, ffart nor i/uien, Dillmann; others, as
Tuch and Delitzsch, Sstlich con, " eastward of."
Cp. also xxv. 18, which, however, is hopelessly
obscure, and probably corrupt). He was the
first Abrahamic settler in the east country. In
xxv. 6 (R) it is said, "But unto the sons of
the concubines, which Abraham had, Abraham
gave gifts, and sent them away from Isaac his
son, while he yet lived, eastward, unto the east
country." The " east country " perhaps was
restricted in early times to the wildernesses of
Beersheba and Paran, and it afterwards seems to
hare included those districts (though neither
supposition necessarily follows from the above
passage); or, Ishmael remored to that east
country, northwards, without being distant from
his father and his brethren; each case being
agreeable with Gen. xxr. 6. The appellation of
the " east country " became afterwards applied
to the whole desert extending from the frontier
of Palestine east to the Euphrates, and south
probably to the borders of Egypt and the
Arabian peninsula (cp. Dilimann, ad loc cit.,
who says that Arabia in general, including
Arabia Deserta and the Syrian desert, is in-
tended). This question is discussed in art.
Bene-Kedem ; and it is interworen, though
obscurely, with the next subject, that of the
names and settlements of the sons of Ishmael.
See also Keturah, &<:. ; for the " brethren " of
Ishmael, in whose presence he dwelt, included
the sons of Keturah.
2. The sons of Ishmael were, Nebajoth his
first-born, Kedar, Adbeel, Mibsara, Mishnia,
Dumah, Massa, Hadar, Tema, Jetur, Naphish,
Kedemah (Gen. xxr. 13-15, P), and he had a
daughter named Mahalath (xxriii. 9, P), the
sister of Nebajoth, before mentioned.* The sons
ISHMAEL
1477
• In Gen. xxxrL 3, the Redactor speaks of BStfmafk
the daughter of Ishmael, the sister of Nebajoth, as a wife
of Esan (cp. also m. 10, 17). In xxrl. 34, P had written
"Biutmaik, the daughter of Eton the Hltttte." As
are enumerated with the statement that " these
are their names, in their villages, and in their
encampments; twelve emirs according to their
kindreds" (or tribal communities, TOOK; origi-
nally perhaps, motherhoods), xxr. 16, P. The
sons of Ishmael here appear as partly settled in
open country places, and partly living in
temporary camping-grounds like the Bedawis at
the present day. "They dwelt from Harilah
unto Shur, that is before (i.e. east of) Egypt, as
thou goest unto Assyria " (xxr. 18) [but see the
remark on this passage, above] ; and it is
certain, in accordance with- this statement of
their limits [see Havilah, Shur], that they
stretched in very early times across the desert
to the N.W. coast of the Persian Gulf, peopled
the north and west of the Arabian peninsula,
and eventually formed the chief element of the
Arab nation. Their language, which is generally
acknowledged to hare been the Arabic commonly
so called, has been adopted with insignificant
exceptions throughout Arabia. It has been said
that the Bible requires the whole of that nation
to be sprung from Ishmael, and the fact of a
large admixture of Joktanite and even Cushite
peoples in the south and south-east has been
regarded as a suggestion of scepticism. Yet not
only does the Bible contain no warrant for the
assumption that all Arabs are Ishmaelites ; but
the characteristics of the Ishmaelites, strongly
marked in all the more northern tribes of
Arabia, and perfectly according with the oracle
(Gen. xvi. 12), " he will be a wild man ; his
hand will be against every man, and every man's
hand against him," become weaker in the south,
and can scarcely be predicated of all the peoples
of Joktanite and other descent. Some of the
bene Ishmael, indeed, became settled, and
attained to a certain degree of civilisation
[Ddmab, Nebajoth, Tema]. The true Ish-
maelites, however, and even tribes of very mixed
race, have always been, for the most part,
thoroughly " wild men," living by warlike
forays and plunder; dreaded by their neigh-
bours; dwelling in tents, with hardly any
household chattels, but rich in flocks and herds,
migratory, and recognising no law but the
authority of the chiefs of their tribes. Even the
religion of Muhammad is held in light esteem
by many of the more remote tribes, among whom
the ancient usages of their people obtain in
almost their old simplicity, besides idolatrous
practices altogether repugnant to Muhamina-
danism as they are to the faith of the patriarchs ;
practices which may be ascribed to the influence
of the Canaanites, of Moab, Ammon, and Edom,
with whom, by intermarriages, commerce, and
war, the tribes of Ishmael must have had long
and intimate relations. ,
The term Ishmaelite (vNTDtf?) occurs on
several occasions : Gen. xxxvii. 25, 27, 28, xxxix.
1 ; Judg. viii. 24 ; Ps. lxxxiii. 6. From the con-
text of the first two instances, it seems to have
been a comprehensive name for the Abrahamic
Dillmann observes, the divergences presented by these
passages are to be traced to differences of tradition or
of theory, rather than to be explained away by the as-
sumption that Ksan had fire wives, or that their names
were changed, or that they bad double names, or that the
names have been corrupted by copyists.
Digitized by
Google
1478
ISHMAEL
peoples of the east country, the Bene-Kedem, or
the northern Arabs geuerally, so that the
Midianites might be included under it. In the
third instance the name is applied in its strict
sense to the Ishmaelites. It is also applied to
Jether, the father of Amasa by David's sister
Abigail (1 Ch. ii. 17.) [Ithra ; Jether.] Cp.
also 1 Ch. xxviii. 30.
The notions of the Arabs respecting Ishmael
( \i&l ( ...\ ) are partly derived from the Bible,
partly from the Jewish Rabbis, and partly from
native traditions. The origin of many of these
traditions is obscure, but a great number may
be ascribed to the fact of Muhammad's having
for political reasons claimed Ishmael for his
ancestor, and striven to make out an impossible
pedigree ; while both he and his followers have,
as a consequence of accepting this assumed de-
scent, sought to exalt that ancestor. Another
reason may be safely found in Ishmael's acknow-
ledged headship of the naturalised Arabs, and
this cause existed from the very period of his
settlement. [Arabia.] Yet the rivalry of the
Joktanite kingdom of Southern Arabia, and its
intercourse with classical and medieval Europe,
the wandering and unsettled habits of the
Ishmaelites, their having no literature, and as
far as we know only a meagre oral tradition, all
contributed, till the importance it acquired with
the promulgation of Al-Islam, to render our
knowledge of the Ishmaelitic portion of the people
of Arabia, before Muhammad, lamentably defec-
tive. That they maintained, and still maintain,
a patriarchal and primitive form of life is known
to us. Their religion, at least in the period
immediately preceding Muhammad, was in
Central Arabia chiefly the grossest fetishism,
probably learnt from aboriginal inhabitants of
the land ; southwards it diverged to the cosmic
worship of the Joktanite Himyarites (though
these were far from being exempt from fetishism),
and northwards (so at least in ancient times) to
an approach to that true faith which Ishmael
may be supposed to have carried with him, and
which his descendants thus gradually lost
[see Wellhausen, Encyc. Brit. xvi. 546 sq.].
This last point is curiously illustrated by the
numbers who, in Arabia, became either Jews
(Caraites) or Christians (though of a very cor-
rupt form of Christianity), and by the movement
in search of the faith of the patriarchs which
had been put forward, not long before the birth
of Muhammad, by men not satisfied with Judaism
or the corrupt form of Christianity with which
alone they were acquainted. This movement
first aroused Muhammad, and was afterwards
the main cause of his success.
The Arabs believe that Ishmael was the first-
born of Abraham, and the majority of their
doctors (but the point is in dispute) assert that
this son, and not Isaac, was offered by Abraham
in sacrifice. 4 The scene of this sacrifice is Mount
'Arafat, near Mecca, the last holy place visited
by pilgrims, it being necessary to the completion
of pilgrimage to be present at a sermon delivered
there on the 9th of the Muhammadan month
4 With this, and some other exceptions, the Muslims
have adopted the chief facts of the history of Ishmael
recorded in the Bible.
ISHBIAEL
Dhu-1-Haggah, in commemoration of the offering,
and to sacrifice a victim on the following evening
after sunset, in the valley of Mina. The sacri-
fice last mentioned is observed throughout the
Muslim world, and the day on which it is made
is called " The Great Festival " (Mr. Lane's Mod.
Egypt, ch. iii.). Ishmael, say the Arabs, dwelt
with his mother at Mecca, and both are buried
in the place called the Higr, on the north-west
(termed by the Arabs the north) side of the
Caaba, and enclosed by a curved wall called the
Hatim. Ishmael was visited at Mecca by Abra-
ham, and they together rebuilt the temple, which
had been destroyed by a flood. At Mecca, Ishmael
married a daughter of Mudad or Al-Mud&d,
chief of the Joktanite tribe G'urhum [Almodad ;
Arabia], and had thirteen children (Jiir-it 'az-
Zaman MS.) ; which agrees with the Biblical
number, if we include the daughter.
Muhammad's descent from Ishmael is totally
lost, for an unknown number of generations,
before 'Adnan, of the twenty-first generation
before the prophet: from him downwards the
latter's descent is, if we may believe the gene-
alogists, fairly proved. But we have evidence
far more trustworthy than that of the gene-
alogists; for while most of the natives of
Arabia are unable to trace up their pedigrees, it
is scarcely possible to find one who is ignorant
of his race, seeing that his very life often depends
upon it. The law of blood-revenge necessitates
his knowing the names of his ancestors for four
generations, but no more ; and this law, obtain-
ing from time immemorial, has made any con-
fusion of race almost impossible. This law, it
should be remembered, is not a law of Mu-
hammad, but an old pagan law that he en-
deavoured to suppress, but could not. In casting
doubt on the prophet's pedigree, we must add
that this cannot affect the proofs of the chief
element of the Arab nation being Ishmaelite
(and so too the tribe of Quraish, of which was
Muhammad). Although partly mixed with
Joktanite?, they are more mixed with Retinites
and other races ; the characteristics of the Jok-
tanites, as before remarked, are widely different
from those of the Ishmaelites; and whatever
theories may be adduced to the contrary, we
believe that the Arabs, from physical charac-
teristics, language, the concurrence of native
traditions (before Muhammadanism made them
untrustworthy), and the testimony of the Bible,
are mainly and essentially Ishmaelite.
[E.S.P.] [C.J. B.]
2. One of the sons of Azel, a descendant of
Saul through Merib-baal, or Mephibosheth (1
Ch. viii. 38, ix. 44). See the genealogy, under
Saul.
3. (B. omits; Ismahel.) A man of Judah,
whose son or descendant Zebadiah was ruler
(T33) of the house of Judah in the time ot
Jehoshaphat (2 Ch. xix. 11).
4. Another man of Judah, son of Jehohanan ;
one of the " captains Q~)P) of hundreds " who
assisted Jehoiada in restoring Joash to the
throne (2 Ch. xxiii. 1).
5. (B. iapatiK, K. -arijA, A. 'U^X.) A
priest of the Bene-Pashur, forced by Ezra to
relinquish his foreign wife (Ezra x. 22). [Is-
MAEL, 2.]
6. The son of Nethaniah ; a perfect marvel
Digitized by
Google
ISHMAEL
of craft and villainy, whose treachery forms
one of the chief episodes of the history of
the period immediately succeeding the first fall
of Jerusalem. His exploits are related in Jer.
xl. 7-xli. 15, with a short summary in 2 K. xxv.
23-25, and they read almost Use a page from
the annals of the Indian mutiny.
His full- description is " Ishmael, the son of
Kethaniah, the son of Elishama, of the seed
royal "* of Judah (Jer. xli. 1 ; 2 K. xxv.
25). Whether by this is intended that he
was actually a son of Zedekiah, or one- of
the later kings, or, more generally, that he
had royal blood in his veins — perhaps a de-
scendant of Elishama, the son of David (2
Sam. v. 16) — we cannot tell. During the siege
of the city he had, like many others of his
countrymen (Jer. xl. 11), fled across the Jordan,
where be found a refuge at the court of Baalis,
the then king of the Bene-Ammon (Jos. Ant. x.
9, § 2). Ammonite women were sometimes
found in the harems of the kings of Jerusalem
(1 K. xi. 1), and Ishmael may have been thus
related to the Ammonite court on his mother's
side. At any rate he was instigated by Baalis
to the designs which he accomplished but too
successfully (Jer. xl. 14; Ant. x. 9, § 3).
Several bodies of Jews appear to have been lying
under arms in the plains on the S.E. of the
Jordan/ during the last days of Jerusalem,
watching the progress of affairs in Western
Palestine, commanded by " princes " O^t? ; R. V.
" captains "), the chief of whom were Ishmael
and two brothers, Johanan and Jonathan, sons
of Kareah. Immediately after the departure of
the Chaldean army these men moved across the
Jordan to pay their respects to Gedaliah, whom
the king of Babylon had left as superintendent
(Tp3) of the province. Gedaliah had taken up
his residence at Mizpah, a few miles north of
Jerusalem, on the main road, where Jeremiah the
prophet resided with him (xl. 6). The house
would appear to have been isolated from the rest
of the town. We can discern a high enclosed
courtyard and a deep well within its precincts.
The well was certainly (Jer. xli. 9 ; cp. 1 K. xv.
22), and the whole residence was probably, a
relic of the military works of Ala king of
Judah.
Ishmael made no secret of his intention to
• rD1^>Dn IHT- Jerome (Qu. Htbr. on 2 Ch.
xxrill. 1) Interprets this expression as meaning "of the
seed of Moloch." He gives the same meaning to the
words " the king's son " applied to M&aselah in the
above passage. The question is an interesting one, and
ban been revived by Geiger (rrichrtft, fcc. p. 30?), who
extends it to other passages and persons. [Molech.]
Jerome (as above) further says — perhaps on the strength
of a tradition —that Ishmael was the son of an Egyptian
slave, Gera : as a reason why the " seed royal " should
bear the meaning he gives it. This the writer has not
hitherto succeeded in elucidating.
' So perhaps, taking it with the express statement of
xl. 11, we may interpret the words " the forces which
were in the Held" (Jer. xl. 7, 13), where the term
rendered "the field" (m(j»J) is one used to denote
VT -
the pasture-grounds of Moab — the modern Bdka —
oflcner than any other district (see Gen. jexxvi. 35;
Num. xxl. 20 ; Ruth 1. 1, and paitim ; 1 Ch. viil. 8; and
Stanley's 5. <*• P. App. } 15). The persistent use of the
word in the semi-Moabite Book of Ruth Is alone enough
to fix its meaning.
ISHMAEL
1479
kill the superintendent, and usurp his position.
Of this Gedaliah was warned in express terms
by Johanan and his companions ; and Johanan.
in a secret interview, foreseeing how irreparable
a misfortune Gedaliah's death would be at this
juncture (Jer. xl. 15), offered to remove the
danger by killing Ishmael. This, however, Ge-
daliah, a man evidently of a high and unsus-
pecting nature, would not hear of (xl. 16. See
the amplification in Jos. Ant. x. 9, § 3). They all
accordingly took leave. Thirty days after (Ant.
x. 9, § 4), in the seventh month (xli. 1), on the
third day of the month — so says the tradition —
Ishmael again appeared at Mizpah, this time
accompanied by ten men, who were, according to
the Hebrew text, " princes (R.V. "chief officers")
of the king" 0]7ljri '31), though this is
omitted by the LXX. and by Josephus. Gedaliah
entertained them at a feast (xli. 1). According
to the statement of Josephus, this was a very
lavish entertainment, and Gedaliah became
much intoxicated. It must have been a private
one, for before its close Ishmael and his followers
had murdered Gedaliah and all his attendants
with such secrecy that no alarm was given out-
side the room. The same night he killed all
Gedaliah's establishment, including some Chal-
dean soldiers who were there. Jeremiah appears
fortunately to have been absent, and, incredible
as it seems, so well had Ishmael taken his pre-
cautions that for two days the massacre remained
perfectly nnknown to the people of the town.
On the second day Ishmael perceived from his
elevated position a large party coming south-
ward along the main road from Shechem and
Samaria. He went out to meet them. They
proved to be eighty devotees, who with rent
clothes, and with shaven beards, mutilated
bodies, and other marks of heathen devotion, and
weeping ' as they went, were bringing frankin-
cense and oblations to the ruins of the Temple. At
his invitation they turned aside to the residence
of the superintendent. And here Ishmael put
into practice the same stratagem which on a
larger scale was employed by Muhammad Ali in
the massacre of the Mamelukes at Cairo in 1806.
As the unsuspecting pilgrims passed into the
courtyard b he closed the entrances behind them,
and there he and his band butchered the whole
number : ten only escaped by the offer of heavy
ransom for their lives. The seventy corpses
were then thrown into the well which, as at
Cawnpore, was within the precincts of the house,
and which was completely filled with the bodies.
It was the same thing that had been done by
Jehu — a man in some respects a prototype of
Ishmael — with the bodies of the forty-two
relatives of Ahaziah (2 K. x. 14). This done he
descended to the town, surprised and carried off
the daughters of king Zedekiah, who had been
sent there by Nebuchadnezzar for safety, with
their eunuchs and their Chaldean guard (xli. 10,
« This Is the LXX. version of the matter— outoi
chojxvoito «ai cxAaior. The statement of the Hebrew
-text and A. V. that Ishmael wept is unintelligible.
a The Hebrew has "VICT— " the city " (A. V. v. 1).
This has been read by Josephus "IVM — "courtyard."
T T
The alteration carries its genuineness in its face. The
same change has been made by the Masorets (Qeri) In
2 K. XX. 4.
Digitized by
Google
1480
ISHMAIAH
16), and all the people of the town, and made
off with his prisoners to the country of the
Ammonites. Which road he took is not quite
clear ; the Hebrew text and LXX. say by Gibeon,
— that is, north ; but Josephus, by Hebron, round
the southern end of the Dead Sea. The news of
the massacre had by this time got abroad, and
lshmael was quickly pursued by Johanan and
his companions. Whether north or south, they
soon tracked him and his unwieldy booty, and
found them reposing by some copious waters
(D'ST D?0)- He was attacked, two of his
braroes slain, the whole of the prey recovered,
and lshmael himself, with the remaining eight
of his people, escaped to the Ammonites, and
thenceforward passes into the obscurity from
which it would have been well if he had never
emerged.
Johanan's foreboding was fulfilled. The result
of this tragedy was an immediate panic. The
small remnants of the Jewish commonwealth —
the captains of the forces, the king's daughters,
the two prophets Jeremiah and Barnch, and all
the men, women, and children — at once took
flight into Egypt (Jer. xli. 17 ; xliii. 5-7); and
all hopes of a settlement were for the time at
an end. The remembrance of the calamity was
perpetuated by a fast — the fast of the seventh
month (Zech. vii. 5; viii. 19), which is to this
day strictly kept by the Jews on the third of
Tishri (see Reland, Antiq. iv. 10; Kimchi on
Zech. vii. 5). The part taken by Baalis in this
transaction apparently brought upon his nation
the denunciations both of Jeremiah (xlix. 1-6)
and the more distant Ezekiel (xxv. 1-7), but we
have no record how these predictions were
accomplished. [G.] [W.J
ISHMA'IAH (IfWQ?*, i.e. Ishmayahu,
= Jehovah hears ; iaftaiat ; Jesmaias), ion of
Obadiah : the ruler of the tribe of Zebulun in
the time of king David (1 Ch. xxvii. 19).
ISH'MEELITE and ISHIIEELITES,
R.V. ISH'MAELITE and ISH'MAELITES
CSkSOB" and D^KJ?DB» respectively; LXX.
'Io7u»iaWti|s, -t« [usually]; hmahelithes, Is-
maelitae); the form — in agreement with the
vowels of the Hebrew — in which the descen-
dants of lshmael are given in a few places
in the A.V. : the former in 1 Cb. ii. 17 ; the
latter in Gen. xxxvii. 25, 27, 28, xxxix. 1.
ISrTMERAI C<ttX?*., if = mDB»= whom
Jehovah keeps ; B. Xafiapd, A. 'U<ra/iapi ; Jesa-
mari), a Benjamite ; one of the family of Elpaal,
and named as a chief man in the tribe (1 Ch. viii.
18).
ISHOD O^K. '•«• Ish-hod=ma» of
renown ; B. 'lo-aSht, A. Xout ; virum decorum),
one of the tribe of Manasseh on the east of
Jordan, son of Hammoleketb, i.e. the Queen,
and, from his near connexion with Gilead, evi-
dently an important person (1 Ch. vii. 18).
I8H-PAN (JBt£ ; B. 'Io-fdV, A. 'E<r<fxf»;
Jespham), a Benjamite, one of the family of
Shashak ; named as a chief man in his tribe
(1 Ch. viii. 22).
ISLE
ISH-TOB Qto-B*K ; B. Zurrmfi, -. 'ltrifi,
Jos. "IotkjBoi; Istob), apparently one of the
small kingdoms or states which formed part of
the general country of Aram, named with Zobao,
Rehob, and Maacah (2 Sam. x. 6, 8), and pro-
bably situated east of Jebel Mattr&n. [Abam.]
In the parallel account of 1 Ch. xix. Ishtob U
omitted. By Joseph as (Ant. vii. 6, § 1) the
name is given as that of a king. But though is
the ancient Versions the name is given as one
word, it is probable that it should be rendered,
as in R. V., " the men of Ton," a district men-
tioned also in connexion with Amnion in the
records of Jephthah, and again perhaps, under
the shape of Tobie or Tubieni, in the history of
the Maccabees. [G.] [W.]
ISHU'AH, R. V. ISH'VAH (m&>=peaceful
[M.V. 11 ]; A. 'Uo-aat, D. 'Uoovi;' Jesua), the
second son of Asher (Gen. xlvi. 17). In the
genealogies of Asher in 1 Ch. vii. 30 (B. 'Itmi,
A. 'Uaovi) the name, though identical in the
original, is in the A. V. given as Isuah (R. V.
Ishvah). In the lists of Num. xxvi., however,
Ishuah is entirely omitted,
ISH'UAL R. V. ISH'VI (*1B* =peaeefnl;
B. 'ioW, A. 'lttrovt ; Jessui), the third son of
Asher (1 Ch. vii. 30), founder of a family bearing
his name (Nnm. xxvi. 44 ; A. V. " Jesuites," K. V.
" Ishvitcs "). His descendants, however, are not
mentioned in the genealogy in Chronicles. His
name is elsewhere given in the A. V. as lsui,
J ESDI, and (another person) Ishui.
ISH'UI, R. V. ISH'VI Cl#? =P«>e<f*l; B.
'Uao-mix, A. 'laovti, Joseph. Iso-ovs ; Jessui),
the second ion of Saul by his wife Ahinoam
(1 Sam. xiv. 49, cp. v. 50) : his place in the family
was between Jonathan and Melchishna. In the
list of Saul's genealogy in 1 Ch. viii. and ix.,
however, the name of Ishui is entirely omitted ;
and in the sad narrative of the battle of Gilbos
his place is occupied by Abinadab (1 Sam. nii
2). We can only conclude that he died young.
The same name is elsewhere given in the
A. V. as Isci and Ishuai. [G.] [W.]
ISLE (*K; more frequently in the plural,
D^K: yjjo-os). The radical sense of the Hebrew
word seems to be land places, as opposed to
water, and in this sense it occurs in Is. xlii. Vo-
Hence it means secondarily any maritime district,
whether belonging to a continent or to an
island : thus it is used of the shore of the
Mediterranean (Is. xx. 6 [R. V. " coastland "1
xxiii. 2, 6 [K. V. marg. ooasthndj), and of the
coasts of Elishah (Ezek. xxvii. 7), i.e. of Greece
and Asia Minor. In this sense it is more
particularly restricted to the shores of the
Mediterranean, sometimes in the fuller ex-
pression "islands of the sea" (Is. xi. 11), •'
" isles of the Gentiles " (Gen. x. 5 ; cp. Zeph. ii.
11), and sometimes simply as " isles" (Ps. lxxii.
10; Ezek. xxvi. 15, 18, xxvii. 3, 35, xxxix.6;
Dan. xi. 18): an exception to this, however,
occurs in Ezek. xxvii. 15, where the shores of the
Persian Gulf are intended. Occasionally the
word is specifically used of an island, as «(
Caphtor or Crete (Jer. xlvii. 4), and Chittim or
Cyprus (Ezek. xxvii. 6; Jer. it 10), or of islamlt
Digitized by
Google
ISMACHIAH
as opposed to the mainland (Esth. x. IX But I
more generally it is applied to any region
separated from Palestine by water, as fully
described in Jer. xxv. 22, " the isles which are
beyond the sea," which were hence regarded as
the most remote regions of the earth (Is. xxiv.
15, xlii. 10, lix. 18 ; compare the expression in
Is. lxri. 19, "the isles afar off") and also as
large and numerous (Is. xl. 15 ; Ps. xcvii. 1) :
the word is more particularly used by the
Prophets (see J. D. Michaelis, Spicilegiam, i.
131-142). In many of the above passages the
R. V. uses the term " coastlands," either in the
margin or in the text. [W. L. B.]
ISMACHTAH (W30D*, U. Ismac-yahu
=toAon» Jehovah supports; B. 2afiax«<*\ A.
-X<o ; Jesmachias), a Levite who was one of the
overseers (QTpD) of offerings, during the
re-rival under king Hexekiah (2 Ch. xxxi. 13).
ISRAEL. 1. ("Itr/idix ; IsmaS.) Judith ii.
23. Another form for the name Ishmaf.Ii, son
of Abraham.
2. ('l(T futfiKos ; Hismaenis.) 1 Esd. ix. 22.
[IBHMAEI, 5.]
I8MAIAH, R. V. ISHMAI'AH (lVyDe»
= Jehovah heart ; BA. iafudas, X. Scuudr ;
Samaiat), a Gibeonite, one of the chiefs of
those warriors who relinquished the cause of
Saul, the head of their tribe, and joined them-
selves to David, when he was at Ziklag (1 Ch.
xiL 4). He is described as " a hero (Gibbor)
among the thirty and over the thirty" — 1.«.
David's body-guard: but his name does not
appear in the lists of the guard in 2 Sam. xxiii.
and 1 Ch. xi. Possibly he was killed in some
encounter before David reached the throne.
IS-PAH, B.. V. ISH-PAH (flBB* [see
MV.»]; B. Ivpar, A. 'E<r«*»x; Jespha\ a Ben-
jamite, of the family of Beriah ; one of the
heads of his tribe (1 Ch. viii. 16).
ISRAEL (V???S n<rfa4,\; fsraet). In
times strictly historical, the collective or
national designation of the brother tribes who
came out of Egypt (Hos. ii. 15, xi. 1, xii. 9, 13),
and whose eponymous ancestor was Jacob-
Israel, after whom they called themselves Blnl
Ytsraii, " the sons of Israel," or simply
Israel (cp. Gen. xxxiv. 7; xiviii. 20; xlix. 7).
According to an exquisitely beautiful and pro-
foundly significant tradition, preserved in the
older stratum of Genesis (Gen. xxxii. 25-
32, J), and cited with one or two important
variations by the early prophet Hosea (Hos.
xii. 3, 4), Jacob, "the wandering Aramean"
(T3K *D"\K) of the Deuteronomist (Dent.
xxtL by, received this name of Israel after his
mysterious conflict at Penuel or Peniel, upon
the borders of the Holy Land [Jacob]. Since in
the monarchical period the northern and larger
group of Israelitish tribes was designated Israel,
in distinction from the kingdom of Judah, it
might be conjectured that Israel was, in fact,
an ancient name of middle and northern Pales-
tine ; but as no trace of this has been found in
Egyptian records, nor in the oldest cuneiform
documents that refer at all to the country
ISBAEL
1481
[Hebrew]," we seem obliged to conclude that
Israel was not a name indigenous to Canaan,
but really peculiar to the confederacy of tribes
that emerged from the Sinaitic peninsula, and
gradually effected its conquest.
The etymological meaning of this name, so
glorious in the records of revelation, is not easy
to determine. According to the analogy of
similar proper names, it might be El striveth
or doeth battle ("Es streitet Gott," Nestle,
Israel. Eigennamen, p. 60 sq.); cp. Jerubbaal
(i'.«. bm 3T, "Baal contendeth "). If we
prefer to regard the first element as a verbal
noun (like Izhar or Yishar, Isaac or Yischaq),
we may render EC's warrior or Soldier of God
(" pugnator, miles Dei," Gesen. The*. 1338 b ;
" GotteskSmpfer," Kautzsch ; so Ewald, H. I. i.
344). This would suit very well with the
implications of the fragmentary reference, Gen.
xiviii. 22 (E), where Jacob speaks of having
wrested Shechem from the Amorites with sword
and bow ; and some such reason as this may
perhaps have been assigned for the name in the
original form of the passage, Gen. xxxv. 10 (P).
On the other hand, El striveth or is a warrior
is in perfect harmony with such expressions
as "Jahvah is a Man of War "(Ex. xv. 3;cp.
Hos. xii. 6) ; " The God of the hosts of Israel "
(1 Sam. xvii. 45); and the frequent Jahvah
§ebff6th <i.e. Jahvah 'lithe Siba'oth), "The Lord
(God) of Hosts." But it can hardly be said
that the interpretation put upon the name both
by the Jahvist (Gen. xxxii. 29) and by the
Prophet Hosea (Hos. xii. 4 : D'rfomK PPC,
" he strove with Elohim ") is grammatically
impossible (cp. Ewald, Lehrb. § 282)." That
Israel was the name of the undivided nation
in the time of the first kings (Saul, David,
Solomon) hardly requires proof (see 2 Sam. i.
24, xxiii. 3). After the division of the king-
dom, the northern monarchy came to be known
as Israel and the House of Israel (cp. the As-
syrian designation of it, "House of Omri");
while the Davidic kingdom of the south
was called Judah or the House of Judah
(Hos. i. 4, 6, iv. 15, v. 5, 12 ; Amos ii. 4, 6,
v. 1, vii. 11, 17 ; but cp. iii. l.ix. 7). Naturally,
however, where the contrast was necessary, the
same restriction of the title Israel was observed
even in the previous time (e.g. 1 Sam. xi. 2 ;
2 Sam. i. 12, ii. 4, xx. 1). Indeed the partial
isolation of Judah may hie traced back through
the period of the Judges to the beginnings of the
conquest of the land west of the Jordan. Judah
• The earliest occurrence of the name Israel In As-
syrian records is the mention of Ahab of Israel ( Afuibbu
mat Sir'ilai or Sir'ilaa) by Shalmaneser (ctrc. 8M ax.),
If Schroder's transcription be accepted as correct. In
the same century the northern kingdom is called Israel
by Mesba king of Moab, who names both Omrt and
Ahab In his famous inscription.
b The strange explanation, "the man that seal God."
which St. Jerome says was In vogue In bis day, may be
accounted for by a confusion of the roots Mir, *' to
strive " (yjff ; Hor. xll. 6), and tar, " to see " (Sti? ;
Num. xxiv. 17), which In the unpointed text are exactly
alike. In his own view, he combines the sense of *Hg\
" to be a prince " (Judg. lx. 32 ; but also " to strive,"
Hos. xii. 6), with that of mC. "to strive," though he
renders tbe name " Prince with Ood " (Quasil. Heb. in
Gen.)— a curious instance of exegetteal vacillation.
Digitized by
Google
1482 ISRAEL, KINGDOM OF
was the first to part company with the other
tribes, and to win possession of that hill-country
which was to be his permanent territory (Judg.
i. 3, 19). Neither he, nor " his brother Simeon "
who had shared in the enterprise, is named in
the Song of Deborah (Judg. v.). Wellhausen
accordingly thinks that this '• secession " of
Judah, Simeon, (and Levi) from the remaining
tribes was the origin of the division of the
nation into Israel and Jndah (H. I. p. 441).
But the primal unity, however loose, was never
forgotten ; and Isaiah could speak of " the two
houses of Israel " (Is. viii. 14), and could call
Judah " the remnant of Israel " (Is. x. 20).
The latest historian, whose compilation is
dismembered in the Canon into the Books of
Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, sometimes calls
the Judean state Israel, even when referring
to the pre-exilic period (2 Ch. xi. 3, xii. 1, xv. 17,
xix. 8, xxi. 2, 4, xxiii. 2 ; Ezra ii. 2, iii. 1, ix. 1 ;
but cp. 2 Ch. xxx. 1, 5, 10; Ezra x. 7, 9).
The Chronicler has also a peculiar use of the
term " Israel," to denote the lay folk as
distinct from the priestly orders (1 Ch. ix. 2 ;
Ezra vi. 16, ix. 1 ; Neh. xi. 3). In the Macca-
bean age, the old name, so rich in inspiring
memories, was naturally revived (1 Mace. L 11,
20, 30 sq., it 70, iii. 35, iv. 11, 30 sq.) ; and
the coins of the Hasmonean princes bore the
legend " shekel of Israel." Israel, in truth,
never ceased to be the name to which the
highest associations of religious and patriotic
feeling clung inseparably; hence the psalms
of every age almost without exception (Ps.
lxxvi. 1) speak of Israel, not of Judah.' The
later prophetic use of the term Israel (e.g. Is.
xlix. 3) prepared the way for St. Paul's distinc-
tion between " Israel after the flesh " and the
true spiritual Israel (cp. John i. 47). [C. J. B.]
ISBAEL, KINGDOM OF.* 1. The prophet
Ahijah of Shiloh, who was commissioned in the
latter days of Solomon to announce the division
of the kingdom, left one tribe (Judah) to the
House of David, and assigned ten to Jeroboam
'IK. xi. 31, 35). These were probably Joseph
t = Ephraim and Manasseh), Issachar, Zebulun,
Asher, Naphtali, Benjamin, Dan, Simeon, Gad,
and Reuben ; Levi being intentionally omitted.
Eventually, the greater part of Benjamin, and
probably the whole of Simeon and Dan, were
included as if by common consent in the kingdom
of Judah. With respect to the conquests of
David, Moab appears to have been attached to
the kingdom of Israel (2 K. iii. 4) ; so much of
Syria as remained subject to Solomon (see 1 K.
xi. 24) would probably be claimed by his
successor in the northern kingdom ; and Ammon,
though connected with Rehoboam as his mother's
native land (2 Ch. xii. 13), and though after-
wards tributary to Judah (2 Ch. xxvii. 5), was
at one time allied (2 Ch. xx. 1), we know not
« So far as they belong to the period of the Judean
monarchy, this may, perhaps, be partly explained by
the fact that the boose of David never formally sur-
rendered its claim to rule the entire nation.
• The political aspect of the periods Included in this
article is presented by Wellhausen (summarily) in
" Israel" (Encycl. Brit.'), by Stade (more in detail) in
bis GtKk. d. Volkc$ lirael, and by Edershelm, Bible
HUtary. The student will further turn to Edershelm
for a careful presentment of the religions aspect.
ISBAEL, KINGDOM OF
how closely, or how early, with Moab. The
sea-coast between Accho and Japho remained in
the possession of Israel.
2. The population of the kingdom is not ex-
pressly stated; and in drawing any inference
from the numbers of fighting-men, we must
bear in mind that the numbers in the Heb. text
of the O. T. are strongly suspected to have been
subjected to extensive, perhaps systematic, cor-
ruption. Forty years before the disruption the
census taken by direction of David gave 800,00V
according to 2 Sam. xxiv. 9, or 1,100,000
according to 1 Ch. xxi. 5, as the number of
fighting-men in Israel. Jeroboam, B.c. 938,
brought into the field an army of 800,000 nun
(2 Ch. xiii. 3). The small number of the army
of Jehoahaz (2 K. xiii. 7) is to be attributed to
his compact with Haxael ; for in the next reign
Israel could spare a mercenary host ten times as
numerous for the wars of Amaziah (2 Ch. xxr.
6). If in B.C 957 there were actually under
arms 800,000 men of "twenty years old and
above " (Num. i. 3 ; 2 Ch. xxv. 5) in Israel, the
whole population may perhaps have amounted
to at least three millions and a half. Later
observers have echoed the disappointment with
which Jerome from his cell at Bethlehem con-
templated the small extent of this celebrated
country (Ep. 129, ad Dardan. § 4). The area of
Palestine proper, from Dan to Beersheba, wu
— west of the Jordan — 6,000 square miles, or
about the size of the Principality of Wales ; east
of the Jordan the habitable district was about
4,000 square miles. At the time of the disrup-
tion the area claimed for Israel would have been
about 7,500 square miles, not including Syria
(cp. Condor, Handbook to the Bible, p. 204; and
for remarks on the density of the population,
pp. 271-3, 281).
3. Shecueh was the first capital of the new
kingdom (1 K. xii. 25), venerable for its tradi-
tions, and beautiful in its situation. Subse-
quently Tirzah, whose loveliness had fixed the
wandering gaze of Solomon (Cant. vi. 4), became
the royal residence, if not the capital, of Jero-
boam (1 K-. xiv. 17) and of his successors (it.
33; xvi. 8, 17, 23). Samaria, uniting in itself
the qualities of beauty and fertility, and s
commanding position, was chosen by Omri (1 K.
xvi. 24), and remained the capital of the kingdom
until it had given the last proof of its strength
by sustaining for three years the onset of the
hosts of Assyria. Jezreel was probably only s
royal residence of some of the Israelitish kings.
It may have been in awe of the ancient holiness
of Shiloh, that Jeroboam forbore to pollute the
secluded site of the Tabernacle with the golden
calves. He chose for the religious capitals of
his kingdom Dan, the old home of northern
schism, and Bethel, 1 * a Benjamite city not far
from Shilob, and marked out by history and
situation as the rival of Jerusalem.
4. The disaffection of Ephraim and the northern
tribes having grown in secret under the pros-
perous but burdensome reign of Solomon, broke
out at the critical moment of that great
monarch's death. It was just then that Ephraim.
the centre of the movement, found in Jeroboam
an instrument prepared to give expression to
b On these seven places see Stanley's S. & P., cbs. Iv.
v. and si.
Digitized by
Google
ISRAEL, KINGDOM OF
the rivalry of centuries, with sufficient ability
and application to rise him to high station, with
the stain of treason on his name, and with the
bitter recollections of an exile in his mind.
Judah and Joseph were rivals from the time
that they occupied the two prominent places,
and received the amplest promises in the blessing
of the dying patriarch (Gen. xlix. 8, 22). When
the twelve tribes issued from Egypt, only Judah
and Joseph could each muster above 70,000
warriors. In the desert and in the conquest,
Caleb and Joshua, the representatives of the two
tribes, stand out side by side eminent among the
leaders of the people. The blessing of Hoses
(Deut. xxxiii. 13) and the divine selection of
Joshua inaugurated the greater prominence of
Joseph for the next three centuries. Othniel,
the successor of Joshua, was from Judah : the
last, Samuel, was born among the Ephraim-
itea. Within that period Ephraim supplied at
Shiloh (Judg. xxi. 19) a resting-place for the
.Ark, the centre of divine worship; and a
rendezvous or capital at Shechcm (Josh. xxiv. 1;
Judg. ix. 2) for the whole people. Ephraim
arrogantly claimed (Judg. viii. 1, xii. 1) the
exclusive right of taking the lead against in-
vaders. Royal authority was offered to one
dweller in Ephraim (viii. 22), and actually
exercised for three years by another (ix. 22).
After a silent, perhaps sullen, acquiescence in
the transfer of Samuel s authority with additional
dignity to a Benjamite, they resisted for seven
years (2 Sam. ii. 9-11) its passing into the
hands of the popular Jewish leader, and yielded
reluctantly to the conviction that the sceptre
which seemed almost within their grasp was
reserved at last for Judah. Even iu David's
reign their jealousy did not always slnmbcr
(2 Sam. xix. 43) ; and though Solomon's alliance
and intercourse with Tyre must have tended to
increase the loyalty of the northern tribes, they
took the first opportunity to emancipate them-
selves from the rule of his son. Doubtless the
length of Solomon's reign, and the clouds that
gathered round the close of it (1 K. xi. 14-25),
and possibly his increasing despotism (Ewald,
Qesch. Itr. iii. 395), tended to diminish the
general popularity of the house of David ; and
the idolatry of the king alienated the affection
of religious Israelites. But none of these was
the immediate cause of the disruption. No
aspiration after greater liberty, political privi-
leges, or aggrandizement at the expense of
other powers, no spirit of commercial enterprise,
no breaking forth of pent-up energy seems to
have instigated the movement. Ephraim proudly
longed for independence, without considering
whether or at what cost he could maintain it.
Shechcm was built as a capital, and Tirzah as a
residence, for an Ephraimite king, by the people
who murmured under the burden imposed upon
them by the royal state of Solomon. Ephraim
felt no patriotic pride in a national splendour
of which Judah was the centre. The dwelling-
place of God when fixed in Jerusalem ceased to
be so honourable to him as of old. It was
ancient jealousy rather than recent provocation,
the opportune death of Solomon rather than
unwillingness to incur taxation, the opportune
return of a persecuted Ephraimite rather than
any commanding genius for rule which Jeroboam
possessed, that finally broke up the brotherhood
ISBAEL, KINGDOM OF 1483
of the children of Jacob. It was an outburst of
human feeling so soon as that divine influence
which restrained the spirit of disunion was
withdrawn in consequence of the idolatry of
Solomon, so soon as that stern prophetic Voice
which had called Saul to the throne under a
protest, and David to the throne in repentance,
was heard in anger summoning Jeroboam to
divide the kingdom.
5. The kingdom of Israel developed no new
power. It was but a portion of David's kingdom
deprived of many elements of strength. Its
frontier was as open and as widely extended as
before ; but it wanted a capital for the seat of
organised power. Its territory was as fertile
and as tempting to the spoiler, but its people
were less united and patriotic. A corrupt
religion poisoned the source of national life.
When less reverence attended on a new and
unconsecrated king, and less respect was felt for
an aristocracy reduced by the retirement of the
Levites, the army which David found hard to
control rose up unchecked in the exercise of its
wilful strength ; and thus eight houses, each
ushered in by a revolution, occupied the throne
in quick succession. Tyre ceased to be an ally
when the alliance was no longer profitable to
the merchant-city. Moab and Ammon yielded
tribute only while under compulsion. A power-
ful neighbour, Damascus, sat armed at the gate
of Israel ; and, beyond Damascus, might be
discerned the rising strength of the first great
monarchy of the world.
These causes tended to increase the mis-
fortunes and to accelerate the early end of the
kingdom of Israel. It lasted 216 years, from
B.C. 938 to B.C. 722, about two-thirds of the
duration of its more compact neighbour Judah.
But it may be doubted whether the division
into two kingdoms greatly shortened the inde-
pendent existence of the Hebrew race, or inter-
fered with the purposes which, it is thought,
may be traced in the establishment of David's
monarchy. If among those purposes were the
preservation of the true religion in the world,
and the preparation of an agency adapted for
the diffusion of Christianity in due season, then
it must be observed — first, that as a bulwark
providentially raised against the corrupting
influence of idolatrous Tyre and Damascus,
Israel kept back that contagion from Judah, and
partly exhausted it before its arrival in the
south ; next, that the purity of Divine worship
was not destroyed by the excision of those tribes
which were remote from the influence of the
Temple, and by the concentration of priests and
religious Israelites within the southern kingdom ;
and lastly, that to the worshippers at Jerusalem
the early decline and fall of Israel was a solemn
and impressive spectacle of judgment, — the
working out of the great problem of God's
toleration of idolatry. This prepared the heart
of Judah for the revivals under Hezekiah and
Josiah, softened them into repentance during
the Captivity, and strengthened them for their
absolute renunciation of idolatry, when after
seventy years they returned to Palestine, to
teach the world that there is a spiritual bond
more efficacious than the occupancy of a certain
soil for keeping up national existence, and to be-
come the channel through which God's greatest
gift was conveyed to mankind. [Captivitx".]
Digitized by
Google
H84 ISRAEL, KINGDOM OP
6. The detailed history of the kingdom of
Israel will be found under the names of its
nineteen kings. [See also Ephraim.] A sum-
mary view may be taken in four periods : —
(.1.) B.C. 938-888. Jeroboam had not suffi-
cient force of character in himself to make a
lasting impression on his people. A king, but
not a founder of a dynasty, he aimed at nothing
beyond securing his present elevation. Without
any ambition to share in the commerce of Tyre,
or to compete with the growing power of
Damascus, or even to complete the humiliation
of the helpless monarch whom he had deprived
of half a kingdom, Jeroboam acted entirely on a
defensive policy. He attempted to give his
subjects a centre which they wanted for their
political allegiance, in Shechem or in Tirzah.
He sought to change merely so much of their
ritual as was inconsistent with his authority
over them. But as soon as the golden calves
were set up, the priests and Levites and many
religions Israelites (2 Ch. xi. 16) left their
country, and the disastrous emigration was not
effectually checked even by the attempt of
Baasha to build a fortress (2 Ch. xvi. 6) at
Kamah. A new priesthood was introduced'
(1 K. xii. 31) absolutely dependent on the king
(Amos vii. 13), not forming as under the Mosaic
law a landed aristocracy, not respected by the
people, and unable either to withstand the
oppression or to strengthen the weakness of a
king. A priesthood created and a ritual devised
for secular purposes had no hold whatever on
the conscience of the people. To meet their
spiritual cravings a succession of prophets was
raised up, great in their poverty, their purity,
their austerity, their self-dependence, their moral
influence, but imperfectly organised, — a rod to
correct and check the civil government, not, as
they might have been under happier circum-
stances, a staff to support it. The army soon
learned its power to dictate to the isolated
monarch and disunited people. Baasha in the
midst of the army at Gibbethon slew the son
and successor of Jeroboam ; Zimri, a captain
of chariots, slew the son' and successor of
Baasha ; Omri, the captain of the host, was
chosen to punish Zimri ; and after a civil war of
four years he prevailed over Tibni, the choice of
half the people.
(6.) ac. 888-843. For forty-five years Israel
was governed by the house of Omri, the
second founder of the kingdom. That sagacious
king pitched on the strong hill of Samaria
as the rite of his capital. Damascus, which
in the days of Baasha had proved itself more
than a match for Israel, now again assumed
a threatening attitude. Edom and Hoab showed
a tendency to independence, or even aggression.
Hence the princes of Omri's house cultivated an
alliance with the contemporary kings of Judah,
which was cemented by the marriage of Jehoram
and Athaliah, and marked by the community of
names among the royal children. Ahab's Tyrian
alliance strengthened him with the counsels of
the masculine mind of Jezebel, but brought him
no farther support. The subsequent rejection
of the God of Abraham, under the disguise of
abandoning Jeroboam's unlawful symbolism, and
adopting Baal as the god of a luxurious court
and subservient populace, led to a reaction in
the nation, to the moral triumph of the prophet*
ISRAEL, KINGDOM OF
in the person of Elijah, and to the extinction of
the house of Ahab in obedience to the bidding of
Klisha.
(c.) B.C. 843-743. Unparalleled triumphs,
but deeper humiliation, awaited the kingdom of
Israel under the dynasty of Jehu. The worship
of Baal was abolished by one blow ; but, so
long as the kingdom lasted, the people never
rose superior to the debasing form of religion
established by Jeroboam. Hazael, the successor
of the two Benhadads, the ablest king of
Damascus, reduced Jehoahax to the condition of
a vassal, and triumphed for a time over both
the disunited Hebrew kingdoms. Almost the
first sign of the restoration of their strength
was a war between them ; and Jehoash, the
grandson of Jehu, entered Jerusalem as the
conqueror of Amaziah. Jehoash also turned the
tide of war against the Syrians ; and Jeroboam
II., the most powerful of all the kings of Israel,
captured Damascus, and recovered the whole
ancient frontier from Hamath to the Dead Sea.
In the midst of this long and seemingly glorious
reign the prophet Amos uttered his warnings.
The short-lived greatness expired with the last
king of Jehu's line.
(d.) B.C. 743-722. Military violence, it would
seem, broke off the hereditary succession after
the obscure and probably convulsed reign of
Zachariah. An unsuccessful usurper, ShaUom,
was followed by the cruel Menahem, who, being
unable to make head against the first attack of
Assyria under Pul (Tiglath-pileser U.), became
the agent of that monarch for the oppressive
taxation of his subjects. Yet his power at home
was sufficient to insure for his son and successor
Pekahiah a ten years' reign, cut short by s
bold usurper, Pekah. Abandoning the northern
and Transjordanic regions to the encroaching
power of Assyria under Tiglath-pileser, he vu
very near subjugating Judah, with the help of
Damascus, now the coequal ally of Israel. Bat
Assyria interposing summarily put an end to
the independence of Damascus, and perhaps was
the indirect cause of the assassination of the
baffled Pekah. The' irresolute Hoshea, the next
and last usurper, became tributary to his in-
vader, Shalmaneser IV., betrayed the Assyrian
to the rival monarchy of Egypt, and was
punished by the loss of his liberty, and by the
capture by Sargon, after a three years' siege, of
his strong capital, Samaria. Some gleanings of
the ten tribes yet remained in the land after so
many years of religious decline, moral debase-
ment, national degradation, anarchy, bloodshed,
and deportation. Even these were gathered np
by the conqueror and carried to Assyria, never
again, aa a distinct people, to occupy their
portion of that goodly and pleasant land which
their forefathers won under Joshua from ths
heathen. [W. L. B.] [F.]
7. The following table gives the chronology
of the periods as now generally accepted (see
Riehm's SWB., s. n. " Zeitrechnung "> The
chronology of Ussher, &c will be found in the
1st ed. of this work, and in Ederaheim's BSk
History, vol. v. end.
Division or the Ktsodohb, B.C. 93*.
Itrael. Jvdak.
938-917 Jeroboam L 938-921 Rebobosm.
91T.918 Nadab. 921-919 AMJslL
Digitized by
Google
ISBAELITE
ISSACHAB
1485
Inatl.
Judah.
916-893 Baasha.
818-878 Asa.
883, 882 Kith.
882 ZtaDlL
882-888 Tlbnl.
888-877 Omri.
877-858 Ahab-
877-853 Jehosbapt
856,865 Ahaziah.
866-844 Joram.
852-846 Jehoram.
844 Abailah.
843-81$ Jehu.
843-838 Atballab.
815-788 Jeboahaz.
837-788 Jehoash.
788-783 Jehoash.
787-768 Amailah.
783-743 Jeroboam 1L
780-738 Uzziah.
743 Zacharlah, Shallum.
742-738 Menahem.
760-735 Jotham.
738,731 Pekahlah.
738-731 Pekab.
736-716 Ahaz.
730-722 Hoshea.
722 Fall of Samaria.
[F.]
ISBAELITE C^t? - ^ ; B. 'IvptaiKtlrtis ; de
Jesraeli). In 2 Sam. xvii. 25. Ithra is called
"the Israelite" (R. V. and LXX. B.). The
true reading is "the Ishmaelite" (cp. LXX.
A. and 1 Ch. ii. 17). "Israelite" is also the
A. V. rendering of VkTE* B»K (R. V. "man
of Israel ") in Num. xxv. 14, and of "Io-oaqXf (rip
in John i. 47, Rom. zi. 1. "Israelites" is the
translation of ?K1B^, used collectively in many
passages (e.g. Ex. ix. 7 ; Josh. iii. 17 ; 1 Sam.
ii. 14; 2 Sam. iv. 1 ; 2 K. iii. 24; 1 Ch.
ix. 2) ; — of 'Ifoa^A in Bar. iii. 4 ; 1 Mace. i. 43,
&c. ; — of ui'ol 'lap. in Judith vi. 14; 1 Mace
vii. 23 ; — and of 'IopaiiAt <rcu in Rom. ix. 4 ;
2 Cor. ii. 22. [F.]
ISBAELITISH (nVKnfc^, B. 'I<rp(tnAt?T.j ;
Isratlitit). The designation of a woman whose
son was stoned for blasphemy (Lev. xxiv. 10).
IS'SACHAB COtW, it. IsascaT— such is
the invariable spelling of the name in the
Hebrew, the Samaritan Codex and Version, the
Targums of Onkelos and Pseudojonathan, but
the Masorets hare pointed it so as to supersede
the second S, "aWSPj Issa[s]car: lae&xt '»
Rec. Text of N. f. 'lo-o<rxd>, but Coi - C - ' I<ro *
x dp ; Joseph, laaixt't '• Itachar), the ninth
son of Jacob and the fifth of Leah ; the first
born to Leah after the interval which occurred
in the births of her children (Gen. xxx. 17;
cp. xxix. 35). As is the case with each of the
sons, the name is recorded as bestowed on account
of a circumstance connected with the birth.
But, as may be also noticed in more than one of
the others, two explanations seem to be com-
bined in the narrative, which even then is not
in exact accordance with the requirements of
the name. " God hath given me my hire COt?,
tacar) . . . and she called his name Issachar," is
the record ; but in r. 18 that " hire " is for the
surrender of her maid to her husband — while
in ct). 14-17 it is for the discovery and be-
stowal of the mandrakes. Besides, as indicated
above, the name in its original form — Isascar —
rebels against this interpretation, an interpreta-
tion which to be consistent requires the form
subsequently imposed on the word, Is-sachar.*
• The words occur again almost identically In 2 Ch.
The allusion is not again brought forward as it
is with Dan, Asher, &c, in the blessings of Jacob
and Hoses. In the former only it is perhaps
allowable to discern a faint echo of the sound of
" Issachar " in the word sAi'cmo — " shoulder "
(Gen. xlix. 15).
Of Issachar the individual we know nothing.
In Genesis he is not mentioned after his birth,
and the few verses in Chronicles devoted to the
tribe contain merely a brief list of its chief
men and heroes in the reign of David (1 Ch.
vii. 1-5).
At the descent into Egypt four sons are
ascribed to him, who founded the four chief
families of the tribe (Gen. xlvi. 13 ; Num. xxvi.
23, 25 ; 1 Ch. vii. 1). Issachar's place during
the journey to Canaan was on the east of the
Tabernacle with his brothers Judah and Zebulun
(Num. ii. 5), the group moving foremost in the
march (x. 15), and having a common standard
which, according to the Rabbinical tradition,
was of the three colours of sardine, topaz, and
carbuncle, inscribed with the names of the three
tribes, and bearing the figure of a lion's whelp
(see Targum Pseudojon. on Num. ii. 3). At this
time the captain of the tribe was Nethaneel
ben-Zuar (Num. i. 8, ii. 5, vii. 18, x. 15). He
was succeeded by Igal ben-Joseph, who went as
representative of nis tribe among the spies
(xiii. 7), and he again by Paltiel ben-Azzan,
who assisted Joshua in apportioning the land of
Canaan (xxxiv. 26). Issachar was one of the
six tribes who were to stand on Mount Gerizim
during the ceremony of blessing and cursing
(Dent xxvii. 12). He was still in company
with Judah, Zebulun being opposite on Ebal.
The number of the fighting men of Lssachar
when taken in the census at Sinai was 54,400.
During the journey they seem to have steadily
increased, and after the mortality at Peor they
amounted to 64,300, being inferior to none but
Judah and Dan — to the latter by 100 souls only.
The numbers given in 1 Ch. vii. 2, 4, 5, pro-
bably the census of Joab, amount in all to
145,600.
The Promised Land once reached, the con-
nexion between Issachar and Judah seems to
have closed, to be renewed only on two brief
occasions, which will be noticed in their turn-
The intimate relation with Zebulun was, how-
ever, maintained. The two brother-tribes had
their portions close together, and more than
once they are mentioned in company. The allot-
ment of Issachar lay above that of Manasseh.
The specification of its boundaries and contents
is contained in Josh. xix. 17-23. But to the
towns there named must be added Daberath,
given in the catalogue of Levitical cities (xxi. 28 :
Jarmuth here is possibly the Remeth of xix. 21),
and five others — Beth-shean, Ibleam, En-dor,
Taanach, and Megiddo. These last, though the
property of Manasseh, remained within the
limits of Issachar (Josh. xvii. 11 ; Judg. i. 27),
xv. 7 and Jer. xxxl. 16: 13*B> E« = " ulere to *
t T
reward for," A. V. "shall be rewarded."
An expansion of the story of the mandrakes, with
curious details, will be found In the TaUmentum
Itachar, Fabrlclns, Cod. Pteudepiar. pp. 620-23. They
were ultimately deposited " In the house of the Lord,"
whatever that expression may mean.
Digitized by
Google
1486
ISSACHAK
aud they assist us materially in determining
his boundary. In the words of Josephus {Ant.
v. 1, § 22), " it extended in length from Carmel
to the Jordan, in breadth to Mount Tabor." In
fact it consisted of the plain of Esdraelon or
Jezreel, and probably that of Dothan also.
The south boundary we can trace by En-gannim,
the modern Jenin, at the foot of the heights
which form the southern enclosure to the Plain ;
and then further westward by Taanach and
Megiddo, the authentic fragments of which still
stand on the same heights as they trend away
to the hump of Carmel. On the north the
territory ceased with the plain, which is there
bounded by Tabor, the outpost of the hills of
Zebulun. East of Tabor the hill-country con-
tinued so as to screen the tribe from the Sea of
Galilee, but a wide and gently sloping valley on
the S.E. led to Bethshean and the upper part of
the Jordan valley. West of Tabor again, a little
ISSACHAR
to the south, is Chesulloth, the modern Tksal,
close to the traditional " Mount of Precipita-
j tion ; " and hence the boundary probably ran in
a slanting course till it joioed Mount Carmel,
I where the Kishon (Josh. xiz. 20) worked its
I way below the eastern bluff of that mountain —
| and thus completed the triangle at its western
: apex. Nazareth lies among the hills, a few
miles north of the so-called Mount of Precipita-
tion, and therefore escaped being in Issachar.
Almost in the centre of the territory stood
Jezreel, on a low swell, attended on the one
hand by the eminence of Mount Gilboa, on the
other by that now called ed-Duhy, or " little
Hermon," the latter having Shunem, Nain, and
Endor on its slopes, — names which recall some
of the most interesting and important events in
the history of Israel.
This territory was, as it still is, among the
richest land in Palestine. Westward was the
famous plain which derived its name, the " seed-
plot of God " — such is the signification of Jezreel
— from its fertility, and the very weeds of which
at this day testify to its enormous powers of pro-
duction (Stanley, S. & P., p. 348). [Esdraelon ;
Jezreel.] On the north is Tabor, which even
under the burning sun of that climate retains the
glades and dells of an English wood (ti>, p. 350).
On the east, behind Jezreel, is the opening which
conducts to the plain of Jordan — to that Beth-
shean which was proverbially among the Rabbis
the gate of Paradise for its fruitfulness. It is
this aspect of the territory of Issachar which
appears to be alluded to in the Blessing of Jacob.
The image of the " strong-boned he-ass " ("ifan
0^.3)— the large animal used for burdens and
field-work, not the lighter and swifter she-ass
for riding — "couching down between the two
hedge-rows " b (R. V. " sheepfolds "), chewing the
cud of stolid ease and quiet — is very applicable,
not only to the tendencies and habits, but to the
very size and air of a rural agrarian people,
while the sequel of the verse is no less sugges-
tive of the certain result of such tendencies when
unrelieved by any higher aspirations : " He
saw a resting-place that was good and the land
that it was pleasant ; and he bowed his shoulder
to bear and became a servant under task
» The word here rendered "hedge-rows " Is one which
only occurs In Judg. v. 16. The sense there is evidently
similar to that in this passage. But as to what that
sense is all the authorities differ. See Gesenlua, Ben
Zev, &c. The rendering given Beams to be nearer the
real force than any. In each case B. V. renders " sheep-
folds."
Digitized by
Google
1SSACHAK
work * " (R. V.)— the tnsk-work imposed on him
by the various marauding tribes who were
attracted to his territory by the richness of the
crops. The Blessing of Moses completes the
picture. He is not only " in tents " — in nomad
or semi-nomad life — but " rejoicing " in them ;
and it is perhaps not straining a point to observe
that he has by this time begun to lose his in-
dividuality. He and Zebulun are mentioned
together as having part possession in the holy
mountain of Tabor, which was on the frontier
line of each (Deut. xxxiii. 1 8, 19). We pass from
this to the time of Deborah : the chief struggle
in the great victory over Sisera took place on
the territory of Issachar, " by Taanach at the
waters of Megiddo " (Judg. v. 19) ; but the
allusion to the tribe in the song of triumph
is of the most cursory nature, not consistent
with its having taken any prominent part in the
action.
One among the Judges of Israel was from
Issachar — Tola (Judg. x. 1); but beyond the
length of his sway we have only the fact re-
corded that he resided out of the limits of his
own tribe — at Shamir in Mount Ephraim. By
Josephus he is omitted entirely (see Ant. v. 7,
§ 6). The census of the tribe taken in the
reign of David has already been alluded to. It
is contained in 1 Ch. vii. 1-5, and an expression
occurs in it which testifies to the nomadic
tendencies above noticed. Out of the whole
number of the tribe no less than 36,000 were
marauding mercenary troops — "bands " (DHnj)
— a term applied to no other tribe in this enu-
meration, though elsewhere to Gad, and uni-
formly to the irregular bodies of the Bedawi
nations round Israel.* This was probably at
the close of David's reign. Thirty years before,
when two hundred of the head men of the tribe
had gone to Hebron to assist in making David
king over the entire realm, different qualifica-
tions are noted in tbem — they " had under-
standing of the times to know what Israel ought
to do . . . and all their brethren were at their
commandment." What this "understanding
of the times " was we have no clue. By the
later Jewish interpreters it is explained as skill
in ascertaining the periods of the sun and moon,
the intercalation of months, and dates of solemn
feasts, and the interpretation of the signs of the
heavens (Targum ad loc ; Jerome, Quaest. Heb.).
Josephus (Ant. vii. 2, § 2) gives it as " knowing
the things that were to happen ; " and he adds
that the armed men who came with these leaders
were 20,000. One of the wise men of Issachar,
according to an old Jewish tradition preserved
by Jerome (Qnaest. Heb. on 2 Ch. xvii. 16), was
Amasiah, son of Zichri, who with 200,000 men
offered himself to Jehovah in the service of
* "l^i? Och- By the LXX. rendered injp ytwpycK.
Cp. their similar rendering of rplUlKA. V. " servants"
and " husbandry ") in Gen. xxvi. it.
* The word " bands," which is commonly employed
in the A. V. to render Otdoodim, as above, is unfortu-
nately used In 1 Ch. xll. 23 for a very different term, by
which the orderly assembly of the fighting men of the
tribes is denoted when they visited Hebron to make
David king. This term is »E»JO = •• heads." We
may almost suspect a mere misprint, especially as the
Vulgate has prineipa.
ISSACHAR
1487
Jehoshaphat (2 Ch. xvii. 16) : but this is very
questionable, as the movement appears to have
been confined to Judah and Benjamin. The
ruler of the tribe at this time was Omri, of the
great family of Michael (1 Ch. xxvii. 18; cp.
vii. 3). May he not have been the forefather
of the king of Israel of the same name — the
founder of the " house of Omri " and of the
" house of Ahab," the builder of Samaria, pos-
sibly on the same hill of Shamir on which the
Issacharite judge, Tola, had formerly held his
court? But whether this was so or not, at
any rate one dynasty of the Israelite kings
was Issacharite. Baasha, the son of Ahijah,
of the house of Issachar, a member of the
army with which Nadab and all Israel were
besieging Gibbethon, apparently not of any
standing in the tribe (cp. 1 K. xvi. 2), slew the
king, and himself mounted the throne (1 K.
xv. 27, &c). He was evidently a fierce and
warlike man (xvi. 29; 1 Ch. xvi. IX and an
idolater like Jeroboam. The Issacharite dynasty
lasted during the twenty-four years of his reign
and the two of his son Elah. At the end of that
time it was wrested from Elah by the same
means that his father had acquired it, and
Zimri, the new king, commenced his reign
by a massacre of the whole kindred and con-
nexions of Baasha — he left him "not even so
much as a dog" (xvi. 11). Elisha, being
from Abel-meholah, may be said to have been
of Issachar.
One more notice of Issachar remains to be
added to the meagre information already col-
lected. It is fortunately a favourable one.
There may be no truth in the tradition just
quoted that the tribe was in any way connected
with the reforms of Jehoshaphat, but we are
fortunately certain that, distant as Jezreel was
from Jerusalem, they took part in the Passover
with which Hezekiah sanctified the opening of
his reign. On that memorable occasion a multi-
tude of the people from the northern tribes, and
amongst them from Issachar, although so long
estranged from the worship of Jehovah as to
have forgotten how to make the necessary
purifications, yet by the enlightened wisdom of
Hezekiah were allowed to keep the Feast ; and
they did keep it seven days with great gladness
—with such tumultuous joy as had not been
known since the time of Solomon, when the
whole land was one. Nor did they separate till
the occasion had been signalised by an immense
destruction of idolatrous altars and symbols,
"in Judah and Benjamin, in Ephraim and
Manasseh," up to the very confines of Issachar's
own land — and then " all the children of Israel
returned every man to his possession into their
own cities " (2 Ch. xxxi. 1). It is a satisfactory
farewell to take of the tribe. A few years later
Sargon king of Assyria had taken Samaria after
three years' siege, and with the rest of Israel had
carried Issachar away to his distant dominions.
There we must be content to leave them until,
with the rest of their brethren of all the tribes
of the children of Israel (Dan only excepted), the
twelve thousand of the tribe of Issachar shall be
sealed in their foreheads (Rev. vii. 7).
2, A Korhite Levite, one of the doorkeepers
(A V. "porters") of the house of Jehovah,
seventh son of Obed-EDOM (1 Ch. xxvi. 5).
[G.] [W.]
Digitized by
Google
1488
ISSHIAH
IS8HI' AH (Tny]=whom Jehovah leads). 1.
(B. omits, A. 'Inrios; Jesias.) A descendant
of Moses by his younger son Eliezer; the
head of the numerous family of Rehabiah,
in the time of David (1 Ch. xxiv. 21 ; cp. xxiii.
17, xxri. 25). His name is elsewhere given as
Jeshaiah.
2. (B. 'Iffii, A. 'A<rla ; Jesia.) A Levite of the
house of Kohath and family of Uzziel ; named in
the list of the tribe in the time of David (1 Ch.
xxiv. 25).
ISSUE RUNNING (3J. 3'tt). The texts
Lev. xv. 2, 3, xxii. 4 ; Num. v. 2 (and 2 Sam.
iii. 29, where the malady is invoked as a curse),
are probably to be interpreted of gonorrhoea.
In Lev. xv. 3 a distinction is introduced, which
merely means that the cessation of the actual
flux does not constitute ceremonial cleanness,
but that the patient must bide the legal time,
seven days (r. 13), and perform the prescribed
purifications and sacrifice (t>. 14). See, however,
Surenhusius's preface to the treatise Zabim of
the Mishna, where another interpretation is
given. As regards the specific varieties of this
malady, it is generally asserted that its moat
severe form (gon. viniienta) is modern, having
first appeared in the 15th century. Chardin
(Voyages en Perse, ii. 200) states that he
observed that this disorder was prevalent in
Persia, but that its effects were far less severe
than in Western climates. If this be true, it
would go some way to explain the alleged
absence of the gon. tirul. from ancient nosology,
which found its field of observation in the East,
Greece, &c ; and to confirm the supposition
that the milder form only was the subject of
Mosaic legislation : cp. Num. xxv. 1, 9 ; Josh,
xxii. 17, where at any rate some persistent
malady is intended. But, beyond this, it is
probable that diseases may appear, run their
course, and disappear, and, for want of an
accurate observation of their symptoms, leave
no trace behind them. The " bed," " seat," &c.
(Lev. xv. 5, 6, &c), are not supposed by that
law to have been contagious, but the defilement
is extended to them merely to give greater
prominence to the ceremonial strictness with
which the case was ruled. In the woman's
"issue" (v. 19) the ordinary menstruation
seems alone intended, supposed prolonged (r. 25)
to a morbid extent. The scriptural handling of
the subject not dealing, as in the case of leprosy,
in symptoms, it seems gratuitous to detail them
here: those who desire such knowledge will
find them in any compendium of therapeutics
(see Biblisch - Talmudisc/ie Medicin, iii., B, e).
The reff. are Joseph, de B. J. v. 5, 6, vi. 9, 3 ;
Mishna, Zabim. ii. 2, Chelim. i. 3, 8 ; Maimon.
ad Zabim. ii. 2 : whence we learn that persons
thus affected might not ascend the Temple
mount, nor share in any religious celebrations,
nor even enter Jerusalem. See also Michaelis,
Laws of Moses, iv. 282. [H. H.]
ISTALCU'RUS. In 1 Esd. viii. 40, the " son
of Istalcurus" (A. 'IoTaAiroi'oos, B. 'Io-TcucdA-
(toi) is substituted for "and Zabbud" of the
corresponding list in Ezra (viii. 14). The Qeri
has Ziccur instead of Zabbud, and of this there
is perhaps some trace in Istalcurus.
ITHAMAB
IS'UAH, R. V. ISHVAH (tTYP), peaceful;
B. 'laavi, A. 'Uoovi ; Jesua\ second son of
Asher (1 Ch. vii. 30> Elsewhere in the A V.
his name, though the same in Hebrew, appears
as Ishcah.
IS'UI, R. V. ISHVI C)^!; BA. Itoik;
Jessui), third son of Asher (Gen. xlvi. 17);
founder of a family called after him, though in
the A V. appearing as the Jesuites (Num.
xxvi. 44; R.V. "Uhvites"> Elsewhere the
name also appears as Ishuai.
ITALIAN BAND (Acts x, 1). [Abmt.]
ITALY CItoAIo; Italia). This word is u*d
in the N. T. in the usual sense of the period,
i.e. in its true geographical sense, as denoting
the whole natural peninsula between the Alps
and the Straits of Messina. For the progress of
the history of the word, first as applied to the
extreme south of the peninsula, then as extended
northwards to the right bank of the Po, see the
Diet, of Ok. Sf Bom. Qeogr? s. n. From the
time of the close of the Republic it was em-
ployed as we employ it now. In the N. T. it
occurs three, or indeed, more correctly speaking,
four times. In Acts x. 1, the Italian cohort at
Caesarea (4 o-wiipa i/ staAovpeVq 'IraAuti), A V.
" Italian band "), consisting, as it doubtless did,
of men recruited in Italy, illustrates the military
relations of the imperial peninsula with the
provinces. [Amir.] In Acts xviii. 2, where
we are told of the expulsion of Aquila and
Priscilla with their compatriots "from Italy,"
we are reminded of the large Jewish population
which many authorities show that it contained.
Acts xxvii. 1, where the beginning of St. Paul's
voyage " to Italy " is mentioned, and the whole
subsequent narrative, illustrate the trade which
subsisted between the peninsula and other parts
of the Mediterranean. And the words in Heb.
xiii. 24, "They of Italy (ot 4x6 tiji IroAfar)
salute you," whatever they may prove for or
against this being the region in which the letter
was written, are interesting as a specimen of the
progress of Christianity in the West.
[J.S.H.] [W.]
I-THAI OJVK ; B. Alf*i, K. AlBtt, A *H«<hS;
Ethai), a Benjamite, son of Ribai of Gibeah,
one of the heroes of David's guard (1 Ch. xi. 31)
In the parallel list of 2 Sam. xxiii. 29 the
name is given as Ittai. Kennicott decides
that the form Ithai is the original (Dissertation,
ad loc.).
I-THAMAR ("IDJTK; 'liapdp; manor),
the youngest son of Aaron (Ex. vi. 23). After
the deaths of Nndab and Abihu (Lev. x. 1),
Eleazar and Ithamar, having been admonished to
show no mark of sorrow for their brothers' loss,
were appointed to succeed to their places in the
priestly office, as they had left no children (Ex.
xxviii. 1, 40, 43 ; Num. iii. 3, 4 ; 1 Ch. xxiv. 2).
In the distribution of services belonging to the
Tabernacle and its transport on the march of
the Israelites, the Gershonites had charge of the
curtains and hangings, and the Merarites of the
pillars, cords, and boards, and both of these
departments were placed under the superu>
Digitized by
Google
ITHIEL
tendence of Ithamar (Ex. xxxviii. 21 ; Num. iv.
21-33). These services were continued under
the Temple system, so far as was consistent with
its stationary character, but, instead of being
appropriated to families, they were divided by
lot ; the first lot being taken by the family of
Eleazar, whose descendants were more numerous
than those of Ithamar (1 Ch. xxiv. 4, 6). The
high-priesthood passed into the family of Itha-
mar in the person of Eli, but for what reason
we are not informed. It reverted into its
original line in the person of Zadok, in conse-
quence of Abiathar's participation in the rebel-
lion of Adonijah. Thus was fulfilled the
prophecy delivered to Samuel against Eli
(1 Sam. ii. 31-35; 1 K. ii. 26, 27, 35; Joseph.
Ant. viii. 1, § 3).
A descendant of Ithamar, by name Daniel, is
mentioned as returning from captivity in the
time of Artaxerxes (Ezra viii. 2). [H. W. P.]
I-THI-EL (fewK,?=bK m^Oedit with
me; BA. AIM*, K- ' 3*MM Etheet). 1. A
Benjamite, son of Jesaiah (Neh. xi. 7).
2. (LXX. omits ; Vulg. translates, cum quo est
Dew.) One of two persons — Ithiel and Ucal — to
whom Agur ben-Jakeh delivered his discourse
(Prov. xxx. 1). [Ucal.]
ITH-MAH (J1DJV, (?) = orphanhood; BN.
'EBt/ti, A. 'l*8tui ; Jethma), a Moabite, one of
the heroes of David's guard, according to the
enlarged list of Chronicles (1 Ch. xi. 46).
Possibly he attached himself to David when
David visited the king of Moab at Hizpeh with
his father and mother.
ITH-NAN(|JJV ; in both MSS. of the LXX.
the name is corrupted by being attached to that
next it: B. 'A<nptu*du>, A. 'leVotfa): Jethnam),
one of the towns in the extreme south of Judah
(Josh. xv. 23), named with Kedesh and Telem
(cp. 1 Sam. xv. 4), and therefore probably on
the borders of the desert, if not actually in the
desert itself. No trace of its existence has yet
been discovered ; nor does it appear to have been
known to Jerome. [G.] [W.]
ITH-BA (K"lfl*, ? = abundance: in Sam. B.
'loOip, A. 'Io0ip, in Ch. vice versa'; Joseph.
Ant. vii. 10, § 1, 'ueipeos : Jetra), an Israelite
(2 Sam. xvii. 25) or Ishmaelite (1 Ch. ii. 17,
" Jether the Ishmeelite ") ; the father of Amasa
by Abigail, David's sister. He was thus brother-
in-law to David and uncle to Joab, Abishai, and
Asahel, the three " sons of Zeruiah." There is
no absolute means of settling which of these —
Israelite or Jshmaelite — is correct : but there
can be little doubt that the latter is so (so A. in
2 Sam.); the fact of the admixture of Ishmaelite
blood in David's family being a fit subject for
notice in the genealogies, whereas Ithra s being
jin Israelite would call for no remark. [Jether.]
Another Ishmaelite is mentioned among David's
subjects in 1 Ch. xxvii. 30. [G.] [W.]
ITH-BAN (VJJV). 1. A. *I«6>dV, B. Triply.
(1 Ch. i. 41); Jethram, Jethran. Ithran ben
Dishon ben Seir was a clan or sub-tribe of the
Horites or Troglodyte aborigines of the hill-
BtBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
1TTAI
1489
country of Seir, whom the Edomites dispos-
sessed (Gen. xxxvi. 20, 21, 26 ; Deut. ii. 12).
2. B. Btpd, A. 'U9tp; Jethran. Ithran (or
Jether) ben Zophah ben Helem (or Hotham ?)
ben Heber ben Beriah ben Asher ; a chief and
house or clan of the tribe of Asher (1 Ch. vii.
37, 38. The list in this chapter, to. 30-39,
was once probably continuous). The corruptions
of some of the names can be explained; e.g.
Hotham for Helem is due to a copyist's eye
having wandered to ahotham, "their sister,"
v. 30 or v. 32 (see the notes ad he. in Bp.
Ellicott's 0. T. Commentary).
The names Jethro (see Ex. iv. 18) and Ithra
(2 Sam. xvii. 25; cp. 1 K. ii. 5) as well as
Ithran (cp. 1 Ch. vii. 38) are only variations of
Jether. [C. J. B.]
ITH-BE-AM (Djnfl!=r<»itfM« of the people :
in 2 Sam. B. 'UOtpaafi, A. Elefl«poa>; in 1 Ch.
B. 'Uapdn, A. 'Uipa/i; Joseph. Trtpaiims:
Jethraam), a son of David, born to him in
Hebron, and distinctly specified as the sixth,
and as the child of "Eglah, David's wife"
(2 Sam. iii. 5 ; 1 Ch. iii. 3). In the ancient
Jewish traditions Eglah is said to have been
Michal, and to have died in giving birth to
Ithream.
ITH'BITE, THE Q"\T\>n-. in 2 Sam. B.
Aifcipcubs, A. 6 'EipaTos, in 1 Ch. B. 'Hthiptl,
K.'W-, A. 'Uttpl : Jethrites, Jethraeue), the native
of a place, or descendant of a man, called Iether
(according to the Hebrew mode of forming
derivatives); the designation of two of the
members of David's guard, Ira and Gareb
(2 Sam. xxiii. 38; 1 Ch. xi. 40). The Ithrite
(A. V. "Ithrites;" BA. A&aKtlp; Jethrei)
is mentioned in 1 Ch. ii. 53 as among the
"families of Kirjath-jearim ; " but this does
not give us much clue to the derivation of
the term, except that it fixes it as belonging
to Judah. The two Ithrite heroes of David's
guard may have come from Jattir, in the
mountains of Judah, one of the places which
were the "haunt" of David and his men in
their freebooting wanderings, and where he
had " friends " (1 Sam. xxx. 27 ; cp. e. 31). Ira
haii been supposed to be identical with " Ira the
Jairite," David's priest (2 Sam. xx. 26)— the
Syriac Version reading "from Jatir" in that
place. But nothing more than conjecture can
be arrived at on the point (see Driver, Notes on
the Heh. Text of the BB. of Samuel, in loco).
ITTAH - KA'ZIN, R. V. ETH-KAZIN
(|»Vp n$» : B. M riXir YLaratrip.; A
Kaalfi: Thacasm), one of the landmarks of the
boundary of Zebulun (Josh. xix. 13), named
next to Gath-hepher. Like that place (A. V.
" Gittah-hepher "X '"• nan> e a probably Eth-
kszin (as in B. V.), with the Hebrew particle of
motion (ah) added — i.e. " to Eth-kazin." Taken
as Hebrew, the name may bear the interpre-
tation time of a judge ( Ges. Thes. p. 1083 6.
See Dillmann* in loco). It has not been
identified. [G.] [W.]
ITTAI CRN). 1. ('Efll, and so Josephus ;
B. SfW«(, A. 'EWeJ : Ethai.) " Ittai the
Gittite," «'.«. the native of Gath, a Philistine
in the army of king David. He appears only
5 C
Digitized by
Google
1490
ITTAI
during the revolution of Absalom. We first
discern him on the morning of David's flight,
while the king was standing under the olive-
tree below the city, watching the army and the
rsople defile past him. [See David, p. 730.]
ast in the procession came the 600 heroes who
had formed David's band during his wanderings
in Judah, and had been with him at Gath
(2 Sam. xv. 18; cp. 1 Sam. zziii. 13, xxvii. 2,
xxx. 9, 10 ; and see Joseph. Ant. vii. 9, § 2).
Amongst these, apparently commanding them,
was Ittai the Gittite (r. 19). He caught the
eye of the king, who at once addressed him and
besought him as " a stranger and an exile," and
as one who had but very recently joined his
service, not to attach himself to a doubtful
cause, but to return " with his brethren " and
abide with the king ' (vv. 19, 20). But Ittai is
firm ; he is the king's slave Q12V, A. V. "ser-
vant "), and wherever his master goes he will
go. Accordingly he is allowed by David to
proceed, and he passes over the Kedron before
the king (xv. 22, LXX. See Driver in loco),
with all his men, and "all the little ones that
were with him." These " little ones " (e|B!T^>3,
" all the children ") must have been the families
of the band, their " households " (1 Sam.
xxvii. 3). They accompanied them during their
wanderings in Judah, often in great risk (1 Sam.
xxx. 6), and they were not likely to leave them
behind in this fresh commencement of their
wandering life.
When the army was numbered and organised
by David at Mahanaim, Ittai again appears,
now in command of a third part of the force,
and (for the time at least) enjoying equal rank
with Joab and Abishai (2 Sam. xviii. 2, 5, 12).
But here, on the eve of the great battle, we
take leave of this valiant and faithful stranger ;
his conduct in the fight and his subsequent fate
are alike unknown to us. Nor is he mentioned
in the lists of David's captains and of the heroes
of his body-guard (see 2 Sam. xxiii. ; 1 Ch.
xi.), lists which are possibly of a date previous
to Ittai's arrival in Jerusalem.
An interesting tradition is related by Jerome
(Quaeat. Hebr. on 1 Ch. xx. 2). "David took
the crown off the head of the image of Milcom
(A. V. ' their king '). But by the Law it was
forbidden to any Israelite to touch either gold or
silver of an idol. Wherefore they say that Ittai
the Gittite, who had come to David from the
Philistines, was the man who snatched the crown
from the head of Milcom ; for it was lawful for
a Hebrew to take it from the hand of a man,
though not from the head of the idol." The
main difficulty to the reception of this legend
lies in the fact that if Ittai was engaged in the
Ammonite war, which happened several years
before Absalom's revolt, the expression of David
(•2 Sam. xv. 20), " thou earnest but yesterday,"
loses its force. However, these words may be
merely a strong metaphor, implying that he was
not a native of Israel.
From the expression " thy brethren " (xv. 20)
we may infer that there were other Philistines
besides Ittai in the six hundred; but this is
• The meaning of this is doubtful. " The king " may
be Absalom, or It may be Ittai's former king, Acbish.
By the LXX. the words are omitted.
ITUBAEA
uncertain. Ittai was not exclusively a Philistine
name, nor does " Gittite " — as in the case of
Obed-edom, who was a Levite — necessarily im-
ply Philistine parentage. Still David's words,
" stranger and exile," seem to show that he was
not an Israelite.
2. (B. 'Ecrdoef, A.'AAd>; Ithai.) Son of Ribai,
from Gibeah of Benjamin; one of the thirty
heroes of David's guard (2 Sam. xxiii. 29). In
the parallel list of 1 Ch. xi. the name is given as
Ithai. [G.] [W.]
ITUKAE'A ('lTovpata), a district on the
north-eastern border of Palestine (Strabo, xvi. 2,
§ 18 ; Pliny, v. 19), which, with Trachonitis,
belonged to the tetrarchy of Philip (Luke iii. 1).
The Ituraeans were descended from Jetur
("MD')» a son of Ishmael, who gave his name,
like the rest of his brethren, to the little pro-
vince he colonised (Gen. xxv. 15, 16 ; cp. 1 Ch.
i. 31). They therefore belonged to the Arab
race; and Strabo couples them with the Ara-
bians, whilst Dion Cassius calls them Arabs.
After the Israelites had settled in Canaan, a war
broke out between the tribes east of Jordan and
the Hagarites (or Ishmaelites), Jetur, Nephish,
and Nodab. The latter were conquered, and the
children of Manasseh " dwelt in the land : they
increased from Bashan unto Baal-Hermon and
Senir, and unto Mount Hermon " (1 Ch. v. 19-
23). Jetur is not again mentioned in the
Bible; but during the Asmonaean period,
according to Josephus, the Ituraeans were con-
quered by Aristobulus I. (B.C. 105), who took
part of their territory, and compelled them to
fly or to be circumcised {Ant. xiii. 11, § 3).
The mountain district was in the hands of
Ptolemaeus, ruler of Chalcis, who combined with
other petty princes in raids that rendered the
whole country, from Byblus and Berytus to
Damascus, unsafe (Strabo, xvi. 2, §§ 10, 18, 20;
Joseph. Ant. xiii. 16, § 3 ; xiv. 7, § i). When
Pompey came into Syria, Ituraea was ceded to
the Romans (Appian, Mithr. 106), but Ptole-
maeus was allowed, on payment of 1,000 talents,
to retain his position as a vassal chief (Ant.
xiv. 3, § 2). Ptolemaeus was succeeded by his
son Lysanias, who was killed by M. Antonius
at the instigation of Cleopatra, to whom the
province, called by Dion Caasius (xlix. 32)
" Ituraean Arabia," was given (An*, xv. 4, § 1 ;
Appian, B. C. v. 7). At a later date Ituraea
passed into the hands of a certain Zenodorus,
who, to increase his income, made common cause
with the robbers. Augustus, consequently, took
(B.& 23) Auranitis, Batanea, and Trachonitis
away from him and gave them to Herod (Ant
xv. 10, § 1) ; and on the death of Zenodorus,
three years later, added those of his possessions
which lay between Trachonitis and Galilee, and
contained Ulatha and Paneas (Ant xv. 10, § 3).
It is omitted by Josephus" from the list of
districts received by Philip on his father's death,
unless it be included under the term Paneas
(Ant xvii. 8, § 1 ; B. J. ii. 6, § 3). According
to Dion Cassius (lix. 12), it was given by Cali-
gula to a certain Soemus, after that emperor
had granted the greater portion of the tetrarchy
of Philip to Agiippa (Ant xviii. 6, § 10 ; xix. 8,
§ 2). Finally, under Claudius, it became part
of the province of Syria (Tac. Ann. iii. 23 ;
Dion Cass. /. c).
Digitized by
Google
IVAH
Ituraea was a mountainous country with
numerous large caverns (Strata, I. c.) ; and its
inhabitants, a bold robber race, were daring
plunderers and skilful archers (Cicero, Phil.
ii. 44 ; Virgil, Georg. ii. 448 ; Lucan, vii. 230,
514). Apuleius (Flor. i. 6) calls them frugum
pauperis Ityraei; and their modern representa-
tives appear to be the Druses. The boundaries
of Ituraea cannot be defined with precision ; but
the district apparently lay between the Upper
Jordan and Damascus, and included the southern
slopes of Anti-Libanus.
In this position, S.W. of Damascus, is the
modern province of Jeidur (..i^wj-), which
corresponds to the Hebrew Jetur ("10?). Wetz-
stein (Reisebericht, p. 90 sq.) identifies Ituraea
with Jebel Druz in the Hauran ; Riehm (HWB.
s. v.) considers Libanus and Anti-Libanus to have
been the special possession of the Ituraeans; and
Reland (Pal. p. 106) and Lightfoot (Hor. Heb.
s. v. Ituraea) suppose that it was included in
Auranitis. Jedur is table-land with an undu-
lating surface, and has little conical and cap-
shaped hills at intervals. The southern section
of it has a rich soil, well watered by numerous
springs and streams from Hermon. The greater
part of the northern section is wild and rugged.
The rock is all basalt, and the formation similar
to that of the Lejah. [Abgob.] There are
about twenty inhabited villages (Burckhardt,
Trot. p. 286; Porter, Damascus, ii. 272: see
also Miinter, de Beb. Itur. Havre, 1824;
Schenkel, Bib. Lex. s. r. ; Kiepert, Lehrb. d. alt.
aeog.p.W). [J. LP.] [W.]
1"VAH (IVTAH) or A*VA (AV'VA) (TWf
or HW; 'Aj84 or 'Aid; Ava). Ivah is men-
tioned twice (2 E. xviii. 34 and xix. 13; cp.
also Is. xxxrii. 13), both times in connexion
with Hena and Sepharvaim. Ava is mentioned
once (2 K. xvii. 24), in connexion with Babylon
and Cuthah, as one of the places from which
the Assyrian king Sargon transplanted the in-
habitants to Samaria. Ivah and Ava have
generally been regarded as one and the same
Slace, and have been identified with the modern
[it (the *1» of Herodotus), with the Ahava
(mnK) of Ezra viii. 15, &c. These identifica-
tions, however, are very doubtful, for it cannot
be regarded as certain whether the city lay,
like Arpad and Hamath, in Syria, or, like
Cuthah, in Babylonia. Its position, however, is
probably limited to one or other of these two
districts.
Notwithstanding the likeness of the forms
Ava and Ivah, it is not impossible that two
distinct places are really meant, and to this
possibility colour is given by the fact that the
LXX. puts Aba for Ivah, and Ala for Ava. The
inhabitants of the latter place (Awwim, Q'?!?,
Gr. E&cuot) are mentioned (2 K. xvii. 31) as
having been transplanted to Samaria, whither
they tooc ine worship of their two principal
gods, Xibcnaz and Tartak. [T. 0. P.]
IVORY (|E>, then, in all passages except 1 E.
x. 22, and 2 Ch. ix. 21, where D'SHlt?, shen-
habbim, is so rendered). The word shin literally
signifies the " tooth " of any animal, and hence
IVOKY
1491
more especially denotes the substance of the
projecting tusks of elephants. There is no
sufficient reason for believing the ancients to
have been ignorant of the fact that ivory is a
tusk and not a horn. Critics are now generally
agreed that D'Sil is identical with the Sanskrit
Ahas, "an elephant," a name preserved with
scarcely any change in the Cingalese of Ceylon
and the modern vernacular of Malabar ; identi-
fied conjecturally by Sir H. Rawlinson with
habba, which occurs in Assyrian inscriptions,
and which he interprets as meaning " elephant."
But the Assyrian term is al-ab, and " ivory " is
shin al-ab, " tooth of elephant " (see Schrader,
KA T. on 1 K. x. 22). Keil (on 1 K. x. 22) derives
the Hebrew from the Coptic eboy. The name in
1 E. x. 22 shows that the Israelites as early as
the time of Solomon were aware of the fact
that ivory was a tusk, not a horn. It is true
that at a much later date, Ezekiel speaks of
JB> nij"lp (xxvii. 15), but the term "horn"
is merely applied to the shape of the tusk, not
to its growth, and the expression is literally
" horns of tooth." The classical writers from
the earliest times seem to have been aware of
the true character of ivory. Pliny, e.g.,
speaking (viii. 4) of ivory says, " Quae Juba
cornua appellat, Herodotus tanto antiquior, et
consuetudo melius, dentes." It was suggested
in Gesenius' Thesaurus (s. v.) that the original
reading may have been D'33n |B>, "ivory,
ebony " (cp. Ezek. xxvii. 15), but U. senilis after-
wards stated his preference for the present text,
" Magis hoc placet, quam quod dim suspicabar "
(Lexicon, p. 1026). Hitzig (Isaiah, p. 643), with-
out any authority, renders the word " nubischen
Zahn." The Targum Jonathan on 1 K. x. 22
has ?'OT |E/, "elephant's tusk," while the
Peshifto gives simply " elephants." In the
Targum of the Pseudo-Jonathan, Gen. I. 1 is
translated, " and Joseph placed his father upon
a bier of pDIJC " (shindap/iln), which is con-
jectured to be a valuable species of wood, but
fbr which Buxtorf, with great probability,
suggests as another reading T*tfl \(9, " ivory."
The Assyrians appear to have carried on a
great traffic in ivory. Their early conquests in
India had made them familiar with it, and
(according to one rendering of the passage)
their artists supplied the luxurious Tyrians
with carvings in ivory from the isles of Chittim
(Ezek. xxvii. 6). On the obelisk in the British
Museum the captives or tribute-bearers are
represented as carrying tusks. Among the
merchandise of Babylon, enumerated in Rev.
xviii. 12, are included "all manner vessels of
ivory." The skilled workmen of Hiram, king
of Tyre, fashioned the great ivory throne of
Solomon, and overlaid it with pure gold (1 K.
x. 18 ; 2 Ch. ix. 17). The ivory thus employed
was supplied by the caravans of Dedan, a tribe
of merchant traffickers, settled somewhere in
the deserts of Mesopotamia (Is. xxi. 13; Ezek.
xxvii. 15), or was brought with apes and pea-
cocks by the navy of Tharshish (1 E. x. 22).
The Egyptians at a very early period made use
of this material in decoration. The cover of a
small ivory box in the Egyptian Collectiou at
the Louvre is "inscribed with the praenomen
5 C 2
Digitized by
Google
1492
IVORY
Nefar-ka-re, or Neper-cheres, adopted by a
dynasty found in the upper line of the tablet of
Abydos, and attributed by M. Bunsen to the
fifth ... In the time of Thothmes III. ivory
was imported in considerable quantities into
Kgypt, either 'in boats laden with ivory and
ebony ' from Ethiopia, or else in tusks and
cups from the Ruten-nu. . . . The celebrated
car at Florence has its linen-pins tipped with
ivory " (JBirch, in Trans, of Soy. Soc. of Lit. Hi.
2nd aeries). The specimens of Egyptian ivory
work, which are found in the principal mu-
seums of Europe, are, most of them, in the
opinion of Dr. Birch, of a date anterior to the
Persian invasion, and some even as old as the
18th dynasty.
The ivory used by the Egyptians was princi-
pally brought from Ethiopia (Herod, iii. 114),
though their elephants were originally from
Asia. The Ethiopians, according to Diodorus
Siculus (i. 55), brought to Sesostris "ebony
and gold, and the teeth of elephants." Among
the tribute paid by them to the Persian kings
were " twenty large tusks of ivory " (Herod,
iii. 97). In the Periplus of the Bed Sea (c. 4),
attributed to Arrian, Coloe (Callai) is said to
be " the chief mart for ivory." It was thence
carried down to Adouli (Zvila, or Thulla), a
port on the Red Sea, about three days' journey
from Coloe, together with the hides of hippo-
|K>tami, tortoise-shell, apes, and slaves (Plin.
vi. 34). The elephants and rhinoceroses, from
which it was obtained, were killed further up
the country, and few were taken near the sea,
or in the neighbourhood of Adouli. At Ptolemais
Theron was found a little ivory like that of
Adouli (Peripl. c. 3). Ptolemy Philadelphia
made this port the depot of the elephant trade
(Plin. vi. 34). According to Pliny (viii. 10),
ivory was so plentiful on the borders of Ethiopia
that the natives made door-posts of it, and even
fences and stalls for their cattle. The author of
the Periplus (c. 16) mentions Rhapta as another
station of the ivory trade, but the ivory brought
down to this port is said to have been of an in-
ferior quality, and " for the most part found in
the woods, damaged by rain, or collected from
animals drowned by the overflow of the rivers
at the equinoxes" (Smith, Diet. Oeogr. art.
llhaptd). The Egyptian merchants traded for
ivory and onyx stones to Barygaza, the port to
which was carried down the commerce of
Western India from Ozene (Peripl. c. 49).
In the early ages of Greece ivory was fre-
quently employed for purposes of oruament.
The trappings of horses were studded with it
(Horn. II. v. 584): it was used for the handles
of keys (Od. xxi. 7), and for the bosses of
shields (Hes. Se. Here. 141, 142). An
interesting allusion to the use of ivory is
found in Ps. xlv. 8, " ivory palaces," which
probably mean boxes or cases veneered with
ivory, an art in which the Phoenicians excelled,
and in which boxes the robes of the wealthy were
stored, along with perfumes, myrrh, aloes, and
cassia. The " ivory house " of Ahab (1 K. xxii.
3,9) was probably a palace, the walls of which
were panelled with ivory, like the palace of
Menelaus described by Homer (Cklys. iv. 73 ; cp.
Eur. Iph. Aul. 583, iAftfmvroMToi 9ipoi. In
this fashion Ahab was followed by his luxu-
rious nobles. Cp. Amos iii. 15). Beds inlaid or
IZHAB
veneered with ivory were in use among the
Hebrews (Amos vi. 4. I have seen a chamber is
a wealthy house, both in Damascus and Tarablas,
panelled with alternate veneers of ebony and
ivory to the height of 3 or 4 feet from th*
floor. Such doubtless was the ivory palace of
Ahab : cp. Horn. Od. xxiii. 200), as also among
the Egyptians (cp. Wilkinson, Anc. Eg. ii. Ill)
The practice of inlaying and veneering wood
with ivory and tortoise-shell is described by
Pliny (xvi. 84). The great ivory throne of
Solomon, the work of the Tyrian craftsmen, hu
been already mentioned (cp. Rev. xx. 11); bat
it is difficult to determine whether the "tower
of ivory " of Cant. vii. 4 is merely a figure of
speech, or whether it had its original among
the things that were. By the luxurious
Phoenicians ivory was employed to ornament
the boxwood rowing benches (or "hatches"
according to some) of their galleys (Ezek. xivii.
6). Many specimens of Assyrian carving is
ivory have been found in the excavations at
Nimroud, and among the rest some tablets
" richly inlaid with blue and opaque glass,
lapis-laxuli, &c." (Bonomi, Nineveh and its
Palaces, p. 334 ; cp. Cant. v. 14). Part of u
ivory staff, apparently a sceptre, and seven!
entire elephants' tusks, were discovered by
Sir H. Layard in the last stage of decay, aid
it was with extreme difficulty that these in-
teresting relics could be restored (Am. t/ Bah.
p. 195). [W. A. W.j [H. R T.]
IVY (•afford! ; hedera), the common H«kn
helix, of which the ancient Greeks and Romans
describe two or three kinds, which appear to be
only varieties. Mention of this plant is made
only in 2 Mace. vi. 7, where it is said that the
Jews were compelled, when the feast of Bacchus
was kept, to go in procession carrying ivy to this
deity, to whom it is well known this plant wu
sacred. Ivy, however, though not mentioned by
name, has a peculiar interest to the Christian, as
forming the " corruptible crown " (1 Cor. ii.
25) for which the competitors at the great
Isthmian games contended, and which St. Paul
so beautifully contrasts with the " incorruptible
crown " which shall hereafter encircle the brows
of those who run worthily the race of this
mortal life. In the Isthmian contests the victor's
garlnnd was either ivy or pine. Ivy can scarcely
be included among the plants of Palestine, as it
only occurs in Lebanon, and not further south.
Its range extends over the whole of Southern
and Central Europe, the lower ranges of the
Himalayas, North China, and Japan. [H. B. T.]
IZ'EHAR. The form in which the name
Ishar is given in the A. V. of Num. iii. 19 only.
In v. 27 the family of the same person is given
as Izeharites. The Hebrew word is the same as
IzilAR.
IZEHARITES. [Izhakites.]
IZ-HAR (spelt by A. V. Izehar in Num. iii.
19, 27 ; in Heb. always "1TOP = oil; LXX. vsr.
'lo-o-aap and 'laadp ; Jesaar, /soar), son of
Kohatn, grandson of Levi, uncle of Aaron and
Moses, and father of Korah (Ex. vi. 18, 21 ;
Num. iii. 19, xvi. 1 ; 1 Ch. vi. 2, 18). But in
1 Ch. vi. 22 (see in Swete the var. readings of
Digitized by
Google
LZHABITES
the LXX.) Ammmadab is substituted for Izhar, I
as the (on of Kohath and father of Korah, in |
the line of Samuel This, however, must be an
accidental error of the scribe, as in v. 38, where
the same genealogy is repeated, Izhar appears
again in his right place (see Burrington's
Genealogies of the 0. T.). Izhar was the head
of the family of the Izhabites or Izebabites
(Num. iii. 27 ; 1 Ch. xxvi. 23, 29), one of the
tour families of the Kohathites. [A. C. H.]
IZHARITES (nnV??X » family of Koha-
thite Levites, descended from Izhar, the son of
Kohath (Num. iii. 27 ; B. b Sapult, B**. 'laaa-
fuls). In the reign of David, Shelomith was
the chief of the family (1 Ch. xxiv. 22; B.
'loo-apti, A. 'l<raaap(}, and with his brethren had
charge of the treasure dedicated to the use of
the Temple (1 Ch. xxvi. 23 [B. 'laaiap, A. -fj,
29 [B. "looapti, A. 'luaapVj).
IZRAHTAH (njlTltWeAosaA mil cause to
spring forth; B. Zaptid, A. 1*(pla; Izrahia),
h man of Issachar, one of the Bene-Uzzi, and
father of four, or five — which, is not clear—- of
the principal men in the tribe (1 Ch. vii. 3).
IZ'BAHITE, THE (fnt»n, wr. "the Iz-
rach" = ♦rnt** [Tregelles]';' B. o 'He-pit, A.
1t(pd(\; Jezerites), the designation of Sham-
huth, the captain of the fifth monthly course
as appointed by David (1 Ch. xxvii. 8). The
Hebrew name is probably equivalent to 'n"Wn
(v. 13), i.e. the interpretation put on it in the
A. V. Its real force is Zerahite, or one of the
great Judaic family of Zerah — the Zarhites.
IZ'BI Cl^n, i.e. "the Itsrite;" B.
'Uetptl, A. -pi ; Isari), a Levite, leader of the
fourth course or ward in the service of the
House of God (1 Ch. xxv. 11). In e. 3 he is
called Zebi.
JA'AKAN (}J5F ; BA. laxtlpi; Jacan), the
forefather of the Bene-Jaakan, round whose
wells the children of Israel encamped after they
left Mosera, and from which they went on to
Hor-Hagidgad (Deut. i. 6). Jaakan was son of
Ezer, the son of Seir the Horite (1 Ch. i. 42 ;
B. om., A. 'lutucdv). The name is here given in
the A. V. as Jakan, though without any reason
for the change. In Gen. xxxvi. 27 it is in the
abbreviated form of Akan. The site of the
wells has not been identified. Some suggestions
will be seen under Bene-jaakax. [G.] [W.]
JAAKOBAH (fia'piT; B. 'I«ica/M, A.
"laKofii; Jacoba), oue'of'the princes (DWBO)
of the families of Simeon (1 Ch. iv. 36). Ex-
cepting the termination, the name is identical
with that of Jacob.
JA'ALA («/>£= uild she-goat; B. 'WA^A, KA.
'Ieo^A; Jahala). Bene-Jaala were among the
descendants of " Solomon's slaves " who returned
from Babylon with Zerubbabel (Neh. vii. 58).
The name also occurs as
JAA8AU
H93
JA'ALAH (rb& ; B. 'Ici)A<£, A. 'WA<1 ; Jala),
Ezra ii. 56 ; and in Esdras as Jeeu.
JA'ALAH (0b&; AI>.'Uy\6p; IhtUm, Ihe-
lom), a "son" of Esau by his wife Aholibahaii
(Gen. xzxvi. 5, 14, 18 ; cp. 1 Ch. i. 35), and an
Edomite phylarch (A. V. " duke ") or chief of a
thousand (a subdivision of the tribe ; cp. Hicah
v. 2). From Gen. xxxvi. 2 (reading witli
Michaelis and most modern critics " Horite "
for "Hivite": cp. eo. 20, 24, 25), it would
appear that Jaalam was a clan of mixed Horite
and Edomite origin. [C. J. B.]
JA'ANAI CW, for .T3»'_ = Jthocah answers ;
B. 'lavtty, A. 'lovoi ; Janai), a chief man in the
tribe of Gad (1 Ch. v. 12). The LXX. have
connected the following name, Shaphat, to
Jaanai, and rendered it 'lovely i ypafipariis,
JA'ABE-CBEGIM (D'JTfc ♦'W; BA.
'hpueoytin; Saltus polymitarius), according to
the present text of 2 Sam. xxi. 19, a Beth-
lehemite, and the father of Elhanan who slew
Goliath (the words " the brother of" are added
in the A. V.). In the parallel passage, 1 Ch.
xx. 5, besides other differences, Jair is found
instead of Jaare, and Oregim is omitted. Oregim
is not elsewhere found as a proper name, nor
is it a common word ; and occurring as it does
without doubt at the end of the verse (A. V.
" weavers "), in a sentence exactly parallel to
that in 1 Sam. xvii. 7, it is not probable
that it should also occur in the middle of the
same (see Driver, Notes on the Heb. Text of the
BB. of Samuel in loco). The conclusion of
Kennicott (Dissertation, p. 80) appears a just
one — that in the latter place it has been inter-
polated from the former, and that Jair or Jaor
is the correct reading instead of Jaare. [El-
hanan, p. 899.] Still the agreement of the
ancient Versions with the present Hebrew text
affords a certain corroboration to that text, and
should not be overlooked. [Jair.]
The Peshitto, followed by the Arabic, substi-
tutes for Jaare-Oregim the name " Halaph the
weaver," to the meaning of which we have no
clue. The Targum on the other hand, doubtless
anxious to avoid any apparent contradiction of
the iiArrative in 1 Sam. xvii., substitutes David
for Elhanan, Jesse for Jaare, and is led by the
word Oregim to relate or possibly to invent n
statement as to Jesse's calling — "And Davi.l
son of Jesse, weaver of the veils of the house of
the sanctuary, who was of Bethlehem, slew
Goliath the Gittite." By Jerome Jaare is
translated by saltus, and Oregim by polymitarius
(cp. Quaest. Jlebr. on both passages). In
Josephus's account (Ant. vii. 12, § 2) the Israelite
champion is said to have been " Nephan the
kinsman of Darid " (N<$dWi 6 vvyytyiis airrov) ;
the word kinsman perhaps referring to the
Jewish tradition of the identity of Jair and
Jesse, or simply arising from the mention of
Bethlehem.
In the received Hebrew text Jaare is written
with a small or suspended R, showing that in
the opinion of the Masorets that letter is uncer-
tain. [G.] [F.]
JA'ASAU, E. V. JAASU (IW, but the
Qeri has 'C1P, ie. Jaasai = Jehovah vorks
Digitized by VjOOQlC
1494
JAASIEL
fMV."]; and »o the Vulg. Jasi), one of the
Bene-Baoi who had married a foreign wife, and
had to put her away (Ezra x. 37). In the
parallel list of 1 Esdras the name is not recog-
nisable. The LXX. supplied different vowels, —
icol eWijo-ov=1CW.
JA-ASI'EL (V'B^ = G<d «w*»; R
'Aan-fip, A. 'KatfiK; Janet), son of the great
Abner, ruler (TJJ) or " prince " (lb) of his
tribe of Benjamin, in the time of David (1 Ch.
iivii. 21).
JA-A-ZANI'AH QTVmi and iTiTK' =
Jehovah hears). 1. YAAZAJJ-YAHU (A 'it(ovtas,
B. 'O(ortat ; Jezonias), one of the " captains of
the forces" who accompanied Johanan ben-
Kareah to pay his respects to Gedaliah at Miz-
pah after the fall of Jerusalem (2 K. xxt. 23),
and who appears afterwards to have assisted
in recovering Ishmael's prey from his clutches
(cp. Jer. xli. 11). After that he probably
went to Egypt with the rest (Jer. xliii. 4, 5).
He is described as the "son of the (not 'a')
Maachathite." In the narrative of Jeremiah the
name is slightly changed to Jezasiau.
2. Yaazan-vahu {'Uxovlat, A-'Uiovlas ; Je-
zonias), son of Shaphan : leader of the band of
seventy of the elders of Israel, who were seen
by Ezekiel worshipping before the idols on the
wall of the court of the House of Jehovah (Ezek.
viii. 11). It is possible that he is identical
with
8. Yaazan-YAH ('IcxoWat ; Jezonias), son of
Azur ; one of the " princes " Q"WP) of the people
against whom Ezekiel was directed to prophesy
(Ezek. xi. 1).
4. Yaazan-yah ('U x«Wo! ; Jezonias), a Ke-
chabite, son of Jeremiah. He appears to have
been the sheikh of the tribe at the time of
Jeremiah's interview with them (Jer. xxxv. 3).
[Jehonadab.] [G.] [F.]
JA'AZEK and 3 X'ZER= helper, Get The
form of this name is much varied both in the
A. V. and the Hebrew, though the one does not
follow the other. In Num. xxxii. it is twice
given Jazer, and once (v. 35) Jaazer (R. V.
Jazer), the Hebrew being in all three cases "l|B\
In Num. xxi. 32 it is Jaazer (R. T. Jazer) ;
but in Josh., in 2 Sam. xxiv., Isaiah, and
Jeremiah, Jazer: the Hebrew in all these is
"ItJP. Iu Chronicles it is also Jazer; but here
the Hebrew is in the extended form of TT1P
a form which the Samar. Codex also presents in
Num. xxxii. The LXX. have 'Iaftp, but once,
2 Sam. xxiv. 5, 'E\tt(*p, A 'E\id(np — includ-
ing the affixed Heb. particle ; and, in 1 Ch. vi.
81, B. Tafc'p; xxvi. 31, B. 'Piaftp, A'laftp;
Joseph. 'la(apos ; Ptolem. Tifapos : Vulg. Jazer,
Jaser, Jeter. A town on the east of Jordan,
in or near to Gilead (Num. xxxii. 1, 3; 1 Ch.
xxvi. 31). We first hear of it as being in the
possession of the Amorites, and as taken by
Israel alter Heshbon. and on their wav from
thence to Bashan 'Num. xxi. 32).* It was
rebuilt subsequently by the children of Gad
* In Num. xxi. 24, where tbe present Hebrew text
h«s HJ (A. V. "strong "). tbe LXX. have 'Ia£jp.
JAAZIEL
(xxxii. 35), and was on or near their frontier
and a prominent place in their territory (Josh,
xiii. 25 ; 2 Sam. xxiv. 5). It was allotted to
the Merarite Levites (Josh. xxi. 39 ; 1 Ch. vi.
81), bat in the time of David it woold appcu
to have been occupied by Hebronites, ie. de-
scendants of Kohath (1 Ch. xxvi. 31). It seems
to have given its name to a district of dependent
or "daughter" towns (Num. xxi. 32, A V.
" villages ; " 1 Mace v. 8), the « land of Jaser"
(Num. xxxii. 1). In the " burdens " proclaimed
over Moab by Isaiah and Jeremiah, Juer is
mentioned so as to imply that there were vine-
yards there, and that the cultivation of the viae
had extended thither from Sibhah (Is. xvi. 8,
9 ; Jer. xlviii. 32). In the latter passage, is
the text at present stands, mention is made of
the "Sea of Jazer "(ntr* D»). This may have
been some pool (Delitzsch * on Is. J. c.) or lake
of water, or possibly is an ancient corruption
of the text, the LXX. having a different reading
— *6\is 'I. (see Gesenius, Jesaia, p. 550; Dill-
mann* in loco). Jazer was taken and burnt
by Judas Maccabaeus after he had defeated tbe
Ammonites under Timotheus (Joseph. Ant. xn.
8 ' f ! >- .
Jazer was known to Eusebius and Jerome, »m
its position is laid down with minuteness in the
Onomastiam as 10 (or 8, s. voc *Afwf>) Ronun
miles west of Philadelphia ('Amman) and 15
from Heshbon, and as the source of a river which
falls into the Jordan (OS.* p. 267, 98 ; p. 235,
25). The Jazer of Eusebius is either the erten-
sive ruin Kh. Sdr, westward of 'Amman, or A"t
es-Sireh, immediately west of the perennial spring
'Ain es*Sir, the head of the stream in W. ey&<
which answers to the ToTtuior niyurros of Euse-
bius (PEF. Mem. East. Pal. p. 153). Seetien,who
first noticed these places in 1806 (Beisen, 1854,
i. 397-8) calls them Szar and Szir (go):
cp. Burckhardt (Syr. p. 364). Merrill (£ «/
Jordan, p. 405) mentions " two ponds or little
lakes " near Jazer (Sdr). Conder (PEF. Mm.
East. Pal. p. 91) proposes to. identify Jajerwith
Beit Zer'ah, about 2J m, N.E. of Heshbon, but
this seems too near that place to meet the
requirements of Num. xxi. 24-32, and to be
called " J. of Gilead " (1 Ch. xxvi. 32). Burck-
hardt (p. 355) suggests 'Ain Hazeir, a fine sprine
S. of es-Salt, the water of which runs to W<Hy
Sh'atb. In the Targnm Pseudo-Jonathan, Jaxer
is identified with Machaerus (Nenbauer, (JeW-
du Tal. p. 28). [G.] [W]
JA-AZI'AH (*nW,iAYa'aziyahu=/(A»^
oomforU; A. 'OC'a,~B- "Of««£; Oziau), app»:
rently a third son, or a descendant, of Meran
the Levite, and the founder of an independent
house in that family (1 Ch. xiiv. 26, 2")j
neither he nor his descendants are mentions
elsewhere (cp. the lists in xxiii. 21-23; E*
vi. 19, &c). The word Beno (U3), whicb
follows Jaaziah, should probably be 'translated
" his son " (cp. the LXX.), U. the son of Meran.
JA-AZI'EL (V??! = God «*•/<***■>• R
'Ofet^X, A. 'InooA; Jaziel), one of the Levites
of the second order who were appointed br
David to perform the musical service before tbe
Ark (1 Ch. xv. 18). If Aziel in ft 20 is »
contracted form of the same name — and there »
Digitized by
Google
JABAL
no reason to doubt it (cp. Jesharelah and
Asharelah, 1 Ch. xxv. 2, 14)— his business was
to " sound the psaltery on Alamoth."
JA'BAL (^>3J=a leader [MV.»] ; A. 'lufiix,
E. -rfi ; Jabet), son of Lantech and Adah, brother
of Jubal, father of such as dwell in tents and
have cattle (Gen. ir. 20). Abel before him had
kept sheep, but Jabal, as remarked by Bochart,
is to be regarded as having commenced the
pastoral life in its nomad or more extended
sense, not simply feeding sheep about a settled
home, in a farm as we might say, but leading
flocks and various herds about from pasture to
pasture, encamping patriarchically among them
(Bochart, Hierozoicon, lib. ii. c. 34, vol. i.
pp. 517, 518, ed. Rosenmtiller, 1793). Other
etymologies and deductions may be seen in
Delitzsch [1887] and Dillmann* in loco.
[W. L. B.] [C. H.]
JAB'BOK (p3», a play upon "the wrestling"
[cp. MV. 11 ]; 'lafitix; Juboc, Jeboc), a stream
which intersects the hill-country of Gilead (cp.
Josh. xii. 2 and 5), and falls into the Jordan about
21 miles N. of the Dead Sea. There is some
difficulty in interpreting two or three passages
of Scripture in which the Jabbok is spoken of as
" the border of the children of Ammon." The
following facts may perhaps throw some light
upon them : — The Ammonites at one time pos-
sessed the whole country between the rivers
Arnon and Jabbok, from the Jordan on the west
to the wilderness on the east. They were driven
out of it by Sihon king of the Amorites ; and he
was in turn expelled by the Israelites. Yet
long subsequent to these events, the country
was popularly called " the land of the Ammon-
ites," and was even claimed by them (Judg.
xi. 13-22). For this reason the Jabbok is still
called " the border of the children of Ammon "
in Deut. iii. 16 and Josh. xii. 2. Again, when
the Ammonites were driven out by Sihon from
their ancient territory, they took possession of
the eastern plain, and of a considerable section
of the eastern defiles of Gilead, around the
sources and upper branches of the Jabbok.
Rabbath-Ammon, their capital city (2 Sam. xi.),
stood within the mountains of Gilead, and on
the banks of a tributary to the Jabbok. This
explains the statement in Num. xxi. 24 — " Israel
possessed his (Sihon's) land from Arnon unto
Jabbok, unto the children of Ammon ( , 33"ir
pBB), for the border of the children of Ammon
was strong " — the border among the defiles of
the upper Jabbok was strong. This also illus-
trates Deut. ii. 37, "Only to the land of the
children of Ammon thou earnest not near ; all
the side of the river Jabbok (P3? ^>TO T^?)>
nnd the cities of the hill country, and wheresoever
the Lord our God forbad us " (R. V.).
It was on the north bank of the Jabbok th-t
Jacob, after a night of wrestling with God,
received the name Israel (Gen. xxxii. 22); and
this river afterwards became, towards its western
part, the boundary between the kingdoms of
Sihon and Og (Josh. xii. 2, 5). Eusebius rightly
places it between Gerasa and Philadelphia {OS.'
p. 266, 78) ; and at the present day it separates
the province of Belka from Jtbel 'Ajtin. Its
modern name is Wady Zerka. It rises in the
JABESH-GILEAD
1495
plateau east of Gilead, and receives many tribu-
taries from both north and south in the eastern
declivities of the mountain-range— one of these
comes from Gerasa, another from Rabbath-
Ammon (Amman). The stream from 'Ain
'Ammin, which is well stocked with fish, disap-
pears, in autumn, about 1} m. below the town.
It reappears at 'Ain Ghazal, and, after flowing
5 m., again sinks below the ground. It is only
at 'Ain ez-Zerka, near Kalat ez-Zerka, that it
becomes perennial, and it is there a broad, rapid
and clear stream, running through a deep valley
to the Jordan. Throughout the lower part of
its course it is fringed with thickets of cane and
oleander, and the banks above are clothed with
oak-forests. In the Jordan Valley it is a broad
stream, but fordable (PEF. Mem. E. Pal. p. 5 ;
Robinson, Phys. Geog^ p. 161 ; Merrill, E. of
Jordan, p. 269 sq.). The " ford " of Jabbok was
probably close to the spot at which the river
issues from the hills, where there is now a
ford. [J. L. P.] [W.]
JA'BE8H(E'3J=dry: B.'lafitls, A. 'A/Sefj
[t>. 10], "lojSefe; Joseph. 'Io/8Vor: Jabcs). 1.
Father of Shallum, the fifteenth king of Israel
(2 K. xv. 10, 13, 14).
2. B. 'Ia0.it; A. in 1 Sam. EiojSefr, in 1 Ch.
'lafitis. The short form of the name Jabesh-
Gilead (1 Sam. xi. 1, 3, 5, 9, 10 ; xxxi. 12, 13 ;
and 1 Ch. x. 12).
JA'BESH-GIL'EAD O^l &*\ •!»<>
B»3;, 1 Sam. xi. 1, 9, &c. =' 'dry, from 03J,
« to be dry ;" Judg. xxi. 8-14, 1 Sam. xi. ]',
2 Sam. xxi. 12, [BA. 'lafliW] raWJ; 1 Sam.
xi. 9, [B. 'lafrU, A. Siafitlt] roAodJ ; 1 Sam.
xxxi. 11, 2 Sam. ii. 4, 5, [B. 'loflclj, A.
EfajSels] rijt TaXaailnSos [B. -««(-] ; 1 Ch. x.
11, TaKadS; Joseph. 'Ii0t<rot: Jabes Oalaad),
or Jabesh in the territory of Gilead [Gilead].
It is first mentioned in connexion with the
cruel vengeance taken upon its inhabitants
for not coming up to Hizpeh on the occasion
of the fierce war between the children of
Israel and the tribe of Benjamin. Every
male of the city was put to the sword,
and all virgins — to the number of 400 — seized
to be given in marriage to the 600 men of
Benjamin that remained (Judg. xxi. 8-14).
Nevertheless the city survived the loss of its
males; and being attacked subsequently by
Nahash the Ammonite, gave Saul an opportunity
of displaying his prowess in its defence, and
silencing all objections made by the children of
Belial to his sovereignty (1 Sam. xi. 1-10).
Neither were his exertions on behalf of this city
unrequited ; for when he and his three sons
were slain by the Philistines in Mount Gilboa,
the men of Jabesh-Gilead came by night and
took down their corpses from the walls of
Bethshau, where they had been exposed as
trophies ; then burnt the bodies, and buried
the bones under a tree near the city — observing
a strict funeral fast for seven days (1 Sam.
xxxi. 11-13; 1 Ch. x. 11, 12). David does not
forget to bless them for this act of piety to-
wards his old master and his more than
brother (2 Sam. ii. 4, 5) ; though he afterwards
had their remains translated to the ancestral
sepulchre in the tribe of Benjamin (2 Sam. xxi.
12-14). The site of the city is not defined in
Digitized by
Google
1496
JABEZ
the 0. T. ; and Josephus only mentions that it
was the chief town of the Gileadites, and noted
in his day for the courage and strength of its
people (Ant. vi. 5, § 1 ; 14, § 8). Eusebius,
however (OS* p. 242, 97 ; p. 269, 81), places it
beyond Jordan, 6 miles from Pella on the moon-
tain-road to Gerasa ; where its name is probably
preserved in the Wddy el- Yabis, which, flowing
from the east, enters the Jordan below Beth-
shan or Scythopolis. According to Dr. Robinson
(Bibl. Res. iii. 319), the ruin ed-Deir, on the
S. side of the Wady, still marks its site (Tris-
tram, Bi>. Places, p. 327 ; Riehm, HWB. s. v.).
Merrill (American PES. 4th stat. p. 81) sug-
gests Miryamin, about 5 miles from Pella on
the road to Gerasa. [E. S. Ff.] [W.]
JABEZ. 1. , 317 , I of same meaning as 2X1P
[cp. 2] ; B. Tapis, A. TafH\s ; Jabes). Apparently
a place at which the families of the scribes
(D'-JSD) resided, who belonged to the families
of tne Kenites (1 Ch. ii. 55). It occurs
among the descendants of Salma, who was of
Judah, and closely connected with Bethlehem
(o. 51), possibly the father of Boaz; and also
— though how is not clear — with Joab. The
Targum states some curious particulars, which,
however, do not much elucidate the difficulty,
and which are probably a mixture of trust-
worthy tradition and of mere invention based
on philological grounds. Rechab is there
identified with Rechabiah the son of Eliezer,
Moses' younger son (1 Ch. xxvi. 25), and Jabes
with Othniel the Kenizzite, who bore the name
of Jabez "because he founded by his counsel
(WW*) a school (KV^in) of disciples called
Tirathites, Shimeathites, and Sucathites." See
also the quotations from Talmud, Temurah, in
Buxtorf s Lex. col. 966, where a similar deriva-
tion is given.
2. (B. 'I>a04s; A. 'lay&fc, Tafiiis.) The name
occurs again in the genealogies of Judah (1 Ch.
iv. 9, 10), in a passage of remarkable and
almost Talmudic detail inserted in a genealogy
again connected with Bethlehem (v. 4). Here
a different force is attached to the name. It is
made to refer to the sorrow (2^1?, 'Stxeb) with
which his mother bore him, and also to his
prayer that evil may not grieve ('3)tV) him.
Jabez was " more honourable than his brethren,"
though who they were is not ascertainable. It
is very doubtful whether any connexion exists
between this genealogy and that in ii. 50-55.
Several names appear in both — Hur, Ephratah,
Bethlehem, Zareathites (in A. V. iv. 2, inaccu-
rately, " Zorathitea "), Joab, Caleb ; and there
is much similarity between others, as Rechab
and Rechah, Eshton and Eshtaulites ; but any
positive connexion seems undemonstrable. The
Targum repeats its identification of Jabez and
Othniel. [G.] [W.]
JA-BIN (]"T = intelligent; B. 'lafitls, F.
'lafitlv ; Jabin). 1. King of Hazor, a royal city
in the north of Palestine, near the waters of
Merom, who organised a confederacy of the
northern princes against the Israelites (Josh. xi.
1-3). He assembled an army, which the Scrip-
ture narrative merely compares to the sands for
multitude (<c. 4), but which Josephus reckons at
300,000 foot, 10,000 horse, and 20,000 chariots.
Joshua, encouraged by God, surprised this vast
JABNEEL
army of allied forces " by the water* of Merom "
(r. 7 ; near Kedesh, according to Josephus),
utterly routed them, cut the hoof-sinews of
their aorses, and burnt their chariots with fire
at a place which from that circumstance may
have derived its name of Miskephoth-Maix
(Hervey, Genealogies of our Lord, p. 228). [Mb-
bephoth-Maim.] It is probable that in con-
sequence of this battle the confederate kings,
and Jabin among them, were reduced to vassal-
age, for we find immediately afterwards that
Jabin is safe in his capital. But daring the
ensuing wars (which occupied some time, Josh,
xi. 18), Joshua " turned back," and, perhaps on
some fresh rebellion of Jabin, inflicted on him
a signal and summary vengeance, making Hazor
an exception to the general rule of not burning
the conquered cities of Canaan (xi. 1-14 ; Joseph.
Ant. v. 1, § 18; Ewald, Gesck. ii. 328).
2. (B. 'luBely, A. 'Itutefr ; Jabin.) A king of
Hazor, whose general Sisera was defeated by
Barak, whose army is described in much the
same terms as that of his predecessor (Judg. iv.
3, 13), and who suffered precisely the same
fate. The similarity between the two narra-
tives (Josh. xi. ; Judg. iv. v.) is great, and an
attentive comparison of them with Josephus
(who curiously omits the name of Jabin alto-
gether in his mention of Joshua's victory,
although his account is full of details) supplies
further points of resemblance. [Barak; De-
borah.] It is indeed by no means impossible
that in the course of 150 years Hazor should
have risen from its ashes, and even re-assumed
its pre-eminence under sovereigns who still bore
the old dynastic name (cp. Keil on Judg. I. c).
But entirely independent considerations show
that the period between Joshua and Barak could
not have been 150 years, and indeed tend to
prove that those two chiefs were contemporaries
(Hervey, Oeneal. p. 228); and we are therefore
led to regard the two accounts of the destruction
of Hazor and Jabin as really applying to the
same monarch, and the same event. There is
no ground whatever to throw doubts on the
historical veracity of the earlier narrative, as is
done by Hasse (p. 129), Maurer (ad loc.), Studer
(on Judges, p. 90), De Wette (Einl. p. 231), and
by Rosenmuller (Schol. Jos. xi. 11); but when
the chronological arguments are taken into con-
sideration, we do not (in spite of the difficulties
which still remain) consider Havernick success-
ful in removing the improbabilities which beset
the common supposition that this Jabin lived
long after the one which Joshua defeated. 0s
the whole subject see Bertheau* on Judies,
p. 82. Budde (Die BB. Richter u. Samuel, p. 105)
rejects the narrative as unhistorical. [F. W. F.]
JAB-NE-EL (^t02^ = God builds). The
name of two towns in Palestine.
1. (In O. T. B. Atftri, A. 'Io/Si^X; in
Apocr. 'lafwtla: Jebneel, Jabnia, Jamnia.) One
of the points on the northern boundary of
Judah, not quite at the sea, though near it*
(Josh. xv. 11). There is no sign, however, of
its ever having been occupied by Judah. Jose-
• In Josb. xv. 4t, after the words " from Eton,"
the LXX. adds 'Iqutai, Jabneh, Instead of " even unto
the sea;" probably reading nj2' for the present word
ilB'. * : "
Digitized by
Google
JABNEEL
phus \(Ant. v. 1, § 22) attributes it to the
Danites. There was a constant struggle going
on between that tribe and the Philistines for
the possession of all the places in the lowland
plain [Dak], and it is not surprising that the
next time we meet with Jabneel it should be in
the hands of the latter (2 Ch. xxvi. 6). Uzziah
dispossessed them of it, and demolished its
fortifications. Here it is in the shorter form
of Jabneh. In Judith ii. 28, the people of
Jemnaan (BA. 'It/ivdav, K*. 'Aju/x4), doubtless
Jamnia, are represented as trembling at the
approach of Holofemes. In its Greek garb,
Iamnia, it is frequently mentioned in the
Maccabees (1 Mace. iv. 15, v. 58, x. 69, it.
40), in whose time it was again a strong place.
According to Josephus {Ant. xii. 8, § 6),
Gorgias was gorernor of it ; but the text of
the Maccabees (2 Mace. xii. 32) has Idumaea.
At this time there was a harbour on the
coast, to which, and the vessels lying there,
Judas set fire, and the conflagration was seen
at Jerusalem, a distance of about 28 miles
(2 Mace. xii. 8, 9, 40). The harbour is also
mentioned by Pliny (H. N. v. 13), who in con-
sequence speaks of the town as double — duae
Jamncs (see the quotations in Reland, p. 823);
and by Ptolemy (v. 16). Like Ascalon and Gaza,
the harbour bore the title of Majumas, perhaps
a Coptic word, meaning the " place on the sea "
(Reland, p. 590, &c. ; Raumer, pp. 174 n., 184 n. ;
Kenrick, Phoenicia, pp. 27, 29). It is now known
as Mhiet Rubin (PEP. Mem. ii. 268). Jamnia was
taken by Simon Maccabaeus (Ant. xiii. 6, § 7 ;
B. J. i. 2, § 2), and was apparently one of the
" strongholds " that he fortified (Ant. xiii. 5,
§ 10). In B.C. 63 Pompey took it away from
the Jews and handed it over to its own inhabi-
tants ( Ant. xiv. 4, § 4) ; and a few years later,
having apparently suffered during the war, it
was restored and repeopled by order of Gabinius
(B. J. i. 8, § 4). Augustus gave it to Herod,
who left it by will to his sister Salome (Ant.
xvii. 8, § 1) ; and she in turn bequeathed it to
Livia, the wife of Augustus (Ant. xviii. 2, § 2 ;
B. J. ii. 9, § 1). Jamnia was one of the towns
occupied by Vespasian, as a preliminary to the
siege of Jerusalem (B. J. iv. 3, §2; "8, § 1).
At this time it was one of the most populous
places of Judaea (Strabo, xvi. 2, § 28 ; Philo, de
Legat. ad Cajum ; Reland, p. 823), and contained
a Jewish school of great fame, whose learned
doctors are often mentioned in the Talmud
(Lightfoot, 0pp. ii. 141 sq. ; Graetz, Geach. der
Juden,vo\. iv. ; Neubauer, Geog. du Talmud, p. 73
sq.). The great Sanhedrin was also held here.
In this holy city, according to an early Jewish
tradition, was buried the great Gamaliel ; or,
according to Sepp (Jer. u. das h. Land, ii. 594),
his grandson, the younger Gamaliel. His tomb
was visited by Parchi in the 14th cent. (Zunz,
in Asher's Benj. of Tudela, ii. 439, 440 ; also
j>. 98). In the time of Eusebius, however, it had
dwindled to a small place, iroXfxn>, merely re-
quiring casual mention (OS.' p. 268, 35). Jerome
( OS. 1 p. 164, 27) gives the name as lamnel. One
of its Bishops took part in the Council of Nicaea ;
and in the 6th cent., under Justinian, it was
still the seat of a Christian Bishop (Epiphanius,
adv. Haer. lib. ii. 730). Under the Crusaders,
who supposed the site to be Gath, it bore the
corrupted name of Ibelin, and gave a title to a
JACHIN
1497
line of Counts, one of whom, Jean d'Ibelin,
about 1250, restored to efficiency the famous
code of the " Assises de Jerusalem " (Gibbon, ch.
58, ad fin. ; also the citations in Raumer, Pa-
lastina, p. 185).
According to Josephus (B. J. iv. 11, §5),
Titus marched from Ascalon to Jamnia, and
thence to Joppa. Jamnia was MP. 20 from
Ascalon, and MP. 12 from Diospolis (Itm.
Ant.); or MP. 10 from Azof us, and MP. 12
from Joppa (Tab. Pent.). It is now Tebna, or
more accurately Ibna (Uuo), a village about
2 miles from the sea on a slight eminence just
south of the Nahr Rubin. It is about 12 miles
south of Jaffa, 18 from Ascalon, 9 from Esdid
(Azotus), and 10} from Ludd (Diospolis). The
village stands in a conspicuous position on a
hill ; and there are some interesting remains of
a church and other buildings erected by the
Crusaders and Saracens (PEP. Mem. ii. 414, 441 ;
Guenn, Judee, ii. 55 sq.).
2. (B. 'U<p8anal, A. 'Iaj3W)A; Jebnael.) One
of the landmarks on the boundary of Naphtali
(Josh. xix. 33, only). It is named next after
Adami-Nekeb, and had apparently Lakkum
between it and the " outgoings " of the boundary
at the Jordan. But little or no clue can be
got from the passage to its situation. Possibly
it is the same place which, as 'la/wtla (Vita,
§ 37) and 'lafwie (B. J. ii. 20, § 6), is mentioned
by Josephus among the villages in Upper Galilee,
which, though strong in themselves (nrpiStis
oto-as), were fortified by him in anticipation of
the arrival of the Romans. The other villages
named by him in the same connexion are Meroth,
Achabare, or the rock of the Achabari, and Seph.
It appears to have belonged to Zenodorus, and
later to the Tetrarchy of Philip (B. J. ii. 6, § 3 :
cp. Ant. xv. 10, §3; xvii. 11, §4); and is
J>laced by Riehm (s. v.) near Lake Hulek. The
ater name of Jabneel was Kefr Yamah}' the
" village by the sea " (Tal. Jer. Megilla, 70 a), a
village which Schwarz (p. 144) places on the
southern shore of the Sea of Galilee, and Neu-
bauer (Geog. du Talmud, p. 225) identifies with
Kefr Yamah, between Mount Tabor and the Lake.
This last place is evidently the Yemma, which
Guenn (Galilee, i. 268) and Cornier (PEF. Mem.
i. 365) identify with the Kefr Yamah of the
Talmud ; but it lies beyond the limits of Upper
Galilee, and is not a naturally strong position,
such as the Jamnia of Josephus appears to have
occupied. [G.] [W.]
JAB-NEH (np; >; B. 'AfaMp, A. 'lafitit ;
Jabnid), 2 Ch. xxvi. 6. [Jabneel.]
JA-CHAN (J3JT; T.' 'lma X i», B. Xifii, A.
'laxdr; Ji'chan), one of seven chief men of the
tribe of Gad (1 Ch. v. 13).
JA'CHIN (P3J = \God\ establishes. Cp. the
D^E>33' of the Phoenician inscriptions [MV. n ] :
in Gen. B. 'Ioxefft A*"* "Ax"/*, D. 'Iox«^;
in Ex. B. 'lax«fr, A. 'lax*': Jachin). 1. Fourth
son of Simeon (Gen. xlvi. 10 ; Ex. vi. 15) ;
founder of the family of the Jacuinites (Num.
xxvi. 12). [Jamb.]
■> Can the name In the Vat. LXX. (given above) be a
corruption of tbls ? It can hardly be corrupted from
Junnla or Jabneel.
Digitized by
Google
1498
JACHINITES, THE
2. Head of the 21st course of priests in the
time of David (1 Ch. ix. 10 [BA. 'Iax«k],
xxiv. 17 [B. Ta/iovK, A. 'Iox«V]). A priest of
this name returned from Babylon (Neh. xi. 10).
Alcimus ("AAki/iuw, 1 Mace. vii. 5), to whom
Josephus gives an alternative name, Jacimus
flaTci/ios, Ant. xii. 9, § 7), high-priest in the
Maccabean period, may possibly have been in
Hebrew Jachin, though the Greek more properly
suggests Jakim.
'Ax«'fh AcmM (Matt. i. 14), seems also to be
the same name. [A. C. H.] [C. H.]
JA'CHINITES, THE(^p»ni B. 'lax.™.',
A. i 'lax*"'; /a»>i7ta Jachinitarum), the family
founded by Jachin, son of Simeon (Nam.
ixvi. 12).
JACINTH (v&kiv6os, hyacinthus; of jacinth,
&aieiv0ivos, hyacinthinus), a precious stone in the
Apocalypse, where there are mentioned breast-
plates " of fire, of jacinth, and of brimstone "
(ix. 17, it being usually considered that colours
or appearances rather than actual substances
are here referred to); while a jacinth consti-
tutes the eleventh foundation of the New
Jerusalem (xxi. 20). The word does not occur
in the A. V. of the Old Testament, but in the
LXX. it stands for n.?3Fl (A. V. blue), a colour
in textile work, at Ex. xxv. 4, xxvi. 1, 31, 36,
and many other places. We find also icuclvOiyos
in Ex. xxvi. 14 and vixtvBos in Ezek. xvi. 10, to
mention no other passages, representing the
ETin ; in A. V. badger's skin ; R. V. seal's skin.
By iixtvSos the Rabbins translate ^2E? (Ex.
xxviii. 19, A. V. agate) the eighth breastplate
stone (H. Emanuel, ubi infra, p. 43). Abont
the commencement of the Christian era, Philc-
Judaeus, apparently referring to the stone, twice
speaks of the hyacinth as being compared to, or
as being the symbol of, air (Hip), this being dark
by nature (n*\as <pva<i. De Congrcssu, and De
Mose lib. mil., Op. ed. Mangey, 1742, i. 536,
1. 16 ; ii. 148, 1. 40). Pliny, about the period
of St. John, describes the hyacinth as allied to
the amethyst, but much differing from it in
having the violet diluted (.V. H. xxxvii. § 122,
Sillig). Solinus speaks of the hyacinth as blue
(nitore caerulo), and as highly prized when
faultless, but as very subject to imperfection,
being for the most part either diluted with
violet, or clouded, or melting to a watery
paleness; ill adapted for engraving, owing to
its hardness, but yielding to the diamond
(adamante. Polyhistor., cap. 30, § 32, ed. 1794).
Epiphanius in the fourth century (De XII.
Oemmis, sec. vii. in Patrol. Gr. xliii. p. 293)
says that hyacinths are of different sorts, the
most excellent being purplish (vTrorop<pvpl(at>),
and he conjectures that the obscure stone called
ligure in the high-priest's breastplate (Ex.
xxxviii. 19) refers to the hyacinth, a view
concurred in by E. F. C. Rosenmiiller (Miner-
alogy and Botany of tlie Bible, p. 35). Late in
the same century Heliodorus (Aethiopica, lib. ii.
c. 30, I. 41, in Erotici Scriptores, 1856) likens
the colour of the hyacinth to that of the sea-
shore under a lofty cliff tinging all below with
purple. Isidore of Seville in the seventh cen-
tury (F.tymol. lib. xvi. c. 9, § 3, in Pat. Lat.
lxxxii. 574) writes that the hyacinth, so called
JACOB
after the flower of that name, is found in
Ethiopia, having a blue colour (caendam
colorem), very hard to be engraved, but cut by
a diamond (adamante).
These various accounts represent the pre-
vailing colour of the ancient jacinth as in-
clining to purple; but since Solinus has
represented that tint as a fault and the normal
colour blue, the hardness also exceptional, some
have been led to identify the stone with the
modern sapphire (C. W. King, Precious Stones,
pp. 194, 195, 1865). The ancient jacinth and
the ancient sapphire, however, could not have
been identical, since both occur in the founda-
tions of the New Jerusalem.
Modern jacinth is described by Rosenmuller
(ubi supr.) as orange-yellow-red; by E. W.
Streeter (Precious Stones, p. 199, 1877) as
orange-red ; by Augusto Castellan! (Gems, tr.
by Mrs. Brogden, p. 115, 1871) as fine reddish
yellow ; by Madame Barren (Gems and Jevcek,
p. 193, 1860) as of the garnet family, and
having when perfect a beautiful orange tint,
with a shade of scarlet ; by H. Emanuel
(Diamonds and Precious Stones, p. 43, 1867) as
possessing, in the most valued specimens, the
glowing hue of a burning coal. The jacinths st
South Kensington are placed within the family
of Zircon (oxygen, zirconium, silicon — Zr Si OJ;
and of the nine specimens (the largest being
nearly the size of a shilling) one might be
compared to sherry wine and the rest to port
By A. L. Millin de Grandmaison our stone is
described as of a golden red, resembling dark
amber, different from the one known by the
ancients as hyacinth, which was akin to the
amethyst and of a light violet tint (De fArche-
ologie des Pierres Gravies, p. 123, ed. 1826).
Augusto Castellani considers that the hyacinth
of the ancients was not our jacinth, but s
corundum, which is crystallized aluminum
coloured by an oxide.
The evidence of ancient texts and the opinions
of modern experts seem to point to the following
conclusion, broadly stated, that the jacinth of
the apostolic period was crystallized aluminum,
blue in the finest kind, turning to purple in the
inferior. Modern jacinth is crystallized zircon
and silicon, orange in the most rained speci-
mens, dark pink in the commoner. [C. H.]
. JACKAL. R. V. marginal rendering for
?ME>. [Fox.]
JACOB (3J3I£, seldom 3^; 'Uuci&P; JaccHy
The people whom we best know as Israel or
the Children of Israel (benS Israel) are often
styled and addressed as Jacob, or the Sons
of Jacob, or the Seed of Jacob, by their own
Psalmists and Prophets. The name Jacob is,
in fact, freely used in the O. T. as a poetical
and rhetorical equivalent of Israel (e.g. Xum.
xxiii. 7, 10, 21; xxiv. 5, 17). The precise
original meaning of these national designations
is difficult to determine. The Biblical allusions
are more in the nature of turns verborum than
scientific etymologies. Consequently different
implications are seen in both names by different
writers, and even by the same writer in different
parts of his work (Gen. xxv. 26, xxvii. 36 ; Hos
xii. 4). An ancient trace of Jacob, as a Pales-
tinian local name, is preserved in the inscription*
Digitized by
Google
JACOB
of the great Egyptian sovereign, Thothmes III.
(1503-1449 B.c. Mahler, Zeitsch. Ag. Spr. xxvii.
2, 97 sqq.). In the three lists of captured towns,
sculptured on the pylons of the temple at Kar-
nak, the 102nd name is I-4-q-b a-e-1 (Mariette,
Karnai); that is, probably, 7K"3pI?\ Jacob-el.
But although 7K"3pIP, Jacob-el, may be the
true Canaanite original of the Egyptian Uqeb-
ael, it cannot mean " Jacob the god " (Sayce,
Bibbert Lectures, p. 51), but " El is (or does) "
— whatever is signified by the root 3pl*, '0906.
It is a tenable and highly probable opinion that
the name Jacob is a familiar abbreviation which
has displaced an original Jacob-el; just as
Nathan in common use represented Nathan-el
or El-nathan, and Hanan El-hanan or Hanan-el.
And a local name Jacob-el would be quite parallel
to Jiphthah-el, as compared with Jephthah
(^tmriB\ Josh. xix. 14, 27. Cp. .TfiriD). As
a personal designation, Jacob(el) would then
belong to the large class of what are called
theophoric names. The names iT3pV, 'Akabiah
(AbotA, iii. 1), and 'Aqabi-ya'wa (! miT3ptf), re-
cently found in a Babylonian contract (JPSBA.
Nov. 1892), confirm this view. Such a fact,
however, affords no basis for the opinion that
the Jacob of Genesis is only an old Canaanitish
god who has been metamorphosed or euhemerized
into the father of the bene Israel. The suggestion
is at once disposed of by the consideration that in
this cue 3pIP is predicative, just as S]DV (Joseph)
is in the fuller iTBDV (Josiphiah). The same
objection is fatal to Goldziher's identification
of Jacob as "the Follower" (that is, as he
explains, the Night who follow! on the Bay),
because the root \ ■ne. (3pU) means " to
follow." It is El (not Night) who " follows,"
if Jacob = Jacob-el ; and El is " God " in old
Hebrew use (*.#. Gen. xxxv. 1, E.), even if, ac-
cording to the apocryphal Sanchoniathon and his
creator Philo Byblius, it was a proper name in
Phoenician, corresponding to the Greek Kronos.
The Arabic root \ ■ofe- 'aqaba, does, however,
suggest what may be the true original sense of
the name Jacob. For this verb, which is strictly
a s
a denominative from \ .oft, 'oqib, "heel,"
meaning "to strike a man's heel," and then
" to follow at his heels," has also the senses of
retribution and requital (iii., iv.). A vestige
of this meaning of the root is preserved in the
Heb, 3gp, 'iqeb, « reward " (Ps. xix. 11.). It
seems possible, therefore, that Jacob (or Jacob-
el) as a personal name originally meant " El
rewardeth " ; a perhaps likelier view than that
which saw in the patriarch's name an anticipation
of his crafty conduct. On the other hand, craft
and cunning by which he outwits his foes would
hardly have seemed to primitive men an im-
proper attribute of the Deity (cp. Job v. 13;
Pa. xviii. 24, 26); so that, after all, this may
be the original import of the name Jacob* (cp.
• If Jacob-el means "El rewardeth," It Is like
IfcabelemUta, "Jah recompenseth," to which Shallum
sppeara to be related as 31pB> 'Akkftb, to Jacob.
OiTTilnn compared the Samaritan 91/Y QJ2J) with
JACOB
1499
Ewald, Hist. i. 346. So Reuss). If Jacob is be
who follows at the heels of his foe, or who way-
lays and overcomes him by fraud (nachfolgt,
nachspurt, nachstellt, belistet) — ideas expressed
by the root 'aqab (Knobel, Dillmann) — the name
may preserve a reminiscence of the old desert
life of Israel. It may perhaps be due to
the sinister meaning associated by tradition
with the name of Jacob, that it does not re-
appear as a personal name throughout the 0. T."
That, however, may rather be a consequence of
the fact that, in the popular mind and speech,
Jacob commonly denoted the nation. Like many
other venerable names of antiquity, its use waa
revived in the later age of Judaism. [For the
N. T. period, see James.]
In the Book of Genesis (our only source, apart
from incidental allusions in the Prophets and
Psalmists; for nothing which Rabbinical fancy
has added to the primary traditions is of the
slightest worth) Jacob is the proper father of
the Israelitish nation, in contrast with Abraham,
who is the common ancestor of Arabian and
Aramean stocks as well as of Israel, and with
Isaac, the father of the brother-peoples Israel
and Edom. Like Abraham and Isaac, Jacob is
a peace-loving nomadic chief, "dwelling in
tents " (Gen. xxv. 2 ; xlvii. 3 sqq.), and moving
his camp from one pasturage to another, as
need required ; but sometimes sowing grain
and reaping the crop (Gen. xxxvii. 7), as the
wandering Bedawi tribes occasionally do at the
present day. The story of his life appears,
roughly speaking, to be the result of a com-
bination of two principal narratives, which
originated in different periods, and are dis-
tinguished by striking differences of language
and thought, of style and scope [Genesis].
The more ancient source told how when Isaac
was dwelling by the well Beer-lahai-roi (in the
neighbourhood of Beersheba), his childless wife
became fruitful in consequence of his prayer to
Jahvah. Even before birth the twin fathers of
Israel and Edom struggled together in the
womb ; and when the mother went in to inquire
of Jahvah, she received in response an oracular
foreshadowing of the history of the rival
peoples (Gen. xxv. 23) : —
" Two nations are In thy womb,
And two peoples from thy bowels forth will part!
And people shall be stronger than people,
And elder snail serve younger."
In due time she bears the twin brethren, the
first " red," or ruddy (1 Sam. xvi. 12, xvii. 42 ;
'3b*1tt, 'adminl, with an allusion to the name
Dft$*, 'Sdim), " all of him like a hairy mantle "
(Zecri. xiii. 4; "lyS?, si'ar, "hair," with an allu-
Hebrew 3pp, "reward." This pronunciation recalls
Prof. Friedrich Deltttsch'e Interesting suggestion that
the well-known clan or tribal name Egibi, which occurs
so often In Babylonian business documents of the 6th
cent. B.C., Is cognate with the Hebrew Jacob. An
exact transcription of Jacob Is seen in Iqub (I-qu-bo)
son of Nabu-nastr ; the name of a witness In a tablet
dated In the istli year of Darius (in the writer's pos-
session). Egibi (Eglbn), on the other hand, formally
oorresponds to the Arabic proper name ', ■''«"
al-'Aqlb. cited by Oolddher.
" Jacobab, A. V. Jaakobuh, occurs aa the name of a
Slmeonite chief (1 Ch. iv. 36).
Digitized by
Google
1500
JACOB
sion to the name TW, S?lr, Selr), whence he
was called Esau 0»W: cp. ^fi\ t "hairy;"
ip, "hair;" iylfr, "long hair"); the
other was born " with his hand clutching Esau's
heel " (3pl?, 'dqib, " heel "), whence his name of
Jacob (3pJP\ Ya'aqib ; as if, Heel-grasper).
The story passes from infancy to manhood
with the brief statement that " the boys grew
up, and Esau became a cunning hunter, a man
•of the field, but Jacob a perfect (gentle or quiet)
man, a dweller in tents." It is added that
Isaac loved Esau, for venison was to his taste,
but the mother preferred Jacob. It is clear
from the context that the term " perfect " (DR)
is not used in any high ethical sense, but chiefly
connotes the peace-loving temper of the gentle
shepherd. It may perhaps include the idea of
piety and assiduous worship, which is through-
out a feature of Jacob, but does not exclude his
equally characteristic love of gain, and the false
wiles by which he overreaches his brother, his
father, and his father-in-law. This side of him
is immediately illustrated by the incident of his
purchase of the rights of the first-born. Esau
comes in from the field, ready to die with
hunger; but Jacob will give him none of his
red lentile pottage, till he has sworn to part
with the birthright (Gen. xxv. lib, 18,21-
26 a, 27-34). It is instructive to note Esau's
cry, " Prithee let me swallow some of that red,
red fare 1 " and the comment, " Therefore was he
culled Edom," or the Red. If the reading
" red " be original in v. 25, this is another
reason for the name, and that from the pen of
the same writer. A discrepancy which did not
trouble him need not trouble us; not even
when we remember that mountainous Edom is
distinguished by its red or ruddy cliffs [Edom].
We are next told of the trickery by which Jacob
contrived to rob Esau of the Blessing (xxvii.).
Here the actual difference in the physical charac-
teristics of the lands of Israel and Edom is well
brought out in Isaac's contrasted utterances
over his two sons. On the one hand, "the
land flowing with milk and honey," the fruitful
fields and rich pastures and sunny vine-covered
slopes : " See, the smell of my son is like the
smell of a field which Jahvah hath blessed.
And God give thee of the dew of heaven and of
the fat lands of the earth, and plenty of corn
and new wine ! " On the other, the arid cliffs
and rocky defiles of Idumea, and the life of the
robber-chief: " Lo, far from the fat lands of
the earth shall thy dwelling be, and far from
the dew of heaven above ! And by thy sword
shalt thou live " (cp. Ma), i. 2, 3 ; Obad. v. 3).
So also the historical fortunes of each people
are again foreshadowed ; and the progress of
the story is marked by the somewhat fuller
detail with which this is done (cp. xxv. 23).
To Jacob it is said : " Let peoples serve thee,
and kindreds bow down to thee ! Become
a master unto thy brethren, and let thy
mother's sons bow down to thee ! Tby cursers
be each accurst, and thy blessers blest ! "
The conquest of Edom by David is plainly
meant, just as the final success of Edomitish
rebellion is intimated in the words to Esau :
JACOB
"And thy brother thou shalt serve; and it
shall befal, what time thou strainest hard (?),
thou wilt burst his yoke from off thy neck "
(xxvii. 40; cp. 2 Sam. viii. 13, 14; cp. IK.
xi. 22, 25, LXX.).
1 In the course of the story, the writer returns
to the name Jacob as expressing in brief the
character of the younger brother. "And he
(Esau) said, Is not he rightly named Jacob, in
that he hath Jaoob'd (outwitted) me now
twice?" Before, Jacob grasped his brother's
heel ; now his name has a moral rather than a
physical reference.
It seems unnecessary to follow in detail the
inimitable narrative which occupies the entire
latter half of the Book of Genesis, and which is
imprinted indelibly upon the memory of every
reader. It may be more useful to ask how far
it can be regarded as historical in the modern
sense of the word, even though we may not find
ourselves able to give any very decided answer
to that question. Some critics, as we saw, are
disposed to seek the foundation of the whole in
a myth which has been mistaken for history.
But the story of Jacob is no simple self-
consistent mythus of the primitive age. Many
traditions of the past relating to local sanc-
tuaries, famous monuments and memorials,
sacred trees and wells, are here blended with
fragments of ancient popular poetry and true
reminiscences of Hebrew history into an ex-
quisite literary unity. To analyse and interpret
this narrative is a difficult task, for which aa
adequate knowledge of Semitic archaeology and
philology is one indispensable qualification.
It is clear that even if Jacob were the name of as
old deity of the Canaanites, that fact alone would
not suffice to resolve the Jacob of Genesis into
a purely mythical personage. In antiquity the
names of gods were often borne by real men and
women. Whether any mythical elements from
the common stock of Semitic folk-lore have
been received into the popular traditions about
the prime fathers of Israel is another question.
That vestige* of primitive mythology are trace-
able in isolated passages of the O. T., is sot
to be denied (cp. Is. xiv. 9, 13, xix. 1, xxiv.
21 sqq., xxvii. 1 ; Job xxvi. 12, 13 ; above
all, Gen. ii. 4b-iii. 24; vi. 1-4, &c). And
it is well known that a halo of legend
often surrounds and obscures important his-
torical characters, even of what may be called
the modern period. Yet the critics who hare
done most to revolutionize current conceptions
of early Hebrew history have not denied out-
right the possibility of Jacob's individual
existence.* But it is now pretty generally
recognised by professional students of Hebrew
and Oriental antiquity that the Biblical ac-
counts of the patriarchs have " an ethnological
at least quite as much as a personal signifi-
cance." No one who has consulted such works u
the Ki'.ab al-Aijhanl, or indeed any of the Arabic
historiographers, can fail to appreciate the fact,
even if owing to the surviving romance of
childhood he has missed the abundant indica-
tions of it which present themselves in the too
familiar texts of Scripture. The practical
difficulty in all such ambiguous relations is to
• Knenen, Hut. of J trail, L 113; Ewald. But. I
| 342; Robertson Smith, Encycl. Brit., art. Jacob.
Digitized by
Google
JACOB
JACOB
1501
separate the personal from the ethnic or tribal
history. It is a difficulty due mainly to the
natural difference between Eastern and Western
modes of thought and speech; and is by no
means to be got rid of summarily, by the
popular bnt groundless assumption of the
identity of things that are essentially dissimilar.
On the other hand, bearing in mind the usual
character of Oriental histories, we may be
inclined to think that some of the objections
raised by critics against the patriarchal tra-
ditions are exaggerated. A closer scrutiny of
the stories about Jacob, for instance, will
perhaps hardly bear out the assertion that he
is represented as " not inferior to the prophets
of the 8th century B.C. in pureness of
religious insight and inward spiritual piety."
This may be the ordinary conception of Jacob.
Cnhistorical religion has read a good deal
besides this into the Biblical narratives. But
Jacob's piety, his prayers and faith in a pro-
tecting Deity, his dreams, his vows, his set-
ting up masiebvth or sacred stones and pouring
oil on them, are religious phenomena which
were doubtless as common in the 18th as in
the 8th century before our era. Parallel
facts might easily be adduced from contem-
porary monuments of Egypt and Babylon. We
see nothing anachronistic, and much that is
perfectly compatible with the ideas and cus-
toms of his supposed period, in the older history
of Jacob. The superior cunning by which he
overreaches all his kin, his marriage with two
sisters at the same time (prohibited by the law
of Lev. xviii. 18), his sustained disregard of vera-
city (xivii. 19 sqq., xxx. 33, 37 sqq., xxxi. 8,
10-12), are certainly no proofs of " pureness of
religious insight and inward spiritual piety."
The writer whose words we have quoted finds
another strong objection in " the familiar
intercourse of the Deity with the patriarchs."
But here, again, what Has rather struck us in
the traditional history of Jacob has been the
general absence of what Dr. Kuenen's words
imply. No doubt, Jacob receives Divine
guidance in warnings and promises. But if
it be asked in what way, we shall probably not
greatly err if we answer by the means known
from the later histories, by dreams and priestly
oracles and lots.' This is surely presupposed,
even when it is not expressly stated, as it is in
the case of the important vision at Bethel
(ixviii. 10-22). In both J and E that theo-
phany is represented as occurring in sleep ; and
even in classical times and countries sleeping in
the sanctuary was a recognised method of com-
munion with the Unseen.
It is true that " among most of the nations of
antiquity we find the belief that many centuries
ago the inhabitants of heaven have associated
with dwellers upon earth ; " and that " we are
not in the habit of accepting as history the
legends and myths which afford evidence of that
belief" (Kuenen, Bel. of Isr. i. 109). But the
classical ^stories are only superficially parallel
to the Israelite traditions in their existing form ;
and any earlier more decidedly mythical form is
a matter of pure conjecture. Leaving on one
aide the accounts of Abraham, let us take the
< So, e.g., Bebekab " Kent to Inquire of Jahvah,"
Gen. xzv. 22.
story of the mysterious conflict of Jacob at
Penuel (Gen. xxxii. 24-33), to which Kuenen
refers.
If the theophany of Beth-el was a dream,
may not a dream lie at the basis of this
famous episode also? It is in a dream that
" the Angel of Elohim " speaks to Jacob, bidding
him return to Canaan (xxxi. 1 1 sqq.) ; and it is
" in the visions of night " that Elohim bids him
go down into Egypt (xlvi. 2). It seems a fair
inference that, on other occasions also when Jacob
is brought into contact with the Unseen, the
writer means us to understand the medium of
the dream. The fact is evident from the mode
in which the vision at Bethel is referred to
(xxxv. 1, 7). When we read that " Elohim said
to Jacob, Arise, go up to Bethel, and dwell
there ; and make there an altar to the God (EC)
who appeared unto thee, when thou fleddest
before thy brother Esan " ; we see at once that
the italicixed words, which, apart from the
fuller account of xxviii. 11, 12, would inevitably
suggest a literal and sensible apparition, indi-
cate, when taken in connexion with that pas-
sage, the proper interpretation of similar state-
ments elsewhere. As for the opening state-
ment " Elohim said to Jacob," this may simply
be understood of an impulse of conscience (cp.
xxviii. 20 sqq.). The patriarch is conceived as
his own priest and prophet. Otherwise it
would be perfectly agreeable to ancient thought
and language to understand the mediation of a
priestly oracle.
It is, indeed, a striking fact that the older
narrative of Jacob's life contains so little of the
marvellous. Any one who wilMook through the
sections attributed to JE, can verify this for
himself.* It is nowhere said, nor perhaps im-
plied, that Elohim or Jahvah appeared to Jacob
except in dreams. Even the wrestling at Penuel
occurs in the night, which suggests the same
intention/ It is easy and perhaps natural to
exaggerate the general impression of the super-
natural made upon ourselves by the story of
Jacob. The restraint in this matter noticeable
in the older history (JE) ought to be taken
into account in any critical estimate of its cre-
dibility.
But, this much premised, it stands to reason
and common sense that we must make all allow-
ances for literary form and for the individual
freedom of writers dealing with a thing so
variable as tradition, when we come to consider
the details of the story. Here again we are met
by verbal assonances which certainly do not
suggest a literal record of objective facts. The
wrestling (pSK'l, way-yj'abi>k, c. 24 ; 1j52Nm,
behS'abeko, e. 25) occurs by the Jabbok (p3\
Yabbok, r. 22); and it is thus hinted that the
name of the watercourse means " Wrestler," or
" Wrestling." The name Israel is connected
with Jacob's victory, as though it meant " He
• In Darvaa, Introduction to the Literature of the
Old Tatament, or Kautzscb and Soclu'a Die Oenttis.
r This is also the most natural explanation of tbe
brief notice, xxxii. 1, 2 (E). The name of Mabanaim,
wbicb doubtless like Bethel was an ancient sanctuary,
is referred to Jacob's vision of Angels, and bis exclama-
tion, " This Is Elohlm's camp ! " But allusion to this
name (Two cumpB) is again made in a different sense
(co. 7, 10. Jacob was still at Mshanaim, r. 14).
Digitized by
Google
1502
JACOB
hath striven with El," whereas "El striveth"
would be more in accordance with the analogy
of such formations (cp. Seraiah, "Jah hath
striven " ; Jernbbaal, " Baal contendeth " ; and
Ex. xt. 3, Ps. xxiv. 8).* And as Ewald suggests,
the incident of the spraining of Jacob's hip may
be a trace of " some ancient notion of this patriarch
as Limping, connected with the idea of his crafti-
ness and crookedness," taking Jacob to mean " the
Crafty ; " a common association of ideas in folk-
lore. The local name Penuel further illustrates
the nse that the Hebrew spirit could make of
materials lying ready to its hand. Like Bethel,
Mizpah, and Mahanaim, Penuel (Judg. viii. 8) was
probably an ancient holy place, which was thus
adopted, as it were, by Israelite religion. The
name is not peculiar to the land of Israel. A Phoe-
nician promontory was also called " El's Face " or
" Presence " (7tOB, Stov npiautrov, Strabo, xvi.
2, 6, 16, cited by Ewald) ; and " Presence of the
lord [Baal] " (^V33B) was a title of the goddess
Ashtoreth. But how different the associations of
the name in the Biblical story 1 As in the second
account of Creation, elements furnished by ancient
Semitic conceptions are moralised and spiritual-
ised in a manner peculiar to the religion of
Israel ; so here, if Ewald is right, old materials
have been worked up into an unique parable of
the loftiest spiritual experience. The religious
significance of the episode — the meaning it had
for a prophet of the 8th cent. u.c. — is brought
ont clearly though briefly by Hosea (xii. 3, 4) :
" In the womb he held Ms brother's heel ('Sodft),
And in bis manhood be strove (sflraA ; Tisri'll) with
Elohlm:
Yea, he strove against an Angel, and prevailed :
He wept and made supplication unto him.
At Bethel He did find him,
And there He spake with him."
Thus in the prophet's estimation the wrestling
with Elohim was a wrestling of prayer, in which
the agony of fear and remorse was overcome by
the final triumph of faith. Weeping and suppli-
cation, indeed, are incidents hardly congruous
with the idea of a merely physical struggle.
This addition is further important, in that it
seems to prove either that other and fuller
versions of the episode existed in Hosea's time,
or that he felt at liberty to modify the rela-
tion of Genesis for his own purposes. What-
ever may be our opinion of the matter, upon a
calm survey of the entire patriarchal history,
from Gen. xii. onwards, we can hardly fail
to be struck by the fact that while visions in
broad daylight, theophanies in the strictest
sense, seem to be connected with the name of
Abraham, nothing of the sort is told of Isaac ;
and that in spite of the far greater length and
richness of detail that distinguish the traditions
about Jacob, only a single isolated story can in
his case be claimed as a record of an objectively
supernatural experience : while, finally, in the
life of Joseph the atmosphere of mystery is
almost wholly withdrawn, fading like the glories
of sunrise into the light of common day.
It is clear that the original tradition does not
treat Jacob's successful wiles with Esau and
• In ch. xxxv. 10, the Levttical source (P) connects
the name wltb another occasion.
JACOB'S WELL
Isaac and Laban as morally reprehensible. It
rather recounts them with the same undisguised
admiration that an Arab story-teller of to-day
might evince in similar narratives. Nor is any
hint of disapproval of his polygamous marriage
to be detected by the closest scrutiny of any one
of the old writers whose hands are discernible
in the composition of Genesis. How indeed
conld we expect it^ in face of the immemorial
usage of the East? Polygamy, however, has
consequences in family life, which must have
some representation in every picture that ii
true to nature ; and these may easily be dis-
cerned in the story of Jacob. Throughout his
family history, indeed, we may perhaps be per-
mitted to see an unavowed purpose ot showing
how the patriarch's spiritual nature was puri-
fied by sorrowful experience, largely due to
the reappearance in his sons of those very faults
which darkened his own character in earlier
life. His old deceits, practised even upon a
blind and bedridden father, come home to him
in the treachery of Simeon and Levi (Gen.
xxxiv.), in the conspiracy against Joseph and the
deceit of the bloody coat (ch. xxxvii.). In later
times Jewish faith unquestionably drew these
and other moral and religious lessons from the
life-story of Jacob. His long servitude is
Paddan-Aram, for instance, was regarded u s
heaven-sent discipline (Judith viii. 26). But
the grand lesson of the whole seems to be
enunciated in the words of Joseph : " So now it
was not you that sent me hither, but Elohim "
(xlv. 8) ; " As for you, ye meant evil against
me, but Elohim meant it for good" (1. 20).
The Divine purpose of grace cannot be thwarted;
human opposition only furthers it (cp. Riehm,
HWB^ s. v. Jacob).
True, therefore, as it is that the character of
Jacob mirrors the historical character of the
Israelite people, and that the great events of
his life reflect the historical relations of that
people with neighbouring and kindred nations ;
we need not hesitate to use the composite his-
tory of the eponymous father of Jacob-Israel
in the manner indicated by St. Paul, " for teach-
ing, for reproof, for correction, for instruction
in righteousness " (2 Tim. iii. 16); in short, for
all purposes of religious edification. The idyllic
beauty, the majestic simplicity, the broad faith-
fulness to antique humanity, everywhere evi-
dent in this wonderful blend of manifold tradi-
tions, but, above all, the diviner meanings with
which they have been imbued under the in-
fluence of the holy spirit of Hebrew religion, sre
things which criticism cannot touch, and which
no sober critic desires to touch. [C J. B-]
JACOB'S WELL (inrrt toD 'Iamifl), the
scene of Christ's discourse with the Samaritan
woman (John iv. 1-42), was made by the
patriarch Jacob (o. 12). It was very deep
(v. 11); near the road from Judaea, through
Samaria, to Galilee (tw. 3, 4) ; outside of a city
called Sychar; and near the plot of ground in
which Joseph was buried (t>. 5 : cp. Gen. xlviii.
22 ; Josh. xxiv. 32). There is every reason to
believe that Bir Vakub, " Jacob's well," near
Nablus, is the place mentioned. It lies at the
N.E. foot of Gerizim, near the road, through
the bills, from Judaea to Galilee, and there is
nowhere else a deep well at which Jesus conld
Digitized by
Google
JACOB'S WELL
have rested when He sent His disciples into the
city to buy food (cc. 6, 9). The surroundings
are in perfect harmony with the words of
Christ. To the E. and S. the eye rests on the
fertile plain of d-Mukhnah, — once the pasture-
ground of Jacob (Gen. xxxiii. 18 ; cp. zxxvii.
12), and, when Jesus looked upon it, covered
with waving corn ripe for the sickle (v. 35).
Northward rises the imposing mass of Mount
Ebal, with the village of 'Askar, possibly
Sychab, at its base, and opposite to it towers
Mount Gerizim with the ruins of the Samaritan
temple (tip. 20, 21) on its summit. The tradi-
tional tomb of Joseph lies in the plain a short
distance to the north, and Shechem, though
hidden from view by a swell of the ground, is
only 1} miles distant to the north-west.
In April 1860 a descent of the well was made
JACOB'S WELL
1503
by Major Anderson, R.E., who found it to be
75 feet deep, and 7 feet 6 inches in diameter.
It was then dry, but on the stones at the
bottom lay an unbroken earthenware pitcher,
which must have fallen when there was some
depth of water. The upper portion of the well
is sunk through the soil of the valley and is
neatly lined with masonry, the lower through
compact beds of limestone. Above the mouth
of the well is a vaulted chamber, and around
it are the ruins of the churches which once
covered it (PEF. Mem. ii. 174 sq.). In 1697
the depth according to Maundrell (E. T. p. 435)
was 105 ft., and there were 15 ft. of water.
There can be little doubt that, although the
water does not now always rise above the rub-
bish that has accumulated in it, the well, if
cleared out, would possess an unfailing supply.
In 1881, what appears to have been the ori-
ginal stone over the mouth of the well was
uncovered (PEFQy. Stat. 1881, p. 212).
The tradition respecting Jacob's Well, in
which Christians, Jews, Samaritans, and Mus-
lims agree, goes back at least to the time of
Eusebius in the early part of the 4th century
(OS* p. 286, 26, s. v. 3v X dp ; Itin. ffierosol.).
Neither of these writers mentions a church,
but Jerome makes Paula visit a church " erected
round the well " (Ep. S. Paul. xvi. ; cp. OS.*
p. 185, 31). This church is mentioned, A.D.
570, by Antoninus Martyr (vi.), who states
that the well was in front of the altar, and
that many sick were healed there. It is de-
scribed, A.D. 670, by Arculfus as cruciform, and
the well was then in the centre of the church
and said to be 40 orgyiae, or about 240 ft. deep
(ii. 19). The well and church are mentioned,
A.D. 754, by Willibald (Hod.) ; but Saewulf,
a.d. 1102, and Abbot Daniel, a.d. 1106, only
mention the well, the water of which, the latter
says, was " very cold and pleasant to the taste "
(p. lxxii.). The church would thus appear to
have been destroyed prior to the Crusades, but,
according to an anonymous writer, circa A.D.
1130, it must have been rebuilt early in the
12th century (De Vogue, Eg. de T. S. App.
pp. 424, 425), and Idr'isi, A.D. 1154, alludes to
it as "a fine church" (Le Strange, Pal- under
the Moslems, pp. 511, 512). This later church
was probably destroyed after the battle of
Hattin, A.D. 1187, as subsequent pilgrims only
mention ruins. The altar, however, appears to
Digitized by VjOOQlC
1504
JACUBUS
have been in existence as late as the 17th cen-
tury (Quaresmias, ii. 800).
It may appear strange that Jacob should have
made a well at this spot when there was such
an abundant supply of water close at hand in
the valley of Shechem ; but such a course
would not be out of keeping with the custom
of nomads. It is characteristic of the prudence
and forethought of the Patriarch that, having
obtained a parcel of ground at the entrance to
the vale, he should have secured, by dint of
great toil, a perennial supply of water at a
time when the adjacent springs were in the
hands of unfriendly, if not openly hostile,
neighbours. The action of the woman in going
at mid-day to obtain cold fresh water from a
deep well is quite natural, and there is no
reason to suppose with Furrer (Schenkel, Bib.
Lex. s. v.) that Christ's discourse is framed in
an ideal picture not drawn with strict accuracy
of detail. Cp. Robinson, iii. 107 sq. ; Guerin,
Samarie, i. 376 sq. ; Sepp, ii. 55-57 ; Riehm,
s. r. [W.]
JACTTBUS (B. 'lapvoifaos, A. 'HkovBos;
Accubus), 1 Esd. ii. 48. [Akkub, 4.]
J ADA (PV = [Cod] hath knoum ; B. "IaJoe,
and at r. 32, B. 'iSouSA, A. 'UBlat), son of Onam,
and brother of Shammai, in the genealogy of the
sons of Jerahmeel by his wife Atarah (1 Ch. ii.
28, 32). This genealogy is very corrupt in the
LXX., especially in the Vatican Codex.
[A. C. H.]
JA'DAU (IV, but the Qeri has »T, i.e. Yad-
dai ; B. Aid, A. 'la&ti; Jeddu), one of the Bene-
Nebo who had taken a foreign wife, and was
compelled by Ezra to relinquish her (Ezra x. 43).
JADDUA (OT = known ; B. 'IoSoe, K.
ISoia; Jeddody 1. Son and successor in the
high-priesthood of Jonathan or Johanan. He
is the last of the high-priests mentioned in
the 0. T., and probably altogether the latest
name in the Canon (Neh. xii. 11, 22), at
least if 1 Ch. iii. 22-24 is admitted to be
corrupt (see Hervey, Geneal. of our Lord,
pp. 101, 107). His name marks distinctly the
time when the latest additions were made to
the Book of Nehemiah and the Canon of Scrip-
ture, and perhaps affords a clue to the age of
Malachi the Prophet. All that we learn con-
cerning him in Scripture is the fact of his
being the son of Jonathan, and high-priest. We
gather also pretty certainly that he was priest
in the reign of the last Persian king Darius,
and that he was still high-priest after the
Persian dynasty was overthrown, i.e. in the
reign of Alexander the Great. For the ex-
pression " Darius the Persian " (Neh. xii. 22)
must have been used after the accession of the
Grecian dynasty ; and had another high-priest
succeeded, his name would most likely have
been mentioned. Thus far then the Book of
Nehemiah bears out the truth of Josephus's
history, which makes Jaddua high-priest when
Alexander invaded Judaea (Ant. xi. 8, §§ 4, 5).
But the story of his interview with Alexander
[Hioh-priest, p. 1360] does not on that account
deserve credit, nor the jtory of the building of
the temple on Mount Gerizim during Jaddua's
JAEL
pontificate, at the instigation of Sanballat (Jo*.
Ant. xi. 8, §§ 2, 4), both of which, as well as the
accompanying circumstances, are probably de-
rived from some apocryphal book of Alexandrian
growth, since lost, in which chronology and
history gave way to romance and Jewish vanity.
Josephus seems to place the death of Jaddu.i
after that of Alexander (Ant. xi. 8, § 7). Ease-
bins assigns 20 years to Jaddua's pontificate
(Chronicon, lib. ii., sub ann. Abrah. 1678, 1698.
in Patrol. Or. xix. 487, 491); upon which point
may further be consulted Selden, De Succession*
m Pontificatum Ebraeorum, lib. i. cap. vi.,
Works, ii. pt. i. 112, ed. 1726 ; Prideanx, Con-
nexion, i. 540, 541, ed. 1838; Hervey, Geneat.
of our Lord, p. 823. [A C. H.] [C. H.]
2. (B. om., «••* ttttoia, A. Itttoiic ; Jed-
dud), one of the chiefs of the people, i.e. of the
laymen, who sealed the covenant with Nehemiah
(Neh. x. 21).
JADON (fiV T = judge; LXX. om.; Jadcm),
a man who, in company with the Gibeonites
and the men of Mizpah, assisted to repair the
wall of Jerusalem (Neh. iii. 7). His title, " the
Meronothite" (cp. 1 Ch. xxvii. 30), and the
mention of Gibeonites, would seem to point to
a place Meronoth, and that in the neighbour-
hood of Gibeon ; but no such place has yet been
traced.
Jadon ClaSiay) is the name attributed by
Josephus (Ant viii. 8, § 5) to the man of God
from Judah who withstood Jeroboam at the
altar at Bethel — probably intending Iddo the
seer. By Jerome (Qu. Hebr. on 2 Ch. ii. 29,
in Pat. Lat. xxiii. 1390) that seer, who is also
identified with the man of God from Judah, is
named Jaddo.
JA'EL(^W ; Hex. Syr. Anael; 'IoftX; Joseph.
'IdAij; Jahei), the wife of Heber the Kenite.
Heber was the chief of a nomadic Arab clan,
who had separated from the rest of his tribe,
and had pitched his tent under the oak, which
had in consequence received the name (R. V.) of
" oak in Zaanaim " (A. V. " plain of Zaanaim,"
Judg. iv. 11), in the neighbourhood of Kedesh-
Naphtali. [Heber; Kenites.] The tribe of
Heber had secured the quiet enjoyment of their
pastures by adopting a neutral position in a
troublous period. Their descent from Jethro
secured them the favourable regard of the
Israelites, and they were sufficiently important
to conclude a formal peace with Jabin king of
Hazor.
In the headlong rout which followed the
defeat of the Canaanites by Barak, Sisera, aban-
doning his chariot the more easily to avoid
notice (cp. Horn. II. v. 20), fled unattended,
and in an opposite direction from that taken
by his army, to the tent of the Kenite chief-
tainess. " The tent of Jael " is expressly men-
tioned, either because the harem of Heber was
in a separate tent (Rosenmiiller, iforgenl. iii.
22), or because the Kenite himself was absent
at the time. In the sacred seclusion of this
almost inviolable sanctuary, Sisera might well
have felt himself absolutely secure from the
incursions of the enemy (Calmet, Fragm. xxv.) ;
and although he intended to take refuge among
the Kenites, he would not hare ventured so
Digitized by
Google
JAEL
openly to violate all idea of Oriental propriety
by entering a woman's apartments (D'Herbelot,
bibi. Orient, s. v. Haram), bad he not received
Jael's express, earnest, and respectful entreaty
to do so. He accepted the invitation, and she
Bung the tent-rug* (B. i-Ki&oXmov; A. JefMis)
over him as he lay wearily on the floor. When
thirst prevented sleep, and he asked for water,
she brought him buttermilk in her choicest
vessel, thus ratifying with the semblance of
officious zeal the sacred bond of Eastern hos-
pitality. Wine would have been less suitable
to quench his thirst, and may possibly have
been eschewed by Heber's clan (Jer. xxxv. 2).
Buttermilk, according to the quotations in
Harmer, is still a favourite Arab beverage
(lebbdn), and that this is the drink intended
we infer from Jndg. v. 25, as well as from
the direct statement of Joseph us (y&\a Su<p-
Oopbs IjSfi, Ant. v. 5, § 4), although there is
no reason to suppose with Josephus and the
Rabbis (D. Kimchi, Jarchi, &c.) that Jael pur-
posely used it because of its soporific qualities
(Bochart, Hieroz. i. 473). But anxiety still
prevented Sisera from composing himself to
rest, until he had exacted a promise from his
protectress that she would faithfully preserve
the secret of his concealment ; till at last, with
a feeling of perfect security, the weary and
unfortunate general resigned himself to the
deep sleep of misery and fatigue. Then it was
that Jael took in her left hand one of the great
wooden'' pins (A. V. " nail ") which fastened
down the cords of the tent (Ex. xxvii. 19 ; Is.
xxii. 23, liv. 2), and in her right hand the
mallet (A. V. "» hammer ") used to drive it
into the ground, and, creeping up to her
sleeping and confiding guest, with one terrible
blow dashed it through Sisera's temples deep
into the earth (cp. Judith xiii. 2, 7, 8). With
one spasm of fruitless agony, with one con-
tortion of sudden pain, " at her feet he bowed,
he fell ; where he bowed, there he fell down
dead " (Jndg. v. 27> In the A. MS. of the
LXX. is found the gloss, " He was convulsed
(6.moK&piotr) between her knees, and fainted,
and died." She then waited to meet the pur-
suing Barak, and led him into her tent that she
might in his presence claim the glory of the deed !
Many have supposed that by this act she
fulfilled the saying of Deborah, that God would
sell Sisera into the hand of a woman (Judg. iv.
9 ; Joseph, v. 5, § 4) ; and hence they have
asserted that Jael was actuated by some Divine
and hidden influence. But the Bible gives no
hint of such an inspiration, and it is at least
equally probable that Deborah merely intended
to intimate the share of the honour which
would be assigned by posterity to her own
exertions. [If further we eliminate the supposi-
tion that Jael's act was " not the murder of a
sleeping man, but the use of a daring stratagem "
(W. R. Smith, 1 The 0. T. in the Jetcish Church,
• " Mantle " is here Inaccurate, as is the Vulg. pallio
and Luther's Mantel. The word Is flD'OBTI— with the
definite article. It is not found elsewhere, and it is
uncertain what the *micaA was; but the Syrlac
JUSOCD suggests something to lie upon. The g>
is for D* according to Jewish tradition.
» wiatraJuK, LXX. ; but, according to Josephus,
tri£ijpcor ^Aor.
e dict. — vor.. I.
JAEL
1505
p. 132), that act will appear murder in all
its naked atrocity. — F.] A fugitive had asked
and received dakheel (or protection) at her
hands, — he was miserable, defeated, weary,—
he was an ally of her husband, — he was her
invited and honoured guest, — he was in the
sanctuary of the harem, — above all, he was
confiding, defenceless, and asleep; — yet she
broke her pledged faith, violated her solemn
hospitality, and murdered a trustful and un-
protected slumberer. Surely we require the
clearestand most positive statement that Jael was
instigated to such a murder by Divine suggestion.
But it may be asked, " Has not the deed of
Jael been praised by an inspired authority?"
" Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of
Heber the Kenite be ; blessed shall she be above
women in the tent" (Judg. v. 24). Without
stopping to ask when and where Deborah claims
for herself any infallibility, or whether, in the
passionate moment of patriotic triumph, she
was likely to pause in such wild times to
scrutinise the moral bearings of an act which
had been so splendid a benefit to herself and her
people, we may question whether any moral
commendation is directly intended. What De-
borah stated was a fact, viz. that the wives of
the nomad Arabs would undoubtedly regard
Jael as a public benefactress, and praise her as
a popular heroine. If in the mind of Deborah
the passionate exultation for natural deliverance
overpowered all finer considerations, her words
are exactly analogous to the terrible verses of
Ps. cxxxvii. 8, 9 : "O daughter of Babylon,
happy shall be he that taketh and dasheth thy
little ones against the stones." If, in the 19th
century after Christ, there were many who
could give to Charlotte Corday the title of " the
Angel of assassination," it is not strange that
a thousand years before Christ Jael would find
many to extenuate and even to praise her crime.
The providence of God sometimes permits the
instrumentality of crime in carrying out the
Divine purposes, though the moral responsibility
of the crime rests (as we see in the case of
Jehu) upon its perpetrator. At the same time
we must not judge the rude impassioned Be-
douin chieftainess by the moral standard of
Christianity, or even of later Judaism. She
must not oe classed with women actuated by a
wild thirst for vengeance, like Criemhild in
the Niebclungenlied, or even with Aretophila,
whom Plutarch so emphatically praises; but
rather with a woman like Judith, actuated by
an overpowering patriotic impulse.*
The suggestion of Gesenius ( Thes. p. 608 6),
Hollmann, and others, that the Jael alluded to
in Judg. v. 6 is not the wife of Heber, but
some unknown Israelitish judge, appears to us
extremely unlikely, especially as the name Jael
must almost certainly be the name of a woman
(Prov. v. 19, A. V. « roe " ; cp. Tabitha, Dorcas)
— " a fit name for a Bedouin's wife, especially for
one whose family had come from the rocks of
Engedi, the spring of the wild-goat or chamois."
At the same time it must be admitted that the
phrase " in the days of Jael " is one which we
should hardly have expected. [F. W. F.]
• See Mozley,* Ruling Ideas in Early Aga, Lecture
VIII., "The Connexion of Jael's act with the Morality
of her Age."— [F.]
Digitized by
Google
1506
JAGUlt
JA'GUB (l*y= lodging place; B. om., A
'layoif ; Jagur), a town of Jndsh, one of thosf
furthest to the south, on the frontier o-
Edom (Josh. iv. 21). Kabxeel, one of its com
panions in the list, recurs subsequently; but
Jagur is not again met with, nor has the name
been encountered in the imperfect explorations
of that dreary region. The Jagur, mentioned
in the Talmud (Neubauer, p. 69) as one of the
boundaries of the territory of Ashkelon, must
have been farther to the N.W. [G.] [W.]
J AH <JV ; Kiptos ; Domiuus). See Jehovah.
An abbreviated form of " Jehovah," or rather
Jahveh or Jahvah, used only in poetry. It
occurs frequently in the Hebrew of the later
Psalms, especially in the liturgical phrase Hal-
letu-Jah, "Praise ye Jah!" (ToA); but with
a single exception (Ps. lxviii. 4) is rendered
Lord in the A. V. The identity of Jah and
Jehovah is strongly marked in two passages of
Isaiah (xii. 2, xxvi. 4), the force of which is
greatly weakened by the English rendering " the
Lord." The former of these should be translated
" for my strength and song is Jah Jehovah"
(cp. Ex. xv. 2); and the latter, "Trust ye in
Jehovah for ever, for in Jah Jehovah is the
rock of ages." " Praise ye the Lord," or Halle-
lujah, should be in all cases "praise ye Jah."
In Ps. lxxxix. 8 [9] Jah stands in parallelism
with " Jehovah the God of hosts " in a passage
which is wrongly translated in the A. V. It
should be "O Jehovah, God of hosts, who like
Theei.strong,OJah ! " [w Op.R.V. [cj]}]
JA'HATH (TVV ; see MV.»). 1. (»• 'I«"«« i
A. 'It 8; Jahath.] Son of Libni, the son of
Gershom, the son of Levi (1 Ch. vi. 20, A. V.>
He was ancestor to Asaph (v. 43).
3. (BA. *It8 ; Leheth). Head of a later house
in the family of Gershom, being the eldest son
of Shimei, the son of Laadan. The house of
Jahath existed in David's time (1 Ch. xxiii. 10,
11). [A. C.H.I [CH]
8. (B. 'U9, A. corrupt [sec Swete] ; Jahath.)
A man in the genealogy of Judah (1 Ch. iv. 2),
son of Reaiah ben-Shobal. His sons were
Ahumai and Lahad, the families of the Zora-
thites. If Ecaiah and Haroeh are identical,
Jahath was a descendant of Caleb ben-Hur.
[Harokh.]
4. (BA. 'IvdB.) A Levitc, son of Shelo-
moth, the representative of the Kohathite
family of Izhar in the reign of David (1 Ch.
xxiv. 22). . .
5. (B. 'U, A. "W0.) A Merarite Levite in the
reign of Josiah, one of the overseers of the
repairs to the Temple (2 Ch. xxxiv. 12).
JA'HAZ,also JAHAZA, JAHA'ZAH, and
JAH'ZAH. Under these four forms are given
in the A. V. the name of a place which in the
Hebrew appears as fiT and nViV, the PI being
in some cases — as Num. and Dent. — the particle
of motion, but elsewhere an integral addition to
the name. It has been uniformly so taken
by the LXX., who have '\avoa, and twice
'Ioo-i Jaiiaz is found in Num. xxi. 23; Deut.
il. 32; JuJg. xi. 20; Is. xv. 4; Jer. xlviii. 34.
In the two latter only is it f il\ without the
JAHAZ
final f1. In Judg. xi. 20, A reads 'l<rpat)\.
The Samaritan Cod. has HVIV ; Vulg. Jasa,
At Jahax the decisive battle was fought
between the children of Israel and Sihon king
of the Amorites, which ended in the overthrow
of the latter and in the occupation by Israel of
the whole pastoral country included between the
Anion and the Jabbok, the Belka of the modern
Arabs (Num. xxi. 23 ; Deut. ii. 32 ; Judg. xi. 20).
It was in the allotment of Reuben (Josh. xiii.
18), though not mentioned in the catalogue of
Num. xxxii. ; and it was given with its suburbs
to the Merarite Levitejs (1 Ch. vi. 78 ; and Josh,
xxi. 36, though here omitted in the ordinary
Hebrew text).
Jahazah occurs in the denunciations of Jere-
miah and Isaiah on the inhabitants of the
"plain country," i.e. the Mishor, the modem
Belka (Jer. xlviii. 21, 34; la. xv. 4); and the
fact that at this period it was in the hands of
Moab agrees with the inscription on "the Moab-
ite stone," in which king Mesha states that he
took it from the king of Israel {Records of tU
Past, N. S., ii. 202).
From the terms of the narrative in Num. xxi.
it would appear that Jahaz was situated N. of
the Arnon (t>. 11); in the vicinity of Pisgah
(v. 20); and on or near " the king's highway
(t>. 22) by which the Israelites were advancing
upon Palestine,— that is, the road from Dibon-
gad, through Almon-diblathaim, to the moon-
tains of Abarim, before Nebo (Num. xxxiii.
45-47). The narrative in Deut. ii. also plat**
Jahax N. of the Arnon ; in e. 24 the Israelite
are directed to pass over the valley of Arnon,
and begin to possess the land of Sihon and
contend with him in battle (cp. o. 31); and
messengers were not sent to ask Sihon's per-
mission for their passage through his territory
until they reached the wilderness (midbar) of
Kedemoth (o. 26), a town of Reuben mentioned
in the same group with Jahax (Josh. xiii. 18).
The sequence of events seems clear. The Israel-
ites after crossing the Arnon, W. MqjA, camped
at Dibon, Dhiban, and thence marched directly
upon Heshbon by the road through Medeba,
Mddeba, which must always have been an im-
portant thoroughfare, and later, during the
Roman period, became one of the great line* ot
communication from north to south. At Jahaz,
between Kedemoth and Heshbon, and not very fiu*
from the latter place and Elealeh, et-'Al (Is. xv. 4 ;
Jer. xlviii. 34), they met and defeated the arm?
which Sihon had assembled for the defence of
his capital. In agreement with this view is the
statement of Eusebius (.OS. 1 p. 267, 94) that
Jahax ("leo-cra) was existing in his day betweea
Medeba and At)/3oSi, or, adopting the reading
suggested by Reland (p. 825), '£<r$ovs, Heshbon.
The site has not been recovered, but it was
possibly at et-Jereineh, or Kefeir Abu Sartmt
(PEF. Mem. E. Pal. pp. 110, 134, and map)
Riehm (HWB. s. v.) place* it between Medebs
and Dibon ; Schwarz (H. L. p. 180) has suggested
Jazaza, a village S.W. of Dhiban : Tristram
(Bib. Places, p. 355) and Palmer (Desert ot
Exodus, map), Muhatel el-ffaj, on the S. side
of the Arnon; Merrill, Ziza, 10 miles S.E. .1
Heshan ; and Conder, Rtijm Makhstyeh, 9 milts
N.E. of the same place (PEF. Mem. E. Pol.
d. 279, note. See also Ewald, OeschicUe, ir.
267,271). [G-] [W.J
Digitized by
Google
JAHAZA
JA-HA'ZA, R. V. JAHAZ (fltfiT, ».e. Yah-
tzah ; 6. Sturdy, A. 'Iturtrd ; Jassa), Josh. xiii. 18.
[Jahaz.]
JA-HA'ZAH, R. V. JAHAZ (nXiV; in Jer.
'Pcipds, in both MSS. ; Jaser, Jasa), Josh. xxi.
36 (though omitted in the Rec. Hebrew Text,
:ind not recognisable in the LXX.), Jer. xlviii.
21 (R. V. Jamzaii). [Jahaz.]
JA-HA-ZI'AH (iTW = Jehovah teeth; A.
'lamias, B. Aafeui, K*. -as; ./aaski), son of
Tikvah, apparently a priest; commemorated as
one of the four who originally sided with Ezra
in the matter of the foreign wives (Ezra x.
15). In Esdras the name becomes Ezecuias.
JA-HA-ZI'-EL ^K^r(>=tchom God strength-
ens). 1. (A. 'U (tfiK, B. 'IeflJA ; Jeheziel.) One
of the heroes of Benjamin who deserted the
cause of Sanl and joined David when he was at
Ziklag (1 Ch. xii. 4).
2. (A. 'Ofi<\, B. "Ofei^A ; Jaziel.) A priest
in the reign of David, whose office it was, in con-
junction with Benaiah, to blow the trumpet at
the ministrations before the Ark, when David
had brought it to Jerusalem (1 Ch. xvi. 6).
[High-priest.]
5. (A. 'Iaf>4A, B. 'OM\, 'leurh; Jahaziel.)
A Kohathite Levite, third son of Hebron. His
house is mentioned in the enumeration of the
Levites in the time of David (1 Ch. xxiii. 19,
xxiv. 23). [A. C. H.] [W.]
4. (A. 'OfriiA, B. *Of«<A; Jahaziel.) Son of
Zechariah, a Levite of the Bene-Asaph, who was
inspired by the Spirit of Jehovah to animate
Jehoshaphat and the army of Jadab in a
moment of great danger ; namely, when they
were anticipating the invasion of an enormous
horde of Moabites, Ammonites, Mehunims, and
other barbarians (2 Ch. xx. 14). Ps. lxxxiii. is
entitled a Psalm of Asaph ; and this, coupled
with the mention of Edom, Moab, Ammon, and
others, in hostility to Israel, has led some to
connect it with the above event. [Geuau]
But, however desirable, this is very uncertain.
6. (LXX. omits; EzechieL) The "son of
Jahaziel " was the chief of the Bene-Sheconiah
who returned from Babylon with Ezra, accord-
ing to the present state of the Hebrew text
(Ezra viii. 5). But according to the LXX. of,
and the parallel passage in, 1 Esd. (viii. 32), a
name has escaped from the text, and it shonld
read, "of the Bene-Zathoe (probably Zattu),
Sbecaniah son of Jahaziel " (for the Septuagintal
variations, see Swete). In the latter place the
name appears as Jkzbmjs.
JAH-DAI («in» ? = fT^rp, whom Jehovah
leads; B. Iqcrov, A. IaSaf; Jahoddai), a man
who appears to be thrust abruptly into the
genealogy of Caleb, as the father of six sons
(1 Ch. ii. 47). Various suggestions regarding
the name have been made : as that Gazez, the
name preceding, should be Jahdai ; that Jahdai
was a concubine of Caleb, &c. : but these are
mere groundless suppositions (see Burrington,
i. 216; Bertheau, ad loc).
JAH-DI'-EL (^K«!IT=wAoro God makes joy-
ful; B. *EA«i^A, A. 'EAiijA; Jediel), one of the
JAIB
1507
heroes who were heads of the half-tribe of
Manasseh on the east of Jordan (1 Ch. v. 24).
JAH'DO ('nn; : A. 'UStai, as if the name
had originally been *WV ; cp. Jaasau, Jadau ;
B. 'lovpti : Jeddo), a Gadite named in the gene-
alogies of his tribe (1 Ch. v. 14) as the son of
Buz and father of Jeshishai.
JAH-LB-EL (W>IT = Aope in God; in
Gen. A. 'AAo^A, D. 'E^A ; in Num. B. 'AAA^A ;
Jahelel, Jahel), the third of three sons of
Zebulun (Gen. xlvi. 14 ; Num. xxvi. 26, LXX.
o. 22), founder of the family of Jahleelites.
Nothing is heard of him or of his descendants.
JAH-LE-E'LITES, THE C^^il; B.
'AAAqAcf ; Jalelitae). A branch of the tribe of
Zebulun, descendants of Jahleel (Num. xxvi. 26,
LXX. r. 22).
JAH-MAI CDtV, 1 = .TOT, whom Jehovah
guards ; B. EftjcdV, A. ItpoS ; Jemai), a man of
Issachar, one of the heads of the house of Tola
(1 Ch. vii. 2).
JAH-ZAH (H*V; A. 'load; Jassa), I Ch.
vi. 78. [Jahaz.]' '
JAH-ZE-EL (^MSIT = God apportions;
'A<ri^A ; Jasiel), the first of the four sons of
Naphtali (Gen. xlvi. 24), founder of the family
of the Jauzeeute8 (vNSIVn, Num. xxvi. 48).
His name is once again mentioned (1 Ch. vii. 13 ;
B. So^A, AF. 'AffrhK) in the slightly different
form of Jahziel.
JAH-ZE-E'LCTE8,THEoVKyn»n; B. i
SmjAi, AF. A 'AcwjAf ; Jesielitae). A' branch of
the Naphtalites, descended from Jahzeel (Num.
xxvi. 48).
JAH-ZKRAH (fntrP; B. •Uipids, A.
"If (ptds ; Jezras), a priest, of the house of
Immer; ancestor of Maasiai (read Maaziah),
one of the courses which returned (1 Ch. ix. 12).
[Jehoiabib.] In Neh. xi. 13 he is called
MnK, Ahasaj, and all the other names are
much varied. [A C. H.] [C. H.]
JAH-ZI'-EL (S??f£ = God beholds ; A.
'imri^A, B. leuri^A ; Jasiel), the form in which
the name of the first of Naphtali's sons, else-
where given Jahzeel, appears in 1 Ch. vii. 13
only.
JA'IE ("1W=tcAom Jehovah enlightens; B.
'\atlp, A. latlp, -4ip, -Xp ; Jair). 1. A man
who on his father's side was descended from
Jndah, and on his mother's from Manasseh.
His father was Segub, son of Hezron the son of
Pharez, by his third wife, the daughter of the
great Machir, a man so great that his name is
sometimes used as equivalent to that of Ma-
nasseh (1 Ch. ii. 21, 22). Thus on both sides he
was a member of the most powerful family of
each tribe. By Moses he is called the " son of
Manasseh " (Num. xxxii. 41 ; Dent. iii. 14), and
according to the Chronicles (1 Ch. ii. 23) he
was one of the "sons of Machir the father of
5 D2
Digitized by
Google
1508
JAIBITE
JAMES
Gilead." This designation from his mother
rather than hia father, perhaps arose from his
having settled in the tribe of Manasseh, east of
Jordan. During the conquest he performed one
of the chief feats recorded. He took the whole of
the tract of AbGOB (Deut. iii. 14), the naturally
inaccessible Trachonitis, the modern Lejah ;
and in addition possessed himself of some nomad
villages in Gilead, which he called after his
own name, Hawoth- Jair (R. V. Num. xxxii. 41 ;
1 Ch. ii. 23).* None of hia descendants are men-
tioned with certainty ; but it is perhaps allow-
able to consider Ira tue Jaibite as one of
them. Possibly another was
2. (BA. latlp.) Jair the Gileadite, who
judged Israel for two and twenty years (Judg.
x. 3-5). He had thirty sons who rode thirty
asses (D**W) and possessed thirty "cities
(D'TJ) in tne land of Gilead, which, like those
of their namesake, were called Havvoth-Jair.
Possibly the original twenty-three formed part
of these. Josephus (Ant. v. 7, § 6) gives the
name of Jair as 'latipns ; he declares him to
have been of the tribe of Manasseh, and his
burial-place, Camok, to have been in Gilead.
[Havoth-Jair.]
3. (B. latloos, A. larpis.) A Benjamite,
son of Kiah and father of Mordecai (Esth. ii. 5).
In the Apocrypha his name is given as Jairus.
4. O'tfJ, a totally different name from the
preceding ; B. 'latlp, A. 'A&tlp ; Saltus.) The
father of Elhanan, one of the Heroes of David's
army, who killed Lachmi the brother of Goliath
(1 Ch. xx. 5). In the original Hebrew text
(KetHiV) the name is Jaor (IMP). In the paral-
lel narrative of Samuel (2 Sam. xxi. 19) Jaare-
Oregim is substituted for Jair. The arguments
for each will be found under Elhanan and
Jaare-Oreqim.
In the N. Test., as in the Apocrypha, we en-
counter Jair under the Greek form of Jairus.
[G.] [W.]
JAPBITE, THE CT**»n; B. laptty, A.
6 'latipti; JairUa). Ira the Jairite was a
priest (Jflb, A. V. "chief ruler") to David
(2 Sam. xx. 26). If "priest" is to be Uken
here in its sacerdotal sense, Ira must have
been a descendant of Aaron, in whose line
however no Jair is mentioned. But this is not
imperative [see Priest], and he may therefore
have sprung from the great Jair of Manasseh,
or some lesser person of the name.
JAPBTJS. 1. ('Icteipor), a ruler of a syna-
gogue, probably in some town near the western
shore of the Sea of Galilee. He was the father
»f the maiden whom Jesus restored to life
(Matt. ix. 18; Mark. v. 22; Luke .viii. 41).
The name is probably the Grecised form of the
Hebrew Jair. [Jair, 3.] [W. T. B.]
JA'KAN (|jjf£ ; B. '0»4t>, A. Ov«d> ; Jacan),
son of Ezer the Horite (1 Ch. i. 42). The name
* This verse would seem not to refer to the original
conquest of these villages by Jair, as the A. V. repre-
sents, but rather to their recapture. The accurate
rendering Is as in R. V., " And Gcshor and Aram took
the towns of Jair from them, with Kenath and the
villages thereof, even threescore cities" (see also
Bertbeau, Ckronik, p. 16).
is identical with that more commonly tjprasri
in the A. V. as JaaKAN. And see Akak.
JA'KEH (n|£, and in some MSS. K£, ttidi
is followed by a MS. of the Targnm in the Cm-
bridge Univ. Libr., and was evidently the
reading of the Vulgate, where the whole dux
is rendered symbolically — " Verba Congrtgutu
filii Vomentii "). The A. V. and B. V. of Pro.
xxx. 1, following the authority of the Tirgora
and Syriac, have represented this as the proper
name of the father of Agur, whose Strugs m
collected in Prov. xxx., and such it the nitunl
interpretation. But beyond this we hire w
clue to the existence of either Agur or Jak*h.
See under AOVB.
JA'KIM (D'J* = IGod] etUMiAa; R Is-
Ktl/t, A. 'EAiturelju ; Jadm). 1. Hesd of tie
12th course of priests in the reign of Dind
(1 Ch. xxiv. 12). [Jehoiarib; JACHDt(2)]
2. ('IairtV) A Benjamite, one of the Be*-
Shimhi (1 Ch. viii. 19). [A. C H] [C. E]
JATON (|fy ? = a lodger; B. 'Aa#V, A
'laKdv ; Jalon\ one of the sons of Eirah (Bd.)
a person named in the genealogies of Jodti
(1 Ch. iv. 17).
JAM'BBES. [Jannes and Jakbres.]
JAM'BBL Shortly after the death <
Judas Maccabaeus (B.C. 161X"the childre»«'
Jambri" are said to have made a preotW!
attack on a detachment of the Maceueas
forces and to have suffered reprisals (1 Msec a.
36-41). The name does not occur elstwbc-
and the variety of readings is considenbli
B. 'lafifipl ; A. 'lapfipttr ; alii, 'Apfipoi, 'k&-
Syr. Ambrci. Josephus (Ant. xiiL 1, § i) m^
of 'Afiapalou mitts, and it seems almost cauu
that the true reading is 'A/tpi (-«<), a fere
which occurs elsewhere (Joseph. Ant. viii. !"■
§ 5, 'Aftopros ; 1 Ch. zxvii. 18, Heb. *XC>
B. 'Apfiptl, A. 'Afuipi; Vulg. Atari; 1 Ch. it*
It has been conjectured (Drusius, Mtcbeb.
Grimm, 1 Mace. ix. 36) that the original ten
was nOM »33, " the sons of the Amorites,"»!
that the reference is to a family of the Amonie
who had in early times occupied the t»m
Medeba (e. 36) on the borders of Reuben (>"«»■
xxi. 30, 31). [B. F. W.] [C. E]
JAMES Cltbrafrt ; Jooootu),' the name *
two or more persons mentioned in the N. T.
• The name itself will perhaps repay a few
consideration. As borne by the Apostles and their a*
temporaries In the N. T., it was of course JiOMnaJ »
Is somewhat remarkable that In them It reappear* t*
the first time since the patriarch himself. la * e * , \
changeable East St. James Is still St. Jta*>-J&i
rakoob; but no sooner had the name left the shore en
Palestine than It underwent a series of cork** «■
interesting changes probably unparalleled la ear ****
case. To the Greeks It became 'lixmfiot, with the •«*»»
on the first syllable; to the Latins, /aooeoe, oooWW*
similarly accented, since in Italian it Is «"•» *
Oidcamo. In Spain it assumed two forms, •ppwm'9
of different origins :—Iafo— in modern Spanu* 'J***
Portuguese Kago— and Xayu or Jafmt, proooraoj
Hayme, with a strong initial guttural. In Franc* •
became Jacjua; but another form wss Jamt, *M«''
Digitized by
Google
JAME8
1. James the Son of Zebedee. This is the
only one of the Apostles of whose life and death
we can write with certainty. The little that
we know of him we have on the authority of
Scripture. All else that is reported is idle
legend, with the possible exception of one tale,
handed down by Clement of Alexandria to Eu-
sebius, and by Eusebios to us. With this single
exception the line of demarcation is drawn clear
and sharp. There is no fear of confounding the
St. James of the New Testament with the hero
of ComposteUa.
Of St. James's early life we know nothing.
We first hear of him aj>. 27, when he was
called to be our Lord's disciple ; and he dis-
appears from view A.D. 44, when he suffered
martyrdom at the hands of Herod Agrippa I.
We proceed to thread together the several
pieces of information which tho inspired writers
have given us respecting him during these
seventeen years.
I. His history. — In tho spring or summer of
the year 27, Zebedee," a fisherman, but possessed
nt least of competence (Mcrk i. 20), was out on
the Sea of Galilee, with his two sons, James and
John, and some boatmen, whom either he had
hired for the occasion, or who more probably
were his usual attendants. He was engaged in
1 1 is customary occupation of fishing, and near
him was another boat belonging to Simon and
Andrew, with whom he ana his sons were in
partnership (Luke v. 7, 10). Finding themselves
unsuccessful, the occupants of both boats came
ashore, and began to wash their nets. At this
time the new Teacher, who had now been
ministering about six months, and with whom
Simon and Andrew, and in all probability John,
were already well acquainted (John i. 35-
41), appeared upon the beach. He requested
leave of Simon and Andrew to address the
crowds that flocked around Him from their
boat, which was lying at a convenient distance
from the shore. The discourse being com-
pleted, and the crowds dispersing, Jesus
desired Simon to put out into the deeper water,
and to try another cast for fish. Though reluc-
tant, Simon did as he was desired, through the
jiwe which he already entertained for One, Who,
he thought, might possibly be the promised
Messiah (John i. 41, 42), and whom even now
he addressed as " Rabbi " («Vi<rrdVa, Lnke v. 5,
JAMES
1509
appears in the metrical life of St. Thomas a Becket by
Oarnler (a.d. 1 170-74), quoted in Robertson's Becket,
p. 139, note. From this list the transition to our James
is easy. When It first appeared In English, or through
what channel, the writer has not been able to trace.
Possibly it came from Scotland, where the name was a
favourite one. It exists in WycliflVs Bible (1381). In
Russia, and in Germany and the countries more im-
mediately related thereto, the name has retained its
original form, and accordingly there alone there would
seem to be no distinction between Jacob and James;
which was the case even in mediaeval Latin, where
Jacob and Jacobus were always discriminated. Its
rxwdern dress, however, sits very lightly on the name ;
and we see In " Jacobite " and "Jacobin " how ready it
is to throw H off, and, like a true Oriental, reveal its
original form. — [O.]
» An ecclesiastical tradition, of uncertain date, places
the residence of Zebedee and the birth of St. James at
Japtaia, now Tafa, near Nazareth. Hence that village
is commonly known to the members of the Latin Church
jn that district as San Oiacomo. [Javhij..]
the word used by this Evangelist for 'Pafi0{).
Astonished at the success of his draught, he
beckoned to his partners in the other boat to
come and help him and his brother in landing
the fish caught. The amazement communicated
itself to the sons of "Zebedee, and flashed con-
viction on the souls of all the four fishermen.
They had doubted and mused before ; now they
believed. At His call they left all, and became,
once and for ever, His disciples, hereafter to
catch men.
This is the call of St. James to the diacipleship.
It will be seen that we have regarded the events
narrated by St. Matthew and St. Mark (Matt,
iv. 18-22; Mark i. 16-20) as identical with
those related by St. Luke (Luke v. 1-11), in
accordance with the opinion of Hammond, John
Lightfoot, Maldonatus, Lardner, Trench, Words-
worth, Mansel, &c. ; not as distinct from them,
as supposed by Alford, Greswell, Carr, &c
For a foil year we lose sight of St. James.
He is then, in the spring of 28, called to the
apostleship with his eleven brethren (Matt. x.
2 ; Mark iii. 14; Luke vi. 13 ; Acts i. 13). In
the list of the Apostles given us by St. Mark,
and in the Book of Acta, his name occurs second,
next to that of Simon Peter ; in the Gospels of
St. Matthew and St. Luke it comes third, after
SS. Peter and Andrew. It is clear that in these
lists the names are not placed at random. In all
four, the names of SS. Peter, Andrew, James, and
John are placed first ; and it is plain that these
four Apostles were at the head of the twelve
throughout. Thus we see that SS. Peter, James,
and John alone were admitted to the miracle
of the raising of Jairus's daughter (Mark v. 37 ;
Luke viii. 51). The same three Apostles alone
were permitted to be present at the Trans-
figuration (Matt. xvii. 1 ; Mark ix. 2; Luke
ix. 28). The same three alone were allowed
to witness the Agony (Matt. xxvi. 37 ; Mark
xiv. 33). And it was SS. Peter, James, John, and
Andrew who asked our Lord for an explanation
of His dark sayings with regard to the end of
the world and His second coming (Mark xiii. 3).
It is worthy of notice that in all these places,
with one exception (Lnke ix. 28), the name of
St. James is put before that of St. John, and
that St. John is twice described as " the brother
of James" (Mark v. 37; Matt. xrii. 1). This
would appear to imply that James, either from
age or character, took a higher position than
his brother. On the last occasion on which
St. James is mentioned (Acts xii. 2) we find
this position reversed. That the prominence of
these three Apostles was founded on personal
character (as out of every twelve persons there
must be two or three to take the lead), and that
it was not an office held by them " quos Dominus,
ordinis servandi causa, caeteris praeposuit," as
King James I. has said (Pnxfat. Monitoria
[p. 53] to Apol. pro Jur. Fid. ed. 1609), can
scarcely be doubted (cp. Eusebius, ii. 14).
It would seem to have been at the time of the
appointment of the Twelve Apostles that ' the
name of Boanerges [Boanerges] was given to
the sons of Zebedee, as to the reasons for which
several Greek patristic opinions will be found
cited in Suicer's Thesaurus, s. v. fiporrii. It
might, however, like Simon's name of Peter,
have been conferred before, and formally con-
firmed on their appointment as Apostles. This
Digitized by
Google
1510
JAMES
name plainly was not bestowed npon them
because "divina illornm praedicatio magnum
quendam et illustrem sonitum per terrarum
orbem datura erat" (Victor of Antioch on
Mark iii. 17 in La Bigne, Biblioth. Pair., Paris
1609, t. viii. 825 a), nor* Sis /ityaKoiefipviao koJ
BtaXoyiKvr&Tovt (Theophylact on Mark iii. 17,
in Pat. Or. cxxiii. 523 d), but it was, like the
name given to Simon, at once descriptive and
prophetic. The " Rock-man " had a natural
strength, which was described by his title,
and he was to have a Divine strength, predicted
by the same title. In the same way the " Sons
of Thunder" had a burning and impetuous
spirit, which twice exhibits itself in its un-
chastened form (Luke ix. 54; Mark x. 37;
Jerom. c. Pelag. ii. 15, Pat. Lat, xxiii. 551 B),
and which, when moulded by the Spirit of
God, taking different shapes, led St. James to
be the first apostolic martyr, and St. John to
become in an especial manner the Apostle of
Love.
The first occasion on which this natural cha-
racter manifested itself in St. James and his
brother was at the commencement of our Lord's
last journey to Jerusalem in the year 30. He
was passing through Samaria ; and now courting
rather than avoiding publicity, He "sent mes-
sengers before His face " into a certain village,
" to make ready for Him " (Luke ix. 52). The
Samaritans, with their old jealousy strong upon
them, refused to receive Him, because He whs
going to Jerusalem instead of to Gerizim ; and
in exasperation James and John asked their
Master that they might, after the example of
Elijah, call down fire to consume them. " But
He turned and rebuked them " * (Luke ix. 55).
At the end of the same journey a similar
spirit appears again. As they went up to
Jerusalem our Lord declared to His Apostles the
circumstances of His coming Passion, and at the
same time strengthened them by the promise
that they, should sit on twelve thrones judging
the twelve tribes of Israel. These words seem
to have made a great impression upon Salome,
and she may have thought her two sons quite
as fit as the sons of Jonas to be the chief
ministers of their Lord in the mysterious king-
dom which He was about to assume. She
approached therefore, and besought, perhaps
with a special reference in her mind to St. Peter
and St. Andrew, that her two sons might sit on
the right hand and on the left in His kingdom,
i'.«. according to a Jewish form of expression d
• The words " even u EUas did," In v. 54, are
omitted by the Sinaitic and the Vatican MSS., and axe
rejected by Tiscbendorf and Tregelles and the K. V.
Whether they are to stand or no, the reference by the
Apostles to the example of Elijah is undoubted. The
words of the rebuke as given In the A. V., " Ye know
not what manner of spirit ye are of" (». 85), are not
found in the Sinaitic, the Vatican, the Alexandrine
codices, or In the Codex Ephraeml, but they are in the
Codex Bezae. The remaining words, " For the Son of
Man Is not come to destroy men's lives, bot to save
them " (e. 66), have not the authority of the Sinaitic,
the Vatican, the Alexandrine, the Ephraemi, or the
Bezae. Lachmann, TlscbeDdorf, Tregelles, and the B. V.
omit the whole of the rebuke ; Griesbach and Meyer the
last clause uf it.
< The same form is common throughout the East.
See Lane's ^roo. Nighti, ill. 212, &c.
JAMES
(Joseph. Ant. vi. 11, § 9), that they might t*
next to the King in honour (Matt. xx. 20). Th»
two brothers joined with her in the paver
(Mark x. 35). The Lord passed by their petition
with a mild reproof, showing that the requefi
had not arisen from an evil heart, but from j
spirit which aimed too high. He told than
that they should drink His cup and be baptize!
with His baptism of suffering, but turned their
minds away at once from the thought of fatal*
pre-eminence : in His kingdom none of Hi'
Apostles were to be lords over the rest. Tkt
indignation felt by the ten would show that ther
regarded the petition of the two brothers its u
attempt at infringing on their privileges a-
much as on those of SS. Peter and Andrew.
From the time of the Agony in the Garden.
a.d. 30, to the time of his martyrdom, A.D. 44,
we know nothing of St. James, except that after
the Ascension he persevered in prayer with the
other Apostles, and the women, and the Lord's
brethren (Acts i. 13). In the year 44 Herod
Agrippa I., son of Aristobulus, was ruler of «li
the dominions which after the death of hi-
grandfather, Herod the Great, had been divided
between Archelaus, Antipas, Philip, and Ly-
sanias. He had received from Caligula, Tn-
chonitis in the year 37, Galilee and Peraea it
the year 40, On the accession of Claudius, ii
the year 41, he received from him Idumsea,
Samaria, and Judaea. This sovereign wit it
once a snpple statesman and a stern Jew (Josepk.
Ant. xviii. 6, § 7, xix. 5-8) : a king with not >
few grand and kingly qualities, at the same tiro
eaten np with Jewish pride — the type of s Uy
Pharisee. "He was very ambitious to oblige
the people with donations," and " he was exactly
careful in the observance of the laws of hs
country, keeping himself entirely pure, and sot
allowing one day to pass over his head without
its appointed sacrifice" {Ant. xix. 7, § 3).
Policy and inclination would alike lead sick a
monarch "to vex certain of the Church" (Act'
xii. 1) ; and accordingly, when the Passover of
the year 44 had brought multitudes to Jeru-
salem, he " killed James the brother of John with
the sword " (Acts xii. 2). This is all that w
know for certain of his death.* We may notict
respecting it, that he perished not by storing-
but by the sword. The Jewish law laid dow
that if seducers to strange worship were if-
they should be stoned ; if many, that they should
be beheaded. Either therefore Herod intended
that James's death should be the beginning of >
sanguinary persecution, or he merely followed
the Roman custom of putting to death from
preference (see Dr. John Lightfoot in loco).
The death of so prominent a champion left i
huge gap in the ranks of the infant society,
• The great Armenian convent at Jerusalem on *
so-called Mount Zloo Is dedicated to " St. James the s*
of Zebedee." The church of the convent, or nubrr •
small chapel on Its north-east side, occupies the tradi-
tional site of his martyrdom. This, however, »'■
hardly be the actual Bite (Williams, Holy City, ii. WV
Its most interesting possession is the chair of it*
Apostle, a venerable relic, the age of which is pertaf*
traceable as far back as the fourth century ( WlUiaas
p. S60) But as it would seem that h is brtletrd '"
have belonged to " the first Bishop of Jerusalem," ft *
doubtful to which of the two Jameses tbe Osdi*'
would attach it.
Digitized by
Google
JAME8
JAMES
1511
which was filled partly by St. James, the
brother of our Lord, who steps forth into
greater prominence in Jerusalem, and partly by
St. Panl, who had now been seven years a con-
vert, and who shortly afterwards set oat on his
first apostolic journey.
II. Chronological recapitulation. — In the
spring or summer of the year 27 St. James was
called to be a disciple of Christ. In the spring
of 28 he was appointed one of the Twelve
Apostles, and at that time probably received,
with his brother, the title of Boanerges. In
the autumn of the same year he was admitted
to the miraculous raising of Jairus's daughter.
In the spring of the year 29 he witnessed the
Transfiguration. Very early in the year 30 he
asked his Lord to let him call down fire from
heaven to consume the Samaritan village.
About three months later in the same year,
just before the final arrival in Jerusalem, he
and his brother made their ambitious request
through their mother Salome. On the night
before the Crucifixion he was present at the
Agony in the Garden. On the day of the
Ascension he is mentioned as persevering with
the rest of the Apostles and disciples in
prayer at Jerusalem. Shortly before the day
of the Passover, in the year 44, he was put to
death. Thus during fourteen out of the seven-
teen years that elapsed between his call and his
death we do not even catch a glimpse of him.
III. Traditions respecting Aim.— -Clement of
Alexandria, in the seventh book of the Hypo-
typoteis, relates, concerning St. James's martyr-
dom, that the prosecutor was so moved by wit-
nessing his bold confession that Ike declared
himself a Christian on the spot: accused and
accuser were therefore hurried off together, and
on the road the latter begged St. James to grant
him forgiveness ; after a moment's hesitation,
the Apostle kissed him, saying, " Peace be to
thee ! and they were beheaded together. This
tradition is preserved by Eusebius (H. E. ii. 9).
There is no internal evidence against it, and the
external evidence is sufficient to make it credible,
for Clement flourished as early as a.d. 195, and
he states expressly that the account was given
him by those who went before him.
Epiphanius, without giving or probably
having any authority for or against his state-
ment, reports that St. James died unmarried
(S. Epiph. adv. Haer. ii. 4, p. 491, Paris, 1622X
and that, like his namesake, he lived the life of a
Nazarite (ftiVf. iii. 2, 13, p. 1045).
The legends which connect St. James with
Spain are of two classes, independent of each
other and springing from different sources. The
first represent him as preaching in the Peninsula
during his lifetime ; the second tell of the con-
veyance of his body after his death to Iria
Flavia, and its subsequent discovery, loss, and
rediscovery. The first mention of his preaching
in Spain is found in a treatise attributed to
Isidore, Bishop of Seville, A.D. 600-636. This
legend found its way into the Roman Breviary
in the following form: — "Afterwards he tra-
velled through Spain, and, after preaching the
Gospel there, returned to Jerusalem." Baronius,
knowing that St. James did not make and could
not have made any such visit to Spain, induced
Clement VIII., in 1602, to change the reading of
the Breviary into : " That he afterwards went
to Spain, and there made some converts to the
faith, is a tradition of the Church of that pro-
vince," which in 1608 took the form of: "That
he afterwards went to Spain, and made some
converts to the faith, is said to be believed
among the Spaniards." But on the protest
of the Spanish Church this was altered in 1625
to : " Afterwards he went to Spain, and there
made some converts to Christ, of whom seven
were subsequently ordained Bishops by the
Blessed Peter, and were the first to be sent to
Spain; then he returned to Jerusalem." This
reading, which makes a compromise between
Spanish dignity and Roman claims, holds its
place in the Breviary at present, together with
a statement that "his body was afterwards
translated to Compostella, where it is worshipped
by vast crowds." The second class of legends,
relating to the miraculous translation of his
body to Spain, originated with Theodomir,
bishop of Iria. in the year 772, and they were
confirmed by Pope Leo III. about a.d. 800 in an
epistle, in which he says that, after the martyr-
dom of the Apostle, his disciples took his body
to Joppa, where they found a ship waiting for
them, in which they placed the body, and sailed
to Iria; there they disembarked and proceeded
to Liberum Donum (Libredun, afterwards Com-
postella), destroyed an idol's temple and buried
St. James's body in a crypt, his two companions.
Theodore and Athanasius, being afterwards
buried with him. These three bodies Theodomir
found in 772, guided by " a brilliant star which
seemed nailed to the sky above the crypt, point-
ing with its flashing ray to the spot where the
sacred remains were buried " (Apostolic Letters
of Zeo XIII., 1880). Over them Alfonso the
Chaste built a church, which was transformed
into a cathedral by Diego Galmirez in 1112.
The cathedral was ravaged and destroyed by the
Moors and by the heretical English, but in 1879
Archbishop Paya y Rico discovered a stone chest
full of bones, so broken that there was not a
single entire bone (Becuerdos). Out of these
pieces were formed three skeletons, and on Nov.
1, 1880, Pope Leo XIII. formally and solemnly
declared, as a matter of certain knowledge and
a thing that no one might controvert, that these
were the skeletons of St. James, Theodore, and
Athanasius. See the Roman Breviary (in Fest.
8. Jac. Ap.); the fourth book of the Apostolical
History written by Abdias, the (pseudo) first
bishop of Babylon (Abdiae, Babyloniae primi
Episcopi ab Apostolis constituti, dc historia cer-
taminis Apostolici, IAbri decern, Paris, 1566);
Isidore, De vita et abitu SS. utriutque Test.
No. LXXIII. (Hagonoae, 1529); Pope Callixtus
II.'s Four Sermons on St. James the Apostle
(JJiW. Patr. Magn. xv. p. 324); Mariana, De
adcentu Jacob* Apostoli Majoris in Hispaniam
(Col. Agripp. 1609); Baronius, Martyrologium
Romanian ad Jul. 25, p. 325 (Antwerp, 1589);
Bollandus, Acta Sanctorum, 25 Jul. vi. § iv. p. 12,
ed. 1868; Estius, Comm. in Act. Ap. c. xii. ;
Annot. in difficiliora loca 8. Script. (Col. Agripp.
1622); Tillemont, Memoires pour servir a FHis-
toire Ecclesiastiyiie des six premiers sicctes, torn. i.
p. 899 (Brussels, 1706); Oams, Die Kirchen-
geschichtc von Spanien (Regensburg, 1862) ;
Menendez y Pelayo, Historia de los Hctercdosos
EspaOoles, vol. i. p. 47 (Madrid, 1880): Fita,
Becucrdos de «n tiaje « Santiago de Oalicia
Digitized by
Google
1512
JAMES
(Madrid, 1880); Fereiro, ifonumentos Antiguos
de la Iglesia Compostellana (Madrid, 1883). The
Apostolic Letters of Pope Leo XIII. will be
found in the Bolctin of the Royal Academy of
History of Madrid, torn. vi. Feb. 1885 ; and in
English in the Foreign Church Chronicle (London,
1885). As there is no shadow of foundation
for any of the legends here referred to, we
pass them by without further notice. Baronios
shows himself ashamed of them ; Estius gives
them up as hopeless ; Tillemont and Gams
reject them with as much contempt as their
position will allow them to show ; and DiJllin-
ger, in a lecture at Munich in 1884, says, "That
the Apostle James the Great came to Spain to
preach the faith contradicts equally the Bible
and history. . . . That his body was landed from
Palestine on the coast of Galicia, and is there
preserved, after having circumnavigated Spain,
is a somewhat later invented fable." On the
other hand, Popes Leo III. and XIII. have pro-
nounced ex cathedra in their favour.
2. J amis OF Alphaeus. Matt. x. 3; Mark
iii. 18 ; Luke vi. 15 ; Acts i. 13.
3. JAMB8 THE BROTHER OF THE LORD (Gal.
i. 19) ; and also of Joses,' Simon, Jude, and
some sisters (Matt. xiii. 55 ; Mark vi. 3).
4. James of Mabt (Luke xxiv. 10); son of
Mary and brother of Joses (Matt, xxvii. 56;
Mark xv. 40). Also called the Little (Mark
xv. 40).
6. James, of whom Jude is brother. Jude 1.
6. James, of whom Jude is brother or son.
Luke vi. 16 ; Acts i. 13.
7. James (1 Cor. xv. 7), shown by the context
to be a Church officer at Jerusalem. Acts xii.
17, xv. 13, xxi. 18 ; Gal. ii. 9, 12.
8. James the Servant of God and of the
Lord Jesus Christ. James i. 1.
Are these distinct personages, or are they the
same person differently designated ?
We reserve the question of the authorship of
the Epistle for the present.
St. Paul identifies for us the Church officer at
Jerusalem with the brother of the Lord ; that is,
No. 7 with No. 3 (see Gal. ii. 9 and 12 compared
with i. 19).
If we may translate 'loiSas 'laicdfiov, Judas
the brother, rather than the son of James; we may
conclude that 5 and 6 are identical. And that
we may so translate it, is proved, if proof were
needed, by Winer (Grammar of the Idioms of
the N. T., translated by Agnew and Ebbeke,
New York, 1850, § lxvi.), by Hanlein (ffandb.
der EM. in die Schriften des Neuen Test.,
' The reeding Joseph may be disregarded. In Matt,
sill. 66, the Vatican Codex and the Codex Ephraeml
read 'l*<rq<t> ; the Codex Bezae with seven othT uncial
HSS. read 'Iu&Vvijt. In the Codex Slnaiticus 'Iuuv^t
was apparently first written, and this was changed Into
'I*Krir$ by the first corrector. In Matt, xxvii. 66,
Iwtri^ Is found in Codex Besae and the Codex Regius
Parislensis, arid the Sinaltic MS. has Mapta i 'LuoTj<f,
for 'luvfi tt-QTTjp. In Mark vi. 3, which Is the parallel
passage with Matt. xiii. 66, the SinaiUc and two cursive
MSS. read 'I«nf£. In Mark xv. 40, which la the parallel
passage with Matt, xxvii. 66, all the MSS. read 'W^tck
or 'laxn}. It is evident that a scribe would be more
likely to write the commoner name 'Iu<rij$ in error than
the rarer 'Imnrt. There is almost as much authority
tor 'Iwdtrvrrt as for 'Iu<nj4.
JAMES
Erlangen, 1809), and by Arnaud (Sechercha Cri-
tiques sur F&pitre de Jude, Strasbourg, 1851).
We may identify the James of whom Jade
was brother with the Lord's brother ; that is,
Nos. 5 and 6 with No. 3, because we know that
James the Lord's brother had a brother named
Jude.
We may identify James the son of Mary with
the Lord's brother ; that is, No. 4 with No. 3,
because James the son of Mary had a brother
named Joses, and so also had James the Lord's
brother.
Thus there remain two only, James the son of
Alphaeus (No. 2), and James the brother of the
Lord (No. 3). Can we, or can we not, identify
them ? This requires a longer consideration.
I. The Evangelists tell us— <1) that James
called the Little and Joses were the sons of
Mary (Matt, xxvii. 56 ; Mark xv. 40), which
Mary was the wife of Clopas (John xix. 25);
and St. John seems to tell us (but here his words
are not free from ambiguity)' that she was the
sister of the Blessed Virgin. The Evangelists
tell us — (2) that there were two brothers,
James and Joses, who with two other brothers,
Jude and Simon, and some sisters, lived si
Nazareth with the Virgin Mary (Matt. xiii. 55 ;
Mark vi. 3). They tell us (3) that there were
two brothers, James and Jude, who were
Apostles. It would certainly be natural to think
that we have here but one family of four
brothel's and three or more sisters, the children
of Clopas and Mary, nephews and nieces of the
Virgin Mary. There are difficulties, however,
in the way of this conclusion. For (1) the four
brethren in Matt. xiii. 55 are described as the
brothers (4S«A«pol) of Jesus, not as His cousins ;
(2) they are found living as at their home with
the Virgin Mary, which seems unnatural if she
were their aunt, their mother being, as we know,
still alive ; (3) James the Apostle is described
as the son not of Clopas, but of Alphaeus ; (4)
s In John xix. 26, we read, " Now there stood by the
cross of Jesus Bis mother, and His mother's sister, Marr
the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene." Probably
It would not have been doubted that three women are
here designated — 1, the mother of our Lord ; 2, her sister,
Mary wife of Clopas; 3, Mary Magdalene— had it not
been for the difficulty of two sisters being thus repre-
sented as bearing the same name of Mary. To obviate
this difficulty, it has been suggested that four persons
are Intended — l.the mother of our Lord; 2,ber sister;
3, Mary wife of Clopas ; 4, Mary Magdalene ; and the
sister of St. Mary the Virgin is identified by some with
Salome (see Kitto, Lange, Wteseler, Davidson, Meyer.
Westcott, Hummer). But first it is not «rtain Uut
the names of St. Mary the Virgin and of Mary ibe wife
of Clopas were the same, the former being not universal It
Indeed but moat generally represented by the wort
Mariam, the latter by Maria, where the difference in sound
would be as great as that between our Marianne and Mary,
and greater than that between Marion and Mary (which
might well be the name or two sisters); secondly.
ibe improbability of two sisters, called perhaps after
Miriam, hearing the same name, is far lean than has been
supposed [see Mart of Clkophas]; and thirdly, Mary of
Clopas and St. Mary may have been sisters, as being tie
wives of two brothers, Clopea and Joseph having been
brothers according to the statement of Hegeeippus. whose
testimony Bishop Lightfoot "sees no reason for doubt-
ing," as he was a younger contemporary, " and Is likely
to have been well informed " (Dissertation appended to
JBpitt. ad Oatat.).
Digitized by
Google
JAMES
the " brethren of the Lord " (who are plainly
James, Joses, Jude, and Simon) appear to be
excluded from the Apostolic band by their
declared unbelief in his Messiahship (John vii.
3-5) and by being formally distinguished from
the disciples by the Gospel-writers (Matt. xii.
48; Hark Hi. 33; John ii. 12; Acts i. 14); (5)
James and Jnde are not designated as the Lord's
brethren in the lists of the Apostles ; (6) Mary
is designated as mother of James and Joses,
whereas she would have been called mother of
James and Jude, had James and Jude been
Apostles, and Joses not an Apostle (Matt, xxvii.
46).
Then are the six chief objections which may
be made to the hypothesis of there being but
one family of brethren named James, Joses,
Jude, and Simon. The following answers may
be given : —
Objection 1.— "They are called brethren." It
is a sound rule of criticism that words are to be
understood in their most simple and literal
acceptation; but there is a limit to this rule.
When greater difficulties are caused by adhering
to the literal meaning of a word than by inter-
preting it more liberally, it is the part of the
critic to interpret more liberally rather than to
cling to the ordinary and literal meaning of a
word. Now it is clearly not necessary to under-
stand iXtKQol as " brothers " in the nearest
sense of brotherhood. It need not mean more
than relative (cp. LXX. Gen. xiii. 8, xiv. 14,
xx. 12, xxix. 12, xxxi. 23 ; Lev. xxv. 48 ; Deut
ii. 8 ; Job xix. 13, xlii. 1 1 ; Xen. Cyrop. i. 5,
§47; Isocr. Paneg. 20; Plat. Phaed. 57, Crit.
16 ; see also Cic. ad Att. 15 ; Tac Ann. iii. 38 ;
Quint. Curt. ri. 10, § 34; comp. Suicer and
Schleusner in toe.). But perhaps the circum-
stances of the case would lead us to translate it
brethren ? On the contrary, such a translation
appears to produce very grave difficulties. For,
first, it introduces two sets of first-cousins, two
of them bearing the name of James, two oi
them that of Joses, without anything to show
which are the sons of Clopas and Mary, and
which are their cousins ; and secondly, it drives
us to take our choice between three doubtful
and improbable hypotheses as to the parentage
of this second James and Joses. There are
three such hypotheses : — (a.) The Eastern hy-
pothesis, that they were the children of Joseph
by a former wife. This notion originated,
according to Origen (on Matt. xiii. 55, Comment.
m Matt. t. x. § 17, Op. t. iii. p. 463, in Pat. Or.
xiii. 876 C), who adopts it, in the apocryphal
'lospel of Peter. Through Origen, and through
Epiphanius, who agreed with him (Adv. ffaer.
lib. i. t. iii. p. 115, Haer. xxviii. § 7, Pat. Or.
xii. 365), the notion was handed on to the
later Greek Church. (6.) The Helvidian hy-
pothesis, put forward at first by Bonosus,
Helvidius, and Jovinian, and revived by Strauss
and Herder in Germany, and by Davidson and
Alford in England, that James, Joses, Jude,
Simon, and the three sisters, were children of
Joseph and Mary. This notion is opposed,
whether rightly or wrongly, to the general
sentiment of the Christian body in all ages of
the Church ; like the other .wo hypotheses, it
creates two sets of cousins with the same name :
it seems to be scarcely compatible with our
Lord's recommending His mother to the care of
JAMES
1513
St. John at His own death (see Jerome, Op.
torn. ii. p. 10); for if, as has been suggested,
though with great improbability, her sons
might at that time have been unbelievers (Blom,
Disp. Theol. p. 67, Lugd. Bat. ; Meander, Plant-
ing, &c, iv. 1 ; Davidson, Introd. to N. T. iii.
306, Lond. 1851), Jesus would have known that
that unbelief was only to continue for a few
days. The argument derived from the expres-
sion " first-born son," vpcrroWoKos vToj, in Luke
ii. 7, is not now often urged, nor does the icts ol
•V«Kf of Matt. i. 25 necessarily imply the birth
of after children (see Pearson, On the Creed, i.
304, ii. 220). (c.) The Levirate hypothesis may
be passed by. It was a mere attempt made in
the eleventh century to reconcile the Greek and
Latin traditions by supposing that Joseph and
Clopas being brothers, Joseph raised up seed to
his dead brother (Theoph. in Matt. xiii. 56;
Op. torn. i. p. 71, Pat. Or. exxiii. 293 a).
Objection 2. — "The four brothers and their
sisters are always found living and moving
about with the Virgin Mary." If they were
the children of Clopas, the Virgin Mary was
their aunt by blood or marriage. Her own
husband would appear to have died at some time
between a.d. 8 and a.d. 26. Nor have we any
reason for believing Clopas to have been alive
during our Lord's ministry. (We need not
pause here to prove that the Cleophas of Luke
xxiv. is an entirely different person and name
from Clopas.) What difficulty is there in sup-
posing that the two widowed sisters should
have lived together, the more so as one of them
had but one son, and he was often taken from
her by his ministerial duties? And would it
not be most natural that two families of first
cousins thus living together should be popu-
larly looked upon as one family, and spoken of
as brothers and sisters instead of cousins ? The
same thing occurs commonly in our country
villages.
Objection 3. — " James the Apostle is said to
be the son of Alphaeus, not of Clopas." But
Alphaeus and Clopas are the same name rendered
into the Greek language in two different but
ordinary and recognised ways, from the Ara-
maic 'NB?n or ..sn\.. . (See Mill, Accounts
of Our Lord's Brethren vindicated, &c, p. 236,
who compares the two forms Clovis and Aloy-
sius.)
Objection 4. — Dean Alford considers John vii.
5, compared with vi. 67-70, to decide that none
of the brothers of the Lord were of the number
of the Twelve (ProUg. to Ep. of James, G. T. iv.
88, and comm. in loc.% Dr. Plummer takes the
same view (Comb. Ok. Test. ,1882). If this
verse, as Alford states, makes "the crowning
difficulty " to the hypothesis of the identity of
James the son of Alphaeus, the Apostle, with
James the brother of the Lord, the difficulties
are not too formidable to be overcome. Many
of the disciples having left Jesus, St. Peter
bursts out in the name of the Twelve with a
warm expression of faith and love (vi. 67-70) ;
and after that — very likely (see Greswell's
Harmony) fully six months afterwards — the
Evangelist states that " neither did His brethren
believe on Him " (vii. 5). Does it follow from
hence that all His brethren disbelieved? Let
us compare other passages in Scripture. St.
Digitized by
Google
1514
JAMES
Matthew and St. Mark state that the thieves
railed on our Lord upon the cross. Are we
therefore to disbelieve St. Luke, who says that
one of the thieves was penitent, and did not rail ?
(Luke xxiii. 39, 40.) St. Luke and St. John say
that the soldiers offered vinegar. Are we to
believe that all did so ? or, as St. Matthew ami
St. Mark tell us, that only one did it ? (Luke
xxiii. 36; John xix. 29; Mark xv. 36; Matt,
xxvii. 48.) St. Matthew tells ns that "His dis-
ciples " had indignation when Mary poured the
ointment on the Lord's head. Are we to suppose
this true of all ? or of Judas Iscariot, and per-
haps some others, according to John xii. 4 and
Mark xiv. 4 ? It is not at all necessary to sup-
|wse that St. John is here speaking of all the
brethren. If Joses, Simon, and the three sisters
disbelieved, it would be quite sufficient ground
for the statement of the Evangelist. The same
may be said of Matt. xii. 47, Mark iii. 32, where
it is reported to Him that His mother and His
brethren, designated by St. Mark (iii. 21) as of
rap' airrov, were standing without. Nor does it
necessarily follow that the disbelief of the
brethren was of such a nature that St. James and
St. Jude, Apostles though they were, and vouched
for half a year before by the warm-tempered
St. Peter, could have had no share in it. "The
phrase need not mean more," says Dr. Westcott,
" than that they did not sacrifice to absolute
trust in Him all the fancies and prejudices
which they cherished as to Messiah's office"
(Speaker's Commentary, 1880). With regard to
John ii. 12, Acts i. 14, we may say that " His
brethren " are no more excluded from the dis-
ciples in the first passage, and from the Apostles
in the second, by being mentioned parallel with
them, than St. Peter is excluded from the Apo-
stolic band by the expression "the other
Apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and
Cephas " (1 Cor. ix. 5).
Objection 5.—" If the title of brethren of the
Lord had belonged to SS. James and Jude, they
would have been designated by it in the list of
the Apostles." The omission of a title is so
slight a ground for an argument that we may
pass this by.
Objection 6.— That Mary the wife of Clopas
should be designated by the title of Mary *' the
mother of James and Joses," to the exclusion of
St. Jude, if SS. James and Jude were Apostles,
appears to Dr. Davidson (Introd. to N. 71, iii.
495) and to Dean Alford (Prol. to Ep. of James,
G. T., iv. 90) extremely improbable. There is
no improbability in it, if Joses was, as would
seem likely, an elder brother of St. Jude, and
next in order to St. James. 1 '
II. We have hitherto argued that the hypo-
thesis which most naturally accounts for the
facts of Holy Scripture is that of the identity of
St. James the Little, the Apostle, with St. James
the Lord's brother. We have also argued that
the six main objections to this view are not
valid, inasmuch as they may either be altogether
met, or at best throw us back on other hypo-
theses which create greater difficulties than that
under consideration. We proceed to point out
h [The oppuslte view that St. James was tlie real
brother of oor Lord is maintained by Dr. Farrar In
the art. Bbothxb, p. 461, and with great learning by
Mr. Mayor in the Introduction to his ed. of the Sp. of
SI. James, Umd. 1892.— Tim Editors.]
JAMES
some further confirmations of our original hypo-
thesis.
1. It would be unnatural that St. Luke, ia i
list of twelve persons, in which the same at
James twice occurred, with its distinguishing
patronymic, should describe one of the last per-
sons on his list as brother to " James," without
any further designation to distinguish him,
unless he meant the James whom he had ju»t
before named. The James whom he had just
before named is the son of Alphaeus ; the person
designated by his relationship to him is Jude.
We hare reason therefore for regarding Jude at
the brother of the son of Alphaeus; on other
grounds (Matt. xiii. 55 ; Mark vi. 3) we have
reason for regarding him as the brother of the
Lord: therefore we have reason for regarding
the son of Alphaeus as the brother of the Lord.
2. It would be unnatural that St. Luke, after
having recognised only two Jameses throughout
his Gospel and down to the twelfth chanter of
the Acts of the Apostles, and having in that
chapter narrated the death of one of them
(James the son of Zebedee), should go on is
the same and following chapters to speak of
" James," meaning thereby not the other James,
with whom alone his readers are acquainted, bat
a different James not yet mentioned by him.
3. St. James is represented throughout the
Acts as exercising great authority among, or even
over, Apostles (Acts xii. 17, xv. 13, xxi. 18);
and in St. Paul's Epistles he is placed before
even Cephas and John, and declared to be a
pillar of the Church with them (Gal. ii. 9-12).
It is more likely that an Ajwstle would hold
such a position, than one who bad not been a
believer till after the Resurrection.
4. St. Paul says (Gal. i. Ill), "Other of the
Apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's
brother " ("Erf pov 8« raw diroo-To'A.ur ob* clter
tl /til 'IebtaijSoy ror do>\d>o» too Kvpiov). This
passage seems to assert distinctly that James
the Lord's brother was an Apostle — and if so, he
was identical with the son of Alphaeus — bat it
cannot be taken as an incontrovertible statement
to that effect, for it is possMc that Aitoo-toW
may be used in the looser sense (Meyer), though
this is not agreeable with the line of defence
which St. Paul is here maintaining, viz. that he
had received his commission from God, and not
from the Twelve (see Thorndike, i. p. 5, Oif-
1844). And again, e{ fdi may qualify the whole
sentence, and not only tlie word AwooraW
(Mayerdorff, Hist. krit. Einleit. in die Petri*.
Schr. p. 52, Hamb. 1833 -, Neander, Michaelis,
Winer, Alford, Davidson). Still this is not
often, if ever, the case, when tl /ill follows
irtpov (Schneckenburger, Adnot. ad Epist. Joe
pcrpet. p. 144, Stuttg. 1832: see also Winer,
Grammatik, 5th ed., p. 647, and Meyer, cornn.
ad /'«■.); and if St. Paul had not intended to
include St. James among the Apostles, we should
rather have expected the singular &*i<rro\tr
than the plural ray a*o<rr6\mr (Arnaud, Be-
chcrches, ic). The more natural interpretation
of the verse would be that which includes
James among the Twelve, identifying him with
the son of Alphaeus ; but, as we have said, sorb
a conclusion does not necessarily follow. Com-
pare, however, this verse with Acts ix. 27, and
the probability is increased by several degrees.
St. Luke there asserts that St. Barnabas brought
Digitized by
Google
JAMES
Paul to the Apostles, xpoj robs oVoo-rdAouj. St.
Paul, as we hare seen, asserts that during that
visit to Jerusalem he saw St. Peter, and none
other of the Apostles, save St. James the Lord's
brother. SS. Peter and James, then, were the
two Apostles to whom St. Barnabas brought St.
Paul. Of course, it may be said here also that
ax6crTo\oi is used in its lax sense ; but it appears
to be a more natural conclusion that James the
Lord's brother was one of the Twelve Apostles,
being identical with James the son of Alphaeus,
or James the Little.
III. We must now turn from Scripture to the
early testimony of uninspired writers. Here
we find four hypotheses — the Hegesippian, the
Apocryphal, the Hieronymian, the Helvidian.
1. The Hegesippian, so called after Hegesippus,
a Hebrew Christian born about a.u. 100, repre-
sents Joseph and Clopas (or Alphaeus) as bro-
thers. Joseph's wife, St. Mary, and Clopas' wife,
Mary, were therefore sisters-in-law. James,
Joses, Jude, and Simon were the children of
Clopas and Mary, nephews and nieces of Joseph,
and first cousins of our Lord. Hegesippus states
in direct terms that Symeon or Simon, the
second Bishop of Jerusalem, was the cousin
(avctyioi) of the Lord because son of Clopas, who
was His ancle (9«(ou), and he speaks of Jude
not as the brother but as the so-called brother
of our Lord (tov kot4 aipna \tyopivov avrov
48«A<poO : Euseb. Hist. Eccl. iii. 20, 32, ir. 22).
The genealogy according to this hypothesis
would be as follows : —
Jacob
JAMES
1515
Joseph=Mary Clopas (or Alphaeus)=Mary
JBSKS
James Jo>es Jude Simon Three
or more
sisters
On this hypothesis James the brother of our
Lord and James the son of Alphaeus are the
same person, being the first cousin of Jesus on
the paternal side.
2. The Apocryphal or Origenistic or Epi-
phanian hypothesis, called Epiphanian by Bishop
I.ightfoot from its having been warmly advocated
by Epiphanius, bishop of Constantia in Cyprus, in
the year 367, but better called Apocryphal be-
cause originating with the Apocryphal Gospels, 1
or Origenistic because transported from them
into the Church by Origen a.d. 250. This
represents James, Joses, Jude, Simon, and the
sisters to be the children of Joseph by a former
wife, and to be called brethren of the Lord in the
same way that Joseph was called His father.
The genealogy on this hypothesis is —
Joseph = Mary Clopas (or Alphaeus)=:Mary
II i 1 I
S 4 ►j B £
§
Epiphanius adds to this genealogical tree by
recognising Joseph and Clopas as brothers, sons
of Jacob, son of Panther. On this hypothesis,
James the brother of our Lord and James the
1 Hence said by Jerome to be founded on the " delira-
menta apocrypborum."
son of Alphaeus were different persons, not
related to one another, so far as we are informed
by the Apocryphal Gospels, but according to
Epiphanius cousins, one of them being the son,
the other the nephew, of Joseph.
3. The Hieronymian hypothesis, so called
because warmly advocated by St. Jerome, A.I>.
382. This represents James, Joses, Jude, Simon,
and their sisters to be the childreu of Mary the
sister of St. Mary, and therefore nephews and
nieces of St. Mary and first cousins of our Lord
on the maternal side. The genealogy on this
hypothesis is —
Joeeph=Mary Clopas (or Alpkoeus)=.Mar.v
Jescs James Joses Jude Simon Sisters
On this hypothesis James the brother of the
Lord and James the son of Alphaeus are the
same person, being the first cousins of Jesbs on
the mother's side.
4. The Helvidian hypothesis, so called from
Helvidius, who advocated it in a book published
about a.d. 380. This represents James, Joses,
Jude, Simon, and their sisters to be the children
of Joseph and Mary, younger brothers and
sisters of Jescs. The genealogy on this hypo-
thesis is —
Mary = Joseph Clopas (or Alphaeus)=Marr
Jescs James Joses Jude Simon Sisters James Joses
On this hypothesis, James was real brother to
Jesus, and James the son of Alphaeus was no
relation to him, so far as we know.
We have to consider with regard to these
hypotheses : 1. Which of them is beset with
fewest objections and solves most difficulties.
2. What authority they each stand on. We
have already argued that the hypothesis which
makes James to be the first cousin of our Lord
(whether paternal or maternal matter! not
for the present) is freer from objections than
that which makes him His brother, whether as
the child of Joseph by a former marriage, or as
the child of Joseph and Mary. We have now to
consider the authority which can be claimed for
each of the four hypotheses.
The Helvidian hypothesis is first found in
Tertullian, if it is found there. Tertullian's
words are ambiguous (de Carne Christi, 7, 23 ;
de Monogam. 8 ; adv. Marc. iv. 19) ; but as
Jerome does not repudiate Helvidius' statement
that Tertullian entertained his view, merely
saying that he was not a Churchman (adr.
Ilchtd. 17), it is to be supposed that Helvidius
was justified in claiming him. Next it was
maintained by the Antidicomarianites in Arabia
about A.D. 375 (Epiphan. Haeres. 78, 79).
Thirdly, it was urged for controversial reasons by
Bonosus in Macedonia, and by Helvidius and
Jovinian in Italy about the year 380.
The Hieronymian hypothesis rests on the
authority of Jerome,' who wrote at once against
I It has been usual to attribute this hypothesis to
Paplas, bishop of Hierapolls. as its originator, in virtue
of a MS. in the Bodleian Library supposed to have been
written by him. and quoted by Grabe and Ronth as his.
But Bishop Ugbtfoot has shown that this MS. can only
claim a Psiqd j olthe elev cnlh century for Its author.
Digitized by
Google
1516
JAMES
Helvidius and the Apocryphal hypothesis about
the year 382; of Augustine, a.d. 354-430,
(cotttr. Faust, xxii. 35) ; of Chrysostom, A.D. 347-
407 (in Gal. i. 19); and of Theodoret, A.D. 386-
458. The weight of the authority of such great
names as Augustine and Chrysostom is sought
to be lightened by a supposition that they
accepted Jerome's view ; they may have accepted
it, but in that case they must have considered
themselves right in doing so, after an examina-
tion of the question into which they would have
been led by the perusal of his treatise. Theodoret
not only adopts the Hieronymian theory, but in
set terms rejects the other. The Western
Church in general accepted Jerome's view.
The Apocryphal, Origenistic, or Epiphanian
hypothesis originated with the Apocryphal
Gosjwls of the second and third centuries — the
Gospel of Peter, the Protevangelium, and the
rest — all of which show a desire of exhibiting
Joseph as an old man at the time of his marriage,
lest a doubt or a slur should be thrown on
St. Mary's virginity. These Apocryphal state-
ments were taken over and planted within the
Church's borders at the end of the third century
by Origen. " Some persons," he says, " on the
ground of a tradition in the Gospel according to
Peter, as it is entitled, or the Book of James
(i.«. the Protevangelium), say that the brothers
of Jesus were Joseph's sons by a former wife, to
whom he was married before Mary. Those who
held this view wish to preserve the honour of
Mary in virginity throughout . . . And I think
it reasonable that as Jesus was the 6rst-fruit of
purity and chastity among men, so Mary was
among women ; for it is not seemly to ascribe
the first-fruit of virginity to any other woman
but her " (in Matt. xiii. 55, Lightfoot's transla-
tion). Thus we see that a statement up to this
time confined to those early heretics whose chief
object it was to magnify St. Mary, was adopted
by Origen, not on the ground of its according
with the Church tradition or with Scripture, but
because it was " seemly " to ascribe perpetual
virginity to St. Mary, and this appeared to be
the way to do it. After Origen we find the
Apostolical Constitutions (vi. 12) and Victorinus
the Philosopher (in Gal. i. 19, aputl Maii Script.
Vet. rum. coll. Romae, 1828) distinguishing
between the brother of the Lord and the Apostle.
Hilary of Poitiers accepts the Apocryphal view,
A.D. 368 (Comrn. in Matt. i. 1). So apparently
does Ambrosiaster, about the year 375. Gregory
Nyssen at the end of the fourth century follows
in the same track, and tries to account for the
second pair of Jameses and Joseses (the sons ot
Mary of Clopas) by identifying their mother
Mary with St. Mary, called their mother because
she was their stepmother (Op. torn. ii. p. 844,
Paris, 1618). Epiphanius' treatise was written
against the Antidicomarianites about the year
:!75. It is for the most part a bald reproduction
of the Apocryphal legends, to which he makes
some additions from " the traditions of the Jews,"
and combines with both of these the Church
tradition, derived no doubt from Hegesippus,
that Clopas and Joseph were brothers, children
of Jacob, whom he represents (again from
Apocryphal sources) as the son of Panther. He
further states in one place that the names of the
sisters were Mary and Anna, and in another
that they were Mary and Salome. St. Ambrose,
JAMES
A.D. 392, doubtfully accedes to the Epiphanian
view (de Inst. Virg. ; Op. torn. ii. p. 260, ed.
Din.), which is also supported by Cyril of
Alexandria at the beginning of the fifth century
(Glaph. in Gen. vii.), and became the generally
accepted view of the Oriental Church.
The Hegesippian hypothesis rests on the au-
thority of Hegesippus, and Hegesippus' evidence
on this point is such as to outweigh that of all
those that have been quoted. In date he is the
earliest witness, having probably been a younger
contemporary of the sons of Clopas, being born
about the year 100 ; his means of information
were infinitely superior to those of others, as he
was a Palestinian converted Jew ; he had no pur-
pose to serve, like the writers of the Apocryphal
Gospels, who are the authors of the Origenistic
or Epiphanian hypothesis ; and his statement
contains within it only one difficulty, namely, that
two women should be called by St. John sisters
because they were the wives of two brothen.
This difficulty, if it be one, is as nothing compared
with the difficulty on one side of two sisters
bearing the same or nearly the same name, which
the Hieronymian hypothesis requires, and, on the
other side, of there being two pain of Jameses
and Joseses, which the Apocryphal and the Hel-
vidian hypotheses alike make necessary.* Clement
of Alexandria, A.D. 200, has been claimed as s
supporter of the Epiphanian view, but he is
quoted by Eusebius as saying that " there are
two Jameses, one the Just who was thrown down
from the pinnacle and beaten to death by s
fuller's pole, and another who was beheaded '
(Hypotyposeis, vii. apud Euseb. Hot. Ecol. ii. 1)
The word used for " are " in th at sentence is not
merely the copula, but it is ytyiyaai. The
writer therefore must have held that there were
only two Jameses in all, and in that case the son
of Alphaeus and the brother of the Lord must
have been identical. It is possible that the
passage may be a comment of Eusebius on
Clement rather than Clement's own, and this
was the opinion of Bishop Pearson (Led. iv. m
Acta Apost., Minor Theol. Works, p. 150, Oxf.
1844), thongh Bishop Light foot is doubtful on
the point. Whoever wrote it — that is, either
Clement or Eusebius — must be regarded as a
supporter of one or other of the two theories
which identify the two Jameses. It must be
allowed that after Hegesippus himself, the Hege-
sippian view is not found in its developed form.
But this is what might not unreasonably hive
been expected. For with Hegesippus* generation
the memory of the relationship between Joseph
and Clopas perished, nor were Hegesippus' writ-
ings sufficiently well known to keep it alive.
k Hegesippus is sometimes represented as Inconsistent
with himself, or as not Identifying Clopas and Alpbsens,
because he uses the expression " The Church was com-
mitted, in conjunction with the Apostles (jtera tir
'AmxrTiSAeiiO, to the charge of the Lord's brother James."
Here, It is argued, he distinguishes James the brother of
the Lord from the Apostle, and therefore he could not
have regarded him as the son of Alphaeus, who t»
acknowledged to be an Apostle. This, however, Is not
so ; for, as Bishop Llghtfoot admits, " from this passage
no inference can be safely drawn ; for, supposing the
term 'Apostles ' to be here restricted to the TweJre,
the expression iura rw 'XwtxrrtAuv may dlstingmtb
St. James not from but among the Apostles, is *»
Acta v. 39, ' Peter and the Apostles.' " (Diutrtolio*-)
Digitized by
Google
JAMES
Room was thus made for the other theories, each
of which may be regarded as the product of
ingenious minds seeking to account for the state-
ment of Scripture after the clue supplied by
Hegesippus was lost. We rank them in the
following order in respect to the degree of pro-
bability attaching to them :— 1. The Hege-
sippian. 2. The Hieronymian. 3. The Hel-
vidian. 4. The Apocryphal.
English theological writers have beeu divided
almost equally into those that hold, and those
that deny, the identity of the son of Alphaeus
and the brother of our Lord, with, however, a
preference on the whole for the first hypothesis.
See, for example, Hooker, Eccl. Pol. vii. 4, 2,
Oxf. 1836; Cosin, Note*, Works, v. p. 188, Oxf.
1855; Lardner, vi. 495, Lond. 1788; Pearson,
Minor Works, i. 350, Oxf. 1844, and On the
Creed, i. 308, ii. 224, Oxf. 1833; Thorndike,
Works, i. 5, Oxf. 1844 ; Home, Introd. to H. S.
iv. 427, Lond. 1834 ; Wordsworth, Greek Test.
Lond. 1868; Scott, in the Speaker's Com-
mentary, N. T. iv. 112, Lond. 1881 ; Punchard,
in Ellicott's New Testament Commentary, iii.
352 — who are in favour of the identity. On the
same side are the elder Lightfoot, Witsius,
Lampe, Baumgarten, Semler, Gabler, Eichhorn,
Hug, Bertholdt, Guericke, Schneckenburger,
Meier, Steiger, Hengstenberg, Gieseler, Theile,
Lange. On the other hand, Hammond (On Schism,
p. 231, Oxf. 1839), Jeremy Taylor (Episcopacy
Asserted, § 13, Works, v. p. 50, Lond. 1849),
Nelson (.Fasts and Festivals, p. 191, Lond. 1805),
Bishop Thos. Wilson {Notes on St. James, Works,
vi. p. 673, Oxf. 1859), Cave {Life of St. James),
Bishop Lightfoot (Epistle to the Qalatians,
p. 252, Lond. 1884), are in favour of their
being distinct persons, with Vossius, Basnage,
Valesius, Grotius, and Olshausen. The Hel vidian
theory is held by Dr. Davidson (Intr. N. T.
vol. iii.) and by Dean Alford (Greek Test.
iv. 87), with Herder, Bleek, Blom, Schaff,
Mayer, Wieseler, Laurent.
The chief treatises on the subject are Blom's
De voir 48eA<fK»» et reus ASt\<pa7s rov Kvplov,
Leyden, 1839; Dr. Philip SchafFs Das Verhillt-
niss des Jakobus Bruders des Herrn xu Jakobus
Alpha, Berlin, 1842, with which however
must be compared the same author's Mist, of the
Apost. Ch. vol. ii. p. 35, Ediub. 1854, modifying
his previous view ; Wieseler, Studien u. Kritiken :
Ueber die Bruder des Herrn, 1842, p. 71 ; Dr.
Mill's Accounts of our Lord's brethren vindicated,
Cambridge, 1843 ; Alford, as above referred to ;
Lange's article in Herzog'a Real~Encyklopadie
fur protestantische Theologie und Kirche, Stutt-
gart, 1856 ; Schneckenburger's Annotatio' ad
Epist Jac. perpetua, Stuttgart, 1832 ; Arnaud's
Becherohes Critiques sur FEpitre de Jude, Stras-
bourg, 1851 ; Bishop Lightfoot's Dissertation on
the Brethren of the Lord appended to the Epistle
to the Qalatians, Lond. 1884.
Had we not identified James the son of Al-
phaeus with the brother of the Lord, we should
have but little to write of him. When we had
said that his name appears twice in the cata-
logue of the Twelve Apostles, our history of him
would be complete. In like manner the early
JAMES
1517
' The author of the article on the •■ Brethren of oar
Lord * takes a different view from the one given above
(see note h , p. 1614).
history of the Lord's brother would be confined
to the fact that he lived and moved from place
to place with his brothers and sisters, and with
the Virgin Mary.
James the Little, the son of Alphaeus,
the brother OF the Lord. — Of James' father
'KB^n, rendered by St. Matthew and St. Mark
Alphaeus ('AAdKuoi), and by St. John Clopas
(KAwmis), we know dbly (1) that, according to
the testimony of Hegesippus (who was likely to
be fully informed) and of Epiphanius (who pro-
bably retained the ancient tradition on the point
and reproduced it, though giving no support to
the theory that he was advocating), he was the
brother of Joseph and son of Jacob ; (2) that he
married a Mary, who was either sister by blood
to the Virgin Mary, or was regarded as her
sister because the two women had married two
brothers ; (3) that he had by her four sons and
three or more daughters. He appears to have
died before the commencement of our Lord's
ministry, and after his death it would seem that
his wife and St. Mary, a widow like herself, and
in poor circumstances, lived together in one
house, generally at Nazareth (Matt. xiii. 55),
but sometimes also at Capernaum (John ii. 12)
and Jerusalem (Acts i. 14). It is probable that
these cousins (or, as they were usually called,
brothers and sisters) of the Lord were older than
Himself; as on one occasion we find them, with
His mother, indignantly declaring that He was
beside Himself, and going out to "lay hold on
Him " and compel Him to moderate His zeal in
preaching, at least sufficiently " to eat bread "
(Mark iii. 20, 21, 31). This looks like the
conduct of elders towards one younger than
themselves.
Of St. James individually we know nothing till
the spring of the year 28, when we find him, to-
gether with his younger brother St. Jude, called
to the A postdate. It has been noticed that in al I
the four lists of the Apostles St. James holds the
same place, heading perhaps the third class, con-
sisting of himself, Jude, Simon, and Iscariot ; as
St. Philip heads the second class, consisting of
himself, Bartholomew, Thomas, and Matthew ;
and Simon Peter the first, consisting of himself,
Andrew, James, and John {Alford, in Matt. x. 2).
The fact of St. Jude being described by reference
to St. James ('louSaj 'Iamif)ov : that is, "James'
St. Jude ") shows the name and reputation which
St. James had, either at the time of the calling of
the Apostles or at the time when St. Luke wrote.
It is not likely (though far from impossible)
that SS. James and Jude took part with their
brothers and sisters and the Virgin Mary, in
trying " to lay hold on " Jescs in the autumn of
the same year (Mark iii.- 21) ; and it is likely
that it is of the other brothers and sister-,
without these two, that St. John says, " Neither
did His brethren believe on Him " (John vii. 5),
in the autumn of a.d. 29 ; but the unbelief here
attributed to the brethren was not of such a
nature as to make it impossible for Apostles to
have participated in it. " They ventured to
advise and urge when Faith would have been
content to wait " (Westcott).
We hear no more of St. James till after the
Crucifixion and the Resurrection. At some
time in the forty days that intervened between
the Resurrection and the Ascension the Lord ap-
Digitized by
Google
1518
JAMES
peared to him. This is not related by the Evan-
gelists, but it is mentioned by St. 1'aul (1 Cor.
xv. 7) ; and there never has been any doubt that
it was to this St. James rather than to the son of
Zebedee that the manifestation was vouchsafed.
We may conjecture that it was for the purpose
of strengthening him for the high position which
he was soon to assume in Jerusalem, and of
giving him the instructions on "the things
pertaining to the kingdom of God" (Acts i. 3)
which were necessary for his guidance, that the
Lord thus showed Himself to James." We can-
not fix the date of this appearance. It was pro-
bably only a few days before the Ascension ;
after which we find SS. James, Jude, and the
rest of the Apostles, together with the Virgin
Mary, St. Simon, and St. Joses, in Jerusalem,
awaiting in faith and prayer the outpouring of
the Pentecostal gift.
Again we lose sight of St. James for ten years,
and when he appears once more it is in a far
higher position than any that he has yet held.
In the year 37 occurred the conversion of Saul.
Three years after his conversion he paid his first
visit to Jerusalem, but the Christians recollected
what they had suffered at his hands, and feared
to have anything to do with him. St. Barnabas,
at this time of far higher reputation than him-
self, took him by the hand, and introduced him
to St. Peter and St. James (Acts ix. 27 ; Gal.
i. 18, 1 9), and by their authority he was ad-
mitted into the society of the Christians, and
allowed to associate freely with them during the
fifteen days of his stay. Here we find St. James
on a level with St. Peter, and with him de-
ciding on the admission of St. Paul into fellow-
ship with the Church at Jerusalem ; and from
henceforth we always find him equal, or in his
own department superior, to the very chiefest
Apostles, SS. Peter, John, and Paul. For
by this time he had been appointed (at what
exact date we know not) to preside over the
infant Church in its most important centre, in a
position equivalent to that of Bishop. This pre-
eminence is evident throughout the after history
of the Apostles, whether we read it in the Acts,
in the Epistles, or in ecclesiastical writers. Thus
in the year 44, when Peter is released from
prison, he desires that information of his escape
may be given to " James, and to the brethren "
(Acts xii. 17). In the year 49 he presides at the
Apostolic Council, and delivers the judgment of
the Assembly, with the expression Sib iyi icplm
(Acts xv. 13, 19; see St. Chrys. in loc.). In the
same year (or perhaps in the year 51, on his
fourth visit to Jerusalem) St. Panl recognises
James as one of the pillars of the Church, to-
gether with Cephas and John (Gal. ii. 9), and
• The Gospel according to the Hebrews says that the
cause of this appearance was that "James bad sworn
not to eat bread from the time that be bad drank the
Lord's cup (or that the Lord had drank the cup) till be
saw Him risen from the dead, 1 * and therefore Jesus
"took bread and blessed it and gave it to James the Just,
and said to him, My brother, eat thy bread, for the Son
of Han has risen from the dead" (Jerome, de Fir.
Illust.). If the reading Domini be right, we may notice
that the writer or this Gospel, which Lightfoot describes
as "one of the earliest and most respectable of the
apocryphal narratives,*' supposed James to have been
present at the Last Supper, which indicates, though it
does not prove, a belief that he was one of the Apostles.
JAMES
places his name before them both. Shortly
afterwards it is " certain who came from James,
that is, from the mother-Church of Jerusalem,
designated by the name of its Bishop, who lead
St. Peter into tergiversation at Antioch. And
in the year 57 St. Paul pays a formal visit to St.
James in the presence of ail his presbyters, after
having been previously welcomed with joy the
day before by the brethren in an unofficial
manner (Acts \xi. 18).
Entirely accordant with these notices of Scrip-
ture is the universal testimony of Christian
antiquity to the high office held by St. James in
the Church of Jerusalem. That he was formally
appointed Bishop of Jerusalem by the Lord Him-
self, as reported by Epiphanius (Haeres. lxxviii.),
Chrysostom (Horn, xi. in 1 Cor. vii.), Proclus of
Constantinople (<fc Trad. Die. Liturg.), and
Photius (.£/>. 157), is not certain. Eusebius fol-
lows this account in a passage of his history, bat
says elsewhere that he was appointed by the
Apostles {Hist. Eccl. ii. 23). Clement of Alex-
andria is the first author who speaks of his
episcopate (Hypotyposeis, Bk. vi. ap. Eoseb.
Hist. Eccl. ii. 1), and he alludes to it as a thing
of which the chief Apostles, SS. Peter, James, and
John, might well hare been ambitious. The
same Clement reports that the Lord, after His Re-
surrection, delivered the gift of knowledge to St.
James the J ust, to St. John, and to St. Peter, who
delivered it to the rest of the Apostles," and they
to the Seventy. This at least shows the estima-
tion in which St. James was held. The author to
whom we are chiefly indebted for an account of
the life and death of St. James is Hegesippus. His
narrative gives us such an insight into the position
of St. James in the Church of Jerusalem that it
is best to let him relate it in his own words : —
Tradition respecting James, as given by Hege-
sippus.— "With the Apostles, James the brother
of the Lord succeeds to the charge of the Church
— that James who has been called Just from
the time of the Lord to our own days, for there
were many of the name of James. He was holy
from his mother's womb ; he drank not wine or
strong drink, nor did he eat animal food ; a raror
came not upon his head ; he did not anoint him*
self with oil ; he did not use the bath. He
alone might go into the holy place ; for he wore
no woollen clothes, but linen. And alone be
used to go into the Temple, and there he was
commonly found upon his knees, praying for for-
giveness for the people, so that his knees grew
dry and thin [generally translated hard] like a
camel's, from his constantly bending them in
prayer, and entreating forgiveness for the people.
On account therefore of his exceeding righteous-
ness he was called 'Just' and 'Oblias,' which
means in Greek ' the bulwark of the people,* and
' righteousness,' as the prophets declare of him.
Some of the seven sects then that I have men-
tioned enquired of him, ' What is the door of
Jesus?* And he said that this man was the
Saviour, wherefore some believed that Jesus is
the Christ. Now the forementioned sects did
not believe in the Resurrection, nor in the
coming of One Who shall recompense every man
according to his works; but all who became
" This expression Implies that Clement of Alexandria
regarded James the Just as one of the Apostles, sal
therefore identical with the son of Alphaeus.
Digitized by
Google
JAMES
JAMES
1519
believers believed through James. When many
therefore of the rulers believed, there was a
disturbance among the Jews, and Scribes, and
Pharisees, saying, ' There is a risk that the
whole people will expect Jesus to be the Christ.'
They came together therefore to James, and
said, ' We pray thee, stop the people, for they
have gone astray after Jesus as though He were
the Christ. We pray thee to persuade all that
come to the Passover concerning Jesus : for we
all give heed to thee, for we and all the people
testify to thee that thou art just, and acceptest
not the person of man. Persuade the people
therefore not to go astray about Jesus, for the
whole people and all of us give heed to thee.
.Stand therefore on the gable of the Temple, that
thou mayest be visible, and that thy words may
he heard by all the people; for all the tribes
and even the Gentiles are come together for the
Passover.' Therefore the forementioned Scribes
and Pharisees placed James upon the gable of
the Temple, and cried out to him, and said, '0
Just one, to whom we ought all to give heed,
seeing that the people are going astray after
Jesus who was crucified, tell us what is the door
of Jesus ? ' And he answered with a loud voice,
' Why ask ye me about Jesus the Son of Man ?
lie sits in heaven on the right hand of great
power, and will come on the clouds of heaven.'
And many were convinced and gave glory on the
testimony of James, crying, Hosannah to the Son
of David 1 Whereupon the same Scribes and
Pharisees said to each other, ' We have done ill
in bringing forward such a witness to Jesus ;
but let us go up, and throw him down, that they
may be terrified, and not believe on him.' And
they cried out, saying, ' Oh ! oh ! even the Just
is gone astray.' And they fulfilled that which
is written in Isaiah, ' Let us take away the just
man, for he is displeasing to us ; therefore shall
they eat of the fruit of their deeds.' They went
up, therefore, and threw down the Just one, and
said to one another, ' Let us stone James the
Just.' And they began to stone him, tor he was
not killed by the foil ; but he turned round, and
knelt down, and cried, ' I beseech thee, Lord God
Father, forgive them, for they know not what
they do.' And whilst they were stoning him,
one of the priests, of the sons of Rechub, a son of
the Bechabites to whom Jeremiah the prophet
bears testimony, cried out and said, 'Stop!
What are you about ? The Just one is praying
for yon t ' Then one of them, who was a fuller,
took the club with which he pressed the clothes,
and brought it down on the head of the Just
one. And so he bore his witness. And they
buried him on the spot by the Temple, and the
column still remains by the Temple. This man
was a true witness to Jews and Greeks that
Jesus is the Christ. And immediately Vespa-
sian commenced the siege" (Euseb. ii. 23, and
Kouth, Bel. 8acr. p. 208, Oxf. 1846).
For the difficulties which occur in this ex-
tract, reference may be made to Routh's Reli-
quiae Sacrae (vol. i. p. 228), and to Stanley's
Apostolical Age (p. 319, Oxf. 1847). It repre-
sents St. James to us in his life and in his death
more vividly than any modern words could
picture him. We see him, a married man
perhaps (1 Cor. ix. 5), but a rigid and ascetic
follower after righteousness, keeping the Naza-
rite rule, like Anna the prophetess (Luke ii. 37),
serving the Lord in the Temple " with fastings
and prayers night and day," regarded by the
Jews themselves as one who had attained to the
sanctity of the priesthood, though not of the
priestly family or tribe, and as the very type
of what a righteous or just man ought to be.
If any man could have converted the Jews as a
nation to Christianity, it would have been St.
James.
Josephus' narrative of his death is apparently
somewhat different. He says that in the interval
between the death of Pestus and the coming of
Albinus, Ananus the high-priest assembled the
Sanhedrin, and "brought before it James the
brother of him who is called Christ, and some
others, and, having charged them with breaking
the laws, delivered them over to be stoned."
But if we are to reconcile this statement with
that of Hegesippus, we must suppose that they
were not actually stoned on this occasion. The
historian adds that the better part of the citizens
disliked what was done, and complained of
Ananus to Agrippa and Albinus, whereupon
Albinus threatened to punish him for having
assembled the Sanhedrin without his consent,
and Agrippa deprived him of the high-priesthood
(Ant. xx. 9, § 1). The words "brother of him who
is called Christ," are judged by LeClerc, Lardner,
&c, to be spurious.
Epiphanius gives the same account that Hege-
sippus does in somewhat different words, having
evidently copied it for the most part from him.
He adds a few particulars which are probably
mere assertions or conclusions of his own (Haeres.
xxix. 4, and lxxviii. 13). Considering St. James to
have been the son of Joseph by a former wife, he
calculates that he must have been 96 years old
at the time of his death ; and adds, on the
authority, as he says, of Eusebius, Clement, and
others, that he wore the TirdKov on his fore-
head, in which he perhaps confounds him with
St. John (Polycr. apud Euseb. Hot. Eoal. v. 24.
But see Valesius' note on Eusebius /. c, and
Cotta, de lam. pont. App. Joan. Jan. et ilarci,
Tub. 1755).
Gregory of Tours reports that he was buried,
not where he fell, but on the Mount of Olives, in
a tomb in which he had already buried Zacharias
and Simeon (De glor. Mart. i. 87). Eusebius
tells us that his chair was preserved down to his
time ; on which see Heinichen's Excursus (Exc.
xi. ad Euseb. Hist. Eccl. vii. 19, vol. iv. p. 957,
ed. Burton).
° The monument — put excavation, part edifice—
which Is now commonly known as the *' Tomb of St.
James," Is on the east side of the so-called Valley of
Jeboebaphat, and therefore at a considerable distance
from the spot on which the Apostle was killed, which
the narrative of Hegesippus would seem to fix as some-
where under the south-east corner of the wall of the
flaram, or perhaps further down the slope nearer the
" Fountain of the Virgin." [Ek-bookl.] It cannot at
any rate be said to stand " by the Temple." The tradi-
tion about the monument In question is that St. James
took refuge there after the capture of Christ, and re-
mained, eating and drinking nothing, until our Lord
appeared to him on the day of His Resurrection (see
Quaresmius, Terrat Sanctat Elucidatio, 1639, lib. iv.
cc. 10, 11, t. II. 358, quoted In Titus Tobler, Die Siloah-
quelk u. der Otlbarg, 1852, p. 299). The legend of his
death there seems to be first mentioned by Maundeville
(».o. mo: see Early Trail, p. ITS). By the old tra-
vellers it is often called the ' ' Church of St. James."
Digitized by
Google
1520 JAMES. GENEBAL EPISTLE OF JAMES, GKNIiBAL EPISTLE OF
We most add a strange Talmudic legend,
which appears to relate to James. It is found
in the Midrash Koheleth, or Commentary on
Kcclesiastes, and also in the Tract Abodah Zarah
of the Jerusalem Talmud. It is as follows:
" K. Eliezer, the son of Dama, was bitten by a
serpent ; and there came to him Jacob, a man of
Oapher Secama, to heal him by the name of Jesu
the son of Pandera ; but R. Ismael su tiered him
not, saying, 'That is not allowed thee, son of
Dama.' He answered, 'Suffer me, and I will
produce an authority against thee that it is
lawful ; ' but he could not produce the authority
before he expired. And what was the autho-
rity ? — This : ' Which if a man do, he shall live
in them ' (Ler. xviii. 5). But it is not said that
he shall die in them." The son of Pandera is the
name that the Jews have always given to our
Lord, when representing Him as a magician.
The name of Panther is given in Epiphanius
{ffacres. lxxviii.) to the grandfather of Joseph,
and by John Damascene {de Fide Orth. iv. 15)
to the grandfather of Joachim, the supposed
father of the Virgin Mary. For the identifica-
tion of James of Secama (a place in Upper
Galilee) with James the Just, see Dr. W. H. Mill
{Historic. Criticism of the Gospel, pp. 225, 360,
Camb. ed. 1861). The short passage quoted by
Origen and Eusebius as from Josephus, which
speaks of the death of James being one of the
causes of the destruction of Jerusalem, is not
now found in that author, and seems to be
spurious (Orig. in Matt. xiii. 55 ; Euseb. Hist.
Eccl. ii. 23).
It is possible that there may be a reference to
James in Heb. xiii. 7 (see Theodoret in toe.),
which would fix his death at some time previous
to the writing of that Epistle. His appre-
hension by Ananas was probably about tlie year
62 or 63 (Lardner, Pearson, Mill, Whitby, Le
Clerc, Tillemont). There is nothing to fix the
date of his martyrdom as narrated by Hege-
sippus, except that it must have been shortly
before the commencement of the siege of Jeru-
salem. We may conjecture that he was between
70 and 80 years old." [F. M.]
JAMES, GENEBAL EPISTLE OF.
1. Title.— The Epistles of SS. James, Peter,
John, Jude, were known under the name of the
Seven Catholic Epistles, by the end of the third
century. Eusebius, A.D. 287, speaks of St. James's
Epistle as "the first of those that bear the
name of Catholic Epistles," and states that those
Epistles were seven in number, describing them
as " the Seven that are called Catholic " ( Hist.
Eccl. ii. 23). St. Athanasius in his Catalogue
of the Books of the Bible contained in his 39th
Festal Letter, written a.d. 365, in like manner
speaks of " those that are called the Catholic
Epistles of the Apostles, seven in number."
Gregory of Nazianzug, a.d. 328, and his con-
temporary Amphilochius, use a similar expres-
sion. Cyril of Jerusalem, who is of about the
same date, in giving his Catalogue of the Books
of the Bible, writes, "The Seven Catholic Epis-
P It is almost unnecessary to Bay that the Jacobite
churches of the East— consisting of the Armenians, the
Copts, and other Honophrstte or Eutychlan bodies — do
not derive their title from St. James, but from Jacob
Baradaeus, who died Bishop of Edessa in 560.
ties of James, and Peter, and John, and Jude "
{Catech. Led. iv. 36). The same list was ap-
pended to the Canons of the Council of Laodicea
held A.D. 363. Didymus of Alexandria wrote a
Commentary on the " Seven Catholic Epistles "
about A.D. 350, and Euthalius about a century
later. Before the number Seven was fixed as
that of the Catholic Epistles, the name Catholic
was applied to one or more of them. Origen
speaks of " the Catholic Epistle of John," " the
Catholic Epistle of Peter," "the Catholic Epistle
of Jude ; " and his pupil Dionysius, of " the
Catholic Epistle of John" (Euseb. Hist. Ecct.
vii. 25).
What was meant by the term Catholic,
whether applied to the Seven Epistles or to any
one of them, is rightly explained by Leontius
of Byzantium towards the end of the sixth cen-
tury, when he says, " They are called Catholic
or General, because they are not written to one
nation, as those of St. Paul, but generally to
all " (de Sectis, ii.). Oecumenius in like manner
in the tenth century says: "They are called
Catholic as being encyclical, for they are not
addressed particularly to one nation or city, but
generally (xadoAov) to the faithful {Exp. in
septem illas qwie Catholicae dicuntur Epistolas ;
in Jac i. p. 115, Frankf. 1610). The Catholic
Epistles follow the Acts in the Alexandrine and
Vatican Codices, preceding the Epistles ot
St. Paul. In the Sinaitic MS. they also follow
the Acts, the Epistles of St. Paul being placed
before the Acts. The Apostolical Constitutions
appear to include the Catholic Epistles with the
Acts of the Apostles, under the simple name ol
the Acts {Const, ii. 57). They are also joined
with the Acts by Philastrius, bishop of Brescia,
in the middle of the fourth century, in his
treatise on Heresies {Haer. lxxxviii.) ; and in the
Karkaphensian Syrian Version, at the conclusion
of the Catholic Epistles, come the words " The
end of the Acts." This close connexion is pro-
bably owing to the general or catholic character
of James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1 John, and Jude. The
authorship of 2 and 3 John (when it came to be
acknowledged) was sufficient to cause those
Epistles to be classed with 1 John as Catholic,
though in their case the word is used with some
inexactness.
Origen's title for St. James's Epistle is i\ ptpo-
liirn 'Iami/fov hturriKl) {Comm. in Joan.), where
there is a question whether iptpoficrn means
" ascribed to " (as it probably does), or " cur-
rent." Eusebius in like manner calls it 4i Arj»-
lUvn 'IttKti&ov eVuTTo'Ai) {Hist. Eccl. iii. 25).
II. Author. — There are, as we have argued,
only two Jameses in the New Testament, James
the son of Zebedee and James the son of Al-
phaens or Clopas, known as James the Just, and
called the brother of the Lord, being his first
cousin. The author of the Epistle must be one
or other of these two, unless he is an unknown
James (Lather); the likelihood of which last
hypothesis falls to the ground as soon as the
canonical character of the Epistle is admitted.
James the son of Zebedee could not have written
it, because the date of his death, only seven
years after the martyrdom of Stephen, does not
give time for the growth of a sufficient number
of Jewish Christians, "scattered abroad." Ex-
ternal evidence (see Euseb. Hist. Eccl. ii. 23:
Alford, Greek Test. iv. p. 23) and internal
Digitized by
Google
JAMES, GENERAL EPISTLE OF , JAMES, GENERAL EPISTLE OF 1521
evidence (see Stanley, Apost. Age, p. 292) point
unmistakably to James the Jnst as the writer,
to whom the care of the Jewish Christians,
whether residing at Jerusalem or living scat-
tered among the Gentiles, and only visiting that
city from time to time, especially belonged in
his character of Bishop of Jerusalem.
Authenticity. — In the third book of his
Ecclesiastical History, where Eusebius makes
his well-known division of the books, or pre-
tended books, of the New Testament into four
classes, he places the Gospels, the Acts, the
Pauline Epistles, the First Epistle of St. John,
the First Epistle of St. Peter, and perhaps the
Apocalypse, under the head of OfioXoyoiiitv*,
or "acknowledged" books. In the class of
iamXtyiinan or " controverted " he places the
Epistle of St. James, the Second and Third
Epistles of St. John, and the Epistle of St.
J tide. Amongst the vi$a or " spurious " he
enumerates the Acts of St. Paul, the Shepherd,
the Apocalypse of St. Peter, the Epistle of Bar-
nabas, the Teachings of the Apostles, the Gospel
according to the Hebrews, and perhaps the
Apocalypse. The ai'oeruca or " heretical " books
consist of the Gospels of Peter, Thomas, Mat-
thias, and others ; the Acts of Andrew, John, and
others. The lurri\ty6ptva, among which he
places the Epistle of St. James, are, lie says, yv4-
pifta S/un roll iroWoTs, whether the expression
means that they were acknowledged by, or
merely that they were known to, the majority
(Hist. Ecd. iii. 25). Elsewhere he says that the
Epistle is regarded by some as belonging to the
class of v60a, for this is the meaning of voBti-
rrai fiiv (see the notes of Valesius and Hei-
nichen); but he bears witness that it was
publicly read in most Churches as genuine (JMst.
Eccl. it. 23), and as such accepts it himself.
This then was the state of the question in the
time of Eusebius: the Epistle was accepted as
canonical, and as the writing of St. James, the
brother of the Lord, by the majority, but not
universally. In the previous century Origen
bears the same testimony as Eusebius (torn. iv.
p. 306), and probably, like him, himself accepted
the Epistle as genuine (torn. iv. p. 535, &c).
Before this date evidence of its acceptance is
supplied in the East by the Peshitto Version,
made for Syrian Christians at the beginning of
the 2nd century ; and in the West, Clement of
Rome (Ep. ad Cor. x.), Hermae Pastor (lib. ii.,
Mand. xii. 5), and Irenaeus {adv. Haer. iv. 16, 2)
show themselves acquainted with it. On the
other hand, it is ignored by the Muratorian
Canon and by Tertnllian. The antiquity of the
Epistle Dr. Salmon judges to be sufficiently
established by external evidence, particularly
by the use made of it in Hennas ; but at the
same time he thinks it had a very limited
circulation in early times, and in Alexandria or
the West was little known (Introd. to If. T.
pp. 562, 565, ed. 1885). It is acknowledged by
almost all the Fathers of the fourth century,
e.g. Athanasius, Cyril, Gregory Nazinnzen, Epi-
phanius, Amphilochius, Philastrius, Ruffinus,
Jerome, Augustine, ami Chrysostom. In 397 the
Council of Carthage accepted it as canonical,
and from that time there has been no further
question of its genuineness on the score of
external testimony. But at the time of the
Reformation the question of its authenticity was
IJIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
again raised, and then upon the ground of in-
ternal evidence. Erasmus and Cardinal Cajetan
in the Church of Rome, Cyril Lucar in the Greek
Church, Luther and the Magdeburg Centu-
riators among Protestants, all objected to it.
Luther pronounced it " a right strawy Epistle,"
compared with the Gospel and First Epistle of
St, John, the Epistles of St. Paul, and the First
Epistle of 'St. Peter, which he called " the
capital Books of the New Testament," as being
sufficient to instruct a Christian fully in the
mysteries of the Faith. Accordingly he places
the Epistle to the Hebrews, James, Jude, and
the Apocalypse after the other Books of the New
Testament in his translation, and declines to
regard the Epistle of James as apostolic, though
he " admires " it " and holds it as good," and
" will forbid no one to place and elevate it as he
pleases" (Werke, xiv. 104, 150. See Westcott,
The Bible m the Church, ch. x.). The chief objec-
tion on internal grounds is a supposed opposition
between St. Paul and St. James on the doctrine
of Justification, concerning which we shall
presently make some remarks. At present we
need only say that it is easy to account for the
non-universal reception of the Epistle in the
early Church, by the fact that it was meant
only for Jewish believers, and was not likely
therefore to circulate widely among Gentile
Christians, for whose spiritual necessities it was
primarily not adapted ; and that the objection
on internal grounds proves nothing except
against the objectors, for it really rests on a
mistake.
III. Date and Place.— The Epistle was written
from Jerusalem, which St. James does not seem to
have ever left. There is internal evidence that
the writer was one familiar with Palestine and
had listened to our Lord's teaching. The time
at which he wrote it has been fixed as late as 62,
and as early as 44. Those who see in its writer
a desire to counteract the effects of a miscon-
struction of St. Paul's doctrine of Justification
by faith, in ii. 14-26 (Wiesinger), and those
who see a reference to the immediate destruc-
tion of Jerusalem in v. 1 (Macknight), and an
allusion to the name Christians in ii. 7 (De
Wette), argue in favour of the later date.
Bishop Chr. Wordsworth, regarding the Epistle
as subsequent to St. Paul's Epistle to the Ro-
mans, is in favour of the year 60. The earlier
date is advocated by most recent writers, chiefly
on the ground that the Epistle could not have
been written by St. James after the Council in
Jerusalem, without some allusion to what was
there decided, and because the Gentile Christian
does not yet appear to be recognised. On these
grounds Pnnchard (Bp. Ellicott's Commentary
on the New Test.) assigns it to the year 44. It
is now generally recognised as being the earliest
portion of the N. T. (Mayor, Ep. of St. James,
p. exxiv.).
IV. Persons addressed. — St. James tells us
that his Epistle is addressed to " the Twelve
Tribes scattered abroad " (A. V.), " the Twelve
Tribes which are of the Dispersion " (R. V.).
The Jewish Dispersion or Diaspora plays a most
important part in the spread of the Gospel
throughout the world. There were four di-
visions of this Diaspora in the apostolic times —
the Babylonian, the Egyptian, the Syrian, and
the Roman. The Babylonian was far the most
5 E
Digitized by
Google
1522 JAMES, GKNEKAL EPISTLE OF JAMES, GENERAL EPISTLE OF
ancient of the four. It owed its existence to
the policy of the Assyrian kings (1 Oh. v. 26 ;
2 K. xvii. 6, xviii. 11) and the Babylonish Cap-
tivity (2 K. xiiv. 16; xxv. 11). The Hebrews
carried away by the Assyrians and Babylonians
were scattered through Media, Persia, and Par-
thia, in bodies of varying size, and Babylon
became at a later date a famous seat of Jewish
learning. Alexander the Great and the Ptolemies
formed the Egyptian Diaspora by settling Jews
in Egypt, whence they spread along the coast to
Cyrene and Tripoli. The Syrian Diaspora owed
its existence to Selencns Nicator, who established
colonies of Jews in Syria, whence they passed in
considerable numbers to Armenia, Asia Minor,
and Greece. The Roman Diaspora was of later
date than the Epistle of St. James, originating
with the conquest of Judaea by Pompey in the
year 63. The Jews belonging to the Diaspora,
while they were on the one hand " scattered
abroad " throughout the length and breadth of
the Soman empire, on the other kept up a close
connexion with Jerusalem, paying their Temple
dues and looking to the High Priest for direction
until the fall of the city. Those Jews of the
Diaspora that were converted to Christianity
would therefore naturally look to the Bishop of
Jerusalem as their instructor, and he would feel
himself to be their natural guide. It was to
them that he addressed this Epistle ; not to the
unbelieving Jews (Lardner, Macknight, Hug,
kc"), but only to believers in Christ, as is proved
by i. 1 ; ii. 1, 7 ; v. 7. The rich men of v. 1
may be the unbelieving Jews (Stanley, p. 299),
but it does not follow that the Epistle was
written to them, as it is not unusual for an
orator, in denouncing, to use the second person.
V. Contents and Character. — The main object
of the Epistle is not to teach doctrine, but to
improve morality St. James is the moral
teacher of the N. T. ; not in such sense a moral
teacher as not to be at the same time a main-
tainor and teacher of Christian doctrine, but
yet mainly in this Epistle a moral teacher, like
the author of the Teaching of the Apostles,
a generation later. There are two ways of
explaining this characteristic of the Epistle.
Some commentators and writers see in St.
James a man who had not realised the essential
principles and peculiarities of Christianity, but
was in a transition state, half-Jew and half-
Christian. Schneckenburger thinks that Chris-
tianity had not penetrated his spiritual life.
Neander is of much the same opinion (Pfianzung
unci Leitung, p. 579). And the same notion may
perhaps be traced in Dean Stanley and Dean
Alford. But there is another and more natural
way of accounting for the fact. St. James was
writing for a special class of persons, and knew
what that class especially needed ; and there-
fore, under the guidance of God's Spirit, he
adapted his instructions to their capacities and
wants. Those for whom he wrote were, as we
have said, the Jewish Christiana whether in
Jerusalem or abroad. St. James, living in the
centre of Judaism, saw what were the chief sins
and vices of his countrymen ; and, fearing that
his (lock might share in them, he lifted up his
voice to warn them against the contagion from
which they not only might, but did in part,
suffer. This was his main object ; but there is
another closely connected with it. As Christ-
ians, his readers were exposed to trials which
they did not bear with the patience sad
faith that would have become them. Here then
are the two objects of the Epistle — 1, to warn
against the sins to which as Jews they were
most liable ; 2, to console and exhort then
under the sufferings to which as Christians they
were most exposed. The warnings and consola-
tions are mixed together, for the writer does
not seem to have set himself down to compose an
essay or a letter of which he had previously
arranged the heads ; but, like one of the old
Prophets, to have poured out what was upper-
most in his thoughts, or closest to his heart,
without waiting to connect his matter, or to
throw bridges across from subject to subject
While, in the purity of his Greek and the vigour
of his thoughts, we mark a man of education, in
the abruptness of his transitions and the no-
polished roughness of his style we may trace
one of the family of the Davideans, who dis-
armed Domitian by the simplicity of their minds
and by exhibiting their hands hard with toil
(Hegesipp. apod Euseb. iii. 20).
The Jewish vices against which he warm
them are — Formalism, which ma-'c the service
(Bpnaittla) of God consist in washings and out-
ward ceremonies, whereas he reminds then
(i. 27) that it consists rather in Active Love
and Purity (see Coleridge's Aids to Beflecticm,
Aph. 23 ; note also that the " Active Love" M
St. James is analogous in the religious sphere to
Bishop Butler's " Benevolence "in morals; and St
James's " Purity" answers to while it transcends
Bishop Butler's " Temperance ") ; Fanaticism,
which nnder the cloak of religious zeal *s>
tearing Jerusalem to pieces (i. 20) ; Fatalism,
which threw its sins on God (i. 13) ; Meanness,
which crouched before the rich (ii. 2); False-
hood, which had made words and oaths play-
things (iii. 2-12); Partisanship (iii. 14); Evil-
speaking (iv. 11) ; Boasting (iv. 16) ; Oppres-
sion (v. 4). The great lesson which be teaches
them, as Christians, is Patience— Patience in
trial (i. 2) ; Patience in good works (i. 22-25) ;
Patience under provocations (iii. 17) ; Patience
under oppression (v. 7) ; Patience under perse-
cution (v. 10): and the ground of their
Patience is, that the Coming of the Lord draw-
eth nigh, which is to right all wrongs (r. 8).
There are two points in the Epistle which
demand a somewhat more lengthened notice.
These are (a) ii. 14-26, which has been repre-
sented as a formal opposition to St. Paul's doc-
trine of Justification by Faith, and (6) v. 14, 15,
which is quoted as the authority for the Sacra-
ment of Extreme Unction.
(a) Justification being an act not of man bat
of God, both the phrases " Justification by
Faith" and "Justification by Works" are in-
exact. Justification must either be by Grace,
or of Reward. Therefore our question is, DW or
did not St. James hold Justification by Grace ?
If he did, there is no contradiction between the
Apostles. Now there is not one word in St.
James to the effect that a man can earn his
justification by works; and this would be
necessary in order to prove that he held Justifi-
cation of Reward. Still St. Paul does use the
expression "justified by faith" (Rom. v. IX
and St. James the expression "justified by
works, not by faith only." And here is •"
Digitized by
Google
JAMES, GENERAL EPISTLE OF
apparent opposition. Bat, if we consider the
meaning of the two Apostles, we see that there
is no contradiction either intended or possible.
St. Paul was opposing the Judaizing party,
which claimed to earn acceptance by good works,
whether the works of the Mosaic Law, or works
of piety done by themselves. In opposition to
these, St Paul lays down the great truth that
acceptance cannot be earned by man at all, but
is the free gift of God to the Christian man, for
the sake of the merits of Jesus Christ, appro-
priated by each individual, and made his own by
the instrumentality of faith. St. James, on the
other hand, was opposing the old Jewish tenet
that to be a child of Abraham was all in all ;
that godliness was not necessary, so that the
belief was correct. This presumptuous confi-
dence had transferred itself, with perhaps
donble force, to the Christianized Jews. They
bad said, " Lord, Lord," and that was enough,
without doing the Father's will. They had re-
cognised the Messiah : what more was wanted ?
They had faith : what more was required of
them? It is plain that their "faith" was a
totally different thing from the " faith " of St.
Paul St. Paul tells us that what he means by
••faith" is a "faith that worketh by lover
but the very characteristic of the " faith " which
St. James is attacking, and the very reason why
he attacked it, was that it did not work by love,
bat was a bare assent of the head, not influencing
the heart, — a faith such as devils can have, and
tremble. St. James tells us that faith which
does sot influence practice is not sufficient on
the part of man for Justification ; St. Paul tells
us that faith which does influence practice by
affecting the heart ia sufficient : and the reason
why the first will not justify us is, according to
St James, because it lacks that special quality,
the addition of which makes it to be the last.
See on this subject Bull's Harmonia Apostolica
d Examai Censwae ; Jeremy Taylor's Sermon
on "FoUli working by Low," vol. viii. p. 284,
Lond. 1850 ; and, as a corrective of Bull's view,
Uurence's Hampton Lectures, iv. v. vi., Oxf.
1820. Dr. Salmon (Introd. p. 575 sq.) has some
valuable remarks showing the perfect consis-
tency of St. Paul and St. James in their teach-
ing on Justification.
(o) With respect to T. 14, 15, it is enough to
say that the ceremony of Extreme Unction and
the ceremony described by St. James differ both
>n their subject and in their object. The sub-
ject of Extreme Unction is a sick man who is
about to die ; and its object is not his cure. The
subject of the ceremony described by St. James
i* a sick man who is not about to die ; and its
object is his cure, together with the spiritual
benefit of absolution. St. James is plainly giv-
ing directions with respect to the manner of
sdministering one of those extraordinary gifts of
'he Spirit with which the Church was endowed
only in the Apostolic age and the age imme-
diately succeeding the Apostles.
VI. BMiography. — The following expository
works on St. James's Epistle may be mentioned
as worthy of notice. The Commentary of Oecu-
menius in Greek, Jacobi Apostoli Epistola Ca-
tMka, in Pat. Or. cxix. 455; Thos. Manton,
Practical Commentary on the Epistle of James,
1651 ; Dr. George Benson's Paraphrasis in
EpisL 8. Jacob., ed. by J. D. Michaelis, Halae
JAMLECH
1523
Magdeburgicae, 1746 ; D. J. S. Semler's Para-
phrasis Epitt. Jac., Halae, 1781 ; S. F. N. Morus,
Praelectiones in Jacobi et Petri Epistolas, Lipsiae,
1794; Schneckenburger's Annotatio ad Epist.
Jac. perpetua, Stuttg. 1832 ; C. G. G. Theile,
Commentaria in Epistolam Jacobi, Lips. 1833 ;
Davidson's Introduction to the New Test. vol. iiil
p. 296 sq., Lond. 1851; Alford's Greek Test.
vol. iv. p. 274, Lond. 1859; Wordsworth's Greek
Test., Lond. 1860; The Speaker's Commentary,
N. T., iv. p. 105, Lond. 1881 ; Ellioott's N. T.
Commentary, Hi. p. 351, Lond. (without date) ;
F. Tilney Bassett, Epistle of St. James, with
retised Text and Translation, and Notes Critical
and Explanatory, 1876 ; Dr. George Salmon, A
Historical Introduction to the Study of the Books
of the New Testament, 1885, pp. 558 sqq.
The following spurious works have been at-
tributed to St. James : — 1. The Gospel of James
or Protevangelium. 2. Historia de Nativitate
Mariae. 3. De miraculis infantiae Domini nostri,
&c Of these, the Protevangelium is worth a
passing notice, not for its contents, which are a
mere parody on the early chapters of St. Luke,
transferring the events which occurred at our
Lord's Birth to the birth of St. Mary His
mother, but because it appears to have been
known so early in the Church. It is possible
that Justin Martyr (Dial, cum Tryph. c. 78) and
Clement of Alexandria (Strom, lib. viii.) refer
to it. Origen speaks of it (in Matt. xiii. 55) ;
Gregory Nyssen (Op. p. 346, ed. Paris), Epi-
phanins (Haer. lxxix.), John Damascene (Orat. i.
ii. in Nativ. Mariae), Phot ins (Orat. m Nativ.
Mariae'), and others allude to it. TheiProteoan-
gelium and other apocryphal writings are the
unsuspected source of many legends and beliefs.
Thence came, as we have seen that St. Jerome
complains, the hypothesis of James, Joses, Jude,
Simon, and their sisters being the children of
Joseph by a previous marriage, adopted from
them by Origen and Epiphanius. Thence too
were borrowed all the miraculous and legendary
features of the story of St. Mary, which were
admitted into the Church after the Nestorian
controversies. The Protevangelium was first
published in Latin in 1552, in Greek in 1564.
The oldest MS. of it now existing is of the
10th century (see J. C. Thilo's Codex Apocry-
phus Novi testamenti, torn. i. pp. 45, 108, 159,
337, Lips. 1832; Salmon's Introd. p. 229;
Mayor, Ep. of St. James, Lond. 1892). [F. M.]
JATkON flU?; = right hand?: B. 'Ufutv,
'lautlu; A. 'laulr: Jamin). 1. Second son of
Simeon (Gen. xlvi. 10; Ex. vi. 15; 1 Ch. iv. 24),
founder of the family of the Jaminites (Num.
xxvi. 12).
8. (B. 'laueln ; A. 'lafitty.) A man of Judah,
of the great house of Hezron ; second son of
Ram the Jerahmeelite (1 Ch. ii. 27).
8. One of the Levites who under Ezra and
Nehemiah read and expounded the Law to the
people (Neh. viii. 7). By the LXX. he and
most others in this passage are omitted.
JA'MIMTES, THE O^i?; Ki'la/upel,
A. lafuvt ; famSia Jaminitarum), the descendants,
of Jamin the son of Simeon (Num. xxvi. 12).
JAMOiECH Cf?D» = God nw * <,s to ""</» ;
B. 1tfio\6x, A. 'ApoX4* i Jemlech), one of the
5 E 2
Digitized by
Google
1524
JAMNIA
chief men (D'K'M, A. V. "prince.") of the
tribe of Simeon (1 Oh. ir. 34), probably in the
time of Hezekish (see v. 41).
JAM'NIA Clafiria, 'ldfwtia ; Joseph. Ant. ix.
10, § 3, and freq., 'lifutta ; /omnia), 1 Mace.
ir. 15; v. 58; x. 69; xv. 40. [Jabneel.]
JAM'NITES, THE (ol Ir 'laartia, ol 'lo^-
rtroi; Jamnitae, qui erant Jamniae, qui apud
Jamniam fuerunf), 2 Mace. xii. 8 r 9, 40. [JAB-
NEEL.]
JAN'NA Clavvi, 'leaved), ion of Joseph, and
father of Melchi, in the genealogy of Christ
(Lake iii. 24). It is perhaps only a variation of
Joannes or John. [A. C. H.]
JANNES and JAMBRES f/toviis koX 'lap-
0pj}j, al. Ha^fis; Jannes et ifambres), the
Egyptian magicians who withstood Moses at the
court of Pharaoh. They are so named by St.
Paul (2 Tim. iii. 8), though in the early account
(Ex. vii. 11) neither their names nor their num-
ber are recorded. In the apostolic age Pliny (H. AT.
xxx. 1,§ 11) mentions Jannes(the reading adopted
in the latest and best editions, e.g. Detlefsen's,
1871) thus: " Est et alia factio a Mose et Janne et
Lotape ac Judaeis pendens, sed multis milibus
annorum post Zoroastrem." About the middle
of the 2nd century Apnleius (Apol. p. 544, ed.
Flor.) places Moses and Jannes among the cele-
brated magi who lived after Zoroaster. In the
period of the Antonines the Pythagorean phi-
losopher Numenins (as quoted by Eusebius,
Praep. Ev. ix. 8) in his treatise De Bono made
mention of Jannes and Jambres as writers
on the religion of Egypt and skilled in magic,
resisting Moses. In the middle of the 3rd
century the opinion of Origen was (In Matth.
§ 117 fin., in Pat. Or. xiii. 1769 c) that St.
Paul's information was derived from an apocry-
phal book (liber secretus) entitled Jannes et
Jambres Liber, of which nothing is now known ;
though it, or some similar work, was circulating
in 494 when Pope Gelasius included among the
apocryphal books that were to be rejected one
bearing the title Poeniientia Jamnae et Mambrae
(Gelas. Epist.et Decret. in Pat. Lot. lix. 16 M a ;
Mansi, Condi, viii. 151 B). Theodoret (on 2 Tim.
iii. 8, in Pat. Or. lxxxii. 847) considered that
St. Paul learnt the two names from Jewish un-
written teaching (non scripta doctrma) ; and
this opinion has been adopted by many modern
writers. CHerbelot (in his Biblioth. Orient.
pp. 648, 649, ed. 1697, art. Moussa ben Amran)
mentions a tradition from Arabic sources that
the principal magicians called in to oppose
Moses were two brothers, Sabour and Gadour,
while two others were Giaath and Mosfa, these
latter representing, as D'Herbelot conceives,
Jannes and Jambres. Some of the older learning
of this subject was collected by J. A. Fabricius,
in his Codex Epigraphus Vet. Test, 1713 (vol. ii.
pt. 2, p. 813), where the apocryphal book Jannes
and Jambres is dealt with. The Rabbinical
branch of the subject will be found discussed in
BuxtorTs Hebrew and Talmudical Lexicon, For-
scher's new edition (1869-75), under the heading
XTDIM Klrt', Jochanna et Mamre, p. 481.
Several passages in Hebrew are adduced showing
various readings of the names. The Targum of
JANOHAH
Jonathan (Ex. vii. 11) gives the names at VT
D^3DM, Jannes et Jambres (Janis and Jambens,
J. W. Etheridge's Version of the Targum oj
the Pentateuch, 1862, i. 461); whereas in the
Talmud they are called tOODl tUrT, Jochaua
et Mamre. Buxtorf considers that the first of
the two names has been corrupted from an
original ]Vif, Jochanan, whence Johannes.
Riehm likewise (HWB., 1884, s. v.) recognise
this difference between the Targumistic sod
Talmudic forms. To the view which would
make the two names indicate the " children of
Jambri " (1 Mace ix. 36, 37) he rightly objects
the high probability that the reading there
ought to be Ambri. He has no doubt that both
Jambres and Mambres have their root in the
hiphil form of the Hebrew flTD, "to rebel";
while as to Jannes he seeks to show that it is s
mutilated form of Jochanan (». q. Johannes),
with a probable meaning of " seducer." For so
illustration of his argument, he points to the
name Jannaeus borne by the Jewish king Ales-
ander, B.C. 104. On the other hand, there is
thought to be some evidence of an Egyptian
origin of these names. Neville, in the eighth
Memoir of the Egypt Exploration Fund, 1891,
which is devoted to the recent excavations of
Bubastis, mentions (p. 23) his discovery of the
name of a king read by him as Ian-Ra. Tbi
king he considers to have been one of the Hyksot
dynasty, and his conclusion with regard to hi*
identity is that he was the 'lariat or 'Arris,
perhaps to be read as 'lavpas, mentioned in a
fragment of Manetho preserved by Josephus.
The place in Josephus is Oontr. Apian, lib. i.
c. 14 ; and in the Paris edition of that author,
1845-7, the reading is layias. In the same
passage as given by Muller in his Fragments
Bistoricorum Oraec. (Paris, 1848, vol. ii. p. 510)
the readings are 'Iojtoi and 'layias. The re-
semblance of these names (including the one
discovered at Bubastis) to 'lannjs and "Iannis
may be thought to afford some probability in
assigning to the latter an early Egyptian an-
tiquity. For a discussion of the Egyptian ma-
gicians, see Magic. [C. H-l
JANO'AH (PTlJ}; B. 'Arisix, A. 'lW*;
Janoe), a place apparently in the north of
Galilee, or the " land of Naphtali " — one of
those taken by Tiglath-pileser in his first in-
cursion into Palestine (2 K. xv. 29). No trace
of it appears elsewhere. By Eusebius and
Jerome (OS.* p. 268, 59 ; p. 165, 20), and even
by Reland (Pal. p. 826), it is confounded with
Janohah, in the centre of the country. It is
now possibly Tanih, a village E. of Tyre
(PEF. Mem. i. 51). [G.] [W]
JANO'HAH, R. V. JANOAH (JUTtf, i>
Yanochah : B. in r. 6 'layuni, but in v. 7 Marrf;
A. 'layti: Janoe"), a place on the boundary of
Ephraim (apparently that between it and Ma-
nasseh). It is named between Taanath-Shiloh
and Ataroth, the enumeration proceeding from
west to east (Josh. xvi. 6, 7). Eusebius (OS.'
p. 268, 59) places it in Acrabattine, 12 miles
east of Neapolis. About 8 miles from NoVt,
and about S.E. in direction, 2 miles fron
'Akrabeh, is the village of latum, doubtless
identical with the ancient Janohah. It seems
to have been first visited in modern times or
Digitized by VjOOQlC
JANUM
Van de Velde (ii. 303, May 8, 1852; see also
Rob. iii. 297). It is on the edge of a deep valley
descending sharply eastward towards the Jordan.
The modern Tillage is very small, bnt there are
numerous rock-hewn cisterns and caverns of
ancient date. On a rocky hill to the E. is a
small building sacred to Neby Nun (PEF. Mem.
ii. 387 ; Guenn, 8amarie, ii. 6). [G.] [W.]
JATTOM, R. V. JANIM (OUJ, following
the Qeri of the Masorets, bnt in the Kethib
it is , V, Janim = slumber ; B. 'Ie/uU ir, A.
'layoin ; Janum), a town of Judah in the moun-
tain district, apparently not far from Hebron,
and named between Eshean and Beth-tappuah
(Josh. xv. 53). It was not known to Eusebius
and Jerome (0&* p. 268,46; p. 165, 8), nor
does it appear to have been yet met with by
any modern investigator. Conder has suggested
a* a possible identification Bern Watm, a large
village about 3 miles E. of Hebron (PEF. Mem.
iii. 303, 304). [G.] [W.]
JATHBTH (B. % ld<p*0), Jodith ii. 25 ; one of
the countries to the borders of which Holofernes
marched with his army. It was toward the
south, " over against Arabia," and was possibly
the district of which Javan was the capital.
[Javajj, 2.] For other identifications, see
Speaker's Coram, in loco.
JAPHETH (ngj; 'ida^S; Japlieih), one of
the three sons of Noah, considered by some to
have been the eldest, by others the second,
and by others the youngest. The last opinion
is based on the fact that in every mention
of the three together, the order is Shem,
Hun, Japheth (Gen. v. 32, vi. 10, vii. 13,
ix. 18, x. 1 ; 1 Oh. i. 4). The reasons for
thinking him the eldest are these. (l)When
the posterities of the three sons are enumerated,
the line of Japheth is taken up first, that of
Ham second, and that of Shem third (Gen. x.
'2, 6, 21). But the position of Shem here can
be otherwise accounted for ; namely, by the fact
that in his line stands Abraham, whose descent
and posterity it is the historian's ultimate object
to relate ; which being the case, the inversion of
the usual order of the brothers, enabling the
history to proceed uninterruptedly, was but
natural. (2) In Gen. x. 21, Shem is called
"the brother of Japheth the elder" (A.V., sup-
ported by the LXX. and other ancient autho-
rities). But this rendering of the Hebrew is
disputed, other Versions, \including the Vulgate,
making it " the elder brother of Japhet," and
this is adopted in the text of the Ii. V., which
relegates the A.V. to the margin. (3) In Gen.
ix. 24, Ham (though not named) appears the one
alluded to as the " younger son " of Noah ; but
against this it is argued (vid. Speaker's Comm.
in loc.) that the expression, which is literally
"little son," could have pointed to Canaan
the grandson. On the whole the reason given
for regarding Japheth as the third son seems
decidely to outweigh the arguments against it,
though the point cannot be considered decided
(see Delitzsch [1887] and Dillmann* on the
passages in Genesis). Japheth, like his two
brothers, was born about a century before the
Flood (Gen. v. 32; vi. 11), as Josephus also
savs, placing them in the order — Shem, Japheth,
Ham (Ant. i. i, § 1).
JAPUIA
1525
By far the most interesting question however
relating to this patriarch is that arising from
the prophetic passage (Gen. ix. 27), "God shall
enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents
of Shem, and Canaan shall be his servant." The
letters for "shall enlarge" and "Japheth,"
nB\ are the very same, if the vowel-points be
disregarded. In the Targum of Onkelos the
prophecy is thus explained — "The Lord shall
enlarge Japheth, and He [sc. the Lord] shall
make His Shekinah to dwell in the taber-
nacles of Shem, and Kenaan shall be servant
unto them." In the Targum of Jonathan
the comment is — "The Lord shall beautify
the borders of Japhet, and his sons shall be
proselyted and dwell in the schools of Shem,
and Kenaan shall be a servant unto them "
(J. W. Etheridge's Version of the Targums,
1862, i. 54, 185). In Jonathan the "enlarge-
ment" appears pretty much confined to the
advantage the Japhetan race was to receive
from intercourse with Shem, viz. its religious
enlightenment, and this interpretation strik-
ingly harmonizes with such prophecies as Gen.
xxii. 18 and Is. Ix. 3 sq. The sacred writer
when concluding the earlier posterities adds
an ethnographical summary for each of the
brothers, and the ethnography is in the main
still recognisable. In the case of Japheth the
dispersion was through seven sons, — Gomer,
Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, Tiras,
which names may be separately consulted, and
the summary is : "By these were the isles of
the Gentiles divided in their lands ; every one
after his tongue, after their families, in their
nations " (Gen. x. 5). This description is com-
monly understood to indicate the European and
N.W. Asiatic coast lands of the Mediterranean,
which are to a large extent insular and penin-
sular. That was as much as the view of the
historian at the time of his writing embraced.
Josephus (Ant. i. 4, § 6) gives the ethnography
of the subject as apprehended by him. Re-
searches of later ages have led ethnologists to
regard the Indo-European collection of peoples
(including of course iheir distant oceanic develop-
ments of more recent times) as now substantially
representing the Japhetan race. A speculation
as to how the religious ideas of this great family
may be supposed to have been developed from
the times of their Noachian progenitor, previous
to their enlightenment through direct propaga-
tion among them of the knowledge revealed to
the line of Shem, may be seen worked out in
Alexander William Earl of Crawford's Creed of
Japhet, 1891. [C. H.]
JAPHI'A (V&\ = splendid; B. ♦cryyo/, A.
'la/payat; Japhie). The boundary of Zebulun
ascended from Daberath to Japhia, and thence
passed to Gath-hepher (Josh. xix. 12). Daberath
is now DebSrieh, at the foot of Mount Tabor, and
Gath-hepher is probably el Mesh-hed, 2j miles
N. of Nazareth. Japhia is now Yafa,' l| miles
S.W. of Nazareth. There are few remains of the
old town, bnt a system of domed subterranean
chambers, in three storeys, hewn out of the rock,
• It should be remarked that YSfa, \j\>. la the
modern representative of both ^Q\ i.e. Joppa, and
IPDV Japhia, two names originally very distinct.
Digitized by
Google
1526
JAPHIA
is interesting (Rob. ii. 343-4 ; PEF. Mem. i. 353 ;
Guerin, Galilee, i. 103 ; Sepp, /. und h. L. ii. 137).
Eusebius (OS.* p. 269, 69, 'Id>«fl) identifies it
with Haifa, Sycaminon ('H<pd) ; bat this identifi-
cation, though endorsed by Reland (Pal. p. 826),
is neither etymologically nor topographically ad-
missible. Tafa is probably also the same as the
'latf>a which was occupied by Josephus during
his struggle with the Romans — "a very large
village of Lower Galilee, fortified with walls
and full of people " ( Pita, § 45 ; cp. 37, 52, and
B. J. ii. 20, § 6X of whom 15,000 were killed
and 2,130 taken prisoners by the Romans (B. J.
iii. 7, § 31) ; though if Jefat be Jotapata, this
can hardly be, as the two are about 10 miles
apart, and he expressly says that they were
neighbours to each other.
A tradition, which first appears in Innomi-
natus it. (c. 1270) and afterwards in Marino
Sanuto and in Sir John Maundeville, makes
Y&fa the birthplace of Zebedee and of the
Apostles James and John, his sons. Hence it is
called by the Latin monks of Nazareth "San
Giacomo " (see Quaresmius, Elucidatio, ii. 843 ;
and Early 7Vot>. p. 186). Maundeville calls it
the "Castle of Safin." So too Von Harff,
A.D. 1498 : " Saffra, eyn casteel Tan wylcheme
Alpheus und Sebedeus geboren waren " (Pilger-
fahrt, 195). [G.] [W.]
JAPHTAQTB} = brilliant; B. 'Icetfa, A.
'Iwpij; Japhia). 1. King of Lachish at the
time of the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites
(Josh. x. 3); one of the five "kings of the
Amorites " who entered into a confederacy
against Joshua, and who were defeated at Beth-
horon, and lost their lives at Makkedah. The
king of Lachish is mentioned more than once
in this narrative (tro. 5, 23), but his name occurs
only as above.
2. (In 2 Sam. B. 'UQiis, A. 'A$>i<r ; in 1 Ch. B.
'lavovt, 'lavmioi, A. 'laipil : Japhia.) One of the
sons of David, tenth of the fourteen born to him
by his wives after his establishment in Jeru-
salem (2 Sam. t. 15 ; 1 Ch. iii. 7, xiv. 6). In
the Hebrew form of this name there are no
variations. The Pcshitto has Nephia, and, in
1 Ch. iii., Nepheg. In the list given by Jose-
phus (Ant. vii. 3, § 3) it is not recognisable : it
may be 'Hrraftr, or it may be 'lirac. There
do not appear to be any traditions concerning
Japhia. The genealogy is given under David,
p. 729. [G.] [W.]
JAPH-LET (BJ?B» = whom God delivers: 'Io-
<p\fir ; B. 'I^o^A, 'A<f>oM)X, and 'lafaXfa ; A.
'laQakifr: Jephlat), a descendant of Asher
through Beriah, his youngest son; named as
the father of three Bene-Japhlet (1 Ch. Tii. 32,
33>
JAPHLETI, R. V. JAPHLETITES, THE
CDJ»jn = "the Japhletite ; " B. 'AuraAe^,
A tow 'lapaKel; Jephleti). The "boundary
of the Japhletite" is one of the landmarks
on the south boundary -line of Ephraim (Josh,
xri. 3), west of Beth-horon the lower, and
between it and Ataroth. Who " the Japh-
letite" was who is thus perpetuated we
cannot ascertain. Possibly the name preserves
the memory of some ancient tribe who at a
JABEB
remote age dwelt on these hills, just as the
former presence of other tribes in the neighbour-
hood may be inferred from the names of Zema-
raim, Ophni (the Ophnite), Cephar ha-Ammonai,
and others. [Benjamin, p. 395, note.] We can
hardly suppose any connexion with Japhlet of
the remote Asher (Dillmann* in loco) ; bat the
name may be compared with that of Palti
(♦oArl) son of Raphu, a Benjamite who was
one of the twelve spies (Num. xiii. 9). No
trace of the name has yet been discovered in
the district. [G.] [W.]
JA'PHO, R. V. JOPPA (to, beauty ; 'low* ;
Joppe). This word occurs in the A. V. but once,
Josh. xix. 46. It is the accurate representation
of the Hebrew word which on its other occur-
rences is rendered by the better known form
of Joppa (2 Ch. ii. 16 ; Ezra iii. 7 ; Jon. L 3).
In its modern garb it is Tafa (\3U). which is
also the Arabic name of Japhia, a very dif-
ferent word in Hebrew. [Joppa ; Joppe.]
JA'BAH (iTttP, probably a corruption for
miT ; 'laid ; Jara\ one of the descendants
of Saul; son of Hicah, and great-grandson
of Meribbaal, or Mephibosheth (1 Ch. ix. 42,
cp. n. 40). In the parallel list of ch. viii. the
name is materially altered to Jehoadah.
JA'BEB (3T: 'lapclfi, as if DTJ, in both
Hos. v. 13 and x. 6 ; * though Theodoret giTes
'lapelH in the former passage, and "laptlfi in the
latter; and Jerome has Jarib for the Greek
equivalent of the LXX.), a name occurring
twice: as, "When Ephraim saw his sickness
and Judah saw his wound, then went Ephraim
to the Assyrian, and sent to king Jareb ; yet
could he not heal you " (Hos. v. 13); Samaria
"shall be carried unto Assyria for a present
to king Jareb " (Hos. x. 6). As alternatives for
"king Jareb" the A. V. margin gives "the
king of Jareb," or "the king that should
plead." The R. V. retains the same text, with
only one marginal alternative, "a king that
should contend; " the translators of both Ver-
sions following a correct grammatical instinct
in making Jareb a proper name. The Syriac
gives «23Jj, ySrib, as the name of a country,
which is applied by Ephrem Syrus to Egypt,
and the renderings of the Vulgate, " avenger **
(" ad regera ultorem "), which follows Sym-
machus, as well as those of Aquila (Surafo/tcmr)
and Theodotion, "judge," are justified by Jerome
by a reference to Jerubbaal, the name of Gideon
(see the first edition of this work for these and
other opinions) ; but it is best to accept the fact
that Hosea calls a contemporaneous monarch of
Assyria by the name of Jareb. Such a name
has not yet, however, been met with on the
monuments of Assyria. Some therefore have
identified this monarch with Assurdan (Schrader,
EAT* p. 439), others with Pul (or Tiglsth-
pileser II. : cp. Orelli in loco in Strack u.
Z5ckler*s Kqf. Abroro.) ; while Sayce (Bab.
Record, ii. 18, 127, 145) considers it the original
• As an instance or the contrary, Bee N<Am1 S*
yimroi.
Digitized by
Google
JABED
name of Sargon. The riddle of the name most
still be considered unsolved.
Two mystical interpretations, alluded to by
Jerome as current among commentators in his
time, are remarkable for the singularly opposite
conclusions at which they arrived ; the one re-
ferring the word to the devil, the other to
Christ. [W.A.W.] [F.]
JA'BED (TV, i.e. Jered, as the name is
given in A. V. of Oh., but in pause "IT, ^ rom
which the present form may have been derived,
though more probably from the Vulgate: LXX.
sometimes 'liptt, sometimes 'liptr [see Swete
in loco]; N. T. 'IdptB [Westcott and Hort];
Joseph. 'lapiSris : Jared), one of the antedi-
luvian patriarchs, the fifth from Adam; son of
Mahalaleel, and father of Enoch (Gen. v. 15, 16,
18, 19, 20; Luke iii. 37). In the lists of Chro-
nicles the name is given in the A. V. Jered.
JABESI'AH, R V. JAABESHIAH
(n'Bni£=!eAora Jehovah nouraheth; A. 'laptxala,
B. 'laoapaii ; Jersia), a Benjamite, one of the
Bene-Jeroham ; a chief man of his tribe, but of
whom nothing is recorded (1 Ch. viii. 27).
JAB-HA (JflTV ; 'I«x^X ; Jeraa), the Egyp-
tian servant of Sheshan, about the time of Eli,
to whom his master gave his daughter [Ahlai]
and heiress in marriage, and who thus became the
founder of a chief house of the Jerahmeelites,
which continued at least to the time of king
Hezekiab, and from which sprang several
illustrious persons, such as Zabad in the reign
of David, and Axariah in the reign of Joash
(1 Ch. ii. 31 sq.). [Azariaii, 13; Zabad.]
Some, however (cp. Speaker's Comm. in loc.),
consider Ahlai the name of a son who died
before the daughter was married to Jarha. It
may be noticed as an undesigned coincidence that
Jarha the Egyptian was living with Sheshan, a
Jerahmeelite, and that the Jerahmeelites had
their possessions on the side of Judah nearest to
Egypt So™, xxvii. 10 : cp. 2 Sam. xxiii. 20,
21 ; Josh. rv. 21 ; 1 Ch. iv. 18). [Jerahmeel;
Jebudijah.] The etymology of Jarha's name
is quite unknown. [A. C. H.] [C. H.]
JA'BIB (3*V = adhering; B. 'laptb, A.
'lapttp ; Jarib)T 1. Named in the list of 1 Ch.
iv. 24 only, as a son of Simeon. He occu-
pies the same place as Jachin in the parallel
lists of Gen. xlvi., Ex. vi., and Num. xxvi., and
the name is possibly a corruption from that (see
Iiurrington, i. 55).
2. (A. W0; B. 'Ap«79.) One of the "chief
men" (D'E?lO, "heads") who accompanied
Ezra on his journey from Babylon to Jerusalem
(Ezra viii. 16) ; whether Levite or layman is not
clear. In 1 Esdras the name is given as Jorxbas.
3. (A. 'lapiff; B. 'laptipi, tt. 'Ittptlfi) A
priest of the house of Jeshua the son of Jozadak,
who had married a foreign wife, and was com-
pelled by Ezra to put her away (Ezra x. 18).
In 1 Esdras the name is Joribus.
4. CW>'& A - 'laapifi ; 1 Mace. xiv. 29.) A
contraction or corruption of the name Joarib,
which occurs correctly in ii. 1.
JABI1IOTH C»<Vi/«^. B. 'lapttpM; Lari-
moth), 1 Eid. ix. 28. [Jeremoth.]
J ASHEN
1527
JAB-MUTH (WOT = height; Jarimuthy
1. B. in Josh. x. and xii. 'UptipoiB ; A. in Josh,
xii. 11, 'Uptfioi; in Neh. BA. 'lptfu>6$: Jeri-
moth, Jerimuth). A town in the Shefelah or
low country of Judah, named in the same
group with Adullam, Socoh, and Azekah (Josh,
xv. 35). Its king, Piram, was one of the
five who conspired to punish Gibeon for having
made alliance with Israel (Josh. x. 3, 5), and
who were routed at Beth-horon and put to
death by Joshua at Makkedah (v. 23). In this
narrative, and also in the catalogue of the
" royal cities " destroyed by Joshua, Jarmuth is
named next to Hebron, which, however, was
quite in the mountains. In Neh. xi. 29 it is
named as having been the residence of some of
the children of Judah after the return from the
Captivity. Eusebius and Jerome either knew
two places of this name, or an error has crept
into the text of the Onomastioen; for under
'lafittt, Jarimuth, they state it to be near Esh-
taol, 4 miles from Eleutheropolis (OS* p. 267,24 ;
p. 164, 16); while under 'Up/iovs, Jermus, they
gave it as 10 miles from Eleutheropolis, on the
road going up to Jerusalem, and state that it
was then called 'Upiwx&s, Jermucha(OS* p. 268,
38 ; p. 164, 31). It is now Kh. el- Yarmuk, a mass
of shapeless ruins, with cisterns, about 8 miles
N. of Beit Jibrin, Eleutheropolis, and close to
Shuweikeh, Socoh, and Zakariyah, Azekah. Its
distance from Eshtaol is 5J miles (Robinson,
ii. 17; PEF. Mem. iii. 128; Guerin, Judee, ii.
371 sq.; Tobler, DritteWanderung,pf. 120,162-
3 ; Riehm, HWB. s. v.).
2. (B. 'Pt/ifiiB, A. 'UpfUiO; Jaramoth.) A
city of Issachar, alloted with its suburbs to
the Gershonite Levitea (Josh. xxi. 29). In the
specification of the boundaries of Issachar, no
mention is made of Jarmuth (see Josh. xix.
17-23), but a Remeth b mentioned there (v. 20) ;
and in the duplicate list of Levitical cities (1 Ch.
vi. 73) Ramoth occupies the place of Jarmuth.
The two names are modifications of the same
root, and might without difficulty be inter-
changed. This Jarmuth does not appear to
have been yet identified. Conder proposes er-
Eameh, a village 5 1 miles N. of Samaria, near
which, at Neby Hazkfn, there is a Samaritan
tradition that Issachar was buried (PEF. Mem.
ii. 154-5, 219). Riehm, however, considers an
identification with er-Bameh impossible, and
that a more probable though doubtful site is
el-Maz&r, on the summit of Mount Gilboa and
not far from Engannim, with which it is named
(HWB. s. v.). [Ramoth.] [G.] [W.]
JABO'AH (Trt-T; B. 'Ho/, A. "ASaf ; Jard),
a chief man of the tribe of Gad (1 Ch. v. 14).
JA'SAEL (BA. 'Ao-oijAoj; Azatna), 1 Esd.
ix. 30. [Sbeal.]
JA'SHEN (JB'J; "Ao-dV; Jasen). Bene-
Jashen — " sons of Jashen "—are named in the
catalogue of the heroes of David's guard in
2 Sam. xxiii. 32. In the Hebrew, as accented
by the Masorets, the words have no necessary
connexion with the names preceding or following
them ; but in the A. V. they are attached to the
latter — " of the sons of Jashen, Jonathan." The
passage has every appearance of being imper-
fect, and accordingly, in the parallel list in
Digitized by
Google
1528 JASHEB, BOOK OF
Chronicles, it stands, " the sons of Hashem the
Gizonite " (1 Ch. ii. 34). Kennicott has examined
it at length (Dissertation, pp. 198-203. Cp.
Driver, Heb. Text of the BB. of Samuel, in loco),
and has shown good cause for believing that a
name has escaped, and that the genuine text was,
" of the Bene-Hashem, Gouni ; Jonathan ben-
Shamha." In the list given by Jerome in his
Quaestumes Hebraieae, Jashen and Jonathan are
both omitted. [W. A. W.] [F.]
JA'SHEB, BOOK OP ("C^n T^D), or, as
the margin of the A. V. and R. V. gives it, the
book of "the upright," is a record alluded to
in two passages only of the 0, T. (Josh. x. 13
and 2 Sam. i. 18), and the subject of much
dispute. The former passage is omitted in the
IX X., while in the latter the expression is
rendered fiifiklor rov fidovs: the Vulgate has
liber justorum in both instances. The Peshitto
in Joshua has " the book of praises or hymns,"
reading TBTI for "aWl, and a similar transposi-
tion will account for the rendering of the same
Version in Samuel, " the book of Ashir." The
Targum interprets it " the book of the law," and
this is followed by Jarchi, who gives, as the
passage alluded to in Joshua, the prophecy of
Jacob with regard to the future greatness of
Ephraim (Gen. xlviii. 19), which was fulfilled
when the sun stood still at Joshua's bidding.
Further diversity of opinions proves, if it prove
nothing more, that no book was known to have
survived which could lay claim to the title of
the book of Jasher.
That the book of Jasher was one of the
writings which perished in the Captivity was
held by R. Levi ben Gershom, and his opinion
has been adopted by Junius, Hottinger (Thes.
Phil. ii. 2, § 2), and other writers (Wolfii BM.
Heb. ii. 223). What the nature of the book
may have been can only be inferred from the
two passages in which it is mentioned and
their context; and, this being the case, there
is clearly wide room for conjecture.* Lowth
(Praelect. pp. 306, 307) .imagined that the book
was a collection of national songs (cp. Ex. xv. 1);
and his view of the question, that of the Syriac
and Arabic translators, was adopted by Herder.
The more general opinion is that it was this and
something more, a book containing also deeds of
valour recorded of brave Israelites, and put
together somewhere about the time of Solomon
(see Dillmann* on Joshua, /. c, and the authori-
ties named there). Dr. Donaldson, in the preface
to his Jashar, or Fragments Archetypa Carmmum
ffeliraiconun in ifasorethico Veterit Testamenti
textu passim tessellata, advanced a scheme for
the restoration of this ancient record, in accord-
ance with his own idea of its scope and contents.
The attempt has been universally condemned as
a failure needing no refutation."
There are also extant, under the title of " the
Book of Jasher," two Rabbinical works (cp.
Davidson, op. cit.) : one a moral treatise, written
in A. o. 1394 by R. Shabbatai Carmuz Levita, of
which a copy in MS. exists in the Vatican
• It Is superfluous to repeat these conjectures. Many
of them are enumerated In tbe 1st ed. of this work.
» His scheme is briefly but sufficiently described by
Dr. Wright In the 1st ed. of this work, and by Dr.
Davidson In Kltto's Cyclop, qf Sib. Lit.* s. n.
JASHUB
Library ; the other, by R. Tham, treats of the
laws of the Jews in eighteen chapters, and was
printed in Italy in 1544, and at Cracow in 1586.
An anonymous work, printed at Venice and
Prague in 1625, and said to have made its first
appearance at Naples, was believed by some
Jews to be the record alluded to in Joshua. It
contains the historical narrativ.es of the Penta-
teuch, Joshua, and Judges, with many fabulous
additions. R. Jacob translated it into German,
and printed his version at Frankfort-on-t he-
Maine in 1674. It is said in the preface te the
first edition to have been discovered at the
destruction of Jerusalem, by Sidrua, one of the
officers of Titus, who, while searching a boost
for the purpose of plunder, found in a secret
chamber a vessel containing the Books of the
Law, the Prophets, and Hagiographa, with many
others, which a venerable man was reading.
Sidrus took the old man under his protection
and built for him a bouse at Seville, where the
books were safely deposited. The book in
question is probably the production of a Spanish
Jew of the 13th cent. (Abicht, De libr. Secti, in
Thes. Nov. Theol. PhU. i. 525-534). A clumsy
forgery in English, which first appeared in 1751
under the title of "the Book of Jasher," deserves
notice solely for the unmerited success with
which it was palmed off upon the public. It pro-
fessed to be a translation from the Hebrew into
English by Alcuin of Britain, who discovered it
in Persia dnring his pilgrimage. It was re-
printed at Bristol in 1827 and again in 1833,
in each case accompanied by a fictitious com-
mendatory note by Wiclif. . [W. A. W.] [F.]
JASHOBE'AM (Dj/31**: B. 'l«r*$aii, Jo-
Bonifi, ZojSdA; K. 'Ufi'crai&aba ; A. 'lo-jSoati,
'Uafiadp, 'la&oip: Jesbaam, Jesboam). It is
possibly one and the same follower of David,
bearing this name, who is described as a Hacb-
monite (or ton of Hachmon, marg.), who slew
three hundred, and was first of the mighty men
(1 Cb. xi. 11); as a Korhite who joined David
at Ziklag (1 Ch. iii. 6), and as son of ZabdieL
captain of the first monthly course of soldiers,
numbering 24,000 (1 Ch. xxvii. 2). Hachmonite
would denote his descent from Hachmon, Korhite
his family [Jehikl, 5J. In 2 Sam. xxiii. 8, his
name seems to be erroneously transcribed,
na^a ne* (B. 'u$i<r$ t , u. nea «r«. Cp.
Luc. 'I«r/3ddA, ie. bv2 E*N). The original
name was probably ?1?3E* or 'H (^JJ3 being
altered into J1BQ), the name being otherwise
obscured in 1 Ch. xix. xxvii. Cp. Driver, Heb.
Text of the BB. of Sam. and the summary of
Kennicott's view in the Speaker's Comm. on
2 Sam. /. c. • [W. T. B.] [F]
JA'SHUB QW<=he who returns; in the
Kethib of 1 Ch. vii. litis I'B", in the Samaritan
Cod. of Num. xxvi. 3En' : 'Uuroiff ; B. in 1 Ch.
'laaaoip : Jasub). 1. The third son of Issachar,
and founder of the family of the Jashnbites
(Num. xxvi. 24; 1 Ch. vii. 1). In the list of
Gen. xlvi. the name is given (possibly in a con-
tracted or erroneous form, Gesen. Thes. p. 583) at
Job ; but in the Samaritan Codex — followed by
the LXX.— Jashub.
2. (B. 'laaoit.) One of the sons of Bani,
a layman in the time of Ezra who had to pot
Digitized by
Google
JA8HUBILEHEM
away his foreign wife (Ezra i. 29). In Esdras
the name is Jasubus.
JA8HU'BI-LE'HEM (Drf? 'IB", in some
copies v 'SB* ; koI aw4arp*^nr aUrrois ; et qui
reversi sunt m Lahem), a person or a place*
named among the descendants of Shelah, the
son of Judah by Bath-shua the Canaanitess
(1 Ch. iv. 22). The name does not occur again.
It is probably a place, and we should infer from
its connexion with Maresha and Chozeba — if
Chozeba be Chezib or Achzib — that it lay on
the western side of the tribe, in or near the
Shefelah. The Jewish explanations of this and
the following Terse are very curions. They may
be seen in Jerome's Quaest. Bebr. on this pas-
sage, and, in a slightly different form, in the
Targnm on the Chronicles (ed. Wilkins, 29, 30).
The mention of Moab gives the key to the whole.
Chozeba is Elimelech; Joash and Saraph are
Mahlon and Chilion, who " had the dominion in
Moab " from marrying the twoMoabite damsels:
Jashubi-Lehem is Naomi and Ruth, who re-
turned (Jashubi, from IVff, "to return") to
bread, or to Beth-feAem, after the famine : and
the " ancient words " pint to the Book of Ruth
as the source of the whole. [G.] [W.]
JASHU'BITES, THE C?r£&» Samaritan,
*3PVn ; A. i 'laaovfil, B. -fat ; familia Jasubita-
rum). The family founded by Jashub the son
of Isaachar (Num. xxvi. 24). [Jashub, 1.]
JA8 1'EL (^HPl? = God creates ; B. 'Ecrcrei^A,
A. 'Eo-s-riiX; Jasiety, the last named on the
increased list of David's heroes in 1 Ch. xi. 47.
He is described as the Mesobaite. Nothing
more is known of him.
JA'SON ('Idow; Jason), a common Greek
name which was frequently adopted by Helleni-
zing Jews as the equivalent of Jesus, Joshua
('lTj<rSw ; cp. Joseph. Ant. xii. 5, § IX* pro-
bably with some reference to its supposed con-
nexion with tSo-eai (i.e. the Healer). A parallel
change occurs in Alcimus (Eliakim) ; while
Nicotaus, DositKeus, Menelaus, &c, were direct
translations of Hebrew names.
1. Jason the son of Eleazer (cp. Ecclus. 1.
27, 'Ina-ovs vibs Xipax 'EAwlfap, Cod. A.) was
one of the commissioners sent by Judas Macca-
boeus to conclude a treaty with the Romans
ac. 161 (1 Mace viii. 17 ; Joseph. Ant. xii. 10,
§ 6).
2. Jason the father op Anttpater, which
last was an envoy to Rome at a later period
(1 Mace. xii. 16, xiv. 22), ^s probably the same
person as No. 1.
3. Jason of Cyrene, a Jewish historian who
wrote " in five books " a history of the Jewish
war of liberation, which supplied the chief
materials for the Second Book of Maccabees.
His name and the place of his residence seem to
mark Jason as a Hellenistic Jew, and it is pro-
bable on internal grounds that his history was
written in Greek. This narrative included the
wars under Antiochus Eupator, and Jason must
therefore have written after. B.C. 162 ; but
JA8PEB
1529
• Jason »nd Jesus occur together as Jewish names
In the history of Aristeas (Hody, Dt Tat. p. viL).
nothing more is known of him than can be
gathered from 2 Mace ii. 19-23.
4. Jason the High-priest, the second son of
Simon II., and brother of Onias III. He suc-
ceeded in obtaining the high-priesthood from An-
tiochus Epiphanes (c. 175 D.C.) to the exclusion of
his elder brother (2 Mace iv. 7-26), and changed
his name from Jesus to Jason (Joseph. Ant. xii.
5, § 1). He laboured in every way to introduce
Greek customs among the people, and that with
great success (2 Mace. iv. ; Joseph. /. c). In
order to give permanence to the changes which
he designed, he established a gymnasium at
Jerusalem, and even the priests neglected their
sacred functions to take part in the games
(2 Mace. iv. 9, 14), and at last he went so far
as to send a deputation to the Tyrian games in
honour of Hercules. [Hercules. ] After three
years (c. B.C. 172), being in turn supplanted in
the king's favour by his own emissary Menelaus
•[Menelaus], who obtained the office of high-
priest' from Antiochus by the offer of a larger
bribe, Jason was forced to take refuge among
the Ammonites (2 Mace iv. 26). On a report
of the death of Antiochus (c. 170 B.C.) he made
a violent attempt to recover his power (2 Mace,
v. 5-7), but was repulsed, and again fled to the
Ammonites. Afterwards he was compelled to
retire to Egypt, and thence to Sparta, whither
he went in the hope of receiving protection
" in virtue of bis being connected with them by
race" (2 Mace v. 9; cp. 1 Mace. xii. 7;
Frankel, .MonarsjcAn/f, 1853, p. 456), and
there "perished in a strange land" (2 Mace
1. e ; cp. Dan. xii. 30 sq. ; 1 Mace i. 12 sq.).
[B. F. W.] [C.H.]
5. Jason the Thessalonian, who enter-
tained Paul and Silas, and was in consequence
attacked by the Jewish mob (Acts xvii. 5, 6,
7, 9). He is probably the same as the Jason
mentioned in Rom. xvt 21, as a companion of
the Apostle, and one of his kinsmen (avryytrtis)
or fellow-tribesmen. Jason and the other dis-
ciples had to give security (to IkiwSv), which
probably means that they became bound against
all further disturbance, and that explains the
departure of the Apostles during the night.
Chrysostom on the other hand considers that
Jason answered for the production of the
Apostles ; so that, by sending them away, he
in fact endangered his own life on their behalf
(37th Homily on the Acts, § 2, p. 283, in Pat.
Or. lx. 265). [W.A. W.] [C. H.]
JASPEB (SlNffc ; tana; iaspis), a precious
stone mentioned in the 0. and N. T. In the
high-priest's breastplate it stands, under its
Hebrew and English names, last of the twelve,
third in the fourth row (Ex. xxviii. 20, xxxix.
13), and under both names it adorns the robe of
the king of Tyre (Ezek. xxviii. 13>
Plato mentions as among highly-prized stones
o-dpSia, limtts, irndpaytai (Phaed. p. 110 s./.);
and Theophrastus specifies the odptiov, the Uurwis,
the <rdit(p€ipos, as stones engraved for seals and
as beautiful to the eye (deLapid., sect, iv., § 23,
p. 343, ed. Wimmer). Before B.O. 285, sub-
sequently to the two last-named writers, the
Septuagint Version was begun,' in which tatrwis
occurs twice, viz. in the high-priest's breast-
plate (Ex. xxviii. 18) and in the Tyrian royal
robe (Ezek. xxviii. 13). But only in one of these
Digitized by
Google
1530
JASPER
places does it correspond in position with the
Hebrew, Yashepheh (A. V. jasper) ; namely, in the
robe, where it stands sixth. In the breastplate,
where it again stands sixth, the corresponding
Hebrew is Yahalom (A. V. diamond); while
twelfth, where the Hebrew is YasMpheh (A. V.
jasper), the Greek is irix'or. Bnt it does not
follow that the LXX. translated Yahalom by
taems and Yashtpheh by irixior ; for the order
of the words may have got misplaced.
Its earliest Latin occurrence is, we believe, in
Virgil (Am. iv. 261), and here also we find it
for the first time described in appearance.
Aeneas wears a sword stcllatas iaspide fulvd, in
which words we see a sparkling gold-colonred
gem.
To about the same period belongs an epistle
quoted by Macrobius, wherein Augustus ad-
dressed Maecenas as Pearl of the Tiber, Emerald
of the Cilnii, Iaspis of Potters (Iaspi figulorum),
Beryl of Porsena (Hacrob. ii. 4, § 12).
In the apostolic and sob-apostolic period this
stone is further mentioned and described. In
the Apocalypse the Divine Being on the throne
was to look upon like a jasper and a sardine
stone (iv. 3). The luminary (iptea-r^ip) of the
New Jerusalem resembled the jasper, a stone
most precious (ti/u^totoiX clear as crystal
(ctwoTaAA/fvi>, xxi. 11). The wall of the city
was of jasper (v. 18), as was also its first founda-
tion (v. 19). Joaephus in his two accounts of the
breastplate (Ant. iii. 7, § 5 ; B. J. v. 5, § 7) puts
fcurru in the fifth place, where the Hebrew is
sappir (A. V. sapphire), though it does not
follow again that he was translating sappir by
totms.
Pliny (N. II. xxxvii., § 115, Sillig), treating
of Gemmae, says, " viret et saepe translucet
iaspis ; " but there was much variety of colour,
such as emerald-iike, bluish grey, air-like, caeru-
lean, purple, turbid, according to where the
stone was found, the best kind being purplish,
the second best rather rose-coloured, the third
somewhat of emerald tint. For magnitude Pliny
had seen an iaspis of fifteen (al. lee eleven)
undue carved into a breastplated figure of Nero.
Martial said that Stella wore on his finger
sardonyxes, emeralds, diamonds, iaspides (v. 11,
1). Another was seeking out genuine sardo-
nyxes and fixing the value of great iaspides (ix.
60, 19, 20).
Dioscorides (v. 159, al. 160) described the
Uurwts as of various kinds, resembling emerald,
or crystal, or air, smoky, having bright white
veins, resembling turpentine. Dionysius Perie-
getes (w. 724, 782, 1120) describes it as of the
colour of air and of water (i\cp6taaa, i&ar&taoa),
and mentioning it after the diamond makes it
pale green and translucent (xAuoa Siavyd(ovaat>).
Epiphanius describes the iaspis thus, in Rosen-
muller's translation : " The colour of some has a
greenish shade ; these are more soft and im-
perfectly transparent. The internal mass is
green; it resembles the rust of the nobler
metals and has several rows of strata. Another
species is of a light sea-green colour, with a
paler lustre. A third ... its bluish red is
somewhat diaphanous, and has also a wine and
amethyst colour . . . There is also a green
jasper having no lustre ; and another still,
resembling snow and lithomarge, which is called
the old jasper" (Epiphan. De XII. Gemmis,
JATTIB
sect. vi. in Pat. Gr. xliii. 297, 332; E. F. C
RosenmSller, Mineralogy and Botany of tie
Bible, p. 41). Epiphanius, enumerating the
twelve stones in the order of the LXX , places
the iaspis sixth.
Coming now to the jasper of the moderns, we
notice that Andreas Baccius, 1603, describe! its
beautiful combination of many excellent gnus
and whites (De Gemmis, c 8, p. 70). A R.
Millin de Grandmaison makes it the chief of the
opaque silicious stones, coloured green, yellow,
brown, black, grey; and he notices the blood
jasper, a green sort spotted with red (Arcki-
ol-tgie des Pierres Gravees, ed. 1826, p. 134).
Madame Barrera speaks of its lustreless fracture,
its complete lack of transparency, its advan-
tageous use in mosaics on account of its variety
of colour (Gems and Jewels, 1860, p. 201).
Augusto Castellani describes jasper as a dark
quartz, very compact and capable of receiving a
beautiful polish; white, brown, black jasper
being rare; red, blue, violet, green, abundant;
green the most common; blood jasper much
sought for engraving (Gems, tr. by Mrs. Brog-
den, 1871, p. 102). Streeter says it is found in
compact kidney-shaped masses, and in pebbles ;
its colours, green, yellow, red, rarely blue]: near
Cairo it occurs in masses ; in the Vatican there
are a vase of red jasper with white veins,
and one of black jasper with yellow veins
(Precious Stones and Gems, 1877, p. 201). At
South Kensington there are amorphous speci-
mens of porcelain jasper, polished agate jasper,
and riband jasper.
Mr. C. W. King draws the following general
conclusion : — " Greenness and more or less trans-
parency were (according to Pliny) the two
essential characters of the ancient jaspis. Ac-
cording to all ancient testimony, the ancient
jaspis was exactly the opposite to the modern
jasper, the latter being always opaque sad
corresponding to the achates of the Romsns.
The jaspis of the ancients was our chalcedony
(silica and alumina); in its primary sense the
variety coloured green by nickel, now called
plasma, but in after-times embracing the blue,
the purple, the yellow, and whity-brown shades
of the same substance " (Precious Stones, 1865,
pp. 202, 203, 206). It must be observed that if
the jaspis of the ancients was our chalcedony,
this latter could not have been the ancle*
chalcedony, since both jaspis and chalcedony are
named in the New Jerusalem. [C. H.]
JASU'BUS ('Imroifios ; Jasub), I Ead. ix. 30.
[Jasbub, 2.]
JATAL (BA. 'Ardp ; Azer), 1 Esd. v. 28.
The form in A. V. is adopted from the Aldine
Version, after the Bishops' Bible. [Ater, 1.]
JATHNI'-EL (^W'}JV = ieAom God bettotcs;
B. 'UvotrliK ; JathanaS),' a Korhite Levite, and
a doorkeeper (A. V. " porter ") to the House of
Jehovah, i.e. the Tabernacle ; the fourth of the
family of Meshelemiah (1 Ch. xxvi. 2).
JATTIR ("1W, in Josh. xv. 48; elsewhere
IP? = very great, eminent; B. 'USiip, A. 'Ittif
EleeVp; Jether), a town of Judah in the
mountain district (Josh. xv. 48), one of the
group containing Socoh, Eshtemoh, Ik. ; it was
among the nine cities which with their suburbs
Digitized by
Google
JAVAN
were allotted out of Judah to the priests
(xxi. 14; 1 Ch. vi. 57), and was one of the
places in the sooth which David used to haunt
in his freebooting days, and to his friends in
which he sent gifts from the spoil of the enemies
of Jehovah (1 Sam. xxx. 27). By Eusebius and
Jerome (OS* p. 268, 42 ; p. 165, 3) it is spoken
of as a very large place, inhabited only by
Christians, in the middle of Daroma, near Mala-
tha, and 20 miles from Eleutheropolis. It is
named by Hap-Parchi, the Jewish traveller ;
but the passage is defective, and little can be
gathered from it (Zunz in Asher's Benj. Tudela,
ii. 442). By Robinson (i. 494-5) it is identified
with 'Atiir, 9} miles N. of Molada, Eh. et-Milh,
and 12 miles S.S.W. of Hebron, and having the
probable sites of Socoh, Eshtemoh, and other
southern towns within short distances. This
identification may be accepted, notwithstanding
the discrepancy in the distance of 'Attir from
Eleutheropolis, which is by road much more
than 20 Roman miles, though in a direct line it
is about that distance. Possibly Eusebius may
have confounded 'Attir with Yuttah, which, by
road, is about 20 miles from B. Jibrm. There
are many caves, foundations, and masses of stones,
and a kubbeh standing on a knoll (PEF. Mem.
Hi. 404, 408 ; Guerin, Judte, iii. 197 ; Tristram,
Land of Israel, p. 383 sq.). Robinson notices
that it is not usual for the Jod with which
Jattir commences to change into the Ain of
•Attir (Bib. Sea. i. 494, note).
The two Ithrite heroes of David's guard were
probably from Jattir, living memorials to him
of his early difficulties. [G.] [W.]
JA'VAN QV: in Gen. 'War; in Is. and Ezek.
'EAAdj ; in Dan. and Zech. "ZKKnvts : Graecia,
Oraeci, Javan). 1. A son of Japheth, and the
father of Elishah and Tarshish, Kittim and
Dodanim (Gen. x. 2, 4). The name appears in
Is. lxvi. 19, where it is coupled with Tarshish,
Pul, and Lud, and more particularly with Tubal
and the " isles afar off," as representatives of
the Gentile world: again, in Ezek. xxvii. 13,
where it is coupled with Tubal and Meshech, as
carrying on considerable commerce with the
Tyrians, who imported from these countries
slaves and brazen vessels; in Dan. viii.21, x. 20,
xi. 2 (A V. Grecia, R. V. Greece), in reference
to the Macedonian empire ; and, lastly, in Zech.
ix. 13 (A. V. and R. V. Greece), in reference to the
Graeco-Syrian empire. From a comparison of
these various passages there can be no doubt
that Javan was regarded as the representative
of the Greek race : the similarity of the name
to that branch of the Hellenic family with which
the Orientals were best acquainted, viz. the
Ionians, particularly in the older form in which
their name appears ('IdW), is too close to be
regarded as accidental : and the occurrence of
the name in the cuneiform inscriptions of the
time of Sargon (about B.c. 709), in the form of
Jaranu [MV. 11 ], as descriptive of the isle of
Cyprus, where the Assyrians first came in contact
with the power of the Greeks, further shows that
its use was not confined to the Hebrews, but was
widely spread throughout the East. The name *
JAVAN, SONS OF
1531
* In Gen. the name probably signifies the Island of
Cyprus, which was visited by tbe Babylonians at a very
early period (circ. a.c. 3760).
was probably introduced into Asia by the Phoe-
nicians, to whom the Ionians were naturally
better known than any other of the Hellenic
races, on account of their commercial activity
and the high prosperity of their towns on the
western coast of Asia Minor. The extension of
the name westward to the general body of the
Greeks, as they became known to the Hebrews
through the Phoenicians, was but a natural
process. The discovery of the name of a
" Yivana " or Ionian in the Tel-el-Amarna
tablets, serving " in the • country of Tyre,"
points to acquaintance between Greek and
Canaanite a century before the Exodus ; and
it is illustrative of the communication which
existed between the Greeks and the East, that
among the artists who contributed to the orna-
mentation of Esarhaddon's palaces, the names of
several Greek artists appear in one of the in-
scriptions (Rawlinson's Herod, i. 483). ' At a
later period the Hebrews must have gained con-
siderable knowledge of the Greeks through the
Egyptians. Psammetichus (B.C. 664—610) em-
ployed Ionians and Carians as mercenaries, and
showed them so much favour that the war-caste
of Egypt forsook him in a body : the Greeks
were settled near Bubastis, probably at Tah-
panhes, Tell Defenneh, in a part of the country
with which the Jews were familiar (Herod,
ii. 154). It is possible that the Greek garrison
of Tahpanhes accompanied Pharaoh Necho and
took part in the fight at Megiddo (Jer. ii. 16).
At any rate, during the troubled period 607-
587 B.C., when there was a large migration to
Egypt, there must have been constant inter-
course between the Jews and the Greek frontier
garrison at Tahpanhes, under circumstances that
would give opportunity for the permeation of
Greek words and Greek ideas among the upper
classes of the Jewish nation (Flinders Petrie,
Egypt Explor.FundyUh Memoir, p. 48 sq.). The
policy of Psammetichus was followed by the suc-
ceeding monarchs, especially Amasis (571-525),
who gave the Greeks Naucratis as a commercial
emporium. The Greeks themselves were very
slightly acquainted with the southern coast of
Syria until the invasion of Alexander the Great.
The earliest notices of Palestine occur in the works
of Hecataeus (B.C. 549-486), who mentions only
the two towns Canytis and Cardytus ; the next
are in Herodotus, who describes the country as
Syria Palaestina, and notices incidentally the
towns Ascalon, Azotus, Ecbatana (Batanaea ?),
and Cadytis, the same as the Canytis of Heca-
taeus, probably Gaza. These towns were on the
border of Egypt, with the exception of the
uncertain Ecbatana ; and it is therefore highly
probable that no Greek had, down to this late
period, travelled through Palestine.
2. (BA. omit; Graecia.) A town in the
southern part of Arabia (Yemen), whither the
Phoenicians traded (Ezek. xxvii. 19): the con-
nexion with Uzal decides in favour of this place
rather than Greece, as in the Vulg. For con-
jectures as to the origin of the name, see Orelli
in loco (in Strack u. ZBckler's Kgf. Komm.) ;
and Ruetschi in Herzog, BE.*, s. v.
[W. L. B.] [W.]
JA'VAN, SONS OP (DWn '33 ; i/fol rS,
'EW^vtcy ; filii Graecorum), in A. V. "the
Grecians," in R. V. and A. V. marg. the sons
Digitized by
Google
153^
JAVELIN
of the Grecians (Joel Hi. 6). The view gene-
rally adopted is that the Ionians or Greeks
are here intended. [Greece; Greeks; Gre-
cians.] [W.]
JAVEUN. [Arms.]
JA'ZAB (B. 'lafto, A. 'laftr; Gaxer),
1 Mace. v. 8. [Jaazer.]
JA'ZEB ('laftp ; 2 Sam. 'E\u(tp ; in 2 Sam.
A. ' £\lu(^i s ; in 1 Ch. B. raf«>, 'Piaftp, A. raft? :
Jazer, laser, Jeter), Num. xxxii. 1, 3; Josh,
xxi. 39 ; 2 Sam. xiiv. 5; 1 Ch. vi. 81, xxvi. 31 ;
Is. xvi. 8, 9 ; Jcr. xlviii. 32. [Jaazer.]
JA'ZIZ (PTJ = shining ; B. 'la(*l(, A. 'Iow-
(i( ; Jaziz), a Hagarite who had charge of the
"floi-ks," i.e. the sheep and goats (|t&n), of
kin;; David (1 Ch. xxvii. 31), which were pro-
bably pastured on the east of Jordan, in the
aomad country where the forefathers of Jaziz
had for ages roamed (cp. v. 19-22).
JEATOM, MOUNT (D'TBpH; B. wrfAu
'laptly, A. 'lapl/i ; Mons Jarim), a place named
in specifying the northern boundary of Judah
(Josh. xv. 10). The boundary ran from Mount
Seir to " the shoulder of Mount Jearim, which
is Chesalon " — that is, Chesalon was the land-
mark on the mountain. Kesla stands, 9} miles
due west of Jerusalem, " on a high point
on the north slope of the lofty ridge between
Wady Ohwrab and W. Jsm'ain. The latter
of these is the south-western continuation of
W. Beit Hannina, and the former runs parallel
to and northward of it, and they are separated
by this ridge, which is probably Mount Jearim "
(Rob. Hi. 154). If Jearim be taken as Hebrew,
it signifies " forests." Forests in our sense of
the word there are none : but we hare the testi-
mony of one traveller that " such thorough
woods, both for loneliness and obscurity, he had
not seen since he left Germany " (Tobler, Wan-
derung, 1857, p. 178; see also PEF. Mem.
iii. p. 25 ; and Conder, Hbk. p. 259). Kirjath-
Jearim — whether it be Kuryet el-'Enab, towards
the north, or Kh. 'Erma, towards the south — is
not far distant. [Chesalon.] [G.] [W.]
JEA'TERAI(nn$; A. 'Itflof, B. 'leflpef;
Jethrai), a Gershonite Levite, son of Zerah (1 Ch.
vi. 21); apparently the head of his family at
the time that the service of the Tabernacle was
instituted by David (cp. v. 31). In the reversed
genealogy of the descendants of Gershom, Zerah's
son is stated as Ethki 03J1N, o. 41). The two
names have quite similarity enough to allow
of the one being a corruption of the other,
though the fact is not ascertainable.
JEBBRECHI'AH(1iTDnj» =«>hom Jehovah
blesses; Bapaxfas; Barachias% probably the
same name as Berechiah. Nothing is known
of him. [F.]
JEBU'S (W3J; 'U$ois; Jebus), one of the
names of Jerusalem, the city of the Jebusites,
also called Jebusi. It occurs only twice . first
in connexion with the journey of the Levite and
his unhappy concubine from Bethlehem to
Gibeah (Judg. xix. 10, 11); and secondly, in the
JEBUSITE
narrative of the capture of the place by Dsrid
in 1 Ch. xi. 4, 5. In 2 Sam. v. 6-9 the name
Jerusalem is employed. Bj Gesenins {Tka.
p. 189, M3) and Fiirst (Handwb. p. 477) Mm
is interpreted to mean a place dry or down-
trodden like a threshing-floor ; an interpretation
which by Ewald (iii. 155) and Stanley (S. i P.
p. 177) is taken to prove that Jebus most hare
been the south-western hill, the " dry rock " of
the modern Zion, and " not the Mount Moriah,
the city of Solomon, in whose centre arose the
perennial spring." But in the great uncertainty
which attends these ancient names, this is, to
say the least, very doubtful. Jebus was the
city of the Jebusites. Either the name of the
town is derived from the name of the tribe, or
the reverse. If the former, then the inter-
pretation juat quoted falls to the ground. If
the latter, then the origin of the name of Jebus
is thrown back to the very beginning of the
Canaanite race — so far at any rate as to make
its connexion with a Hebrew root extremely
uncertain. [G.] [W.]
JEBU'SI QWyn = the Jebusite; Jebusaem,
Jebus), the name employed for the city of Jebcs,
only in the ancient document describing the
landmarks and the towns of the allotment oi
Judah and Benjamin (Josh. xv. 8 [BA. 'IcSovi}
xviii. 16 [B. 'UBowral, A. 'Ufiovsl, 28 [BA
'UBovsJ). In the first and last place the explana-
tory words, " which is Jerusalem," are added.
In each place R. V. reads " the Jebusite ; " A. V.
in the first only.
A parallel to this mode of designating the
town by its inhabitants is found in this very
list in Zemaraim (xviii. 22), A vim (t>. 23), Ophni
(e. 24), and Japhletite (xvi 3), &c [G.] [W.]
JEBUSITE, JEBUSITES, THE. Al-
though these two forms are indiscriminately
employed in the A. V. and R. V., yet in the
original the name, whether applied to indi-
viduals or to the nation, is never found in the
plural; always singular. The usual form is
'tMajrt; but in a few places — viz., 2 Sam. v. 6,
xxiv.' 16, 18; 1 Ch. xxi. 18 only— it is 'D3W
Without the article, *CHT, it occurs in 2 Sam.
v. 8 ; 1 Ch. xi. 6 ; Zech. ix. 7. In the first two
of these the force is much increased by removing
the article introduced in the A. V., and reading
" and smiteth a Jebusite." We do not hear of a
progenitor to the tribe, but the name whico
would have been his had he existed has attached
itself to the city in which we meet with the
Jebusites in historic times. [Jebus.] The
LXX. A. gives the name 'U0ouaa7os in Judg.
xix. 11, B. 'UPovatrtlr ; in Ezra ix. 1, BA -ere;
Vulg. Jebusaeas.
1. According to the table in Genesis x. "the
Jebusite " is the third son of Canaan. Hi-
place in the list is between Heth and the
Amorites (Gen. x. 16 ; 1 Ch*. i. 14), a position
which the tribe maintained long after (Num.
xiii. 29 ; Josh. xi. 3) ; and the same connexion
is traceable in the words of Ezekiel (xvi. 3, 45),
who addresses Jerusalem as the fruit of the
union of an Amorite with a Hittite. But in
the formula by which the Promised Land is to
often designated, the Jebusites are uniformly
placed last, which may have arisen from their
Digitized by
Google
JEBU8ITE
JECOLIAH
1533
■mall number, or their quiet disposition. See
Gen. xv. 21 ; Ex. iii. 8, 17, xiii. 5, uiii. 23,
xxxiii. 2, xxxiv. 11 ; Dent. vii. 1, xx. 17 ; Josh,
iii. 10, ix. 1, xii. 8, xxiv. 11 ; IK. ix. 20 ; 2 Ch.
▼iii. 7 ; Ezra ix. 1 ; Keh. ix. 8.
2. Our first glimpse of the actual people is in
the invaluable report of the spies — " the Uittite,
and the Jebusite, and the Amorite dwell in the
mountain ** (Num. xiii. 29). This was forty
rears before the entrance into Palestine, but no
change in their habitat had been made in the
interval ; for when Jabin organised his rising
against Joshua, he sent amongst others " to the
Amorite, the Hittite, the Perizzite, and the
Jebusite in the mountain" (Josh. xi. 3). A
mountain-tribe they were, and a mountain-tribe
they remained. " Jebus, which is Jerusalem,"
lost its king in the slaughter of Beth-horon
(Josh. x. I, 5, 26 ; cp. xii. 10) — was sacked and
burnt by the men of Judah (Judg. i. 21), and
its citadel finally scaled and occupied by David
(2 Sam. v. 6) ; but still the Jebusites who in-
habited Jerusalem, the " inhabitants of the
land," could not be expelled from their moun-
tain-seat, but continued to dwell with the
children of Judah and Benjamin to a very late
date (Josh. xv. 8, 63; Judg. i. 21, xix. 11).
This obstinacy is characteristic of mountaineers,
and the few traits we possess of the Jebusites
show them to have been a warlike people. Before
the expedition under Jabin, Adoni-zedek, the king
of Jerusalem, had himself headed the attack on
the Gibeonites, which ended in the slaughter of
Beth-horon, and cost him his life on that eventful
evening under the trees at Makkedah (Josh, x.).*
That they were established in the strongest
natural fortress of the country in itself says
mnch for their courage and power; and when
they lost it, it was through bravado rather
than from any cowardice on their part.
[Jerusalem.]
After this they emerge from the darkness but
once, in the person of Araunah* the Jebusite,
"Araunah the king" OJ^BH flJITKX who
appears before us in true kingly dignity in his
well-known transaction with David (2 Sam.
xxiv. 23 ; 1 Ch. xxi. 23). The picture presented
us in these well-known passages is a very inter-
esting one. We see the fallen Jebusite king and
his four sons on their threshing-floor on Mount
Moriah, treading out their wheat (B'l ; A. V.
"threshing") by driving the oxen with the
heavy sledges (D'JTb; A. V. " threshing instru-
ments ") over the corn, round the central heap.
We see Araunah on the approach of David fall
on his face on the ground, and we hear him ask,
" Wherefore is my lord the king come to his
slave?" followed by his offer of all his pro-
perty. But this reveals no traits peculiar to
• In r. 6 the king of Jerusalem is styled one of the
"five kings or the Amorites." But the LXX. (both
MSS.) have niv 'UfiotnraUty of the Jebusites.
o By Josephus {Ant. vll. 13, $ 9) Araunah Is asid to
have been one of David's chief friends («y nit iii\um
Aavt&»), and to have been expressly spared by him
when the citadel was taken. If there is any troth In
this, David no doubt made bis friendship during his
wanderings, when he also acquired that of Uriah tho
IllttUe, Ahlmelech, Sibbechai, and others of bis asso-
ciates who belonged to the old nations.
the Jebusites, or characteristic of them more
than of their contemporaries in Israel, or in the
other nations of Canaan. The early judges and
kings of Israel threshed wheat in the wine-press
(Judg. vi. 11), followed the herd out of the
field (1 Sam. xi. 5), and were taken from the
sheepcotes (2 Sam. vii. 8) ; and the courtesy of
Araunah is closely paralleled by that of Ephron
the Uittite in his negotiation with Abraham.
We are not favoured with further traits of
the Jebusites, nor with any clue to their reli-
gion or rites ; but these last were no doubt very
similar to those of the Canaanites and Hit-
tttes, with whom they were closely allied.
Two names of individual Jebusites are pre-
served. In Adonizedek the only remarkable
thing is its Hebrew form, in which it means
" Lord of justice."
That of Araunah is much more uncertain —
so much so as to lead to the belief that we
possess it more nearly in its original shape. In
the short narrative of Samuel alone the Hebrew
name is given in three forms — " the Ararnah "
(v. 16, Qeri; the Aravnah, Khetib) ; Araneah
(v. 18, Qeri; Aravnah, Khetib); Aravnah (ro.
20, 21). In 1 Ch. xxi. 15 it is Oman, while
with the LXX. it is 'Opri, and with" Josephus
'Op6wa. [Araunah; Ornan.]
To these, if Jerusalem be Salem, may perhaps
be added Melciiizedek.
In the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles the
ashes of St. Barnabas, after his martyrdom in
Cyprus, are said to hare been buried in a cave,
" where the race of the Jebusites formerly
dwelt ; " and previously to this is mentioned
the arrival in the island of a " pious Jebusite, a
kinsman of Nero" {Act. Apoit. Apocr. pp. 72,
73, ed. Tisch.). [G.] [W.]
JECAMI'AH (iTDjV = may Jehovah set up,
»'.«. Jekamiah, as the name is elsewhere given ;
BA. 'Uxtvii ; Jeccmia), one of a batch of seven,
including Salathiel and Pedaiah, who were
introduced into the royal line, on the failure of
it in the person of Jehoiachin (1 Ch. iii. 18).
They were all apparently sons of Neri, of the
line of Nathan, since Salathiel certainly was so
(Luke iii. 27). [Genealogy of Jesus Christ,
p. 1148«.] [A. C. H.]
JECHOLI'AH Orrb?, with the final u,
= Jehovah is poxcerftU ; .B. XaAeid, A. 'I«x«M« ;
Joseph. Ant. ix. 10, § 3, 'Ax'dAas: Jechelia),
wife of Amaziah king of Judah, and mother
of Azariah or Uzziah his successor (2 K. xv. 2).
Both this queen and Jehoaddan, the mother of
her husband, are specified as " of Jerusalem."
In the A. V. of Chronicles her name is given as
Jecoliaii.
JECHONTAS ('UxoWor; Jechoniat). 1.
The Greek form of the name of king Jecro-
niah, followed by the translators in the books
rendered from the Greek, viz. Esth. xi. 4 ; Bar.
i. 3, 9; Matt. i. 11, 12.
2. 1 Esd. viii. 92. [Shechaniah.]
3. 1 Esd. i. 9. The same as Conaniah.
JECOLI'AH (TI^DV, B. Xooia, A. ItxtKla;
Jechelia), 2 Ch. xxvi.*3 [B. V. Jechiliah]. In
the original the name diners from its form in
the parallel passage in Kings, only in not having
the final li. [Jecholiaii.]
Digitized by
Google
1534
JEOONIAH
JECONI'AH (TW3J; excepting once* 1H\}3J.
with the final u, Jer. xxiv. 1 ; and once in Khetib,
rpjto', Jer. ixvii. 20: Itxortas: Jechonias), an
altered form of the name of Jehoiachijj, last
but one of the kings of Judah, which is found
in the following passages : — 1 Ch. iii. 16, 17;
Jer. xxiv. 1, xxvii. 20, xxviii. 4, xxix. 1 ; Esth.
ii. 6. It is still farther abbreviated to Coniah.
See also Jechoxias and Joacim.
JECONI'AS fltxorfa; Jechoniat), 1 Esd.
i. 9. [CONAMAH.]
JEDAI'AH [3 syll.] (HW = Jehovah hath
known: B. 'AmiSttd, laSai, 'liovtd, Aa&tti,
'ItSSois; A. 'I8««d, '18«i, 'IoSid, 'USSovd;
X. 'IStids, AaAeict: Idaia, Jedaia, Jadaia,
Joiada, Jedei, Jeddu). 1. Head of the second
coarse of priests, as they were divided in
the time of David (1 Ch. xxiv. 7). Some of
them survived to return to Jerusalem after the
Babylonish Captivity, as appears from Ezra ii.
36, Neh. vii. 39—" the children of Jedaiah, of
the house of Jeshua, 973." The addition " of
the house of Jeshua " indicates that there were
two priestly families of the name of Jedaiah,
which it appears from Neh. xii. 6, 7, 19, 21, was
actually the case. If these sons of Jedaiah had
for their head Jeshua, the high-priest in the
time of Zerubbabel, as the Jewish tradition says
they had (Thos. Lewis's Orig. Heb. bk. ii. ch.
vii., Lond. 1724, Oxf. 1835), this may be the
reason why, in 1 Ch. ix. 10 and Neh. xi. 10,
the course of Jedaiah is named before that of
Joiarib, though Joiarib's was the first coarse.
Bat perhaps Jeshua was another priest descended
from Jedaiah, from whom this branch sprung.
It is certainly a corrupt reading in Neh. xi. 10
which makes Jedaiah son of Joiarib. 1 Ch.
ix. 10 preserves the true text. In Esdras the
name is Jbddd.
2. (ol ewe-yywKoVtr ; Idaia.) A priest in
the time of Jeshua the high-priest (Zech. vi.
10, 14). [A. C. H.]
JEDAI'AH (T1JT=A« praiieth or oonfesaeth
Jah). This is a different name from the last,
though the two are identical in the A. V.
1. (B. Iltd, A. 'EJid; Idaia.) A man
named in the genealogies of Simeon as a fore-
father of Ziza, one of the chiefs of the tribe,
apparently in the time of king Hezekiah (1 Ch.
iv. 37).
2. (B. 'USaut, K. "IeJoW ; Jedaiah.) Son of
Harumaph ; a man who did his part in the re-
building of the wall of Jerusalem (Neh. iii. 10).
JEDDU ('WSSovi ; Jeddus), 1 Esd. v. 24.
JEDE'US ('WScuos ; Jeddeut), 1 Esd. ix. 30.
[Adaiah, 5.]
JEDI'A-EL ^PVOTfl = known of God: B.
'A<rM\ 'Aav&ip, 'AScriiA, 'Api^A, iafid ; A.
'laiffiX, 'ArfHiXi Jadihel). 1. A chief patriarch
of the tribe of Benjamin, from whom sprang
many Benjamite houses of fathers, numbering
17,200 mighty men of valour, in the days of
David (1 Ch. vii. 6, 11). It is usually assumed
that Jediael is the same as Ashbel (Gen. xlvi. 21 ;
Num. xxvi. 38 ; 1 Ch. viii. 1). But though this
may be so, it cannot be affirmed with certainty.
TBeciikr; Bela.] Jediael might be a later
JEDUTHUN
descendant of Benjamin not mentioned in the
Pentateuch, but who, from the fruitfulnesi of hit
house and the decadence of elder branches, rose
to the first rank.
2. (B. IStptk, A. 'laS4\ ; Jadihel.) Second
son of Heshelemiah, a Levite, of the sons of
Ebiasaph the son of Koran. One of the door-
keepers of the Temple in the time of David
(1 Ch. xxvi. 1, 2). [A. C H.]
a (B. 'EA0«i4A, A. *I«MA ; Jadihel.) Son of
Shimri ; one of the heroes of David's guard in the
enlarged catalogue of Chronicles (1 Ch. ii 45).
In the absence of further information, we cannot
decide whether or not he is the same person at
4. (B. 'PoAitjX, A. 'UStiiK; Jedihel.) One of
the chiefs (lit. " heads ") of the thousands of
Manasseh who joined David on his march from
Aphek to Ziklag when he left the Philistine
army on the eve of the battle of Gilboa, and
helped him in his revenge on the marauding
A male's ites (1 Ch. xii. 20 ; cp. 1 Sam. xxix. xxi.)
JEDIDAH (flTT = Mowrf; B. 'Itttla, A
"ESi Si ; Idida), queen of Amon, and mother of
the good king Josiah (2 K. xxii. 1). She was >
native of Boxkath near Lachish, the daughter of
a certain Adaiah. By Josephue {Ant. x. 4, § 1)
her name is given as 'IeSfo.
JEDIDI'AH (HH'T = beloved of Jehovah
[cp. the Sabaean name, ^>KT1\ MV .»]; B. 'Hefci,
A. EteSiSut; Amabilis Domino), the name be-
stowed, through Nathan the prophet, on David's
son Solomon (2 Sam. xii. 25).
Bathsheba's first child had died — "Jehovah
struck it " (v. 15). A second son was born, and
David — whether in allusion to the state of his
external affairs, or to his own restored peace of
mind— called his name Shelomoh (" Peaceful ");
and Jehovah loved the child. And David sent
by the hand of Nathan, to obtain through him
some oracle or token of the Divine favour on the
babe, and the babe's name was called JedukJab.
It is then added that this was done " for the
Lord's sake " (R. V.). The clue to the meaning
of these last words, and indeed of the whole
circumstance, seems to reside in the fact that
"Jedid" and "David" are both derived from
the same root, or from two very closely related
(see Gesen. Thee. p. 565 a — " TV, idem quod
111 "). To us these plays on words have little
or no significance ; but to the old Hebrews, as
to the modern Orientals, they were full of mean-
ing. To David himself, the "darling" or "be-
loved" of his family and his people, no more
happy omen, no more precious seal of his re-
storation to the Divine favour after his late
fall, could have been afforded than this an-
nouncement by the prophet, that the name of
his child was to combine his own name with
that of Jehovah — Jedid-Jah, "darling of
Jehovah."
The practice of bestowing a second name on
children, in addition to that given immediately
on birth — such second name having a religions
bearing, as Nur ed-Din, Saleh ed-Din (Saladin),
&c— still exists in the East. [G.] [W.]
JEDITHIN. [Jeduthcn.]
JEDUTHUN (PXHT (?)=pra«e; with the
final |», except in 1 Ch.' xvi. 38, Neh. xL 17,
Digitized by
Google
JEDUTHUN
Pa. ixx. title, and lxxvii. title, where it is
pn*T, i-e. Jcdithun: B. 'I8ei0oi5u, ItitoAp,
'lttiBoir, lliioir, 1Jifl<S/i, "E8«ifoS/i, 18ttB6r,
laMr; A. "Uiflo^ 'Ittioiv, "IJifloO, 'ISovMr;
K. 'I»i9*V, 'OiM'! 'Vtt9<ir, "I8i9oov: Idithun,
idithum), a Levite, of the family of Merari,
who was associated with Heman the Kohathite,
and Asaph the Gershonite, in the conduct
of the musical service of the Tabernacle, in
the time of David; according to what is said
in 1 Ch. xxiii. 6, that David divided the Levites
" into courses among the sons of Levi, namely,
Oershon, Kobath, and Merari." The proof of
his being a Merarite depends upon his identifi-
cation with Ethan in 1 Ch. xv. 17, who, we
learn from that passage as well as from the
genealogy in vi. 44 (A. V.), was a Merarite
[Heman]. But it may be added that the very
circumstance of Ethan being a Merarite, which
Jeduthun must have been (since the only rea-
son of there being three musical chiefs was to
have one for each division of the Levites), is a
strong additional proof of this identity. Another
proof may be found in the mention of Hosah
(xvi. 38, 42), as a son of Jeduthun* and a gate-
keeper, compared with xxvi. 10, where we read
that Hosah was of the children of Merari.
Assuming then that, as regards 1 Ch. vi. 44,
xv. 17, 19, |JJ*8 is a mere clerical variation for
J11VT — which a comparison of xv. 17, 19 with
xvi. 41, 42, xxv. 1, 3, 6, 2 Ch. xxxv. 15, makes
almost certain — we have Jeduthun's descent as
son of Kishi, or Kushaiah, from Mahli, the son
of Mushi, the son of Merari, the son of Levi,
being the fourteenth generation from Levi in-
clusive (1 Ch. vi. 44-47). His office was gene-
rally to preside over the music of the Temple
service, consisting of the nebel, or nablium, the
cinnor, or harp, and the cymbals, together with
the human voice (the trumpets being confined
to the priests). But his peculiar part, as well
as that of his two colleagues Heman and Asaph,
was " to sound with cymbals of brass," while
the others played on the nablium and the harp
'(1 Ch. xv. 16, 17). This appointment to the
office was by election of the chiefs ( D'TBO of the
Levites at David's command, each of the three
divisions probably cnoosing one. The first occa-
sion of Jeduthun's ministering was when David
brought up the Ark to Jerusalem. He then took
his place in the procession, and played on the
cymbals (1 Ch. xv. 17, 19, Ethan). But when
the division of the Levitical services took place,
owing to the Tabernacle being at Gibeon and the
Ark at Jerusalem, while Asaph and his brethren
were appointed to minister before the Ark, it
fell to Jeduthun and Heman to be located with
Zadok the priest, to give thanks "before the
Tabernacle of the Lord in the high place that
was at Gibeon," still by playing the cymbals in
accompaniment to the other musical instruments
(1 Ch. xvi. 39-42, cp, Ps. el. 5). In the
account of Josiah's Passover reference is made
(2 Ch. xxxv. 15) to the singing as conducted in
accordance with the arrangements made by
• The reason ,why "son of Jeduthun" Is especially
attached to the name of Obed-Edom In this verse, Is to
distinguish him from the other Obed-Edom the Glttite
(3 Sam. vi. 10) mentioned In 'the same verse, who was
probably a Kohathite (Josh. xxi. 24).
JEGAB SAHADTJTHA 1535
David, and by Asaph, Heman, and Jeduthun the
king's seer (iron nth). [Heman.] Perhaps
the phrase rather means the king's adviser in
matters connected with the musical service.
The sons of Jeduthun were employed (1 Ch.
xxv. 1, 3, 6) partly in music, viz. six of them,
who prophesied with the harp— Gedaliah, head
of the 2nd ward ; Zeri, or Izri, of the 4th ; Je-
shaiah of the 8th, Shimei of the 10th, 11 Hasha-
biah of the 12th, and Mattithiah of the 14th—
and partly as gatekeepers (A. V. "porters")
(xvi. 42), viz. Obed-Edom and Hosah (v. 38),
which last had thirteen sons and brothers (xxvi.
11). The triple division of the Levitical musi-
cians seems to have lasted as long as the Temple,
and each to have been called after their respec-
tive leaders. At the dedication of Solomon's
Temple "the Levites which were the singers, all
of them of Asaph, of Heman, of Jeduthun,"
performed their proper part (2 Ch. v. 12). In
the reign of Hezekiah, again, we find the sons
of Asaph, the sons of Heman, and the sons of
Jeduthun, taking their part in purifying the
Temple (2 Ch. xxix. 13, 14) ; they are men-
tioned, we have seen, in Josiah's reign, and so
late as in Nehemiah's time we still find de-
scendants of Jeduthun employed about the sing-
ing (Neh. xi. 17 ; 1 Ch. ix. 16). His name stands
at the head of the 39th, 62nd, and 77th Psalms,
indicating probably that they were to be sung
by his choir. [A. C. H.] [C. H.]
JEE'LI (B. lemXff, A. 'WijAt; Celt), 1 Esd.
v. 33. [Jaalah.]
JEEXTJ8 (B. 'ItqAor, A. ItfjA; Jehelm),
1 Esd. viii. 92. [Jebiel, 9.]
JE-E'ZEB PUpK (?) = father of help ;
'Ax'i(*PtJi*er), the form assumed in the list in
Numbers (xxvi. 30 [LXX. v. 34]) by the name of a
descendant of Manasseh, eldest son of Gilead, and
founder of one of the chief families of the tribe.
[Jekzerites.] In parallel lists the name is given
as Abi-ezer, and the family as the Abiezrites
— the house of Gideoh. Whether this change
has arisen from the accidental addition or
omission of a letter, or is an intentional varia-
tion, akin to that in the case of Abiel and
Jehiel, cannot be ascertained. The LXX. per-
haps read "TOWU*.
JEE'ZEBITES, THE OJ^Mn ; 'A X u((p(,
B. 'Ax'«f«f> <4 j fomilia Biezeritarum), the family
of the foregoing (Num. xxvi. 30).
JEGA'B SAHADU'THA (KWinb ">?!'
" Mound of the testimony " ; $ovvbt rris pap-
rvplat, but A. fiowbs iiAprvs ; twmulum testis),
the name said (Gen. xxxi. 47) to have been
given by Laban the Aramean to a heap of stones
which he erected as a memorial of the com-
pact between Jacob and himself, while Jacob
commemorated the same by setting up a " pillar "
(maecebdh ; v. 45). Galeed, " Mound of testi-
mony" (cp. Ex. xx. 16), is given as the Hebrew
equivalent of the western Aramaic ytgdr sdhS-
duthd. The fluctuation of the LXX. shows that
» Omitted In v. 3, but necessary to make up the
six sons.
Digitized by
Google
1536
JEHALELEEL
some doubt was felt about the exact rendering
of the Heb. Ttf, which means both " testifier "
and " testimony," like our own term " witness."
The Vulgate, oddly enough, has rightly trans-
lated Galeod by acervum testimonii, and Jegar
Sahadutha wrongly by tumidum testis (but cp.
v. 48). In the mipd of the Hebrew writer the
two names were evidently identical in meaning.
It should perhaps be added that Galeed (Heb.
Ootid) appears to convey a characteristic allu-
sion to the name of the hill-country of Qilead
(Heb. Off ad), which was the scene of the meeting
between Jacob and Laban. Ewald even supposes
that in the original story " the mound was the
rocky mountain-range of Gilead itself" (if. /.
i. 347). [C J. B.]
JEHAI/EL-EEL (ta$.T=As praises God;
R. V. Jehallelel; B. f«o-«iJA, A. 'loAAeA^A;
Jaleleel). Four men of the Bene-Jehallelel are
introduced abruptly into the genealogies of
Judah (1 Ch. iv. 16). The name is identical
with that rendered in the A. V. Jehalelel.
The more correct form is given by R. V.
JEHAL'EL-EL (Vt0^jV=&> prows God;
R. V. Jehallelel j B. 'EAaV/a. 'laAA^A; Jala-
leel), a Merarite Levite, whose son Azariah took
part in the restoration of the Temple in Heze-
kiah's time (2 Ch. xzix. 12).
JEHDEI'AH (W**WIJ, ue. Yechde-yahn=
Jehovah is glad). 1.* '(ft 'Uttia, A. 'latala,
'ApaSala ; Jehedeia.) The representative of the
Bene-Shubael— descendants of Gershom, son of
Hoses— in the time of David (1 Ch. xxiv. 20).
But in xxvi. 24, a man of the name of Shebuel
or Shubael is recorded as the head of the house ;
unless in this passage the family itself, and not
an individual, be intended.
9. ('IoSfcu; Jadias.) A Meronothite who
had charge of the she-asses — the riding and
breeding stock— of David (1 Ch. xxvii. 30).
JEHEZ'EKEL (fopjIV; R. V. Jehezkeli
* 'E((idlK; ffezechiel), a priest to whom was
given by David the charge of the twentieth of
the twenty-four courses in the service of the
House of Jehovah (1 Ch. xiiv. 16).
The name in the original is the same as that
rendered Ezekiel.
JEHTAH (."I'fT = Jehovah lives; B. 'Uta,
K. Eid, A. 'Itoia ; Jehias). He and Obed-edom
were "doorkeepers for the Ark" (D'TTC, the
word elsewhere expressed by " porters ") at the
time of its establishment in Jerusalem (1 Ch.
xv. 24). The name does not recur, but it is
possible it may be exchanged for the similar
Jehiel or Jeiel in xvi. 5.
JEHTEL (V***n* = God lives). 1. (B. "I«K
ElfMA, Ei'erijA; A. 'I»4x, 'lei^A: Jahiel, Jehiel.)
One of the Levites appointed by David to assist
in the service of the house of God (1 Ch. xv.
18, 20 ; xvi. 4).
8. (B. 'M>A, A. "IeWjA; Jahiel.) One of the
sons of Jehoshaphat king of Judah, who was put
to death by his brother Jehoram shortly after
his becoming king (2 Ch. xxi. 2).
JEHIEL
S. ('UtfiK; Jahiel.) One of the rulers of the
house of God at the time of the reforms of
Joaiah (2 Ch. xxxv. 8). [Svemts.]
4. (B. •!< A, Beo-riiA; A. 'Ict^A: Jahiel.) A
Gershonite Levite, head of the Bene-Lsadan in
the time of David (1 Ch. xxiii. 8), who had
charge of the treasures (xxix. 8). His family—
Jeuieli, i.e. Jehielite, or, as we should sty
now, Jehielites — is mentioned in xxvi. 21.
5. (B. 'IrijA, A. 'IeprijA ; Jahiel.) Son of
Hachmoni, or of a Hachmonite, named in th«
list of David's officers (1 Ch. xxvii. 32) as "with
(DB) the king's sons," whatever that may mess.
The mention of Ahithophel (v. 33) seems to 6x
the date of this list as before the revolt. In
Jerome's Quaestiones Jfebraicae on this passage,
Jehiel is said to be David's son Chileab or
Daniel ; and "Achamoni," interpreted as Sipien-
tissimus, is taken as an alias of David himself.
His being called a son of a Hachmonite brings
him into some connexion with Jashobeam (1 Ch.
xi. 11). ,
6. (I" * he original text, Win', Jehnel— the
A. V. follows the alteration of the Qeri; *I«4A;
Jahiel.) A Levite of the Bene-Heraan, who
took part in the restorations of king Hezekiah
(2 Ch. xxix. 14).
7. (B. EtyA, A. 'Ie^A; Jahiel.) Another
Levite at the same period (2 Ch. xxxi. 13), one
of the " overseers " (D'TDD) of the offerings
dedicated to Jehovah. His parentage is net
mentioned.
a (B. 'HfU, A. 'Utti\ ; Jahiel.) Father of
Obadiah, who headed 218 men of the Bene-Joab
in the return from Babylon with Ezra (Em
viii. 9). In 1 Esd. viii. 35 the name is Jezelus,
and the number of his clan is stated at 212.
©. (B. 'le<A, A. 'Imi^A; Jehiel.) One of the
Bene-Elam. His son Shechaniah encouraged
Ezra to put away the foreign wives of the
people (Ezra x. 2). In 1 Esd. viii. 92, it is
JeEIiUS
10. (B. 'lectiX, N. 'Iosi^A, A. AUd)\ ; Jehiel)
A member of the same family, if not the same
person, who had himself to part with his wife
(Ezra x. 26). [Hierielub.]
11. (B. 'IeftA, A. 'IedjA j Jehiel.) A priest,
one of the Bene-Harim, who also had to put
away his foreign wife (Ezra x. 21). [Hiereei.]
3 [C.H.]
JEHTEL,* a perfectly distinct name from
the last, though the same in the A. V. L
(fo»l£ ; R. V. Jeiel ; so the Qeri, but the Shetib
has !?KW, U. Jeuel; B. 'I^A, K. 'I««A, A.
"lei^A ; Jehiel), a man described as Abi-Gibeon,
father of Gibeon; a forefather of king Sanl
(1 Ch. ix. 35). His wife was Maachah. In
viii. 29 the name is omitted. The presence of
the stubborn letter Ain in Jehiel seems to forbid
our identifying it with Abiel in 1 Sam. ix. 1, as
some have been tempted to do.
2. (In Hebrew the same two variations. B.
'Uul, K. EM, A. "Wi^A ; Jehiel.) One of the son*
of Hotham the Aroerite ; a member of the guard
of David, included in the extended list of 1 Ch.
xi.44. [C.H.]
» Here the A. V. represents Ain by H. unless B
simply follows the Vulgate. Cp. Jkuusii, Mehcxui.
Digitized by
Google
JEH1ELI
JEHI-ETJ. cbwiV ; B. "leriix, A. 1«4a;
Jehieliy, according to the A. V. a Gershonite
Levite of the family of Laadan. The Bene-
Jehieli had charge of the treasures of the house
of Jehovah (1 Ch. xxvi. 21, 22). In other lists
it is given as Jehiel (4). The name appears to
be strictly a patronymic — Jehielite. For a
discussion of the text and a proposed slight
emendation of the Hebrew, see Speaker's Comm.
in loco. [C. H.]
JEHIZEJ'AH (,n»J>MV,t». Yechizki-yahu;
same name as Hezekiah : *Ef«cfax ; Ezechia$\
son of Shallum, one of the heads of the tribe
of Ephraim in the time of Ahaz, who at the
instance of Oded, the prophet, nobly withstood
the attempt to bring into Samaria a large
number of captives and much booty, which the
Israelite army under king Pekah had taken in
the campaign against Judah. By the exertions
of Jehizkiahu and his fellows the captives were
clothed, fed, and tended, and returned to Jericho
en route for Judah (2 Ch. xxviii. 12 ; cp. m. 8,
13, 15).
JEHO-AD'AH (iTttflV = Jehovah it the
adornment, i.e. Jehoaddah [R. V.]; B. laSct,
A. 'ImaSa; Joada), one of the descendants of
Saul (1 Ch. viii. 36); great grandson to
Meribbaal, ix. Mephibosheth. In the duplicate
genealogy (ix. 42) the name ii changed to
Jasah.
JEHO-ADDAN Qfitin], Cbron.; bat in
Kings the original text has {"Win' ; B. 'IttaZtlfi,
'luvad, A. 'Imaltlv, 'lasaZiv; Joadan, Joaden).
" Jehoaddan of Jerusalem " was queen to king
Joash, and mother of Amaziah of Judah (2 K.
xiv. 2 ; 2 Ch. xxv. 1). [C. H.]
JEHO-AHAZ (TPIftrtn* = Jehovah preserves;
B. 'laax&s, A. 'luax&t i Joachaz). 1. The son
and successor of Jehu ; reigned 17 years ( B.C.
856-840 -, al. 815-799) over Israel in Samaria.
His inglorious history, commencing in the 23rd
year of Joash king of Judah, is given in 2 K.
xiii. 1-9. Joeephus (Ant. ix. 8, § 5) puts his
accession in the 21st of Jehoash. Throughout
his reign (y. 22) he was kept in subjection by
Hazael king of Damascus, who, following up
the successes which he had previously achieved
Mgainst Jehu, compelled Jehoahaz to reduce his
army to 50 horsemen, 10 chariots, and 10,000
infantry. His submission to Syria continued
under Benhadad (v. 3). Jehoahaz maintained
the idolatry of Jeroboam ; but in the extremity
of his humiliation he besought Jehovah ; and
Jehovah gave Israel a deliverer — probably either
Jehoash (yv. 23 and 25), or Jeroboam II. (2 K.
xiv. 24, 25 ; see Keil, Commentary on Kings).
The prophet Elisha survived Jehoahaz; and
Ewald (Oesch. Isr. iii. 357) is disposed to place
in his reign the incursions of the Syrians men-
tioned in 2 K. v. 2, vi. 8, and of the Ammonites
mentioned in Amos i. 13.
2. Jehoahaz, otherwise called Shallum, the
fourth (ace. to 1 Ch. iii. 15), or third, if Zede-
kiah's age be correctly stated (2 Ch. xxxvi. 11),
son of Josiah, whom he succeeded as king of
Judah. He was chosen by the people in prefer-
ence to his elder (cp. 2 K. xxiii. 33, 36) brother,
BIBLE MCT.— VOL. I.
JEHOHANAN
1537
B.C. 610, and he reigned three months in Jeru-
salem. His anointing (v. 30) was probably
some additional ceremony, or it is mentioned
with peculiar emphasis, as if to make up for his
want of the ordinary title to the throne. He is
described by his contemporaries as an evil-doer
(2 K. xxiii. 32) and (under the figure of a lion's
whelp) as an oppressor (Ezek. xix. 3), and such
is his traditional character in Josephus {Ant.
x. 5, § 2) ; but his deposition seems to have been
lamented by the people (Jer. xxii. 10, and Ezek.
xix. 1). Pharaoh-necho on his return from
Carchemish, perhaps resenting the election of
Jehoahaz, sent to Jerusalem to depose him, and
to fetch him to Riblah. There he was cast into
chains, and from thence he was taken into
Egypt, where he died (see Prideanx, Connection,
anno B.C. 610; Ewald, Oesch. 1st. iii. 719;
Rosenmiiller, Schol. in Jerem. xxii. 11).
8. (B. "Oxof«[ai, A. 'Oxotfai; Jahachaz.)
The name given (2 Ch. xxi. 17) dnring his
father's lifetime (Bertheau) to the youngest son
of Jehoram king of Judah. As king he is known
by the name of Ahaziah, which is written
Azariah in the present Hebrew text of 2 Ch.
xxii. 6, perhaps through a transcriber's error.
The Hebrew components of Jehoahaz (TriXUT)
and Ahaziah (liTinN) are identical, but stand
in inverse order. [W. T. B.] [C. H.]
JEHOASH (t?qrtiV, of uncertain meaning
[see MV. 11 ]; 'litis; Joas), the original uncon-
tracted form of the name which is more com-
monly found compressed into Joash. The two
forms appear to be used quite indiscriminately ;
sometimes both occur in one verse, in Hebrew
as well as in English (e.g. 2 K. xiv. 17).
1. The seventh king of Judah after Solomon ;
son of Ahaziah (2 K. xi. 21 ; xii. 1, 2, 4, 6, 7,
18 ; xiv. 13). [Joash, 1.]
3. The twelfth king of Israel ; son of Jeho-
ahaz (2 E. xiii. 10, 25; xiv. 8, 9, 11, 13, 15,
16, 17). [Joash, 2.] [C. H.]
JEHO-HA'NAN(|3rtn? = Jehovah it gra-
cious, answering to Theodore ; 'luayiv; Johanan),
a name much in use, both in this form and in
the contracted shape of Johanan in the later
periods of Jewish history. It has come down to
us as John, and indeed is rendered by Josephus
'Ivayyqi (Ant. viii. 15, § 2).
1. (B. 'loyai, A. 'Iupd.) A Levite, one of the
doorkeepers (R. V. ; in A. V. « porters ") to the
bouse of Jehovah, i.e. the Tabernacle, according
to the appointment of David (1 Ch. xxvi. 3;
cp. xxv. 1). He was the sixth of the seven sons
of Meshelemiah ; a Korhite, — that is, descended
from Korah, the founder of that great Kohathite
house. He is also said (v. 1) to have been of the
Bene-Asaph ; but this Asaph is a contraction for
Ebiasaph, as is seen from the genealogy in ix.
19. The well-known Asaph, too, was not a
Kohathite, but a Gershonite.
2. CIemrd».) One of the principal men of
Judah, nnder king Jehoshaphat ; he commanded
280,000 men, apparently in and about Jerusalem
(2 Ch. xvii. 15 ; cp. vv. 13 and 19). He is named
second on the list, and is entitled "1BTI, "the
captain " (A- V. and R. V.), a title also given to
Adnah in the preceding verse, though there
rendered "the chief" in A. V\. but "captain "
5 F
Digitized by
Google
1538
JEHOIACHIN
in K. V. The Hebrew iB often rendered " prince."
He is probably the same person as
3. ClcMtrrfy.) Father of Ishmael, Ishmael
being one of the " captains ('"IC, as before) of
hundreds " — evidently residing in or near Jeru-
salem — whom Jehoiada the priest took into his
confidence about the restoration of the line of
Jndah (2 Ch. xxiii. 1).
4. Qluaviv.) One of the Beae-Bebai, a lay
Israelite who was forced by Ezra to put away
his foreign wife (Ezra z. 28). In 1 Esd. ix. 29
the name is Johannes.
6. C'luaydy.) A priest (Neh. zii. 13), the
representative of the house of Amariah (cp. t>. 2),
during the high-priesthood of Joiakim (v. 12) ;
that is to say, in the generation after the first
return from Captivity.
6. (LXX. B. omits; K. 'IwavdV.) A priest
who took part in the musical service of thanks-
giving, at the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem
by Nehemiah (Neh. zii. 42).
In two other cases this name is given in the
A. V. as Johanan.
JEHOI'ACHIN (P3}ta* = Jehovah estab-
litheth; once only, Ezra i. 2, contracted to }'3ty :
'laxvctl/x; Joseph. "IwdxV"" '■ Joachin). Else-
where the name is altered to Jeooniah and
Coniah. See also Jechonias, Joiakim, and
JOACIM.
Son of Jehoiakim and Nehushta, and for three
months and ten days (B.O. 599) king of Judah,
after the death of his father, being the nineteenth
king from David, or twentieth, counting Jehoa-
haz. According to 2 K. zziv. 8, Jehoiachin was
eighteen years old at his accession ; but 2 Cb.
xxzvi. 9, as well as 1 Esd. i. 43, has the far
more probable reading eight years,* which fixes
his birth to the time of his father's captivity,
according to Matt. i. 11.
Jehoiachin came to the throne at a time when
Egypt was still prostrate in consequence of the
victory at Carchemish, and when the Jews had
been for three or four years harassed and dis-
tressed by the inroads of the armed bands of
Chaldeans, Ammonites, and Moabites, sent against
them by Nebuchadnezzar in consequence of Je-
hoiakim's rebellion. [Jehoiakim.] Jerusalem
at this time, therefore, was quite defenceless,
and unable to offer any resistance to the regular
army which Nebuchadnezzar sent to besiege it in
the eighth year of his reign, and which he seems
to have joined in person after the siege had
commenced (2 K. xxiv. 10, 11). In a very short
time, apparently, and without any losses from
famine or fighting which would .indicate a
serious resistance, Jehoiachin surrendered at
discretion ; and he, and the queen-mother, and
all his servants, captains, and officers, came out
and gave themselves up to Nebuchadnezzar, who
carried them, with the harem and the eunuchs,
• Many commentators prefer the reading "eighteen,"
as agreeing better with the language of Jeremiah. But
the words %htl *»d 12), applied to Jehoiachin In
Jar. xziL 28, 30, imply sex rather than age, and are both
actually used of infants. See Geaen. Tha. s. w. The
words M his seed " may also be taken In the wider sense
of family or kindred (Dan. 1. 3). And so Joeephus
seems to have understood it, rendering It tov» ovyymtc
(Ant. \. », « 1),
JEHOIACHIN
to Babylon (Jer. xxix. 2 ; Ezek. xvii. 12, xix. 9}
All the king's treasures, and all the treasure of
the Temple, were seized ; and the golden vessels
of the Temple, which the king of Babylon had left
when he pillaged it in the fourth year of Jehoi-
akim, were now either cot op or carried away
to Babylon, with all the nobles, and men of war,
and skilled artisans, none but the poorest and
weakest being left behind (2 K. xxiv. 13 ; 2 Ch.
xxzvi. 19). According to 2 K. xxiv. 14, 16, the
number taken at this time into captivity was
10,000, viz. 7000 soldiers, 1000 craftsmen and
smiths, and 2000 whose calling is not specified.
But, according to Jer. lii. 28 (a passage which
is omitted in the LXX.), the number carried
away captive at this time (called the seventh of
Nebuchadnezzar, instead of the eighth, as in
2 K. xxiv. 12) was 3023. Whether this difference
arises from any corruption of the numerals, or
whether only a portion of those originally taken
captive were actually carried to Babylon, the
others being left with Zedekiah upon his swearing
allegiance to Nebuchadnezzar, cannot perhaps
be decided. The numbers in Jeremiah are cer-
tainly very small, only 4,600 in all, whereas the
numbers who returned from captivity, as givea
in Ezra ii. and Neh. vii., were 42,360. However,
Jehoiachin was himself led away captive to
Babylon, and there he remained a prisoner,
actually in prison (K^ T3), and wearing
prison garments, for thirty-six years, viz. till
the death of Nebuchadnezzar, when Evil-Mero-
dach, succeeding to the throne of Babylon, treated
him with mach kindness, brought him out of
prison, changed his garments, raised him above
the other subject or captive kings, and made
him sit at his own table. Whether Jehoiachin
outlived the two years of Evil-Merodach's reign
or not does not appear, nor have we any par-
ticulars of his life at Babylon. The general
description of him in 2 K. xxiv. 9, " He did evil
in the sight of Jehovah, according to all that
his father had done," seems to apply to his
character at the time he was king, and but a
child ; and so does the prophecy of Jeremiah
(xxii. 24-30 ; cp. Ezek. xix. 5-9). We also lean
from Jer. xxviU. 4, that four years after Jehoi-
achin had gone to Babylon, there was a great
expectation at Jerusalem of his return, bnt it
does not appear whether Jehoiachin himself
shared this hope at Babylon. [Hahakiah, 4.]
The tenor of Jeremiah's letter to the elders of
the Captivity (xxix.) would, however, indicate
that there was a party among the Captivity,
encouraged by false prophets, who were at this
time looking forward to Nebuchadnezzar's over-
throw and Jehoiachin's return ; and perhaps the
fearful death of Ahab the son of Kolaiah (ib. v.
22), and the close confinement of Jehoiachin
through Nebuchadnezzar's reign, may hare been
the result of some disposition to conspire against
Nebuchadnezzar on the part of a portion of those
of the Captivity. Bnt neither Daniel norEzekieL
who were Jehoiachin's fellow-captives, make any
further allusion to him, except that Exekiel
dates his prophecies by the year of king Jehoi-
achin's captivity (i. 2, viii. 1, xxi. 1, xxiv. 1,
xxvi. 1, xxix. 1, xxx. 1, xxxii. 1, xL 1); the
latest date being "the twenty-seventh year"
(xxix. 17). We also learn from Esth. ii. 6, that
Kish, the ancestor of Mordecai, was Jehoiachin'i
Digitized by
Google
JEHOIACHIN
fellow-captive. But the apocryphal books are
more communicative. Thus the author of the
book of Baruch (i. 3 ; see Speaker's Comm. in
loco) introduces " Jechonias the son of Joachim
king of Judah " into his narrative, and repre-
sents Baruch as reading his prophecy in his ears,
and in the ears of the king's sons, and the
nobles and elders and people at Babylon. At
the hearing of Baruch's words, it is added, they
wept and fasted and prayed, and sent a collection
of silver to Jerusalem to Joachim the son of
Hilkiah, the son of Shallum the high-priest,
with which to purchase burnt-offerings and
sacrifice and incense, bidding them pray for the
prosperity of Xabuchodonosor and Balthasar his
son. The history of Susanna and the Elders also
apparently makes Jehoiachin an important per-
sonage ; for, according to the author, the husband
of Susanna was Joacim, a man of great wealth,
and the chief person among the captives, to
whose house all the people resorted for judg-
ment, a description which suits Jehoiachin (see
Ball's note on Hist. Sus. v. 1, and Introd. to that
book, p. 328 in Speaker's Comm. on the Apocry-
pha, 1888). Africanus (£)>. ad Orig.; Routh,
Bel. Sac. it 113) expressly calls Susanna's
husband king, and says that the king of Babylon
had made him his royal companion (aiyiporoi).
He is also mentioned in 1 Esd. v. 5, but the text
seems to be corrupt. It probably should be
" Zorobabel, the son of Salathiel, the son of
Joacim," i.e. Jehoiachin. It does not appear
certainly from Scripture, whether Jehoiachin
was marrird or had any children. That Zede-
kiah, who in 1 Ch. iii. 16 is called " his son," is
the same as Zedekiah his uncle (called "his
brother," 2 Ch. xxxvi. 10), who was his successor
on the throne, seems certain. But it is not
impossible that Assir (*1DN = captive), who is
reckoned among the " sons of Jeconiah " in 1 Ch.
iii. 17, may have been so really, and either have
died young or been made an eunuch (Is. xxxix. 7).
This is quite in accordance with the term
" childless," *TTg, applied to Jeconiah by Jere-
miah (xxiL 30). [Genealoot or Jesus
Christ.]
Jehoiachin was the last of Solomon's line ; and
on its failure in his person, the right to suc-
cession passed to the line of Nathan, whose
descendant Shealtiel, or Salathiel, the son of
Neri, was consequently inscribed in the gene-
alogy as of "the sons of Jehoiachin." IJence
hi* place in the genealogy of Christ (Matt. i.
11, 12). For the variations in the Hebrew
forms of Jeconiah 's name, see Haxaniah, 8 ; and
for the confusion in Greek aud Latin writers
between Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin, 'Ierax<)M an <I
'laaKtlfi, see Genealoot of Jesos Christ, and
Hervey's Genealogy, pp. 71-73.
N.B. The compiler of 1 Esd. gives the name
of Jechonias to Jehoahaz the son of Josiah, who
reigned three months after Josiiih's death, and
was deposed and carried to Egypt by Pharaoh-
Mecho (1 Esd. i. 34; 2 K. xxiii. 30). He is
followed in this blunder by Epiphanius (vol. i.
p. 21), who says "Josiah begat Jechooiah, who
is also called Shallum. This Jechoniah begat
Jechoniah, who is called Zedekiah and Joakim."
It has its origin doubtless in the confusion of
the names when written in Greek by writers
ignorant of Hebrew. [A. C. H.]
JEHOIADA
1539
JEHOI'ADA (JTrtPP = Jehovah knows ;
TT ! '
Joseph. 'lAaSos ; Joiaaa). In the later Book*
the name is contracted to Joiada.
1. (B. 'lutat, 'Iavax, 'Ax«iAoi/*; A. 'Ioiaoae,
'lutat.) Father of David's well-known warrior
Benaiah (2 Sam. viii. 18, xx. 23, xxiii. 20, 22 ;
1 K. i. 8, 26, 32, 36, 38, 44, ii. 25, 2!>, 30,
34, 35, 46 ; 1 Ch. xi. 22, xviii. 17, xxvii. 5>
The "son of a mighty man" in 2 Sam. xxiii. 20,
1 Ch. xi. 22, means, according to a well-known
Hebrew usage, simply "a mighty man," and
refers to Benaiah. From 1 Ch. xxvii. 5, where
a chief priest is rather the chief priest (R. V.
and the Heb.), we learn that Benaiah's father
was the chief priest (not to be understood as
high-priest, cp. No. 5), and he is therefore doubt-
less identical with —
2. (B. TcwMi, N. T«a4a«, A.'Iowom.) Leader
(T33) of the Aaronites (accurately " of Aaron "),
i.e. the priests; who joined David at Hebron,
bringing with him 3,700 priests (1 Ch. iii. 27).
3. (B. 'laiat, A. 'IwaSat.) According to 1 Ch.
xxvii. 34, son of Benaiah, and one of David's
chief counsellors, apparently having succeeded
Ahithophel in that office. Many suppose that
Benaiah the son of Jehoiada is meant, by a
transposition similar to that which has arisen
with regard to Ahimelech and Abiathar (1 Ch.
xviii. 16, 2 Sam. viii. 17). Others however see
no reason why a son of Benaiah named after his
grandfather may not be intended.
4. (B. 'lctfat ; A. 'Iwaoae, lataSac, 'ImaitD
High-priest at the time of Athaliah's usurpation
of the throne of Judah (B.C. 884-878 ; al. 843-
838), and during the greater portion of the
forty years' reign of Joash. It does not appear
when he first became high-priest, but it may
have been as early as the latter part of Jeho-
shaphat's reign. Anyhow, he probably suc-
ceeded Amariah. [High-priest.] He married
Jeiiosheha, or Jehoshabeath, daughter of king
Jehoram, and sister of king Ahaziah (2 Ch.
xxii. 11); and when Athaliah slew all the seed
royal of Judah after Ahaziah had been put to
death by Jehu, he and his wife stole Joash from
among the king's sons, and hid him for six
years in the Temple, and eventually placed
him on the throne of his ancestors (2 K. xi. 3 ;
2 Ch. xxii. 12). [Joash; Athaliah.] In
effecting this happy revolution, by which both
the throne of David and the worship of the
true God according to the Law of Moses were
rescued from imminent danger of destruction,
Jehoiada displayed great ability and prudence.
Waiting patiently till the tyranny of Athaliah,
aud, we may presume, till her foreign practices
and preferences, had produced disgust in the
land, he at length, in the seventh year of her
reign, entered into secret alliance with the
chief supporters of the house of David and
of the true religion. He also collected at
Jerusalem the Levites from the different cities
of Judah and Israel, probably under cover of
providing for the Temple services, and then
concentrated a large and concealed force in the
Temple, by the expedient of not dismissing the
old courses of priests and Levites when their
successors came to relieve them on the Sabbath.
By means of the consecrated shields and spears
which David had taken in his wars, and which
were preserved in the treasury of the Temple
5 F3
Digitized by VjOOQIC
1540
JEHOIADA
(cp. 1 Ch. xviii. 7-11, xxvi. 20-28 ; 1 K. xiv.
26, 27), he supplied the captains of hundreds
with arms for their men. Having then divided
the priests and Levites into three bands, which
were posted at the principal entrances, and filled
the courts with people favourable to the cause,
he produced the young king before the whole
assembly, and crowned and anointed him, and pre-
sented to him a copy of the Law according to Deut.
xvii. 18-20. [Hilkiah.] The excitement of the
moment did not make him forget the sanctity of
God's House. None^but the priests and minis-
tering Levites were permitted by him to enter
the Temple; and he gave strict orders that
Athaliah should be carried without its precincts
before she was put to death. In the same spirit
he inaugurated the new reign by a solemn
covenant between himself, as high-priest, and
the people and the king, to renounce the Baal-
worship which had been introduced by the
house of Ahab, and to serve Jehovah. This was
followed by the immediate destruction of the
altar and temple of Baal, and the death of
Mattan his priest. He then took measures for
the due celebration of the Temple service, and at
the same time for the perfect re-establishment
of the monarchy (2 K. xi. 17-21 ; 2 Ch. xxiii.
16-21); all which seems to have been effected
with great vigour and success, and without any
cruelty or violence. For Joash, as he grew to
man's estate, Jehoiada selected two wives (2 Ch.
xxiv. 3), having had probably in view the exter-
mination of the royal lineage of which Athaliah
had been guilty. The young king himself,
under this wise and virtuous counsellor, ruled
his kingdom well and prosperously, and was
forward in works of piety, during the lifetime
of Jehoiada. The reparation of the Temple in
the twenty-third year of his reign, of which a
full and interesting account is given in 2 K. xii.
and 2 Ch. xxiv., was one of the most important
works at this period. At length, however,
Jehoiada died, and, though far advanced in
years, too soon for the welfare of his country
and the weak unstable character of Joash. The
text of 2 Ch. xxiv. 15, supported by the LXX.
and Josephus, makes him 130 years old when he
died. But supposing him to have lived to the
thirty-fifth year of Joash (which leaves only
five years for all the subsequent events of the
reign), he would in that case have been ninety-
five at the time of the insurrection against
Athaliah ; and fifteen years before, when Je-
horam, whose daughter was his wife, was only
thirty-two years old, he would have been eighty :
than which nothing can be more improbable.
There must therefore be some early corruption
of the numeral. Perhaps we ought to read
TVlhlh WpP (83), instead of n>vhfr HNO.
Even 103 (as suggested, dental, of our Lord,
p. 304) would leave an improbable age at the
two above-named epochs. If eighty-three at
his death, he would have been thirty-three years
old at Joram's accession. For his signal services
to his God, his king, and his country, which
have earned him a place among the very fore-
most well-doers in Israel, he had the unique
honour of burial among the kings of Judah in
the city of David. He was probably succeeded
by his son Zechariah. In Josephus list {Ant.
x. 8, § 6) the name of IOAEA2 by an easy
JEHOIAKIM
corruption is transformed into +IAEA2, and in
the Seder 01am into Phadea. It has been
thought that Jehoiada's alliance with the roya'.
house, and his tenure of supreme authority a.*
regent for so many years during the minority,
left its mark in time to come on the high-priest-
hood itself, bringing it into greater civil pro-
minence, and even increasing the authority in
public life of the entire Levitical order. See
Notes in the Speaker's Comm. on 2 K. xii. 2, 10.
In Matt, xxiii. 33, Zechariah the son of
Jehoiada is mentioned as the " son of Barachias,"
i.e. Berechiah. This is omitted in Luke (xi. 51),
and has probably been inserted from a confusion
between this Zechariah and the prophet, who
was son of Berechiah ; or with the son of Je-
berechiah (Is. viii. 2).
5. Second priest, or (as the Rabbins entitle
him) sagan, to Seraiah the high-priest. He
was deposed at the beginning of the reign of
Zedekiah, probably for adhering to the prophet
Jeremiah ; when Zephanlah was appointed sagan
in his room* (Jer. xxix. 25-29 ; 2 K. xxv. 18).
This is a clear instance of the title " the priest "
being applied to the second priest. The passage
in Jeremiah shows the nature of the sagan's
authority at this time, when he was doubtless
"ruler of the house of Jehovah" (XV3 TJJ
rfaV). [HlOH-PElEffr.] Winer (RealuiL) has
quite misunderstood the passage, and makes
Jehoiada the same as the high-priest in the
reign of Joash.
6. (&"#*, U. Joiada; B. 'lotiad, A. 'loeioa;
Joiada), son of Paseach, who assisted to repair
the " old gate " of Jerusalem (Neh. iii. 6).
[A. C. H.]
JEHOI'AKIM (D'piiV = Jehovah raise*
up; 'IaraxWp, Joseph, 'luiiciiios ; Joahon), 18th
(or, counting Jehoahaz, 19th) king of Judah
from David inclusive ; twenty-five years old at
his accession, and originally called Euakix.
He was the son of Josiah and Zebudah, daughter
of Pedaiah of Rumah, possibly identical with
Arumah of Judg. ix. 41 (where the Vulg. ha*
Sumah), and in that case in the tribe of Man-
asseh. His younger brother Jehoahaz, or
Shallum, as he is called in Jer. xxii. 11, was in
the first instance made king by the people of
the land on the death of his father Josiah,
probably with the intention of following up
Josiah's policy, which was to side with Nebu-
chadnezzar against Egypt, being, as Prideaux
thinks, bound by oath to the kings of Babylon
(Conn. i. 57, ann. B.C. 610, ed. 1838). Pharaoh-
Necho, therefore, having borne down all resist-
ance with his victorious army, immediately
deposed Jehoahaz, and had him brought in
chains to Riblah — where, it seems, he was — on
his way to Carchemish (2 K. xxiii. 33, 34 ;
Jer. xxii. 10-12). He then set Eliakim his
elder brother upon the throne, changing his
name to Jehoiakim ; and having charged him
with the task of collecting a tribute of 190
talents of silver, and 1 talent of gold = nearly
40,0001., in which he mulcted the land for
the part Josiah had taken in the war with
Babylon, he eventually returned to Egypt, taking
• It la, however, possible that Jehoiada vacated toe
office by death.
Digitized by
Google
JEHOIAKIM
Jehoahax with him, who died there in captivity
(2 K. zxiii. 34; Jer. xxii. 10-12; Ezek. xiz.
4).* Pharaoh-Necho also himself returned no
more to Jerusalem, for after his great defeat at
Carchemish in the fourth year of Jehoiakim he
lost all his Syrian possessions (2 K. xxiv. 7 ;
Jer. xlvi. 2), and his successor Psammis (Herod,
ii. 161) made no attempt to recover them.
Egypt, therefore, played no part in Jewish
politics during the seven or einht years of
Jehoiakim's reign. After the battle of Car-
chemish Nebuchadnezzar invaded Palestine as
one of the Egyptian tributary kingdoms, the
capture of which was the natural fruit of hi*
victory over Necho. He found Jehoiakim quite
defenceless. After a short siege he entered
Jerusalem, took the king prisoner, bound him
in fetters to carry him to Babylon, and took
also some of the precious vessels of the Temple
and carried them to the land of Shinar to the
temple of Bel his god. It was at this time, in the
fourth, or, as Daniel (i. 1 ; see Speaker'! Comm.*
in loco) reckons, in the third year of his
reign, that Daniel, and Hananiah, Mishael,
and Azariah, were taken captives to Babylon;
but Nebuchadnezzar seems to have changed
his purpose as regarded Jehoiakim, and to
hare accepted his submission, and reinstated
him on the throne, perhaps in remembrance of
the fidelity of his father Josiah. What is
certain is, that Jehoiakim became tributary to
Nebuchadnezzar after his invasion of Judah,
and continued so for three years, but at the
end of that time broke his onth of allegiance
and rebelled against him (2 K. xxiv. 1 ; 2 Ch.
vi. 7). What moved or encouraged Jehoiakim
to this rebellion it is difficult to say, unless it
were the restless turbulence of his own bad
disposition and the dislike of paying the tribute
to the king of Babylon, which he would have
rather lavished upon his own luxury and pride
(Jer. xxii. 13-17), for there is nothing to bear
out Winer's conjecture, or Josephus's assertion,
that there was anything in the attitude of
Egypt at this time to account for such a step.
It seems more probable that seeing Egypt
entirely severed from the affairs of Syria since
the battle of Carchemish, and the king of
Babylon wholly occupied with distant wars, he
hoped to make himself independent. But what-
ever was the motive of this foolish and wicked
proceeding, which was contrary to the repeated
warnings of the Prophet Jeremiah, it is certain
that it brought misery and ruin upon the king
and his country. Though Nebuchadnezzar was
not able at that time to come in person to
chastise his rebellious vassal, he sent against
him numerous bands of Chaldeans, with Syrians,
Moabites, and Ammonites, who were all now
subject to Babylon (2 K. xxiv. 2, 7), and who
cruelly harassed the whole country. It was
perhaps at this time that the great drought
described in Jer. xiv. 1-6 (cp. Jer. xv. 4 with
2 K. xxiv. 2, 3) occurred. In his fourth year
Israel's seventy years' Captivity was predicted
by Jeremiah (xxv. 1-11). The closing years of
this reign must have been a time of extreme
JEHOIAKIM
1541
• It does not appear from the narrative In 2 K. xxlll.
(which is the fullest) whether Necho went straight to
EgTPt fro ii Jerusalem, or whether the calamitous
campaign on the Euphrates Intervened.
misery. The Ammonites appear to have over-
run the land of Gad (Jer. xlix. 1), and the other
neighbouring nations to have taken advantage of
the helplessness of Israel to ravage their land
to the utmost (Ezek. xxv.). There was no rest
or safety out of the walled cities. We are not
acquainted with the details of the close of the
reign. Probably as the time approached for
Nebuchadnezzar himself to come against Judaea,
the desultory attacks and invasions of his troops
became more concentrated. Either in an
engagement with some of these forces, or else
by the hand of his own oppressed subjects, who
thought to conciliate the Babylonians by the
murder of their king, Jehoiakim came to a
violent end in the eleventh year of his reign.
His body was cast out ignominiously on the
ground ; perhaps thrown over the walls to
convince the enemy that he was dead; and
then, after being left exposed for some time,
was dragged away and buried " with the
burial of an ass," without pomp or lamentation,
" beyond the gates of Jerusalem " (Jer. xxii. 18,
19 ; xxxvi. 30). Within three months of his
death Nebuchadnezzar arrived, and put an end
to his dynasty by carrying Jehoiachin off to
Babylon. [Jkhoiacbin.] All the accounts
we have of Jehoiakim concur in ascribing to
bim a vicious and irreligious character. The
writer of 2 K. xxiii. 37 tells us that " he did
that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah,"
a statement which is repeated in xxiv. 9 and in
2 Ch. xxxvi. 5. The Chronicler uses the yet
stronger expression, "the acts of Jehoiakim,
and the abominations which he did " (r. 8).
But it is in the writings of Jeremiah that vve
have the fullest portraiture of him. If, as is
probable, the xixth chapter of Jeremiah be-
longs to this reign, we have a detail of the
abominations of idolatry practised at Jerusalem
under the king's sanction, with which Ezekiel's
vision of what was going on six years later,
within the very precincts of the Temple, exactly
agrees : incense offered up to M abominable
beasts ; " " women weeping for Thammuz ; " and
men in the inner court of the Temple, " with
their backs towards the Temple of the Lord,"
worshipping " the sun towards the east " (Ezek.
viii.). The vindictive pursuit and murder of
Urijah the son of Shemaiah, and the indignities
offered to his corpse by the king's command, in
revenge for his faithful prophesying of evil
against Jerusalem and Judah, are samples of
his irreligion and tyranny combined. Jeremiah
only narrowly escaped the same fate (Jer. xxvi.
20-24). The curious notice of him in 1 Esd.
i. 38, that he put his nobles in chains and
caught Zaraces his brother in Egypt 1 " and
bronght him up thence (to Jerusalem), also
points to his cruelty. His daring impiety in
cutting up and burning the roil containing
Jeremiah's prophecy, at the very moment when
the national fast was being celebrated, is
another specimen of his character, and drew
* The passage seems to be corrupt. The words rbr
a&tAQov avrov seem to be repeated from the preceding
line but one. and Zapajnff is a corruption of Ovptw.
itvAAii0uv idyayiy Is a paraphrase of the Alexandrian
Codex of Jer. XXXlU. 23 (xxvi. 23, A. V.), trmtKifioaa*
avror, itoi itrrfayov. See the note on t Esd. 1. 38, In
the Speaker"! Comm. on the Apocrypha, 1888.
Digitized by
Google
1542
JEHOIAKIM
down upon him the sentence, " He shall have
none to ait upon the throne of David " (Jer. xxxvi.
23, 30. Cp. Stanley's Hist, of the Jewish Church,
ii. 452, &c. [1883]). His oppression, injustice,
oovetousness, luxury, and tyranny, are most
severely rebuked (xxii. 13-17); and it has been
frequently observed, as indicating his thorough
selfishness and indifference to the sufferings of
his people, that at a time when the land was so
impoverished by the heavy tributes laid upon it
by Egypt and Babylon in torn, he should have
squandered large sums in building luxurious
palaces for himself (xxii. 14, 15). Josephus'*
history of Jehoiakim's reign is consistent neither
with Scripture nor with itself. His account of
Jehoiakim's death and Jehoiachin's accession
appears to be only his own inference from the
Scripture narrative. According to Josephus
(Ant. x. 6, § 1), Nebuchadnezzar came against
Judaea in the eighth year of Jehoiakim's reign,
and compelled him to pay tribute, which he did
for three years, and then revolted in the eleventh
year, on hearing that the king of Babylon had
gone to Egypt.* He then inserts the account
of Jehoiakim's burning Jeremiah's prophecy in
his fifth year, and concludes by saying, that a
little time afterwards the king of Babylon made
an expedition against Jehoiakim, who admitted
Nebuchadnezzar into the city upon certain
conditions, which Nebuchadnezzar immediately
broke ; that he slew Jehoiakim and the flower
of the citizens, and sent three thousand captives
to Babylon, and set up Jehoiachin for king, but
almost immediately afterwards was seized with
fear lest the young king should avenge his
father's death, and so sent back his army to
besiege Jerusalem ; that Jehoiachin, being a
man of just and gentle disposition, did not like
to expose the city to danger on his own account,
and therefore surrendered himself, his mother,
and kindred, to the king of Babylon's officers on
condition of the city suffering no harm; but
that Nebuchadnezzar, in direct violation of the
conditions, took 10,832 prisoners, and made
Zedekiah king in the room of Jehoiachin, whom
he kept in custody (Ant. x. 7, § 1) — a statement
the principal portion of which seems to have no
foundation whatever in fact. The account
given above is derived from the various state-
ments in Scripture, and seems to agree perfectly
with the probabilities of Nebuchadnezzar's
movements and with what the most recent
discoveries have brought to light concerning
• Nothing can be mure Improbable than an invasion
of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar at this time. All the
Syrian possessions of Egypt fell Into the power of
Babylon soon after the victory at Carchemish, and the
king of Egypt retired thenceforth Into his own country.
His Asiatic wars seem to have engrossed Nebuchad-
nezzar's attention for the next seven years ; and in like
manner the king of Egypt seems to have confined him-
self to Ethiopian wars. The first hint we have of Egypt
aiming at recovering ber lost Influence in Syria Is at the
accession of Pharaoh-Hophra, In the 4th of Zedekiah.
[Hahaxiah, 4.] He mode several abortive attempts
against Nebuchadnezzar in Zedeklah's reign, and detached
the Ammonites, Moabltes, Edomltra, Tyrians, and Zido-
nlana from the Babylonish alliance (Jer. xxvtl). In
consequence, Nebuchadnezzar, after thoroughly sub-
duing these nations, and devoting thirteen years to the
siege of Tyre, at length Invaded and subdued Egypt in
the thirty-fifth year of his reign (Eaek. xxix. IT).
JEHOIARIll
him. [Nebuchadnezzar.] The reign of Je-
hoiakim extends from B.C. 609 to B.C. 596, or
as some reckon 599.
The name of Jehoiakim appears in a contracted
form in Joiakim, a high-priest [A. C. H.]
JEHO-IA'BlB(annn , ) (?) = Jehovah <eUI
plead, 1 Ch. ix. 10, xxiv. 7, only; elsewhere,
both in Hebrew and A. V., the name is ab-
breviated to Joiabjb: B. 'IsmumIai, 'laptln; h.
'Icaptift, 'laptlp : Joiarib), head of the first of
the twenty-four courses of priests, according to
the arrangement of king David (1 Ch. xxiv. 7).
Some of his descendants returned from the Baby-
lonish captivity, a* we learn from 1 Ch. ix. 10,
Neh. xi. 10. [Jedaiah.] Their chief in the
days of Joiakim the son of Jeshna was Mattenai
(Neh. xii. 6, 19). They were probably of the
house of Eleazar. To the course of Jehoiarib
belonged the Asmonean family (1 Mace ii. 1;
Jos. Ant. xii. 6, § 1) and Josephus, as he informs
us (Life, § 1). [Hioh-priest.] Prideaux in-
deed (Connection, i. 149, ann. B.C. 536, ed. 1833),
following the Jewish tradition, affirms that only
four of the courses returned from Babylon,
Jedaiah, Immer, Pashur, and Harim — for which
last, however, the Babylonian Talmud has Joisrib
— because these four only are enumerated in
Ezra ii. 36-39, Neh. vii. 39-42. He accounts
for the mention of other courses, aa of Joisrib
(1 Mace ii. 1) and Abiah (Luke i. 5), by saying
that those four courses were subdivided into six
each, so as to keep up the old number of twenty-
four, which took the names of the original
courses, though not really descended from them.
But this is probably an invention of the Jem,
to account for the mention of only these four
families of priests in the list of Ezra ii. aaJ
Neh. vii. However difficult it may be to say
with certainty why only those four courses
are mentioned in that particular list, we hare
the positive authority of 1 Ch. ix. 10 and Neh.
xi. 10 for asserting that Joiarib did return;
and we have two other lists of courses, one of
the time of Nehemiah (Neh. x. 2-8), the other
of Zerubbabel (Neh. xii. 1-7); the former
enumerating twenty-one, the latter twenty-two
courses ; and the latter naming Joiarib as one
of them,* and adding, at v. 19, the name of the
chief of the course of Joiarib in the days of
Joiakim. So that there can be no reasonable
doubt that Joiarib did return. The notion of
the Jews does not receive any confirmation from
the statement in the Latin version of Josephus
(cont. Apion. ii. 7), that there were four
courses of priests, as it is a manifest corruption
of the text for twenty-four, as Whiston and
others have shown (note to Life of Josephus, § 1).
The subjoined table gives the three lists of
courses which returned, with the original list
in David's time to compare them by : —
* It K however, very singular that the names sfter
Shemalah In Neh. xii. 6, including Joiarib and Jedaiah.
have the appearance of being added on to the previously
existing list, which ended with Shemalah, as does that
In Neh. x. 3-8. For JoUrlb's Is Introduced with the
copula "and;" It Is quite out of Its right order as the
first coarse ; and, moreover, these names are entirety
omitted In the LXX. till we come to the times of
Joiakim at m. 13-31. StiU the utmost that conM to
concluded from this Is, that Joiarib returned later than
the time of Zerubbabel.
Digitized by
Google
JEHONADAB
COURSES of priests.
JEHONADAB
1543
In Laril't
reign,
1 Ch. iilr.
Ill Uat In Mm
iL. Neh. ill.
In Nahamiah'i
tiro*,
N«h.r
In ZarnbtaboTi
1 Jeh.Urlb.
-_
__
Joiarib.
1 Cll. il. .0,
N«li. li. 10.
t. jnUlsk.
ChiMrra of
Jeuaiah.
—
Jadalah.
S. Harim.
Children of
H-finy
IMram
Harim.
(Harim, *a 15).
4. fieorlm.
e. m-1-mj.i.
Children of
PMhor, ICh.
Ix. 12.
M-Uchljih.
— *
6. Wjamia.
—
UijUDin.
Miiunla
(Mmlamln,.. 17}
1. Halloa.
—
Hun moth. Km
HcmnoU.
ofHakkos,
(Hrrmlotb,
X«h. Jit. 4
(R.V.).
Abljah.
». 16;.
>. AhUah.
8. Jaahnah.
Bona* of
Abijafc.
Jeahua (T>,
brail, at.
Kah.nl. aa.
10. »MW«lll«ll,
"
Shefaanlab.
SheehaaUh
(Shabauiab,
». 14).
11. Ellaahlb.
—
—
__
12. Jaklm.
—
—
_
18. Buppah.
—
—
—
It. JnlitUab.
—
—
—
18. HUgah.
—
BllgmJ.
BOgalL
Id. Imnuar.
ChDdna of
lmmtr.
Ajnariah.
A-a-i -t-K
17. B«dr.
—
—
_
It. Apham
—
_
__
1>. fMhahiah.
—
_
_
20. J«h«ek«L
—
_
_
2L Jachin,
—
_
_
Nth. iL 10.
lCh.il. 10.
22. OamaL
—
—
_
a. Nan.
—
—
_
24. "—*-*•
"~
IWrniTth
ITaadifth
(Moadlah,f47).
The coursea which cannot be identified with
the original ones, but which are enumerated as
existing after the Return, are as follows : —
Nab,*.
Neh. xIL
Hah. *t, 1 Ch. Ix.
Smith.
Uandah.
Saimlah(?).
Aiariah.
In
Amriah.
JmnUfc.
Jfln*nUh-
—
Tmkmr.
—
—
Hattttah.
Hattub.
—
HallWrtt
MftQiwh.
—
ObatUah.
Iddo.
AdaiahfJ).
DaiilaL
—
—
OlDiutUtoa.
(Mnnrtbo.
—
Barm-fa.
—
—
Ifaaahrnllamn^
— •
—
Sawmaial*.
Bbemalah.
■alio.
Amok.
HUMafa.
J*iaiah(S).
For the courses, see Lewis's Orfy. J5fe6r. ii.
ch. vii. ; Schiirer, Qe$ch. d. Jiid. Volkcs, ii. 182 sq.
In 1 Esd. i. 44, ix. 19, the name is given as
Joeubas, Joribub. [A. C. H.] [C. H.]
JEHO-NATDAB, and JON'ADAB (the
longer form, 3*1^iV = Jehovah hath incited, is
employed in 2 K. x. and Jer. xxxv. 8, 14, 16, 18 ;
the shorter one, 313i\ in Jer. xxxv. 6, 10, 19 :
lumSipy, the son of Rechab, fonnder of the
Rechabites. It appears from 1 Ch. ii. 55, that
his father • or ancestor Rechab (" a rider ")
belonged to a branch of the Kenitea) the
Arabian tribe which entered Palestine with
the Israelites. One settlement of them was
to be found in the extreme north, under
the chieftainship of Heber (Jndg. iv, 11), re-
taining their Bedouin customs under the oak
which derived its name from their nomadic
habits. The main settlement was in the south.
Of these, one branch had nestled in the cliffs of
Engedi (Judg. i. 16 ; Num. xxiv. 21). Another
had returned to the frontier of their native
wilderness on the south of Judah (Judg. i. 16).
A third was established, under a threefold
division, at or near the town of Jabez in
Judah (1 Ch. ii. 55). To these last belonged
Rechab and his son Jehonadab [Rechabites].
The Bedouin habits, which were kept up by
the other branches of tho Kenite tribe, were
inculcated by Jehonadab with the utmost
minuteness on his descendants ; the more so,
perhaps, from their being brought into closer
connexion with the inhabitants of the settled
districts. The vow or rule which he prescribed
to them is preserved to us : " Ye shall drink no
wine, neither ye nor your sons for ever. Neither
shall ye build houses, nor sow seed, nor plant
vineyard, nor have any : but all your days ye
shall dwell in tents ; that ye may live many
days in the land where ye be strangers " (Jer.
xxxv. 6, 7). This life, partly monastic, partly
Bedouin, was observed with the tenacity with
which from generation to generation such
customs are continued in Arab tribes: and
when, many years after the death of Jehonadab,
the Rechabites (as they were called from his
father) were forced to take refuge from the
Chaldean invasion within the walls of Jerusa-
lem, nothing would induce them to transgress
the rule of their ancestor ; and in consequence
a blessing was pronounced upon him and them
by the Prophet Jeremiah (xxxv. 19) : " Jonadab
the son of Rechab shall not want a man to stand
before Me for ever." [Kechabites.]
Bearing in mind this general character of
Jehonadab as an Arab chief, and the founder of
a half-religious sect, perhaps in connexion with
the austere Elijah, and the Nazarites mentioned
in Amos ii. 11 (see Ewald, AllerthUmcr, p. 118,
3rd ed. 1869 ; p. 88 of Solly's Engl, tr., 1876),
we are the better able to understand the single
occasion on which he appears before us in the
historical narrative.
Jehu was advancing, after the slaughter of
Beth-eked, on the city of Samaria, when he
suddenly met the austere Bedouin coming to-
wards him (2 K. x. 15). It seems that they
were already known to each other (Jos. Ant. ix.
6, § 6). The king was in his chariot ; the Arab
was on foot. It is not clear, from the present
state of the text, which was the first to speak.
The Hebrew text— followed by the A. V.—
implies that the king blessed (A. V. "saluted ")
Jehonadab. The LXX. and Josephus {Ant. ix.
6, § 6) imply that Jehonadab blessed the king.
Each would have its peculiar appropriateness.
The king then proposed their close union. " Is
thy heart right, as my heart is with thy heart ? "
The answer of Jehonadab is slightly varied. In
the Hebrew text he vehemently replies, " It is,
it is : give me thine band." In the LXX., and
in the A. V. and R. V., he replies simply, " It
is ; " and Jehu then rejoins, " If it is, give me
thine hand." The hand, whether of Jehonadab or
Jehu, was offered and grasped (see QPH.*). The
king lifted him up to the edge of the chariot,
apparently that he might whisper his secret
into his ear, and said, " Come with me, and see
my zeal for Jehovah." It was the first indica-
tion of Jehu's design upon the worship of Baal,
for which he perceived that the stern zealot
would be a fit coadjutor. Having entrusted
Digitized by
Google
1544
JEHONATHAN
JEHOEAM
him with the secret, he (LXX., or his attendants,
Heb., A. V., R. V.) causes Jehonadab to proceed
with him to Samaria in the royal chariot.
So completely had the worship of Baal become
the national religion, that even Jehonadab was
able to conceal his purpose under the mask of
conformity. Mo doubt he acted in concert with
Jehu throughout; but the only occasion on
which he is expressly mentioned is when (prob-
ably from his previous knowledge of the secret
worshippers of Jehovah) he went with Jehu
through the temple of Baal to turn out any
that there might happen to be in the mass of
Pagan worshippers (2 K. x. 23). [Jehu.]
This is the last we hear of him (Stanley,
Lectures on the Jewiah Church, ii. 287 [1883]).
[A.P.S.]
JEHO-NA'THAN flnjta; = Jehovah hath
given ; 'luvaBAr ; Jonathan) : the more accurate
rendering of the Hebrew name, which is most
frequently given in the A. V. as Jonathan. It
is ascribed to three persons : —
1. Son of Uzziah ; superintendent of certain
of king David's storehouses (friiyfc : the word
rendered " treasures " earlier in the verse [R. V.
"treasuries"], and in w. 27, 28 "cellars");
1 Oh. xxvii. 25.
2. One of nine Levites who, along with five
princes and two priests, were sent by Jehosha-
phat, in the third year of his reign, through the
cities of Judah, with a book of the Law, to teach
the people (2 Ch. xvii. 8).
8. A priest (Neh. xii. 18) : the representative
of the family of Shemaiah (e. 6), when Joiakim
was high-priest ; that is, in the next generation
after the return from Babylon under Zerubbabel
and Jeshua.
JEHO'RAM (D^n* = Jehovah it exalted.
Op. thePhoen. D"6»3[M V."] ; 'I-o<t>; Joseph.
'Itipafws : Joram). The name is more often
found in the contracted form of Jobaic.
1. Son of Ahab king of Israel. In the second
year of Jehoram king of Judah (2 K. i. 17),
and in the eighteenth of Jehoshaphat king of
Judah (2 K. iii. 1), he succeeded his brother
Ahaziah (who had no son) upon the throne at
Samaria, B.C. 896-884 (Riehm, 855-844). His
history is related in the Second Book of Kings,
tnere being but a passing mention of him in
2 Oh. xxii. 5-7. During the first four years of
his reign his contemporary on the throne of
Judah was Jehoshaphat, and for the next seven
years and upwards Jehoram the son of Jehosha-
phat, and for the last year, or portion of a year,
Ahaziah the son of Jehoram, who was killed
the same day that he was (2 K. ix. 27). The
alliance between the kingdoms of Israel and
Judah, commenced by his father and Jehosha-
phat, was very close throughout his reign. We
first find Jehoram associated with Jehoshaphat
and the king of Edom, at that time a tributary
of the kingdom of Judah, in a war against the
Moabites (2 K. iii.). Mesha their king, on the
death of Ahab, had revolted from Israel, and
refused to pay the customary tribute of 100,000
lambs and 100,000 rams. Jehoram asked and
obtained Jehoshaphat's help to reduee him to
his obedience, and accordingly the three kings,
of Israel, Judah, and Edom, marched through
the wilderness of Edom to attack him. The
three armies were in the utmost danger of
perishing for want of water. The piety of
Jehoshaphat suggested an inquiry of some
prophet of Jehevah, and Elisha the son of
Shaphat, at that time and since the latter part
of Ahab's reign Elijah's attendant (2 K. iii. 11;
1 K. xix. 19-21), was found with the host
When the three kings went down to him,
Jehoram received a severe rebuke, and was
bidden to inquire of the prophets of his father
and mother, the prophets of Baal. Never-
theless for Jehoshaphat's sake Elisha inquired of
Jehovah, and received the promise of an abun-
dant supply of water, and of a great victory
over the Moabites: a promise which was im-
mediately fulfilled. The same water which,
filling the valley and the trenches dug by the
Israelites, supplied the whole army and all their
cattle with drink, appeared to the Moabites,
who were advancing, like blood, when the
morning sun shone upon it. Concluding that
the allies had fallen out and slain each other,
they marched incautiously to the attack, ami
were put to the rout. The allies pursued them
with great slaughter into their own land, which
they utterly ravaged and destroyed with all its
cities. Kirhareseth alone remained, and then
the king of Moab made his last stand. An
attempt to break through the besieging army
having failed, he resorted to the desperate ex-
pedient of offering up his eldest son, the heir to
his throne, as a burnt-offering, upon the wall of
the city, in the sight of the enemy. Upon this
the Israelites retired and le turned to their own
land (2 K. iii.). It was perhaps in consequence
of Elisha's rebuke, and of the above remarkable
deliverance granted to the allied armies ac-
cording to his word, that Jehoram, on his return
to Samaria, put away the image of Baal which
Ahab his father had made (2 K. iii. 2). For in
2 K. iv. 13 we have an evidence of Elisha's being
on friendly terms with Jehoram, in the offer
made by him to speak to the king in favour of
the Shunammite. The impression on the king's
mind was probably strengthened by the subse-
quent incident of Naaman's cure, and the tem-
porary cessation of the inroads of the Syrians,
which doubtless resulted from it (2 K. v.). Ac-
cordingly when, a little later, war broke out
between Syria and Israel, we find Elisha be-
friending Jehoram. The king was made ac-
quainted by the prophet with the secret counsels
of the king of Syria, and was thus enabled to
defeat them (2 K. vi. 8-12) ; and on the other
hand, when Elisha had led a large band of
Syrian soldiers, whom Qod had blinded, into the
midst of Samaria, Jehoram reverentially asked
him, " My father, shall I smite them?" and, at
the prophet's bidding, not only forbore to kill
them, but made a feast for them, and then seat
them home unhurt. This procured another
cessation from the Syrian invasions for the
Israelites (2 K. vi. 19-23). What happened
after this to change the relations between the
king and the prophet we can only conjecture
But in view of the general bad character given
of Jehoram (2 K. iii. 2, 3), together with toe
fact of the prevalence of Baal-worship at the
end of his reign (2 K. x. 21-28), it seems pro-
bable that when the Syrian inroads ceased, and
he felt less dependent upon the aid of the
Digitized by
Google
JEHORAM
prophet, he — relapsing into idolatry — was re-
taked by Elisha, and threatened with a return of
the calamities from which he had escaped. Upon
his refusing to repent, a fresh invasion by the
Syrians, and a close siege of Samaria, actually
-came to pass (2 K. vi. 24, 25), according
probably to the word of the prophet. Hence,
when the terrible incident arose, in consequence
of the famine, of a woman boiling and eating
her own child, the king * immediately attributed
the evil to Elisha the son of Shaphat, and de-
termined to take away his lite (ct>. 26-31). The
message which he sent by the messenger whom
he commissioned to cut off the prophet's head,
** Behold, this evil is from Jehovah ; why should
I wait for Jehovah any longer ? " coupled with
the fact of his having on sackcloth at the time
<2 K. vi. 30, 33), also indicates that many
remonstrances and warnings, similar to those
given by Jeremiah to the kings of his day, had
passed between the prophet and the weak and
unstable son of Ahab. The providential inter-
position by which both Elisha's life was saved
and the city delivered is narrated in 2 K. vii., and
Jehoram appears to have returned to friendly
feelings towards Elisha (2 K. viii. 4). His life,
however, was now drawing to its close. It was
very soon after the above events that Elisha
went to Damascus, and predicted the revolt of
Hazael, and his accession to the throne of Syria
in the room of Benhadad; and it was during
Elisha's absence, probably, that the conversation
between Jehoram and Gehazi, and the return of
the Shunammite from the land of the Philistines,
recorded in 2 K. viii. 1-6, took place. Jehoram
seems to have thought the revolution in Syria,
which immediately followed Elisha's prediction,
a good opportunity to pursue his father's
favourite project of recovering Ramotb-Gilead
from the Syrians. He accordingly made an
alliance with his nephew Ahaziah, who had just
succeeded Jehoram on the throne of Judah, and
the two kings proceeded to occupy Ramoth-
Gilead by force. The expedition was an un-
fortunate one. Jehoram was wounded in battle,
and obliged to return to Jezreel to be healed of
his wounds (2 K. viii. 29 ; ix. 14, 15), leaving
his army under Jehu to hold Ramoth-Gilead
against Hazael. Jehu, however, and the army
under his command, revolted from their al-
legiance to Jehoram (2 K. ix.), and, hastily
marching to Jezreel, surprised Jehoram, wounded
and defenceless as he was. Jehoram, going out
to meet him, fell pierced by an arrow from
Jehu's bow on the very " plat " of ground which
Ahab had wrested from Naboth the Jezreelite ;
thus fulfilling to the letter the prophecy of
Elijah (1 K. xxi. 21-29). With the life of
Jehoram ended the dynasty of Oniri.
Jehoram's reign was rendered very remark-
able by the two eminent prophets who lived in
it, Elijah and Elisha. The former seems to have
survived till the sixth year of his reign ; the
latter to have begun to be conspicuous quite in
the beginning of it. For the famine which
Elisha foretold to the Shunammite * (2 K. viii. 1),
» Some prefer to consider "the king " to have been
not Jehoram, but Jehoabas the son of Jehu.
b The "then" of the A. V. of 2 K. viii. 1 Is a
thorough misrepresentation of the order of the even:s.
Instead of " Then spake KUsna," the B. V. reads " Now
JEHORAM
1545
and which seems to be the same as that alluded
to iv. 38, must have begun in the sixth year of
Jehoram's reign, since it lasted seven years, and
ended in the twelfth year. In that case his
acquaintance with the Shunammite must have
begun not less than five or at least four years
sooner, as the child must have been as much as
three years old when it died ; which brings us
back at latest to the beginning of the second
year of Jehoram's reign. Elisha's appearance
in the camp of the three kings (2 K. iii. 11)
was probably as early as the first year of Je-
horam. With reference to the very entangled
chronology of this reign, it is important to
remark that there is no evidence whatever to
show that Elijah the prophet was translated
at the time of Elisha's first prophetic minist ra-
tions. The history in 2 K., at this part of it,
having much the nature of memoirs of Elisha,
and the active ministrations of Elijah having
closed with the death of Ahaziah, it was very
natural to complete Elijah's personal history
with the narrative of his translation in ch. ii.
before beginning the series of Elisha's miracles.
But it by no means follows that ch. ii. is really
prior in order of time to ch. iii., or that, though
the raising from the dead of the Shunammite a
son was subsequent, as it probably was, to
Elijah's translation, therefore all the preliminary
circumstances related in ch. iv. were so likewise.
Neither again does the expression (2 K. iii. 11),
"Here is Elisha, which poured water on the
hands of Elijah," * imply that this ministration
had at that time ceased, and still less that
Elijah was removed from the earth. We learn,
on the contrary, from 2 Ch. xxi. 12, that he was
still on earth in the reign of Jehoram son of
Jehoshaphat, who did not begin to reign till the
fifth of Jehoram (2 K. viii. 16) ; and it seems
highly probable that the note of time in 2 K.
i. 17, " in the second year of Jehoram the son
of Jehoshaphat,'* which is obviously and cer-
tainly out of its place where it now is, properly
belongs to the narrative in ch. ii. With regard
to the other discordant dates at this epoch, it
must suffice to remark that all attempts to
reconcile them are vain. That which is based
upon the supposition of Jehoram having been
associated with his father in the kingdom for
three or seven years, is of all perhaps the most
unfortunate, as being utterly inconsistent with
the history, annihilating his independent reign,
and after all failing to produce even a verbal
consistency. The table given below is framed
on the supposition that Jehoshaphat's reign
really lasted only twenty-two years, and Ahab's
only nineteen, as appears from the texts cited ;
that the statement that Jehoshaphat reigned
twenty-five years is caused by the probable cir-
cumstance of his having taken part in the govern-
ment during the last three years of Asa's reign,
when his father was incapacitated by the disease
in his feet (2 Ch. xri. 12) ; and that three years
were then added to Ahab's reign, to make the whole
Elisha bad spoken." The narrative goes back seven
years, merely to Introduce the woman's return at this
time. The king's conversation with Gehazi was doubt-
lees caused by the providential deliverance related in
ch.rU.
* The use of the perfect tense In Hebrew often
tmpltrs the habit or the repetition of an action, as
e«. Ps. i. 1, Ii. 1, kc.
Digitized by
Google
1546
JEHOBAM
number of the years of the kings of Israel agree
with the whole number of those of the kings of
Judah, thus unduly lengthened by an addition
of three years to Jehoshaphat's reign. This
arrangement, it is believed, reconciles the
greatest number of existing texts, agrees best
with history, and especially coincides with what
is the most certain of all the elements of the
chronology of this time, vix. that the twelve
years' reign of Jehoram son of Ahab, and the
few months' reign of Ahaziah, the successor of
Jehoram son of Jehoshaphat, ended simul-
taneously at the secession of Jehu. 4
kikos or JUDAH.
sixes or israix.
Ah*b (rtl«n«d IK r".) 1*71.= { A ?K.'S!fia " ^ "*'
ai *> «hjr.= I'isr'i^^it^ - *"'*''•
Ah»b. . . hat MKl J»th jr. = MnabApbat . .' ISth. lb, SI.
Ah«il«h(rri«D«clJjT»)litrT.= Johoal.tphM, 17th. 1 K, jxll. 61.
AhuUh Jndyr. 1
•M = Waholutpliu, t«th.SK. Ut 1.
Jehonun(ral8nedlSrA)Mrr* J
IMnahaplutt. lut «al Jind ;
•nd Mil. IS.
Jabonun (ntened Svn.) lit. tK.
Jthonia, tad. I 1 L 17, 1L:
ICh. nL It,
Jihoimm.Sth,tfc»Bl.l7:
•ad PK. TillSS.
Ahutah (nlfMd 1 yr >. It,
2. King of Judah, the eldest son of Jehosha-
phat, in whose lifetime, and in the fifth year of
Jehoram king of Israel, he began to reign,
at the age of thirty-two, and he reigned eight
years (2 K. viii. 16, 17 ; 2 Ch. xxi. 1-5), from
B.c. 893-2—885-4 [Riehm, 852-845]. [Jeho-
ram, l.j Jehosheba his daughter was wife to
the high-priest Jehoiada. The ill effects of his
marriage with Athaliah the daughter of Ahab
(2 K. viii. 18 ; 2 Ch. xxi. 6), and the influence
of that second Jezebel upon him, were imme-
diately apparent. As soon as he was fixed on
the throne, he put his six brothers to death,
with many of the chief nobles of the land
(2 Ch. xxi. 4, 13). He then proceeded to estab-
lish the worship of Baal and other abominations,
and to enforce the practice of idolatry by
persecution. A prophetic writing from the
aged Elijah (2 Ch. xxi. 12), the last recorded
act of that prophet, reproving him for his
crimes and his impiety, and foretelling the
most grievous judgments upon his person and
his kingdom, failed to produce any good effect
upon him. This was in the first or second
year of his reign. The remainder of it was a
series of calamities. First the Edomites, who
had been tributary to Jehoshaphat, revolted
from his dominion, and established their perma-
nent independence (2 K. viii. 20-22 ; 2 Ch. xxi.
8-10). It was as much as Jehoram could do, by
a night-attack with all his forces, to extricate
himself from their array, which had surrounded
him. Next, the priestly city Libnah, one of the
strongest fortified cities in Judah (2 K. xix. 8),
indignant at his cruelties, and abhorring his
apostasy, rebelled against him (2 K. viii. 22;
2 Ch. xxi. 10). Then followed invasions of
armed bands of Philistines and of Arabians (the
same who paid tribute to Jehoshaphat, 2 Ch.
xvii. 11), who burst into Judaea, stormed the
king's palace, put his wives and all hi* children,
except his youngest son Ahaziah, to death
(2 Ch. xxii. 1), or carried them into captivity,
and plundered all his treasures (2 Ch. xxi. 16,
" See another table
Ming," p. I82i— F.
in Riehm, HWB„ "Zeitrech-
JEHOSHAPHAT
17). To crown all, a terrible and incurable
disease in his bowels fell upon him, of whirh
after two years of misery he died, unregretted.
He went down to a dishonoured grave in the
prime of life, without either private or public
mourning, and, though buried in the city of
David, without a resting-place in the sepulchres
of his fathers (2 Ch. xxi. 18-20). He died early
in the twelfth year of his brother-in-law Jeho-
ram 's reign over Israel, and was succeeded by
his son Ahaziah. [A. C. H.] [C. H.]
8. (B. 'lupdv, A.'Iapd/i ; Joran.) One of two
priests sent by king Jehoshaphat in the third
year of his reign, along with nine Levites and
fire princes, to teach the Law in the cities of
Judah (2 Ch. xvii. 8). [C. H.]
JEHOSHABE'ATH (niDS^T; B. IWa-
$t4, A. 'la<ra$4e ; Jotabeth) : the form in which
the name of Jehosheba is given in 2 Ch. xxii. 11,
where only we are informed that she was the
wife of Jehoiada the high-priest. [Jehosheba.]
JEHO-SHATHAT (DDfii\'= Jchmak kati
judged; 'Imratpdr ; JotapKaf). 1. King of
Judah ; the son of Asa and Axnbah (1 K. xxii.
42; 2 Ch. xx. 31). He succeeded Asa, in the
fourth year of Ahab king of Israel (1 K. xiii.
41), when he was thirty-five years old and
reigned twenty-five years (Riehm, B.C. 877-
853). His history is to be found among the
events recorded in 1 K. xv. 24, xxii. ; 2 K. iii.
7-14, xii. 18; and in a continuous and fuller
narrative in 2 Ch. xvii.-xxi. The rest of his
acts were recorded in the Book of the Chro-
nicles of the Kings of Judah (1 K. xxii 45) and
in the Book of Jehu the son of Hanani (1 Ch.
xx. 34). He was contemporary with Ahab,
Ahaziah, and Jehoram, kings of Israel. At tint
he strengthened himself against Israel by forti-
fying and garrisoning the cities of Jndah and
the Ephraimite conquests of Asa. But soon
afterwards the two Hebrew kings, perhaps
appreciating their common danger from Da-
mascus and the tribes on their eastern frontier,
came to an understanding. Israel and Judah
drew together (1 K. xxii. 2-4; 2 Ch. xviii. 2, 8)
for the first time since they parted at Sbechem
sixty years previously. Jehoshaphat's eldest
son Jehoram married Athaliah, the daughter of
Ahab and Jezebel (1 K. viii. 18 ; 2 Ch. xxi. 6).
A comparison of dates and ages shows that the
marriage occurred in the lifetime of Jehoshaphat.
but it does not appear how far he encouraged it.
The closeness of the alliance between the two
kings is shown by many circumstances : — Elijah's
reluctance when in exile to set foot within the
territory of Judah (Blunt, Und. Come ii. § 19,
p. 199); the identity of names given to the
children of the two royal families ; the admis-
sion ef names compounded with the name of
Jehovah into the family of Jezebel, the zealous
worshipper of Baal; and the extreme alacrity
with which Jehoshaphat afterwards accompanied
Ahab to the field of battle.
But in his own kingdom Jehoshaphat ever
showed himself a zealous follower of the com-
mandments of God : he tried, it would teem
not quite successfully, to put down the high
places in which the people of Judah used to
burn incense (1 K. xxii. 43 ; 2 Ch. xix. 3, xx.
33). The Chronicler adds much that is interest-
Digitized by
Google
JEHOSHAPHAT
ing, and which is not to be set aside as the
projection of later ideas on early times. Id
his third year, apprehending perhaps the evil
example of Israelitish idolatry, and considering
that the Levites were not fulfilling satisfact-
orily their function of teaching the people,
Jehoshaphat sent out a commission of certain
princes, priests, and Levites, to go through
the cities of Judah, teaching the people out of
the Book of the Law (2 Ch. xvii. 7-9). He
made separate provision for each of his sons as
they grew up, perhaps with a foreboding of
their melancholy end (2 Ch. xxi. 4). Riches and
honours increased around him. He received
tribute from the Philistines and Arabians, and
kept np a large standing army in Jerusalem
(2 Ch. xvii. 10-19).
It was probably about the 16th year of his
reign when he went to Samaria to visit Ahab
and to become his ally in the great battle of
Ramoth-gilead (1 K. xxii. 2-33; 2 Ch. xviii.
2-32) — not very decisive in its result, and
fatal to Ahab. From thence Jehoshaphat re-
turned to Jerusalem in peace; and, after re-
ceiving a rebuke from the prophet Jehu, went
himself through the people " from Beersheba to
Mount Ephraim," reclaiming them to the Law of
God (2 Ch. xix. 1-4). He also took measures
for the better administration of justice, ecclesi-
astical and civil, throughout his dominions
(re. 5—11) ; on which see Selden, De Synedriis,
ii. cap. 8, § 4. Turning his attention to foreign
commerce, he built at Ezion-geber, with the
help of Ahaziah, a navy designed to go to
Tarshish (np. Speaker's Comm., Keil, and Oettli
on 2 Ch. xx. 36); but in accordance with a
prediction of a prophet Eliezer, it was wrecked
at Ezion-geber (2 Ch. xx. 35-37) ; and Jehosha-
phat resisted Ahaziah 's proposal to renew their
joint attempt.
Before the close of his reign he was engaged
in two additional wars. He was miraculously
delivered from a threatened attack of the people
of Ammon, Moab, and Seir (2 Ch. xx. 1-28); the
result of which is thought by some critics to be
celebrated inPss. xlviii. and xcii.,and to be alluded
to by the Prophet Joel (iii. 2, 12). Those invaders
coming by the ascent of Ziz must have entered
Judah from the Salt Sea at Engedi ; and the
Israelite army, advancing from Jerusalem some
ten miles southward towards the Wilderness of
Tekoa, saw them dead in the valley of Berachah
midway between Bethlehem and Hebron. After
this, perhaps, must be dated the war which
Jehoshaphat, in conjunction with Jehoram king
of Israel and the king of Edom, carried on
against the rebellious king of Moab (2 K. iii.
4-27). The kings of Israel and Judah reached
Moab, not at the north of that country, at the
Anion border, but at the south of it, arriving
by way of Hebron and round the lower bay of
the Salt Sea at the Widy Kurahy or Ahsy at
the S.E. corner, where they would unite with
Edom, which was there divided from Moab.
After this the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet.
In his declining years the administration of
affairs was placed in the hands of his son Jeho-
ram ; to whom, as (Jssher conjectures, the same
charge had been temporarily committed during
Jehoshaphat's absence at Ramoth.gilead.
Like the prophets with whom he was brought
into contact, we cannot describe the character
JEHOSHAPHAT, VALLEY OF 1547
of this good king without a mixture of blame.
Eminently pious, gentle, just, devoted to the
spiritual and temporal welfare of his subjects,
active in mind and body, he was wanting in
firmness and consistency.
2. (B. 'Iteampir, 'lutra^iS ; A. "lmrcup<ir, 'Ia>-
<rt(<f>.) Son of Ahilud, who filled the office of re-
corder or annalist in the court of David (2 Sam.
viii. 16, xx. 24 ; 1 Ch. xviii. 15), and afterwards
of Solomon (1 K. iv. 3). The marginal alter-
natives of " recorder " are in A. V. « remem-
brancer," "writer of chronicles;" in K. V.
" chronicler." [Recorder.] Such officers are
found not only in the courts of the Hebrew
kings, bat also in those of ancient and modern
Persia, of the Eastern Roman Empire (Gesenius),
of China, be. (Keil). An instance of the use
made of their writings is given in Esth. vi. 1.
8. floM-a^ir.) One of seven priests (1 Ch.
xv. 24) appointed by David to blow trumpets
before the Ark in its transit from the house of
Obed-edom to Jerusalem.
4. (B. omits, A. 'IwraQdr.) Son of Paruah ;
one of the twelve purveyors of king Solomon
(1 K. iv. 17), his district being Issachar.
5. (B. 'ImrcupAe, A. 'laxrcupdr.) SonofNimshi,
and father of king Jehu (2 K. ix. 2, 14).
[W.T. B.] [C.H.]
JEHO-SHA'PHAT, VALLEY OF (PQB
BBCHiT; KoiAos 'laxrcupir ; I'atlis Jomphat),
a valley mentioned by the prophet Joel only, as
the spot in which, after the return of Judah
and Jerusalem from captivity, Jehovah would
gather all the heathen (Joel iii. 2 ; Heb. iv. 2),
and would there sit to jndge them for their
misdeeds to Israel (iii. 12 ; Heb. v. 4). The
passage is one of great boldness, abounding in
the verbal turns in which Hebrew poetry so
much delights, and in particular there is a
play between the name given to the spot —
Jehoshaphat, i.e. " Jehovah's judgment " — and
the " judgment " there to be pronounced. The
Hebrew Prophets often refer to the ancient
glories of their nation : thus Isaiah speaks of
" the day of Midian," and of the triumphs of
David and of Joshua in " Monnt Perazim " and
in the " Valley of Gibeon ;" and in like manner
Joel, in announcing the vengeance to be taken
on the strangers who were annoying his country
(iii. 14), seems to have glanced back to that
triumphant day when king Jehoshaphat, the
greatest king the nation had seen since Solomon,
and the greatest champion of Jehovah, led out
his people to a valley in the wilderness of Tekoah,
and was there blessed with such a victory over
the hordes of his enemies as was without a
parallel in the national records (2 Ch. xx.).
But though such a reference to Jehoshaphat
is both natural and characteristic, it is not
certain that it is intended (cp. Orelli in Strack
u. ZOckler's Kg/. Komm. on Joel I. c). The
name may be only an imaginary one conferred
on a spot which existed nowhere but in the
vision of the Prophet. Such was the view of
some of the ancient translators. Thus Theodo-
tion renders it x<*P a xptatas; and so the Targum
of Jonathan — " the plain of the division of
judgment." Michaelis (B&el fOr Ungekhrten,
Remarks on Joel) takes a similar view, and
considers the passage to be a prediction of the
Maccabean victories. By others, however, the
Digitized by
Google
1548 JEHOSHAPHAT, VALLEY OK
Prophet ha* been supposed to have the end of
the world in view. And not only this, but the
scene of " Jehovah's judgment " has been
localised, and the name has come down to us
attached to the deep ravine which separates
Jerusalem from the Mount of Olives. At
what period the name was first applied to
this spot is not known. There is no trace
of it in the Bible or in Josephns. In both
the only name used for this gorge is KlDRON
(N. T. Cedbon). We first encounter its new
title in the middle of the 4th century in the
Onomasticon of Eusebius and Jerome (s. v. KoiAas
'Iwrwpir, OS* p. 272, 89; p. 145, 13); in the
Commentary of the latter Father on Joel ; and in
the Itin. Hisrotol. Eucherius (c. A.D. 440) has
Geennon sice vallit Jotaphat, and in the 6th cent.
it was also known as the " Valley of Geth-
semane " (Ant. Hart. xvii.). Since that time the
name has been recognised and adopted by tra-
vellers of all ages and all faiths. It is used by
Christians — as Arculf about 670 (Early Trav.
p. 4), the author of the Citex de IhertuaUm in
1187 (Rob. ii. 562), and Haundrell in 1697 (£.
Trav. p. 469) ; and by Jews, as Benjamin ofTudela,
about 1170 (Asher, i. 71 ; and see Reland, Pal.
p. 356). By the Muslims it is called Wddy Jahan-
num, but it is commonly known as the W. 8UU
Mnryam, from the "Tomb of the Virgin"; or
W. el-J6s, possibly an abbreviation of Jehosha-
phat. According to Seetzen (ii. 23, 26) it bears
the name of W. Jushafat or Shafat. Both Mus-
lims and Jews believe that the last judgment is
to take place there. To find a grave there is the
dearest wish of the latter (Briggs, Heatlten and
Holy Lands, p. 290) ; and the former show— as
they have shown for certainly two centuries —
the place on which Muhammad is to be seated
at the Last Judgment, a stone jutting out
from the east wall of the Haram area near
the south corner, one of the pillars* which once
adorned the churches of Helena or Justinian,
and of which multitudes are now embedded in
the rude masonry of the more modern walls
of Jerusalem. The steep sides of the ravine,
wherever a level strip affords the opportunity,
are crowded — in places almost paved— by the
sepulchres of the Muslims, or by the simpler
slabs of the Jewish tombs, alike awaiting the
assembly of the Last Judgment.
So narrow and precipitous a glen is quite
unsuited for such an event ; but this incon-
sistency does not appear to have disturbed those
who framed, or those who hold, the tradition.
It is however implied in the Hebrew terms em-
• This pillar Is wld to be called tt-Tarik, - the road "
(De Stulcy, Voyage, II. 189). Front It will spring the
Bridge of et-Sirdt, the crossing of which la to test the
true believers. Those who cannot stand the test will
drop off Into the abyss of Gehenna in the depths of the
valley (All Bey, 224--6; Mejr.ed-Dtn In Rob. I. 3«»).
According to Muslim tradition, all mankind will be
assembled for Judgment on the plain ei-SAhirak, near
the Church of the Ascension (Mukadaatl) or to tbe north
or Jerusalem (He)r ed-Dtn).
■> St. Cyril (of Alexandria) eltoer did not know the
spot, or has another Valley in his eye ; probably the
former. He describes It as not many stadia from Jeru-
salem; and says be Is told (*ij<ri) that It is "bare and
apt for horses " tyiAbv «<u imrTJAaroc, Oomm. on Joel,
quoted by Reland, p. 355). Perhaps this Indicates that
the tradition was not at that time quite fixed.
JEHOSHAPHAT, VALLEY OF
ployed in the two cases. That by Joel is 'Enek
(PQV), a word applied to spacious valleys, such
as those of Esdraelon or Gibeon (Stanley, 8.$ P.
App. § 1). On the other hand the ravine of the
Kidron is invariably designated by Xachal (yTU),
answering to the modern Arabic Wady. There
is no instance in the 0. T. of these two terms
being convertible, and this fact alone would
warrant the inference that the tradition of the
identity of the Emek of Jehoshaphat and the
Nachal Kedron did not arise until Hebrew had
begun to become a dead language.* The grounds
on which it did arise were probably two: — 1.
The frequent mention throughout this passage
of Joel of Mount Zion, Jerusalem, and the
Temple (ii. 3'J ; iii. 1, 6, 16, 17, 18), may hare
led to the belief that the locality of the great
judgment would be in their immediate neigh-
bourhood. This would be assisted by the men-
tion of the Mount of Olives in the somewhat
similar passage in Zechariah (xiv. 3, 4).
2. The belief that Christ would reappear in
judgment on the Mount of Olives, from which
He had ascended. This was at one time a
received article of Christian belief, and was
grounded on the words of the Angels, "He
shall so come in like manner as ye have seen
Him go into heaven " * (Adrichomius, Tkeair.
Ter. Sanctae, Jerusalem, § 192 ; Corn, a Lapide
on Acts i.).
There is the alternative that the valley
of Jehoshaphat was really an ancient name
of the Valley of the Kedron ; and that, from
the name, the conneiion with Joel's pro-
phecy and the belief in its being the scene of
Jehovah's last judgment have followed. This
may be so ; but then we should expect to find
some trace of the existence of the name before
the 4th century after Christ. It was certainly
nsed as a burying-place as early a* the reign of
Josiah (2 K. xxiii. 6), but no inference can fairly
be drawn from this.
But whatever originated the tradition, it has
held its ground most firmly, (a.) In the valley
itself, one of the four remarkable monuments
which exist at the foot of Olivet was at a very
early date connected with Jehoshaphat. At
Arculf s visit (about 670) the name appears to
have been borne by that now called "Absalom's
tomb," bnt then the " tower of Jehoshaphat ; "
whilst the present " tomb of Jehoshaphat " was
assigned to Simeon and Joseph (E. Trar. p. 4). In
the time of Maundrell the " tomb of Jehosha-
phat " was, what it still is, an excavation, with
an architectural front, in the face of the rock
behind "Absalom's tomb" (E. Trav. p. 469).
A photograph of the tomb has been published
in the series of the Palestine Exploration Fund.
The name may, as already observed, really point
to Jehoshaphat himself, though not to his tomb,
as he was buried, like the other kings, in the city
• It appears In the Targum on Cant. »!ii. 1.
* In Sir John Maunderille a different reason Is given
for the same. "Very near this"— the place where
Christ wept over Jerusalem— " Is the stone on which
our Lord sat when He preached; and on that same
stone shall He sit on tbe day of doom, right aa He said
Himself." Bernard the Wise, In tb) 8th century, speaks
of the church of St. Leon, in the Valley, "where oar
Lord will come to Judgment " (i'arly rrav. p. 28>
Digitized by
Google
JKHOSHEBA
of David (2 Ch. xxi. 1). (6.) One of the gates
of the city in the east wall, opening on the
valley, bore the same name. This is plain from
the Citez de Iherusalem, where the present St.
Stephen's Gate is called the Porte de Jmajas,
and the street leadiDg westward from it the
Hue <fc Josa/as (§§ 22-24 ; cp. J. of Wfirxburg,
xvi.). Mention is also made in the Citez de I.
(§ 13) of a "postern," called the Porte de
Josa/as, which was to the left, or north of the
Golden Gate, and probably the same gate as
that just mentioned. It cannot be the supposed
walled-up doorway, 50 ft. south of the Golden
Gate, to which M. de Saulcy has given the name
Pdterne de Josaphat. This " postern," if it be
A doorway, is of comparatively modern date,
and perhaps marks the position of the Bab el-
Barak of Mejr ed-Din {Notes to 0. S. of Jeru-
salem, p. 25 ; and PEK. photograph).
The name would seem to be generally confined
by travellers to the upper part of the glen,
from about the " Tomb of the Virgin " to the
sooth-east corner of the wall of Jerusalem.
[Tombs.] [G.] [W.]
JEHO-SH£BA(V2^n); LXX. 'to<<0<«,
Joseph. 'ItMTa&dtfi), daughter of Jehoram king
of Israel, and wife of Jehoiada the high-priest
(2 K. xi. 2; 2 Ch. xxii. 11). Her name in the
Chronicles is given Jehoshabeath. It thus
exactly resembles the name of the only two
other wives of Jewish priests who are known to
us, vix. ELI8HEBA (LXX. and N. T. 'EKurafitr,
whence our ElisaArtA), the wife of Aaron, Ex.
vi. 23, and the wife of Zechariah, Luke i. 7.
In the former case the word signifies " Jehovah's
oath ; " in the second, " God's oath."
As she is called (2 K. xi. 2) " the dangbter of
Joram, sister of Ahaziah," it has been conjec-
tured that she was the daughter, not of Atha-
liah, bnt of Jehoram, by another wife; and
Josephus (Ant. ix. 7, § 1) calls her 'Ox»(fa
Afunr&rpm &8«A<>4. This may be; but it is
also possible that the omission of Athaliah's
name may have been occasioned by the detesta-
tion in which it was held, — in the same way as
modern commentators have, for the same reason,
eagerly embraced this hypothesis. That it is
not absolutely needed is shown by the fact that
the worship of Jehovah was tolerated under the
reigns both of Jehoram and Athaliah— and that
the name of Jehovah was incorporated into both
of their names.
She is the only recorded instance of the mar-
riage of a princess of the royal house with a
high-priest. On this occasion it was a provi-
dential circumstance (" for she was the sister of
Ahaziah," 2 Ch. xxii. 11), as inducing and pro-
bably enabling her to rescue the infant Joash
from the massacre of his brothers. By her, he
and his nurse were concealed in the palace, and
afterwards in the Temple (2 K. xi. 2, 3 ; 2 Ch.
xxii. 11), where he was brought up probably
with her sons (2 Ch. xxiii. 11), who assisted at
his coronation. One of these was Zechariah,
who succeeded her husband in his office, and
was afterwards murdered (2 Ch. xxiv. 20). The
" bed-chamber " of this narrative is explained
aa the " chamber of mattresses " in the palace,
a room belonging to an Eastern abode at this
day, wherein those articles and what pertained
to them were stored, a convenient refuge for
JEHOVAH
1549
the child in the first moments of danger (KeiL
Comm. in loc. ; Ewald, Hist, of 1st. in loc. ;
Stanley, Jewish Ch. ii. 39 [1883]). "With
ber hid in the house of the Lord," may refer to
the high-priest's abode in the Temple precincts
(Keil), or to some building in the high-priest's,
charge adjoining the Temple (Ewald).
[A. P. S.] [CH.]
JEHO-SHU'A (nf\n]i'lnvovt; Jotue). In
this form— contracted in the Hebrew, but fuller
than usual in the A. V. — is given the name of
Joshua in Num. xiii. 16, on the occasion of its
bestowal by Moses. The addition of the name
of Jehovah probably marks the recognition by
Moses of the important part taken in the affair
of the spies by him, who till this time had been
Hoshea, "help," but was henceforward to be
Jeho-shua, "Jehovah is help" (Ewald, ii. 306).
Once more only the name appears in its full
form in the A. V. — this time with a redundant
letter — as
JEHO-SHU'AH (the Heb. is as above;
'lijtroCe, in both MSS. ; Josue), in the genealogy
of Ephraim (1 Ch. vii. 27). We should be
thankful to the translators of the A. V. for
giving the first syllables of this great name
their full form, if only in these two cases ;
though why in these only it is difficult to under-
stand. Nor is it easier to see whence they got
the final A in the Utter of the two. [G.]
JEHOVAH (rrtn»; so the word is usually
pointed, with the vowels of *J*16t ; but when
the two occur together, the former is pointed
rftiV; that is, with the vowels of D'rDN, as in
Obadf. i. 1, Hab. iii. 19. The LXX.' generally
render it by Kilpioj, the Vulgate by Domimtt ;
and in this respect they have been followed by
the A. V., where it is translated "The Lord").
The true pronunciation of this Name, which,
strictly speaking, is the proper Name of the God
of Israel, has been entirely lost, the Jews them-
selves scrupulously avoiding every mention of
it, and reading in its stead one or other of the
words with whose proper vowel-points it may
happen to be written. This custom, which had
its origin in reverence, but degenerated into a
superstition, was founded upon an erroneous
construction of Lev. xxiv. 16 (see Targ. Onk. ad
loc.), from which it was inferred that the mere
utterance of the Name constituted a capital
offence. In the Rabbinical writings it is dis-
tinguished by various euphemistic expressions ;
as simply " the Name," or " the Name of four
letters" (the Greek tetragrammatori) ; "the
great and terrible Name;" "the peculiar
Name," i.e. appropriated to God alone; "the
separate Name," i.e. either the Name which is
separated or removed from human knowledge,
or, as some render, " the Name which has been
interpreted or revealed" (EHIBDfl EXP, thtm
hammephfrath). The Samaritans followed the
same custom, and in reading the Pentateuch
substituted for Jehovah J[ujui, thtma, "the
Name," at the same time perpetuating the
practice in their alphabetical poems and later
writings (cp. Geiger, Onchrift, p. 262). Ac-
cording to Jewish tradition, it was pronounced/
but once a year by the high-priest on, the day
Digitized by
Google
1550
JEHOVAH
of Atonement when he entered the Holy of
Holies ; but on this point there is some doubt,
Maimonides (Star. Neb. i. 61) asserting that the
nse of the word was confined to the blessings of
the priests, and restricted to the sanctuary,
without limiting it still further to the high-
priest alone. On the same authority we learn
that its use ceased with Simeon the Just ( i'ad.
Chaz. c. 14, § 10), having lasted through two
generations, that of the men of the Great Syna-
gogue and the age of themed (i.e. apostasy or
persecution) ; while others include the generation
of Zedekiah among those who possessed the use
of the sljm hammephtrath (Midrash on Ps. nxvi.
1 1, quoted by Buxtorf in Reland's Decas Exercit.).
But even after the destruction of the second
Temple we meet with reports of individuals
who were credited with knowledge of the secret.
A certain Bar Kamzar is mentioned in the
Mishna (I'oma, iii. § 11) who was able to write
this Name of God; but even on such evidence
we may conclude, that after the second siege of
Jerusalem, and probably at an earlier period,
the Divine Name had passed altogether out of
popular use. Josephus, who was a priest, pro-
fesses a religious scruple about revealing this
holy Name (Ant. ii. 12, § 4) ; and Philo states
(de Vit. Mot. iii. p. 519) that for those
alone whose ears and tongue were purged by
wisdom was it lawful to hear or utter it.
It is evident therefore that no reference to
Jewish writers can be expected to decide the
question of its exact sound. At the same
time the discussion of the probable ancient
pronunciation may prove to be interesting ;
and as it is one in whioh great names
are ranged on both aides, it would for this
reason alone be impertinent to dismiss it with
a cursory notice. In Reland's Decide of Da-
tertatimu, Fuller, Gataker, and Leusden do
battle for the pronunciation Jehovah, against
such formidable antagonists as Drusius, Amaina,
Cappellus, Buxtorf, and Alting, who, it is
scarcely necessary to say, fairly beat their
opponents out of the field ; the only argument,
in fact, of any weight, which is employed by the
advocates of the pronunciation of the word as it
is written, being that derived from the form in
which it appears in proper names, such as
Jehoshaphat, which, however, is simply due to
the shifting of the accent. Their antagonists
make a strong point of the fact that, as has
been noticed above, two different sets of vowels
are applied to the same consonants according to
circumstances. To this Leusden, of all the
champions on his side, but feebly replies. The
same may be said of repliea to the argument
derived from the fact that the letters 3731D,
when prefixed to nifl\ take, not the vowels
which they would regularly receive were the
present punctuation true, but those with which
they would be written if 'j'W, 'adonai, were the
reading ; and that the letters ordinarily taking
dagesh lene when following TOil' would, accord-
ing to the rules of the Hebrew points, {{Jehovah
were correctly vocalized, be written without
dagesh, whereas it is uniformly inserted. What-
ever, therefore, be the true pronunciation of the
word, the usage of the Masorets themselves
indicates that it is not Jehovah.
In Greek writers it appears under the several
JEHOVAH
forms of 'I«uB (Died. Sic. i. 94 ; Irenaeus, L 4,
§ 1), 'lews (Porphyry in Eusebius, Pratp. Evan.
i. 9, § 21), 'laoi (Clem. Alex. Strom, v. p. 666),
and in a catena to the Pentateuch in a MS. at
Turin 'Io oil Both Theodoret (Quaett. 15 ia
Exod.) and Epiphanins (Adv. Haer. 20) girt
'lafli, the former distinguishing it as the pro-
nunciation of the Samaritans, while 'AW repre-
sented that of the Jews. Of these forms, 'la*
and 'loot may both have arisen from liT (j/ahi),
the second element in so many Hebrew proper
names ; 'UuA is perhaps an attempt to render a
pronunciation rrtrp (Yehwdh) which might have
succeeded IT1PI' ' ( Yahicah) ; cp. JttiV, Jehu,
Assyrian Ya-u-a. 'Aid has the look of a Greek
imitation of iVntt ('ahyah or 'ehyih), "I am"
(Ex. iii. 14), but another MS. reads 'Id, that is,
apparently, Fl', Jah ( Yah), which occurs in the
O. T. as an independent Name; while 'lafU
seems to preserve the pronunciation nVT ( 1 <i»-
toSA or Yahxceh), as nearly as Greek writing
allows. Epiphanins, in fact, expressly statei
that '10/91 was the Name interpreted by God
Himself to Moses (Ex. vi. 3). Lastly, the Jah
of pseudo-Jerome (Brev. in Pmlt. Ps. viii.) seems
to be only a Latin modification of 'low.
The conjectures of the moderns may next be
reviewed. It will be better perhaps to ascend
from the most improbable hypotheses to those
which carry with them more show of reason,
and thus prepare the way for the considerations
which will follow.
I. Von Bohlen unhesitatingly asserts that
beyond all doubt the word Jehovah is not
Semitic in its origin. Pinning his faith upon
the Abraxas gems of the Gnostics, in which he
finds it in the form Jao, he connects it with
the Sanscrit devas, the Greek A«ft, and Latin
Jovit or Diovit. But, apart from the considera-
tion that hia authority is at least questionable,
he omits to explain the striking phenomenon
that the older form which has the d should he
preserved in the younger languages, the Greet
and ancient Latin, while not a trace of it appears
in the Hebrew. It would be desirable also,
before a philological argument of this nature is
admitted, that the relation between the Semitic
and Aryan families of speech should be more
clearly established. In the absence of this, any
inferences which may be drawn from apparent
resemblances (the resemblance in the present
case not being even apparent) will lead to
certain error. That the Hebrews learned the
Name of their God from the Egyptians is a
theory which has found some advocates. The
foundations for this theory are sufficiently
slight. As has been mentioned above, Diodoms
(i. 94) gives the Greek form 'low; and from
this it has been inferred that 'Io» was a deity
of the Egyptians, whereas nothing can be clearer
from the context than that the historian u
speaking specially of the God of the Jews.
Again, in Mncrobius (Sat. i. c. 18), a line is
quoted from an oracular response of Apollo
Clarius,
0p4£co T&r wiwrmw vworof efdp Jsftlr' 'las*,
which has been made nse of for the same
purpose. But Jnblonsky (Panlh. Aeg. ii. § *)
has proved incontestably that the author of the
Digitized by
Google
JEHOVAH
Tenet from which the above is quoted, was one
of the Judaizing Gnostics, who were in the
habit of making the names 'lew and SfQaiiB the
subjects of mystical speculations. The Ophites,
who were Egyptians, are known to hare given
the name 'laa to the moon (Nvander, Gnost. -52),
but this, as Tholuck suggests, may have arisen
from the fact that in Coptic the moon is called
•bA ( Verm. Schriften, Th. i. 385) ; just as the
absurd fable that the Jews worshipped an ass
or the head of an ass probably arose from the
fact that ioh is Coptic for ass. Movers (Phoen.
i. 540), while defending the genuineness of the
passage of Macrobius, connects 'laa, which de-
notes the Sun or Dionysus, with the root Din,
so that it signifies " the life-giver " (?). In any
case, the fact that the name 'lew is found among
the Greeks and Egyptians, or among the Orientals
of Further Asia, in the 2nd or 3rd century,
cannot be made use of as an argument that the
Hebrews derived their knowledge of the Name
of their own God from any one of these nations.
On the contrary, there can be but little doubt
that the process in reality was reversed, and
that in this case the Hebrews were, not the
borrowers, bnt the lenders. We have indis-
putable evidence that it existed among them,
whatever may have been its origin, many
centuries before it is found in other records ; of
the contrary we have no evidence whatever.
Remosat supposed that a Chinese phonetic
spelling of " Jehovah " was actually to be found
in the 14th chapter of the Tao Teh King of
Lao Tsze, the contemporary of Confucius (Mem.
sur la Vie et let Opinions de LSo-Tsee, Paris,
1823). M. Remusat translates the passage as
follows :— " Celui que vous regardez et que
vous ne voyez pas, se nomme j ; celui que vous
ecoutez et que vous n'entendez pas, se nomme
Mi ; celui que votre main cherche et qu'elle ne
pent pas saisir, se nomme WW. Ce sont trois
litres qu'on ne peut comprendre, et qui, con-
fondus, n'en font qu'un. This strange mis-
application of three technical terms of Chinese
metaphysics, which appears to have originated
with certain Romish missionaries in the 17th cen-
tury, was exploded by Stanislas Julien in his
version of the Tao Teh King (Le Litre de la Vote
et de la Vertu, Paris, 1842. See Legge, Encyc.
Britann. a. v. Lao-Tsze). Equally groundless is
the identification suggested in a letter from
the missionary Plaisant to the Vicar Apostolic
Boucho, dated 18th Feb. 1847, which mentions
a tradition existing among a tribe in the jungles
of Burmah, that the divine being was called
Jova or Kara-Joea, and that the peculiarities
of the Jehovah of the Old Testament were at-
tributed to him (Reinke, Beitrage, iii. 65). The
inscription in front of the temple of Isis at Sals
quoted by Plutarch (de Is. et Os. § 9), " I am
all that hath been, and that is, and that shall
be," which has been employed as an argument
to prove that the Name Jehovah was known
among the Egyptians, is mentioned neither by
Herodotus, Diodorus, nor Strabo; and Proclus,
who does allude to it, says it was in the adytum
of the temple. But, even if it be genuine, its
authority is worthless for the purpose for which
it is adduced. For, supposing that Jehovah is
the Name to which such meaning is attached, it
follows rather that the Egyptians borrowed it
and learned its significance from the Jews,
JEHOVAH
1551
unless it can be proved that both in Egyptian
and Hebrew the same combination of letters con-
veyed the same idea. Without, however, having
recourse to any hypothesis of this kind, the
peculiarity of the inscription is sufficiently
explained by the Pantheism which is known to
have characterised the decline of Egyptian
religion (Renouf, Hiljbert tect., pp. 230 sqq.).
The advocates of the Egyptian origin of the
Name have shown no lack of ingenuity in
summoning to their aid authorities the most
unpromising. A passage from a treatise on
interpretation (rtpl ipntirttas, § 71), written
by one Demetrius, in which it is said that the
Egyptians hymned their gods by means of the
seven vowels, has been tortured to give evidence
on the point. Scaliger was in doubt whether
it referred to Serapis, called by Hesychius
"Serapis of seven letters" (to tuTaypdii/iaroy
Sapcbru), or to the exclamation iliiV (Mil, Alt'
yehdvdh, " He is Jehovah." But the gloss in
Hesychius is 'Emoypdnparor . to bpylkov. t\
o-kAijpoV . iced iipeewiy ; which may be explained
like the Latin phrase Aomo trium literarum (i.e.
fur). Sarapis, like the two disparaging epithets
which precede it in the gloss, is a hepta-
gram or word of seven letters, including vowels
and consonants. The citation, therefore, has
clearly no bearing on our subject. Gesner took
the seven Greek vowels, and, arranging them in
the order IEHXIOTA, found therein Jehovah.
But he was triumphantly refuted by Didymus,
who maintained that the vowels were merely
used for musical notes, and in this very probable
conjecture he is supported by the Milesian in-
scription elucidated by Barthelemy and others.
In this the invocation of God is denoted by the
seven vowels five times repeated in different
arrangements, Aei/ioiw, Eifioucea, Hioiwas, Iou-
(wict), Oiwan)i : each group of vowels precedes
a " holy " (tyn), and the whole concludes with
the following: "The city of the Milesians and
all the inhabitants are guarded by Archangels."
Miiller, with much probability, concludes that
the seven vowels represented the seven notes of
the octave. Another argument for the Egyptian
origin of Jehovah is found in the circumstance
that Pharaoh changed the name of Eliakim to
Jehoiakim (2 K. xxiii. 34), which it is asserted
is not in accordance with the practice of con-
querors towards the conquered, unless the
Egyptian king imposed upon the king of Judah
the name of one of his own gods. But the
same reasoning would prove that the origin of
the word was Babylonian, for the king of
Babylon changed the name of Mattaniah to
ZedekuzA (2 K. xxiv. 17). Of late, again, it
has been suggested that niiT\ " He Who Is "
or " Becometh," is a- Hebrew version of the
Egyptian Chepera, the god who is always
"becoming," i.e. the Sun, symbolised by the
scarabaeus, which in Egyptian was also called
chepera. But evidence of connexion between
the two names is entirely wanting ; apart from
the fact that the original meaning of the Hebrew
Name is far from certain (see also Renouf, Nib.
Left. pp. 243 sqq).
But many, abandoning as untenable the theory
of an Egyptian origin, have sought to trace the
Name among the Phoenicians and Canaanitish
tribes. In support of this, Hartmann brings
forward a passage from a pretended fragment
Digitized by
Google
1552
JEHOVAH
of Sanchoniathon quoted by Philo Byblius, a
writer of the age of Nero. But it is now
generally admitted that the so-called frag-
ments of Sanchoniathon, the ancient Phoenician
chronicler, are impudent forgeries concocted by
Philo Byblius himself. Besides, the passage
to which II art maim refers is not found in Philo
Byblius, but is quoted from Porphyry by Euse-
bius (Praep. Evan. i. 9, § 21), and, genuine or
not, evidently alludes to the Jehovah of the
Jews. It is there stated that the most trust-
worthy authority in matters connected with
the Jews was Sanchoniathon of Beyrout, who
received his information from Hierombalos
(Jervhbaal), the priest of the god *Iei«i. From
the occurrence of Jehovah as a compound in the
S roper names of many who were not Hebrews,
lamaker {Mac. Phoen., p. 174, ire.) contends
that it must have been known among heathen
peoples. But such knowledge, if it existed, was
no more than might have been obtained by
their necessary contact with the Hebrews. The
names of Uriah the Hittite, of Araunah or
Aran/'aA the Jebusite, of TobiaA the Ammonite,
and of the Canaanitish town Bizjotbjah, may
thus be all explained without having recourse
to Hamaker's hypothesis. Besides, Araunah is
doubtful, as its variants show, and Bizjothjah
is a mere corruption of rmi331, "and her
daughters," as the LXX. shows (Josh. xv. 28).
No certain instance, in fact, can be adduced of
Jah compounded with a local name. Of as
little value is his appeal to 1 K. v. 7, where we
find the Name Jehovah in the mouth of Hiram,
king of Tyre. Apart from the consideration
that Hiram would necessarily be acquainted
with the Name as that of the Hebrews' national
God, its occurrence is sufficiently explained by
the tenor of Solomon's message (1 K. v. 3-5).
Another point on which Hamaker relies for
support is the name 'A/38aibi, which occurs as
that of a Tyrian suffete in Menander (Joseph,
c. Apion. i. 21), and which he identifies with
Obadiah (iT*Uir). But both Furst and Hengsten-
berg represent it in Hebrew characters by ^OS,
'abdai, which even Hamaker thinks more pro-
bable.* While, however, it must be admitted
that no trace of iTH"P, as a Canaanitish deity, can
be specified, and while therefore we agree with
Kuenen and others that this Name, in fact,
designates the national God of Israel as distinct
from the gods of Canaan, the same can hardly
be affirmed of TV and lfV, which are usually
regarded as contractions of the fuller form
iTin\ Already in the tablets of Tell al-Amarna
(15th cent. B.c.) we meet with such names as
Arzau-ya, Wid(?>ya (governor of Ashkelon),
and Bi-i-ya (i.». perhaps Abi-yah), which seem
to imply that Yahu or Yah really was a Divine
name known to the peoples of Canaan before the
Exodus. The evidence of numerous Babylonian
contract tablets of a later period points likewise
to the conclusion that this Name was known to
other Semitic nations besides Israel. It is
difficult to suppose that all such names as Kittia
or Kitttya, " son of Ea's priest "—to cite a tablet
in the writer's collection (PSBA. Feb. 1892) —
* '"13U. however, may represent rP^|3I? or n^ljtft
and 'A/lga<oc may be compared with Z^&ubt=iT - 12t.
» :- 1
JEHOVAH
are those of Jews settled in Babylonia, Kitttya,
from kittu, "righteousness," is an exact Baby-
lonian parallel to the Hebrew Zedekiah (Sidtfya).
Quite recently Mr. Pinches has found the name
Bet-YaU in one of these documents, which mens,
apparently, "Bel is Tah," like the Heb. TrhiX
" Baal is Jah." (See PSBA. Nov. 1892.)
II. Such are the principal hypotheses which
have been constructed in favour of a Don-
Hebraic origin of Jehovah. To attribute much
value to them requires a large share of faith.
It remains now to examine the theories on the
opposite side ; for on this point authorities are
by no means agreed, and have frequently gone
to the contrary extreme. S. D. Luztatto
(Anim. in Jes. Vat. in Rosenmuller's Competd.
xxiv.) advanced with singular simplicity the ex-
traordinary statement that Jehovah, or rather
nift* divested of points, is compounded of two
interjections, ill, vah, of pain, and IIT*, ydau, of
joy, and denotes the author of good and eril.
Such an etymology, from one who was un-
questionably among the first of modern Jewiih
scholars, is a remarkable phenomenon. Ewald,
referring to Gen. xix. 24, suggested at the
origin of Jehovah, the Arab. \jt, which signi-
fies " the air ; " a not impossible suggestion, is
view of the fact that the atmospheric pheno-
mena of storm and thunder and lightning wen
looked upon as special manifestations of His
Presence (e.g. Hab. iii. ; Ps. xxix.). EwaU
refers to Gen. xix. 24 (mil* flKO) and to Micah
v. 7, and cites the later designation of Jehovah
as " The God of Heaven " (HI. ii. 157, Eng.
Trans.). But most have taken for the baas of
their explanations, and the different modes of
punctuation which they propose, the passage
Ex. iii. 14; according to which, when Motes
received his commission to be the deliverer of
Israel, the Almighty, Who appeared in the
burning bush, communicated to him the Name
which he should give as the credentials of hi*
mission: "And God said unto Moses, 1 AX
that i am (irn$* yfe njn**, '«*»<* ',««>
'ehyih) ; and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto
the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto
you." That this passage was intended to
indicate the etymology of Jehovah, as under-
stood by the Hebrews, no one has ventured
to doubt. According to this view then, HIIT
must be formed from the 3rd sing, mssc
impf. of the substantive verb n\1> the older
form of which was mil, still found in the
Chaldee iTin, and Syriao loOl, a f»<* WBJC>>
will be referred to hereafter in discussing the
antiquity of the Name. If this etymology be
correct, and there seems little reason to call it
in question, one step towards the true punc-
tuation and pronunciation is already gained.
Many learned men, and among them Grotius,
Galatinus, Crusius, and Leusden, in an age
when such fancies were rife, imagined that,
reading the Name with the vowel-points usually
attached to it, they discovered an indication of
the eternity of God in the fact that the Name
by which He revealed Himself to the Hebrews
was compounded of the Present Participle, and
the Future and Praeterite tenses of the sub-
stantive verb. The idea may have been sug-
Digitized by
Google
JEHOVAH
Rested by the expression in Rev. iv. 8 (6 %v Kal |
A ir teal 6 ipxifuvos), and received apparent
confirmation from the Tare. Jon. on Deut.
xxxii. 39, and Targ. Jer. on Ex. iii. 14. These
passages, however, throw no light upon the
composition of the Name, and merely assert
that in its significance it embraces past, present,
and future. But having agreed to reject the
present punctuation, it is useless to discuss any
theories which may be based upon it, had they
even greater probability in their favour than
the one just mentioned. As one of the forms
in which Jehovah appears in Greek characters
is 'law, it was proposed by Cappellua to punc-
tuate it itfiT, yahvih, which is clearly contrary
to the analogy of D"? verbs. Gussetius sug-
gested rVliT, yehivih, or 7\}j\\, yihtih, in the
former of which he is supported by Fiirst ; and
Mercer and Corn, a Lapide read it H^iT, yehveh :
bat on all these suppositions we should have
in* for liV in the terminations of compound
proper names. The suffrages of others are
divided between fljll}, or J1JTIT, supposed to be
represented by the 'lafii of Epiphanius above
mentioned, and miV or 71)7)1, which Fiirst
wrongly holds to be the 'UvA of Porphyry, or
the laoi of Clemens Alexandrinus. Caspari
(Micha, p. 5, &c.) decides in favour of the
former on the ground that this form only would
give rise to the contraction VV in proper names,
and opposes both Font's pnnctuation iTJiTJ or
njTIJ, as well as that of miT or illTP, which
would naturally be contracted into 1H\ Gesenius
punctuates the word H)iV, from which, or from
ITJi}*, may be derived the abbreviated form FIV
yM, used in poetry, and the form \T\\ = in? =
1iT* (so VI} becomes *iT), which occurs at the
commencement of compound proper names (Hit-
zig, Jexria, p. 4). Delitzsch once maintained
that, whichever pnnctuation be adopted, the
quiescent sheva under il is ungrammatical, and
Chateph Pathach is the proper vowel. He
therefore wrote it iTin}, yah&vah, with which
he compared the 'Ala of Theodoret ; the last
vowel being Kametz instead of Segol, according
to the analogy of proper names derived from
H'6 verbs («.$. flJD', n"ID% ?13D\ and others).
Afterwards, he adopted the pronunciation Jahve
(i.e. Yakut"), as agreeing best with patristic and
Talmudic tradition (Camm. Bber den Psalter,
Kinl.> There remains to be noticed the sug-
gestion of Gesenius that the form ITIiV, which
he adopted, might be the Hiph. impf. of the
substantive verb. Of the same opinion was
Reuss. The objection is that a Hiphil of this
verb does not exist. Others again would make
it Piel, and read T",Vy, against which a similar
objection may be urged. Fiirst (Handw, s. v.)
mentions some other etymologies which affect
the meaning rather than the pnnctuation of the
name ; such, for instance, as that it is derived
from a root flirt, "to overthrow," and signifies
" the destroyer or storm-sender " (cp. the
Arabic iSjti, " to fall from a height," causa-
tive "to throw down," "ruin," used of God's
overthrow of Sodom, Qur'an, Surah, 53, 54,
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
JEHOVAH
1553
cited by W. H. Green), or that it denotes " the
light or heaven," from a root mil = rtD»,
"to be bright," or "the life-giver," from the
root = mn, "to live." We have practically
to decide between fljil* or i"lirp. The former,
that is, Jahveh or Yakteh, has been very gener-
ally adopted by modern scholars. But perhaps
Jahxah or JahStah has a better claim, if, as
seems most probable, the names Gamar-ya-a-wa,
Aqabi-ya-a-wa, recently found on Babylonian
tablets in the British Museum, are really tran-
scriptions of the Hebrew Gemariah and Akabiah
(Aboth, iii. 1).
III. The next point for consideration is of
vastly more importance : what is the meaning
of Jehovah, and what does it express of the
Being and Mature of God, more than or in
distinction from the other Names applied to the
Deity in the 0. T. ? That there was some
distinction in these different appellations was
early perceived, and various explanations were
employed to account for it. Tertnllian (adv.
Nerrrwg. e. 3) observed that God was not called
Lord (iciptos) till after the Creation, and in con-
sequence of it ; while Augustine found in it an
indication of the absolute dependence of man
upon God (de Gen. ad lit. viii. 2). Chrysostom
(Horn. xiv. in Gen.) considered the two Karnes,
Lord and God, as equivalent, and the alternate
use of them arbitrary. But all their argu-
ments proceed upon the supposition that the
iciptot of the LXX. is the true rendering of the
original, whereas it is merely the translation of
'SIN, 'Sdonai, whose points it bears. With
regard to DWK, 'iUMm, the other chief Name
by which the Deity is designated in the 0. T.,
it has been held by many, and the opinion does
not even now want supporters, that in the
plural form of the word was shadowed forth
the plurality of Persons in the Godhead, and the
mystery of the Trinity was inferred therefrom.
Such, according to Peter Lombard, was the true
significance of Elohitn. But Calvin, Mercer,
Drusius, and Bellarmine have given the weight
of their authority against an explanation so
fanciful and arbitrary. Among the Jewish
writers of the Middle Ages the question much
more nearly approached itMolution. R. Jehuda
Hallevi (12th cent.), the author of the book
Cozri, found in the usage of Elohim a protest
against idolaters, who call each personified
power rrt>$, 'ilSah, and all collectively Elohim.
He interpreted it as the most general Name of
the Deity, distinguishing Him as manifested in
the exhibition of His power, without reference
to His personality or moral qualities, or to any
special relation which He bears to man. Je-
hovah, on the contrary, is the revealed and
known God. While the meaning of the former
could be evolved by reasoning, the true signi-
ficance of the latter could only be apprehended
" by that prophetic vision by which a man is,
as it were, separated and withdrawn from his
own kind, and approaches to the angelic, anil
another spirit enters into him." In like
manner Maimonides (Mar. Neb. i. 61, Buxt.)
saw in Jehovah the Name which teaches of the
substance of the Creator, and Abarbanel (quoted
by Buxtorf, de Nam. Dei, § 39) distinguishes
Jehovah, as denoting God according to what He
5 G
Digitized by
Google
1554
JEHOVAH
is in Himself, from Elohim which conveys the
idea of the impression made by His power. In
the opinion of Astruc, s Belgian physician, with
whom the documentary hypothesis of Genesis
originated, the alternate use of the two Names
was arbitrary, and determined by no essential
difference. Ilassc (Entdeckungen) considered them
as historical Karnes, and Sack (de ustt nam. dm,
&c.) regarded Elohim as a vague term denoting
"a certain infinite, omnipotent, incomprehensible
existence, from which things finite and visible
have derived their origin;" while to God, as
revealing Himself, the more definite title of
Jehovah was applied. Ewald, in his tract on
the composition of Genesis (written when be
was nineteen), maintained that Elohim denoted
the Deity in general, and is the common or
lower Name, while Jehovah was the national
God of the Israelites. But in order to carry
out his theory he was compelled in many places
to alter the text, and was afterwards induced to
modify his statements, which were opposed by
Gramberg and Stithelin. Doubtless Elohim is
used in many cases of the gods of the heathen,
who included in the same title the God of the
Hebrews, and denoted generally the Deity when
spoken of as a supernatural being, and when no
national feeling influenced the speaker. It was
Elohim who, in the eyes of the heathen, delivered
the Israelites from Egypt (I Sam. iv. 8), and the
Egyptian had adjured David by Elohim, rather
than by Jehovah, of Whom he would have no
knowledge (1 Sam. xix. 15). So Ehnd announces
to the Moabitish king a message from Elohim
(Judg. iii. 20) ; to the Syrians the Jehovah of
the Hebrews was only their national God, one
of the Elohim (1 K. xx. 23, 28), and in the
mouth of a heathen the Name Jehovah would
convey no more intelligible meaning than this.
It is to be observed also that when a Hebrew
speaks with a heathen he uses the more general
term Elohim. Joseph, in addressing Pharaoh
(Gen. xli. 16), and David, in appealing to the
king of Moab to protect his family (1 Sam. xxii.
:)), designate the Deity by the less specific
title ; and on the other hand the same rule is
generally followed when the heathen are the
speakers, as in the case of Abimelech (Gen. xxi.
23), the Hittites (Gen. xxiii. 6), the Midianite
(Judg. vii. 14), and Joseph in his assumed
character as an Egyptian (Gen. xlii. 18). But,
although this distinction between Elohim, as
the general appellation of Deity, and Jehovah,
the national God of the Israelites, contains some
superficial truth, the real natnre of their differ-
ence must be sought for far deeper, and as a
foundation for the arguments which will be
adduced recourse must again be had to ety-
mology, j
IV. With regard to the derivation of CfDJ},
'Hohim, the pi. of HvR, etymologists are divided
in their opinions ; some connecting it with ?K,
'it, and the unused root 7W, 'St, " to be strong"
(" vorn sein," NOldeke), while others refer it to
the Arabic aS\,'ali/ia, «JV 'aloha, "to wor-
ship, adore ; " Elohim thus denoting the Supreme
Being Who was worthy of all worship and
adoration, the dread and awful One. Furst
.takes the noun in this raise as the primitive from
JEHOVAH
which is derived the idea of worship contained
in the verb, and gives as the true root !l7tt=7W,
" to be strong." Delitzsch would prefer a root
a^K = nS« = ^K {Symb. ad Ptalm. illmtr.
p. 29). The connexion with 7\Vt seems doubtful,
in view of forms like ?M Y$ t I^r? > <T- also
the Assyrian «7u, Htu, " god,"* " goddess," with f.
From whatever root, however, the word may be
derived, most are of opinion that the primary
idea contained in it is that of strength, power ;
so that Elohim is the proper appellation of the
Deity, as manifested in His creative and univer-
sally sustaining agency, and in the general
divine guidance and government of the world.
Hengstenberg, who adheres to the derivation
above-mentioned from the Arab., 'aliha, 'alaka,
deduces from this etymology his theory that
Elohim indicates a lower and Jehovah a higher
stage of the knowledge of God, on the ground
that " the feeling of fear is the lowest which can
exist in reference to God, and merely in respect
of this feeling is God marked by this designation."
But the same inference might also be drawn on
the supposition that the idea of simple power or
strength is the most prominent in the word;
and it is more natural that the Divine Being
should be conceived of as strong before He
became the object of fear and adoration. To
this view Gesenius accedes, when he says that
the notion of worshipping and fearing is rather
derived from the power of the Deity which is
expressed in His Name. The question now arises,
What is the meaning to be attached to the plural
form of the word? As has been already men-
tioned, some have discovered here the mystery of
the Trinity, while others maintain that it points
to polytheism. The Rabbis generally explain it
as the plural of majesty ; Rabbi Bechai, a?
signifying the lord of all powers. Abarbanel
and Kimchi consider it a title of honour, in
accordance with the Hebrew idiom, of which
examples will be found in Is. liv. 5, Job xxxv.
10, Gen. xxxix. 20, xlii. 30. In Prov. ix. 1, the
plural rtODIT, chokmBth, " wisdoms," is used for
wisdom in the abstract, as including all the
treasures of wisdom and knowledge. Hence it
is probable that the plural form Elohim, instead
of pointing to polytheism, is applied to God a>
comprehending in Himself the fulness of all
power, and uniting in a perfect degree all that
which the Name signifies, and all the high attri-
butes which the heathen ascribe to the several
divinities of their pantheon. The singular W/K,
'lldah, with few exceptions (Neh. ix. 17 ; 8 Ch.
xxxii. 15), occurs only in poetry. It will bf
found, upon examination of the passages is
which Elohim occurs, that it is chiefly in places
where God is exhibited only in the plenitude of
His power, and where no especial reference is
made to His unity, personality, or holiness, or to
His relation to Israel and the theocracy (•»*
Ps. ivi. 1; xix. 1, 7, 8). Hengstenberg's ety-
mology of the word is disputed by Delituca
{Symb. ad Ps). i«usfr. p. 29), who refers it, as
has been mentioned above, to a root indicating
power or might, and sees in it an expression not
of what men' think of God, but of what He is in
Himself, in so far as He has life omnipotent in
Himself, and according as He is the beginning
Digitized by
Google
JEHOVAH
and end of all life. For the true explanation of
the Name he refers to the revelation of the
mystery of the Trinity. But it is at least ex-
tremely doubtful whether to the ancient Israel-
ites any idea of this nature was conveyed by
Elohim ; and in making use of the more advanced
knowledge supplied by the New Testament, there
is some danger of discovering more meaning and
a more subtle significance than was ever in-
tended to be expressed.
V. Bat while Elohim exhibits God displayed
in His power as the Creator and Governor of the
physical universe, the Name Jehovah designates
His nature as He stands in relation to man, as
the only, almighty, true, personal, holy Being,
a Spirit, and " the Father of spirits " (Num. xvi.
22 ; cp. John iv. 24), Who revealed Himself to
His people, made a covenant with them, and
became their Lawgiver, and to Whom all
honour and worship are due. If the etymology
above given be accepted, and the Name be de-
rived from the impf. tense of the substantive
verb, it would denote, in accordance with the
general analogy of proper names of a similar
form, "He that is,'* " the Being," Whose chief
attribute is eternal existence. Jehovah is re-
presented as eternal (Gen. xxi. 33 ; cp. 1 Tim.
vi. 16X unchangeable (Ex. iii. 14; Mai. iii. 6),
the only Being (Josh. xxii. 22 ; Ps. 1. 1), Creator
and Lord of all things (Ex. xx. 11; cp. Num.
xvi. 22 with xxvii. 16 ; Is. xlii. 5). It is Jehovah
Who made the covenant with His people (Gen. xv.
18 ; Num. x. 33, &c.). In this connexion Elohim
occurs but once (Ps. lxxviii. 10) ; and even with
the article, Ha-Elohim, which expresses more
personality than Elohim alone, is found but
seldom (Judg. xx. 27; 1 Sam. iv. 4). The
Israelites were enjoined to observe the com-
mandments of Jehovah (Lev. iv. 27, &c), to
keep His Law, and to worship Him alone. Hence
the phrase " to serve Jehovah " (Ex. x. 7, 8, &c.)
is applied to denote true worship, whereas " to
serve Ha-Elohim " is used but once in this sense
(Ex. iii. 12), and Elohim occurs in the same
association only when the worship of idols is
spoken of (Deut. iv. 28 ; Jndg. iii. 6). As Jeho-
vah, the only true God, is the only object of
true worship, to Him belong the sabbaths and
festivals, and all the ordinances connected with
the religious services of the Israelites (Ex. x. 9,
xii. 11; Lev. xxiii. 2). His are the altars on
which offerings are made to the true God ; the
priests and ministers are His (1 Sam. ii. 11, xiv.
8), and so exclusively that a priest of Elohim is
always associated with idolatrous worship. To
Jehovah alone are offerings made (Ex. viii. 8) ;
and if Elohim is ever used in this connexion, it
is always qualified by pronominal suffixes, or
some word in construction with it so as to
indicate the true God; in all other cases it
refers to idols (Ex. xxii. 20, xxxiv. 15). It
follows naturally that the Temple and Tabernacle
are Jehovah's ; and if they are attributed to
Elohim, the latter is in some manner restricted
as before. The prophets are the prophets of
Jehovah, and their announcements proceed from
Him, seldom from Elohim. The Israelites are
the people of Jehovah (Ex. xxxvi. 20), the con-
gregation of Jehovah (Num. xvi. 3), as the
Moabites are the people of Chemoah (Jer. xlviii.
46). Their king is the anointed of Jehovah ;
their wars are the wars of Jehovah (Ex. xiv. 25 ;
JEHOVAH
1555
1 Sam. xviii. 17) ; their enemies are the enemies
of Jehovah (2 Sam. xii. 14) ; it is the hand of
Jehovah that delivers them up to their foes
(Judg. vi. 1, xiii. 1, &c), and He it is Who raises
up for them deliverers and judges, and on whom
they call in times of peril (Judg. ii. 18, iii. 9,
15 ; Josh. xxiv. 7 ; 1 Sam. xvii. 37). In fine,
Jehovah is the Divine King of His people
(Judg. viii. 23) ; by Him their kings reign and
achieve success against the national enemies
(1 Sam. xi. 13, xiv. 23). Their heroes are in-
spired by His Spirit (Judg. iii. 10, vi. 84), ami
their hand steeled against their foes (2 Sam. vii.
23) ; the watchword of Gideon was " The Sword
of Jehovah, and of Gideon 1 " (Jndg. vii. 20.)
The day on which God executes judgment on the
wicked is the day of Jehovah (Is. ii. 12, xxxiv. 8 ;
cp. Rev. xvi. 14). As the Israelites were in a
remarkable manner distinguished as the people of
Jehovah, Who became their Lawgiver and Supreme
Ruler, it is not strange that He should be put in
strong contrast with Chemosh (Judg. xi. 24),
Ashtaroth (Judg. x. 6), and the Baalim (Judg. iii.
7), the national deities of the surrounding nations,
and thus be pre-eminently distinguished as the
tutelary Deity of the Hebrews in one aspect of
His character. [For the Moabite view of Chemosh,
see the Stone of Dibon.] Sncb and no more was
He to the heathen (1 K. xx. 23); but all this
and much more to the Israelites, to whom
Jehovah was the Jiving God, Who reveals Himself
to man by word and deed, helps, guides, saves,
and delivers, in all the exigencies of life. Jeho-
vah was no abstract Name, but thoroughly
practical, and stood in intimate connexion with
the religious life of the people. While Elohim
represents God only in His most outward relation
to man, and distinguishes Him as recognised in
His omnipotence, Jehovah describes Him accord-
ing to His innermost being. In Jehovah the
moral attributes are presented as constituting
the essence of His nature ; whereas in Elohim
there is no reference to personality or moral
character. The relation of Elohim to Jehovah
has been variously explained. The former, in
Hengstenberg's opinion, indicates a lower, and
the latter a higher, stage of consciousness of
God ; Elohim becoming Jehovah by an historical
process, and to show how He became so, being
the main object of the sacred history. Kurtz
considers the two names as related to each other
as power and evolution : Elohim the God of the
beginning, Jehovah of the development; Elohim
the Creator, Jehovah the Mediator. Elohim is
God of the beginning and end, the Creator and
the Judge ; Jehovah the God of the middle, of the
development which lies between the beginning
and end {Die Einheit der Qen.). That Jehovah
is identical with Elohim, and not a separate
Being, is indicated by the joint use of the
names Jehovah-Elohim (see also Kuenen, HI. i.
39 sqq. ; W. R. Smith, Prophets, pp. 33, 49 sq.).
VI. The antiquity of the Name Jehovah among
the Hebrews has formed the subject of much
discussion. That it was not known before the
age of Moses has been inferred from Ex. vi. 3 ;
while Von Bohlen assigned to it a much more
recent date, and contended that we have " no
conclusive proof of the worship of Jehovah
anterior to the ancient hymns of David " (Tni.
to Qen. i. 150, Eng. tr.). Bnt, on the other
hand, we might be inclined to infer from the tra-
5 G 2
Digitized by
Google
1556
JEHOVAH
ditionnl etymology of the word that it originated
id an age long prior to that of the Pentateuch,
in which the root DID has already been dis-
placed by n'n. From the Aramaic form in
which it appears (cp. Chald. mn ; Syr. |OOV)>
Jahn refers to the earliest times of Abraham
for its dare, and to Mesopotamia or Vr of
the Chaldees for its birthplace, [it is now
known that Vr was in S. Babylonia, and
that the language of Ur was not Aramaic
but Accadian first, and then Assyrio-Baby-
Ionian.] Its usage in Genesis cannot be ex-
plained, as Le Clerc suggests, by supposing it to
be employed by anticipation, for it is introduced
where the persons to whom the history relates
are speaking, and not only where the narrator
adopts terms familiar to himself; and the
same difficulty remains whatever hypothesis be
assumed with regard to the original documents
which formed the basis of the history." At the
same time it is distinctly stated in Ex. vi. 3,
that to the patriarchs God was not known by
the Name Jehovah. If, therefore, this passage
has reference to the first revelation of Jehovah
.-imply as a Name and Title of God, there is
clearly a discrepancy which requires to be
explained. In renewing His promise of deliver-
ance from Egypt, " God spake unto Moses and
said unto him, I am Jehovah; and I appeared
unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by
(the .name of) God Almighty ('£7 S/uiddn'l,
% !& ?KX but by My Name Jehovah was 1 not
known to them." It follows then that, if the
reference were merely to the Name as a Name,
the passage in question would prove equally
that before this time Elohim was unknown as an
appellation of the Deity, and God would appear
uniformly as El Shaddai in the patriarchal
history. (This assumes that 'ildhlm is a " Name "
in the same sense as Yahvah or the obscure
'El Shaddai, which is hardly the case.] But
although it was held by Theodoret (Quaest. 15
in Ex.) and many of the Fathers, who have
been followed by a long list of moderns, that
the name was first made known by God to
Moses, and then introduced by him among the
Israelites, the contrary was maintained by
Cajetan, Lyranus, Calvin, Rosenmiiller, Heng-
stenberg, and others, who deny that the passage
in Ex. vi. alludes to the introduction of the
Name. Calvin saw at once that the knowledge
there spoken of could not refer to the syllables
and letters, but to the recognition of God's
glory and majesty. It was not the Name, but
the true depth of its significance which was
unknown to and uncotnprehended by the
Patriarchs. They had known God as 'El
Shaddai (Gen. xvii. 1, xxviii. 3), the Ruler of the
physical universe, and of man as one of His
creatures ; as a God eternal, immutable, and
true to His promises He was yet to be revealed.
In the character expressed by the Name Jehovah
He had not hitherto been fully known ; His true
attributes had not been recognised (cp. Rashi
on Ex. vi. 3) in His working and acts for Israel.
Aben Exra explained the occurrence of the
Name in Genesis as simply indicating the know-
" The truth Is that J uses mn* from the beginning ;
P consistently eschews It till Ex. vl. 3 (Driver).
JEHOVAH
ledge of it as a proper same, not as a qualifi-
cative expressing the attributes and qualities ot
God. Referring to other passages in which the
phrase " the Name of God " occurs, it is clear
that something more is intended by it thin a
mere appellation, and that the proclamation ot
the Name of God is a revelation of His moral
attributes, and of His true character as Jehovah
(Ex. xxxiii. 19 ; xxxiv. 6, 7), the God of the
covenant. Maimonides (Jfor. 2V«6. i. 64, ed.
Bnxtorf) explains the Name of God as signifying
His essence and His truth, and OLshausen (on
Matt, xviii. 20) interprets " name " (trofui) as
denoting " personality and essential being, and
that not as it is incomprehensible or unknown,
but in its manifestation." The same of a thing
represents the thing itself so far as it can be
expressed in words. That Jehovah was not »
new Name Havernick concludes from Ex. iii. 14.
where " the Name of God Jehovah is evidently
presupposed as already in use, and is only
explained, interpreted, and applied ... It i>
certainly not a new Name that is introduced ; oe
the contrary, the ilVI£ y(fe iT.TK (I am that
I am) would be unintelligible, if the Name iUelt
were not presupposed as already known. TV
old Name of antiquity, whose precious signifi-
cance had been forgotten and neglected by tin
children of Israel, here as it were rises again (•
life, and is again brought home to the con-
sciousness of the people" (Intrtd. to the Pat.
p. 61). The same passage supplies an argument
to prove that by " name " we are not to under-
stand merely letters and syllables, for Jehovah
appears at first in another form, 'ehyek (iTHK).
The correct collective view of Ex. vi.' 3.
Hengstenberg conceives to be the following:—
"Hitherto that Being, Who in one aspect wa>
Jehovah, in another had always been Elohim.
The great crisis now drew nigh in which
Jehovah Elohim wonld be changed into Jehovah.
In prospect of this event God solemnly an-
nounced .Himself as Jehovah."
Great stress has been laid, by those who deny
the antiquity of the Name Jehovah, npos the
fact that proper names compounded with it
occur but seldom before the age of Samuel and
David. It is undoubtedly true that, about thi<
period, proper names so compounded did become
more frequent ; but if it could be shown thst
prior to the time of Moses any such names existed,
it would be sufficient to prove that the Name
Jehovah was not entirely unknown. Amour
those which have been quoted for this purpo*
are Jochebed the mother of Moses, and daughter
of Levi, and Moriah, the mountain on which
Abraham was commanded to offer np Isaac.
Against the former it is urged that Moses might
hare changed her name to Jochebed after the
Name Jehovah had been communicated by Got).
as he changed Hoshea to Joshua ; but this i-
very improbable, as he was at this time eighty
years old, and his mother in all probability
dead. If this only be admitted as a genuine
instance of a name compounded with Jehovah, it
takes tu at once back into the patriarchal apt.
and proves that a word which was employed in
forming the proper name of Jacob's grand-
daughter could not have been unknown to that
patriarch himself. [Ewald, on the ground ot
the name Jochebed, and the language of Ex. xr.
Digitized by
Google
JEHOVAH-JIBEH
2, supposed that Jahveh was a Name of God
current in the family of Moses. KSnig agrees
with him (Mmptprobl. p. 27). Stade, Tiele, and
Wellhausen think that Jahveh may hare been
originally the god of the Kenites. The evidence,
upon the whole, appears to justify a suspicion
that at least in the forms Yaku, Yah, the
name was once current among Israel's, heathen
neighbours.] The name Monah (JV^tB) is of
more importance, for in one passage in which
it occurs it is accompanied by an etymology
intended to indicate what was then understood
by it (2 Ch. iii. 1). Hengstenberg regarded it as
a compound of fltOD, the Hoph. Part, of TOO,
and JP, the abbreviated form of frtrP ; so that,
t t :
according to this etymology, it would signify
" shown by Jehovah." [It is, however, a serious
objection, that iVKTD could hardly become
n""lto, and, moreover, a place-name compounded
with rp is otherwise unknown.] Gesenius,
adopting the meaning of DK1 in Gen. xxii. 8,
renders it " chosen by Jehovah," but suggests at
the same time what he considers a more pro-
bable derivation, according to which Jehovah
does not form a part of the compound word.
But there is reason to believe from various
allusions in Gen. xxii. that the former was
regarded as the true etymology. [Isaac]
Having thus considered the origin, signifi-
cance, and antiquity of the Name Jehovah, the
reader will be in a position to judge how much
of truth there is in the assertion of Schwind
(quoted by Keinke, Beitr. iii. 135, n. 10) that
the terms Elohim, Jehovah Elohim, and then
Jehovah alone applied to God, show " to the
philosophic inquirer the progress of the human
mind from a plurality of gods to a superior god,
and from this to a single Almighty Creator and
Ruler of the world."
The principal authorities which have been
made use of in this article are Hengstenberg, On
the Authenticity of the Pentateuch, i. 213-307,
Eng. trans. ; Keinke, Phil, histor. Abhandtung
Hher den Qottemamen Jehova, Beitriiije, vol. iii. ;
Tholuck, Vermischte Schriften, Th. i. pp. 377-
405 ; Kurtz, Die Emheit der Genesis xliii.-liii. ;
Keil, Ueber die Qottemamen im Pentateuche, in
Kudelbach and Guericke's Zeitschrift ; Ewald,
Die Composition der Genesis ; Gesenius, The-
saurus; Bunsen, Bihelwerk; and Reland, Decas
cxercitationum philologicarum de vera pronuntia-
tione nominis Jehova ; besides those already
■juoted.
The more recent authorities are cited by
Driver, Stadia Biblica, i. Oxford, 1885. Among
them may be mentioned Baudissin, Studien,
pp. 181 sqq. (1876); Knobel-Dillmann, Exodus
(1880); Friedrich Delitzsch, Parodies, pp. 158
sqq. (1881) ; KSnig, Hauptprobleme d. alti~r.
Relig. pp. 29 sqq. (1884); Lagarde (cp. OS*
p. 192). [W. A. W.j [C. J. B.]
JEHCVAH-JIR'EH (nMTffyT; Ktpu>s
fVStv ; Dominus videt), i.e. " Jehovah will see,"
or provide, the name given by Abraham to the
place on which he had been commanded to offer
Isaac, commemorating the interposition of the
Angel of Jehovah, who prevented the sacrifice
(Gen. xxii. 14) and provided another victim.
The immediate allusion is to the expression in
the 8th verse, "God will look out for Himself a
JEHOVAH-SHALOM
1557
lamb for a burnt offering," but it is not unlikely
that there is at the same time a covert reference
to Moriah, the scene of the whole occurrence.
The play upon words is followed up in the
latter clause of v. 14, which appears in the form
of a popular proverb : " as it is said this day. In
the mountain of Jehovah, He will be seen," or
" provision shall be made." Such might be the
rendering if the received punctuation be accepted,
but on this point there is a division of opinion.
The iv rf tpti Kiptos &<p&n of the LXX. implies
!"IKT rrtlT "in2, "on the mountain Jehovah
V T" » : » T
appearetn ; " and the same, with the exception of
n^T for the last word, mnst have been the
reading of the Vulgate and Syriac The Targum
of Onkelos is obscure. [Isaac.]
[W. A. W.] [C. J. B.]
JEHO'VAH-NIS'SI CWrtiT; Kiptos «a-
ro(pvyfi uov; Dominus cxaltatio mea), i.e. "Je-
hovah is my banner," the name given by Moses
to the altar which he built in commemoration
of the discomfiture of the Amalekites by Joshua
and his chosen warriors at Rejihidim (Ex. xvii.
15). It was erected either upon the hill over-
looking the battle-field, upon which Moses sat
with the staff of God in his hand, or upon the
battle-field itself. According to Aben Ezra, it
was on the Mount Horeb. The Targum of On-
kelos paraphrases the verse thus : — " Moses built
an altar and worshipped upon it before Jehovnh,
Who had wrought for him miracles" (PB'J,
nissin). Such too is Rashi's explanation of the
name, as referring to the miraculous inter-
]>osition of God in the defeat of the Amalekites.
The LXX. in their translation, " the Lord my
refuge," evidently supposed nisei to be derived
from the root W3, «««, " to flee," and the Vul-
gate traced it to MM, "to lift up " (cp. Ps. iv.
7, Heb.). The significance of the name is
probably contained in an allusion to the staff
which Moses held in his hand as a banner during
the engagement, and the raising or lowering of
which turned the fortune of battle in favour of
the Israelites or their enemies. God is thus
recognised in the memorial altar as the deliverer
of His people. Who leads them to victory, and
is their rallying-point in time of peril. [The
Hebrew of v. 16, which assigned the reason for
the name, is corrupt (see R. V., which follows
the Jewish expositors). We may perhaps re-
store: " And he said MOITJDn DJ ^JT 'D, The
banner of warfare shall be lifted up unto Jahvah
against Amalek from generation to generation "
(cp. Cant. v. 10, vi. 4; Ps. xx. 5).] Ou the
figurative use of "banner," see Ps. lx. 4, Is.
xLlO. [W. A. W.] [C. J. B.]
JEHO'VAH-SHA'LOM (ofe? fl)iT ; tlpfa
Kvplov; Domini pax), i.e. "Jehovah is peace,"
or, with the ellipsis of '•}?$, " Jehovah is the
God of peace." The altar erected by Gideon in
Ophrah was so called in memory of the saluta-
tion addressed to him by the Angel of Jehovah,
"Peace be unto thee" (Judg. vi. 24). The
LXX. and Vulg. appear to have inverted the
words as they stand in the present Hebrew text,
and to have read fliiV DXTV, but they are
supported by no MS. authority.
[W. A. W.] [C. J. B.]
Digitized by
Google
1558 JEHOVAH-SHAMMAH
JEHO'VAH-SHAM'MAH (fllf^ rrt.T;
A. Kvpios iicti, B. om. ; Dominus ibidem), " Je-
hovah is there" (slia'mmah, " illuc " for " illic,"
as in Jer. xviii. 2) ; the name of the New Jeru-
salem of Ezekiel's prophetic visions (Ezek.
xlviii. 35; mare. A. v.): cp. Rev. xxiii. 3.
[C. J. B.]
JEHO'VAH-TSIDKE'NU Qlgrt ?T)n»;
AB. ,'I«<r«S<K, S*. 'Imrc uc< l> ; Domima Justus
noster = tig^¥ f defective), " Jehovah is onr
Righteonsness": (1) The name of the Messianic
king, whose coming is announced in Jer. xxiii.
5, 6. There appears to be an allusion to the
name of Zedekiah (WpTV), " Righteousness of
Jah," the last native sovereign of Judah ; not in
the sense that the Prophet ever expected such
a glorious future for that unhappy prince, but
rather by way of suggesting that the Divine
Righteousness which required the imminent or
already realized overthrow of his kingdom
would not rest there, but would in its own
time accomplish the promises as well as the
menaces of prophecy. The LXX. translation
connects TOil' with the preceding verb as its
subject: "And this is his name, whereby the
Lord will call him : Josedek." It may be that
the last two letters of Uplit were effaced in
the translator's MS., or that the name was
abbreviated thus, 'P1Y V \ or thus, 'piX%T.
The vocalisation 'Iato-cSix [see Jehozadak]
implies a Hebrew punctuation, pltf'1] or
PIVV, a form like Melchizedek, and essentially
like Zedekiah.
(2) The name of the restored Jerusalem, in
the similar prophecy, Jer. xxxiii. 16. [C. J. B.]
JEHO-ZA'BAD piflTP. = Jehovah hath
given ; Joxabad). 1. (B. 'tefi&iff ; A. 'Io>faJ3<i J.)
A Korahite Levite, second son of Obed-edom,
and one of the porters or doorkeepers of the
south gate of the Temple, and of the storehouse
there (D'BDt* JV3), in the time of David
(1 Ch. xxvi. 4,' 15, compared with Neh. xii. 25).
2. flofaliiS; Joseph. 'Oxi$aros.) A Ben-
jamite, captain of 180,000 armed men, in the
days of king Jehoshaphat (2 Ch. xvii. 18 ; Joseph.
Ant. viii. 15, § 2).
3. ('U(t0oie,Z«(a${S; A.'IafajSft; Jotabad.)
Son of Shomer or Shimrith, a Moabitish woman,
and possibly a descendant of the preceding, who
with another, Jozachar or Zabad, conspired
against king Joash and slew him in his bed
(2 K. xii. 21 ; 2 Ch. xxiv. 26). [Joash.] The
similarity in the names of both conspirators and
their parents is worth notice.
This name is commonly abbreviated in the
Hebrew to Jozabad. [A. C. H.] [C. H.]
JEHO-ZAT)AK (pVf\TV ; B. 'IaxraMjt, A.
'WeScTr; Josedec), son of the high-priest
Seraiah (1 Ch. vi. 14, 15) in the reign of
Zedekiah. When his father was slain at Riblah
by order of Nebuchadnezzar, in the 11th of
Zedekiah (2 K. xxv. 18, 21), Jehozadak was led
away captive to Babylon (1 Ch. vi. 15), where
he doubtless spent the remainder of his days.
He himself never attained the high-priesthood,
the Temple being burnt to the ground, and so
continuing, and he himself being a captive all
JEHU
his life. But he was the father of Jeshua the
high-priest who with Zerubbabel headed the
Return from Captivity, and in whom the succes-
sion continued till the pontificate of Alamos-
(Ezra iii. 2, 8, v. 2, x. 18: Neh. xii. 26; Hagg.i.
1, 12, 14, ii. 2, 4 ; Zech. vi. 11). [High-priest.]
Nothing more is known about him. It is per-
haps worth remarking that his name is com-
pounded of the same elements, and has nearly the
same meaning, as that of the contemporary king
Zedekiah (plW, rPplX)— " Jehovah is right-
eons;" and that the righteousness of Jehovah
was signally displayed in the simultaneous sus-
pension of the throne of David and the priest-
hood of Aaron, on account of the sins of judah.
This remark perhaps acquires weight from the
fact of his successor Jeshua, who restored the
priesthood and rebuilt the Temple, having the
same name as Joshua, who brought the nation
into the land of promise, and Jesus, a name
significative of salvation.
In Haggai and Zechariah, though the name
in the original is exactly as above, yet the
A. V., following the Greek form, presents it &>
Josedech. In the R. V. it is Jehozadak.
In Ezra and Nehemiah it is abbreviated, in
Hebrew, A. V., and R. V., to Jozadak.
[AC. H.] [C. H.]
JEHU. 1. flttfV, probably = WfliiT =
Jehovah is He; B. EiotS, A. 'li)oi, Joseph. 'Iijew:
Jehu.) The founder of the fifth dynasty of
the kingdom of Israel (Riehm, ac. 843-816).
His history* was told in the lost "Chronicle*
of the Kings of Israel" (2 K. x. 34). His
father's name was Jehoshaphat (2 K. ix. 2,
14) ; his grandfather's (which, as being better
known, was sometimes affixed to his own — 2 K.
ix.) was Nimshi. In his youth he had been one
of the guards of Ahab. His first appearance is
history is when, with a comrade in arms, Bidkar.
or Bar-Dakar (Ephrem Syr. Explan. in it.
Jlegum, cap. iv. sec. 2, Op. t. ii. 125,cd. Caillsn,
1842), he rode b behind Ahab on the fatal journey
from Samaria to Jezreel, and heard, and laid op
in his heart, the warning of Elijah against the
murderer of Naboth (2 K. ix. 25). But he had
already, as it would seem, been known to Elijah
as a youth of promise, and, accordingly, in the
vision at Horeb he is mentioned as the future
king of Israel, whom Elijah is to anoint as the
minister of vengeance on Israel (1 K. xix. 16, 17).
This injunction, for reasons unknown to c*.
Elijah never fulfilled. It was reserved long
afterwards for his successor Elisha.
Jehu meantime, in the reigns of Ahaziah and
Jehoram, had risen to importance. The same
activity and vehemence which had fitted him
for his earlier distinctions still continued, and
he was known far and wide as a charioteer whose
• Modem criticism tods but little fault with toe
section dealing with Jehu and his revolution. See >
nummary in KltteL Oesek. d. Hebraer, 11. 1M (sal
Index), 1892.— {F.]
» The Hebrew word Is D'TOV: usually employed
for the coupling together of oxen. This the LXX.
understands as though the two soldiers rode in separate
chariots— <m0<0>|iroVr< nrl fc'vyn (2 K. Ix. M) ; Joeer-bus.
(Ant. ix. 6, $ 3) as though they sat In the same durfc*
with the king («a0«<b»Uvow oino*rr rov amura ni
~A.xi$ov).
Digitized by
Google
JEHU
rapid driving, as if of a madman* (2 K. ix. 20%
could be distinguished even from a distance.
He was, under the last-named king, captain of
the host in the siege of Ramotb-Gilead. Accord-
ing to Ephrem Syrua (who omits the words
"with the Lord" in 2 K. ix. 26, and makea
" I " refer to Jehu) he had, in a dream the night
before, seen the blood of Naboth and his sons
(see Ephr. Syr. «. ».> Whilst in the midst of
the officers of the besieging army a youth sud-
denly entered, of wild appearance (2 K. ix. 11),
and insisted on a private interview with Jehu.
They retired into a secret chamber. The youth
uncovered a phial of the sacred oil, as Joseph us
puts it (Ant. ix. 6, 1 ; Stanley, Jewiah Ch. ii.
283 [1883]), which he had brought with him,
poured it over Jehu's head, and after announcing
to him the message from Elisha, that he was
appointed to be king of Israel and destroyer of
the house of Ahab,. rushed out of the house and
disappeared (2 K. ix. 1-10 ; 2 Ch. xxii. 7).
Jehu's countenance, as he re-entered the
assembly of officers, showed that some strange
tidings had reached him. He tried at first to
evade their questions, but then revealed the situa-
tion in which he fonnd himself placed by the pro-
phetic call. In a moment the enthusiasm of those
present took fire. They threw their garments—
the large square Begad, similar to a wrapper or
plaid — under his feet, so as to form a rough
carpet of state, placed him on the top of the
stairs,* as on an extempore throne, blew the
royal salute on their trumpets, and thus pro-
clnimed him king. He then cut off all communi-
cation between Ramoth-Gilead and Jezreel, and
set off, full speed, with his ancient comrade Bid-
kar, whom he had made his chief officer (Stanley,
Jew. Ch. ii. 285 [1883]), and a band of horsemen.
From the tower of Jezreel a watchman saw the
cloud of dust (DVBt?, Kovtopr&r ; A. V. and R. V.
"company") and announced his coming (2 K.
ix. 17). The messengers that were sent out to
Mm he detained, on the same principle of secrecy
which had guided all his movements. It was
not till he had almost reached the city, and
was identified by the watchman, that alarm
was taken. But even then it seems as if the
two kings in Jezreel anticipated news from
the Syrian war rather than a revolution at
home. It was not till, in answer to Jehoram's
question, "Is it peace, Jehu?" that Jehu's
fierce denunciation of Jezebel at once revealed
JEHU
1559
• This Is the force of the Hebrew word which the
LXX. translate iv mvaAAayS. Joseph™ (.An*. U. 6,
$ 3) says ■rxoWrcpov M not per' evraf uw Mcv«v.
« The expression translated "on the top of the
atalre" (R. V. marg. on the ban steps) Is one the clue
to which Is lost. The word Is gerem, D^, »•«• » bone,
and the meaning appears to be that they placed Jehu
on the very stairs themselves— If Tn?VO be stairs—
without any seat or chair below him. The stairs doubt-
leas ran round the Inside of the quadrangle of the house,
as they do still, for Instance, In the ruin called the
house of Zacchaeus at Jericho, and Jehu sat where
they Joined the flat platform which formed the top or
roof of the house. Thus be was conspicuous against
the sky, while the captains were below him in the open
quadrangle. The LXX. repeats the Hebrew word, Ui
t4 yd>t|i ™» avaSatftar. which Luclan's Version
renders intelligible by hrl /uav ri>y iya^o»/ii&»v. By
Josepbus Ii Is avoided.
the danger. Jehu seised his opportunity, and
taking full aim at Jehoram, with the bow
which, as captain of the host, he had always with
him, shot him through the heart (ix. 24). The
body was thrown out on the fatal field, and
whilst his soldiers pursued and killed the king
of Judah (2 K. ix. 27, 28 -, 2 Ch. xxii. 9) at
Beth-gan (A. V. aud R. V., '• the garden-house,"
LXX. BoufldV), probably Engannim, Jehuadvanced
to the gates of Jezreel and fulfilled the divine
judgment on Jezebel as already on Jehoram.
[Jezebel.] He then entered on a work of ex-
termination hitherto unparalleled in the history
of the Jewish monarchy. All the descendants
of Ahab that remained in Jezreel, together with
the officers of the court and hierarchy of
Astarte, were swept away. His next step was
to secure Samaria. Every stage of his progress
was marked with blood. At the gates of
Jezreel he found the beads of seventy princes of
the house of Ahab, ranged in two heaps, sent to
him as a propitiation by their guardians in
Samaria, whom he had defied to withstand him,
and on whom he thus threw the responsibility
of destroying their own royal charge. Next, at
" the shearing-house " (or Betheked, LXX. Bai0d-
«a0) between Jezreel and Samaria he encoun-
tered forty-two sons or nephews (2 K. x. 13, 14 ;
2 Ch. xx. 8) of the late king of Judah, and
therefore connected by marriage with Ahab, on
a visit of compliment to their relatives, of whose
fall, seemingly, they had not heard. These also
were put to the sword at the fatal well, as in
the later history, of Mizpah (2 K. x. 14), and,
in our own days, of Cawnpore. [ISHHAEL, 6.]
As he drove on he encountered a strange figure,
such as might have reminded him of the great
Elijah. It was Jehonadab, the austere Arabian
sectary, the son of Rechab. In him his keen
eye discovered a ready ally. He took him into
his chariot, and they concocted their schemes as
they entered Samaria (x. 15, 16). [Jehonadab.]
Some stragglers of the house of Ahab in that
city still remained to be destroyed. But the
great stroke was yet to come ; and it was con-
ceived and executed with that union of intrepid
daring and profound secrecy which marks the
whole career of Jehu. Up to this moment there
was nothing which showed anything beyond a
determination to exterminate in all its branches
the personal adherents of Ahab. Jehn might still
have been at heart, as he seems up to this time
to have been in name, disposed to tolerate, if not
to join in, the Phoenician worship. "Ahab
served Baal a little, but Jehu shall serve him
much." There was to be a new inauguration
of the worship of Baal. A solemn assembly,
sacred vestments, innumerable victims, were
ready. The vast temple at Samaria raised by
Ahab (1 K. xvi. 32 ; Joseph. Ant. ii. 7, § 6) was
crowded from end to end. The chief sacrifice was
offered, as if in the excess of his zeal, by Jehu
himself. Jehonadab joined in the deception.
There was some apprehension lest worshippers
of Jehovah might be found in the temple ; such,
it seems, had been the intermixture of the two
religions. As soon, however, as it was ascer-
tained that all, and none but, the idolaters were
there, the signal was given to eighty trusted
guards, and a sweeping massacre removed at
one blow the male heathen population of the
kingdom of Israel. The innermost sanctuary of
Digitized by
Google
1560
JEHU
the temple (A. V. and R. V. "the city of the
house of Baal ") was stormed, the great stone
statue of Baal was demolished, the wooden
figures of the inferior divinities sitting round
him were torn from their places and burnt
(Ewald, Qesch. iii. 526), and the site of the
sanctuary itself became the public resort of the
inhabitants of the city for the basest uses. This
is the last public act recorded of Jehu. The
remaining twenty-seven years of his long reign
are passed over in a few words, in which two
points only are material: — He did not destroy
the calf-worship of Jeroboam : the Trans-
jordanic tribes suffered much from the ravages
of Hazael (2 K. x. 29-33). With reference to
this second point, cuneiform discovery has much
to suggest. Jehu's name is found on the Black
Obelisk discovered at Ximrud (Layard, Nineveh,
i. 396) and now in the British Museum, amongst
the kings who are bringing tribute (in this
case gold and silver, and articles manufactured
in gold) to Shalmaneser II. His name is given
as " Yahua the son of Khumri " (Omri) {Black
Obelisk of Shaltnaneter, tr. by Sayce in Record*
of the Poet, v. 41, 1875. Cp. Schrader, KAT?
p. 208 sq. ; Keiiintchriftl. Bibliothek, i. 151).
This substitution of the name of Omri for that
of his own father may be accounted for, either
by the importance which Omri had assumed as
the second founder of the northern kingdom, or
by the name of " Beth-Khumri," only given to
Samaria in these monuments as " the House or
Capital of Omri" (Layard, Nineveh and Babylon,
p. 613, ed. 1853 ; Rawlinson's Herodvt. i. 469,
3rd ed. 1875).*
Jehu's appearance in this may be thus ex-
plained. Under Jehoram Israel had held its own
against its Syrian foes. In B.C. 842, Shalmaneser
ilirected an expedition against Damascus and
Hazael ; and when he did so, Jehu lost no time
in sending his ambassadors, bearing tribute, to
enlist the protection of the Assyrian. He had
but just ascended the throne, and every step
had been marked in blood; and he may have
felt that Assyrian protection was needed by
himself personally, even more than by his
people. Kor a time his policy probably secured
the desired end; but the Assyrian expedition
was practically unsuccessful. On the retire-
ment of the Assyrians, the Syrians once more
turned against the Israelites, and the havoc and
cruelty foretold by Elisha (2 K. viii. 12), and so
summarily stated by the historian (2 K. x. 32-3),
took place.
• The Black Obelisk Is figured large In Ltyard's
Monument* of Nineveh (fol.. Sex. I., 1849, Mo. 63),
small In Layard's yineveh (1849, 8vo, p. 347) ; and In
both volumes there are descriptions, but not translations.
Tbe name Jehu was first discovered on this monument
in 1861 by Dr. Hlncks. His name Is also found, ac-
cording to Norris, upon an unpublished fragment of
another inscription of Shalmaneser (Norris, Aityr.
Diet., Ft. II. p. 467). It was for some while the
earliest In Scripture history yielded by the Assyrian
records, and was so represented in the former edition
of this Dictionary. But about 1867 the earlier king
Aiub was found in the Monolith Intcription of f&al-
maneter from Kurkh (see Its entire translation by Sayce
in Accords of ike Pott, ill., 1874 ; cp. Norris, Attyr. Diet.,
Ft. 1. p. as), and he now holds the priority, as noticed
by Prof. Sayce (Wilnai of Ancient Monument*, 1884,
p. 9 ; see also the Introductions to his above translation n\
JEHU
The character of Jehu is not difficult to
understand, if we take it as a whole, and judge
it from a general point of view.
He must be regarded, like many others in
history, as an instrument for accomplishing
great purposes rather than as great or good in
himself. In the long period during which his
destiny — though known to others and perhaps
to himself — lay dormant ; in the suddenness of
his rise to power ; in the ruthle&sness with
which he carried out his purposes ; in the union
of profound silence and dissimulation with a
stern, fanatic, wayward zeal, — he has not been
without his likeness in modern times. Tbe
Scripture narrative, although it fixes our at-
tention on the services which he rendered to
the cause of religion by the extermination of
a worthless dynasty and a degrading worship,
yet on the whole leaves the sense that it was a
reign barren in great results. His dynasty, in-
deed, was firmly seated on the throne longer
than any other royal house of Israel (2 K. x. 30),
and under Jeroboam II. it acquired a high name
amongst tbe Oriental nations. But Elisha, who
had raised him to power, as far as we know
never saw him. In other respects it was a
failure ; the original sin of Jeroboam's worship
continued ; and in the Prophet Hoses there
seems to be a retribution exacted for the blood-
shed by which he had mounted the throne : " 1
will avenge the blood of Jezreel upon the house
of Jehu " (Hos. L 4), as in the similar condem-
nation of Baasha (1 K. xvi. 2). See a striking
poem to this effect on the character of Jehn in
the Lyra Apostolica.
2. (B. Eton, "loo, 'ItjotoC; A. iinov, 'lyoi.)
Jehu, son of Hanani ; a prophet of Judah, but
whose ministrations were chiefly directed to
Israel. His father was probably the seer who
reproved Asa (2 Ch. xvi. 7). He must have
begun his career as a prophet when very young.
He first denounced Baasha, both for his imitation
of the dynasty of Jeroboam, and also (as it
would seem) for his cruelty in destroying it
(1 K. xvi 1, 7), and then, after an interval of
thirty years, reappears to denounce Jehoshaphat
for his alliance with Ahab (2 Ch. xix. 2, 3).
He survived Jehoshaphat and wrote his life
(xx. 34). From an obscurity in the text of
1 K. xvi. 7, the Vulgate has represented him as
killed by Baasha. But this is not required by
the words, and (except on the improbable hypo-
thesis of two Jehus, both sons of Hanani) is
contradicted by the later appearance of this
prophet.
8. (B. 'Iif<roSf, A. 'Iijorf; Jehu.) A man of
Judah of the house of Hezron (1 Ch. ii. 38).
He was the son of a certain Obed, descended
from the union of an Egyptian, Jarha, with
the daughter of Sheshan, whose slave Jarha
was (cp. t . 34).
4. ("IijoiS.) A Simeonite, son of Josibiah
(1 Ch. iv. 35). He was one of the chief men of
the tribe, apparently in the reign of Hezekiah
(cp. r. 41).
6. flqooA.) Jehu the Antothite (A. V. ; Ana-
thothite, B. V.), i.e. native of Anathoth, was one
of the chief of the heroes of Benjamin, who for-
sook the cause of Saul for that of David when
the latter was at Ziklag (1 Ch. xii. 3). He
does not appear in any of the later lists.
[A. P. S.] [CH.]
Digitized by
Google
JEHUBBAH
JEHUB'BAH (nan', (?)= hidden; B. 'a$i$,
A. 'O&i ; Haba), a man of Aaher ; son of Shamer
or Shomer, of the hooae of Beriah (1 Ch. vii. 34).
JEHU'CAL(?MiT, perhaps a contraction of
favfelj = Jehovah is able [MV.»]; B. 'IwlxaA,
A. 'Iwax^Ci Jfchal), son of Shelemiah, sent
with Zephaniah by king Zedekiah to Jeremiah,
to entreat his prayers and advice (Jer. xxxvii.
3). His name is also given as Jccal, and he
appears to have been one of the " princes of the
king " (cp. ixxviii. 1, 4).
JEHUD Cin) ; B. 'A(<ip, A. 1M ; Just), one
of the towns of the tribe of Dan (Josh. lix.
45), named between Baalath and Beae-berak,
Jon Ibrdh. By Eusebius and Jerome Jehnd is
not named. It has been identified by Robinson
(ii. 242) and Schwarz (p. 110) with el- Yehudiyeh,
a. large mud village, surrounded by palm trees,
on the plain about 8 miles east of Jafla. Ac-
cording to the Samaritans, it is the burial-place
of Xeby Hidah, Judah (PEF. Mem. ii. 258).
Possibly Jehud, and not Jerusalem, as Prof.
Sayce has suggested, may be the Judab-Helek of
Shishak's inscription at Karnak. [G.] [W.J
JEHUDI (H1HJ = Jeio; BK. om. v. 14;
A. 'lovtd, BKA "Iowjf Ik in it. 21,23; Judi), son
of Nethaniah, employed by the princes of
Jelioiakim's court to bring Baruch before them
with the roll of Jeremiah's denunciation. When
this had been read to them by Baruch and after-
wards laid up in the chamber of Elishama,
Jehudi fetched it therefrom by command of the
king and read it to him and the princes; but
after Jehudi had read three or four leaves the
king cut the roll and cast it into the fire
(Jer. xii ri. [LXX. xliii.] 14, 21, 23).
JEHUDI'JAH (njTTPiT); B. 'Mtti, A. 'Uti ;
fudaia). There is really no such name in the
Hebrew Bible as that which our A. V. exhibit*
in 1 Ch. iv. 18. It is rather an appellative, "the
Jewess," as in the A. V. margin, the K. V. text,
and modern commentators generally. As far as
an opinion can be formed on so obscure and
apparently corrupt a passage, Mered, a descend-
ant of Caleb the son of Jephunneh, and whose
towns (Qedor, Socho, and Eshtemoa) lay in the
south of Judah, married two wi ves ; one a Jewess,
the other an Egyptian, a daughter of Pharaoh.
The Jewess was sister of Naham, the founder of
the cities of Keilah and Eshtemoa. The descend-
ants of Mered by his two wives are given in
or. 18, 19, and perhaps in the latter part of
r. 17. Hodijah in v. 19 may be a corruption of
Hn-jehudijah, "the Jewess," though the R. V.
and modern critics retain it as a proper name.
If the full stop at the end of c. 18 be removed,
the passage may be read, "These are the sons
of Bithiah, the daughter of Pharaoh, which
Mered took (for his wife), and the sons of his
wife, the Jewess, the sister of Naham (which
Naham was), the father of Keilah, whose in-
habitants are Garmites, and of Eshtemoa, whose
inhabitants are Maachathites ;" the last being
named possibly from Maachah, Caleb's concu-
bine, as the Ephrathites were from Ephratah.
Berthean (Ckronik) arrives at the same general
result, by proposing to place the closing words
JEKAHIAU
1561
of e.*18 before the words "And she bare Miriam,"
&c, in v. 17, and with him agree Keil, Oettli,
&c. in loco. See also Vatablus in loco in Bp.
Pearson's Critic* Sacri, 1660, t. ii. col. 2661.
[A. C. H.] [C. H.]
JEHO'SH, R. V.'JEUSH (B*W»; 'Us, B.
Tiy, A 'litis ; Jehus), son of Eshek, a remote
descendant of Saul (1 Ch. viii. 39). The parallel
genealogy in ch. ix. 43, 44 stops abort of this
man.
JEI'EL (V??i •fcAW)- 1- CM*-) A
chief man among the Reubenites, one of the
house of Joel (1 Ch. v. 7).
2. {'UHiK; A. once '16it)\.) A Merarite
Lerite, one of the gate-keepers (D'Ttrtt? ; A. V.
"porters" and "doorkeepers") to the sacred
tent, at the first establishment of the Ark in
Jerusalem (1 Ch. xv. 18). His duty was also
to play the harp (t>. 21), or the psaltery and
harp (xvi. 5), in the service before the Ark.
a f/EAffyA, B. 'EAaAeiiX, A. 'EXs^A.) A
Gershonite Levite, one of the Bene-Asaph, fore-
father of Jahaziel in the time of king Jehosha-
phat (2 Ch. xx. 14).
4. (^KMP, i.e. Jeuel, but the A V. and
R. V. follow the correction of the Qeri; 'UvtJK.)
The scribe (TD^Dn) who kept the account of
the numbers of king (Jzziah's irregular pre-
datory warriors (DHIIi, A. V. " bands," 2 Ch.
xxvi. 11).
6. (Jeuel, as in the preceding, but the A. V.
again follows the Keri, whilst R. V. reads Jeuel ;
'Utf)x ; Jahiel.) A Gershonite Levite, one of
the Bene-Elizaphan, who assisted in the restora-
tion of the house of Jehovah under king Heze-
kiah (2 Ch. xxix. 13).
0. (B. 'IaWjA, A. 'W H}\.) One of the chiefs
of (.*"&) the Levites in the time of Josiah, and
an assistant in the rites at his great Passover
(2 Ch. xxxv. 9).
7. (Jeuel as above, but in Qeri and A V.
Jeie); in R. V. Jeuel: 'Id)*.; B. E&fut, A.
Ety\.) One of the Bene-Adonikam who formed
part of the caravan of Ezra from Babylon to
Jerusalem (Ezra viii. 13). In Esdras the name
is Jeuel.
8. fla^X, A. 'Itfi^X.) A layman, of the
Bene-Nebo, who had taken a foreign wife and
had to relinquish her (Ezra x. 43). in Esdras it
is omitted from the Greek and A. V., though
the Vulgate has Idetus.
JEKAB-ZE-EL (^Ml* ; B. omits, A. Kofi-
<rts)\ ; Cabseel), a fuller form of the name of
Kabzeel, the most remote city of Judah on the
southern frontier. This form occurs only in
the list of the places re-occupied after the Cap-
tivity (Neh. xi. 25). Its site is unknown.
[G.] [W.]
JEKAM-EAM (DBDjV, (?)=[Godj raises up
the people : B. 'Ixt/iidi, 1 IokoV ; A. 'Ificfptd :
Jccmaam, Jecmaan), a Levite in the time of king
David : fourth of the sons of Hebron, the son of
Eohath (1 Ch. xxiii. 19 ; xxiv. 23>
JEEAMI'AH (HJDiV, Q)=May Jehovah up-
raise; B. 'Itxfpioi, A. 'Uitotuis; Icamia), son of
Digitized by
Google
1562
JEKUTHIEL
Shall am, in the line of Ahlai, about contemporary
with king Ahaz. In another passage the same
name, borne by a different person, is given as
jECAJHAH(lCh.ii.41). [Jaeha.] [A.C. H.]
JEKU'THXEL (^Orup»,(?)= the protection
of God [MV. 11 ]; B.Vx«tWJA, A. 'UxSufiX;
Icuthiel), a man recorded in the genealogies
of Judith (1 Ch. iv. 18) as the son of a certain
Ezrah by his Jewish wife (A. V. Jehudijah),
and in his turn the father, or founder, of
the town of Zanoah. This passage in the Tar-
gum is not without a certain interest. Jered
is interpreted to mean Moses, and each of the
names following are taken as titles borne by
him. Jekuthiel — " trust in God "—is so applied
" because in his days the Israelites trusted in the
God of heaven for forty years in the wilderness."
In a remarkable prayer used by the Spanish
aud Portuguese Jews in the concluding service
of the Sabbath, Elijah is invoked as having had
"tidings of peace delivered to him by the hand
of Jekuthiel." This is explained to refer to
some transaction in the life of Phineas, with
whom Elijah is, in the traditions of the Jews,
believed to be identical (see the quotations in
Modern Judaism, p. 229).
JEMI'MA (TOW ; 'Mpa; Dies, as if from
OP x
DV, "a day:" cp. ]&Q&Q*)> imama, day), the
eldest of the three daughters born to Job after
the restoration of his prosperity (Job xlii. 14).
Gesenius and Dillmann identify the name with
an Arabic word signifying " dove." [W. T. B.J
JEBTNAAN ('Ic/u-adV ; Vulg. omits), men-
tioned among the places on the sea-coast of
Palestine to which the panic of the incursion of
Holofernes extended (Judith ii. 28). Mo doubt
Jabneel — generally called Jarania by the Greek
writers — is intended. The omission of Joppa,
however, is remarkable. [G.] [W.]
JEMU'EL (StttD* : B. "U^iWjx, 'U/ufa; A.
'UpotrflK : Jemuel, Samuel), the eldest son of
Simeon (Gen. xlvi. 10 ; Ex. vi. 15). In the
lists of Num. xxvi. and 1 Ch. iv. the name is
given as Nemuel, which Gesenius decides to be
the corrupted form.
JEPHTHA'E QU&&* ; Jephte), Heb. xi.32.
The Greek form of the name Jephthah.
JEPHTHAH (PIFIB* = [God] opens or
makes free [M.V. 11 ] or'= the breaker through
[Edersheim] ; 'lupeit ; Jephte), a judge. His
history is contained in Judg. xi. 1-xii. 7. He
was a Gileadite, the son of Gilead and a con-
cubine. Driven by the legitimate sons from
his father's inheritance, he went to Too, and
became the head of a company of freebooters
in a debatable land probably belonging to
Amnion (2 Sam. x. 6). The idolatrous Israelites
in Gilead were at that time smarting under the
oppression of an Ammonitish king j and Jephthah
was led, as well as by the unsettled character of
the age as by his own family circumstances, to
adopt a kind of life unrestrained, adventurous,
and insecure as that of a Scottish border-chieftain
in the Middle Ages. It was not unlike the life
which David afterwards led at Ziklag, with this
JEPHTHAH
exception, that Jephthah had no friend among
the heathen in whose land he lived. His fame
as a bold and successful captain was carried
back to his native Gilead ; and when the time
was ripe for throwing off the yoke of Amnion,
the Gileadite elders sought in vain for any leader
who in an equal degree with the base-born out-
cast could command the confidence of his coun-
trymen. Jephthah consented to become their
captain, on the condition — solemnly ratified be-
fore the Lord in Mizpeh — that in the event of
his success against Amnion he should still remain
as their acknowledged head. Messages, urging
their respective claims to occupy the trans-
Jordanic region, were exchanged between the
Ammonitish king and Jephthah. Then the
Spirit of the Lord came upon Jephthah. He
collected warriors throughout Gilead and Ma-
nasseh, the provinces which acknowledged bU
authority. And then he vowed his vow unto
the Lord, " Whatsoever Cometh forth of the doors
of my house to meet me, when I return in peace
from the children of Amnion, it shall be the
Lord's, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering "
(R. V.). The • Ammonites were routed with
great slaughter. Twenty cities, from Aroer on
the Anion to Minnith and to Abel Keramim,
were taken from them. But as the conqueror
returned to Mizpeh there came out to meet him
a procession of damsels with dances and timbrels,
and among them — the first person from his own
house — his daughter and only child. "Alas!
my daughter, thon hast brought me very low,"
was the greeting of the heart-stricken father.
But the high-minded maiden was ready for any
personal suffering in the hour of her father's
triumph. Only she asked for a respite of two
months to withdraw to her native mountains,
and in their recesses to weep with her virgin-
friends that she was to die unmarried. When
that time was ended, she returned to her father ;
and " he did unto her his vow."
But Jephthah had not long leisure, even if he
were disposed, for the indulgence of domestic
grief. The proud tribe of Ephraim challenged
his right to go to war, as he had done without
their concurrence, against Amnion; and they
proceeded to vindicate the absurd claim by in-
vading Jephthah in Gilead. They did bnt add
to his triumph which they envied. He first
defeated them, then intercepted the fugitives at
the fords of Jordan, and there, having insultingly
identified them as Ephraimites by their peculiar
pronunciation, he put forty-two thousand men
to the sword.
The eminent office for which Jephthah had
stipulated as the reward of his exertions, and
the glory which he had won, did not long abide
with him. He judged Israel six years and died.
It is generally conjectured that his jurisdic-
tion was limited to the trans-Jordanic region.
That the daughter of Jephthah was really
offered up to God in sacrifice, slain by the hand of
ber father and then burned, is a horrible conclu-
sion ; but one which it seems impossible to avoi-i
(cp. Wordsworth, Holy Bible, with notes, in loco).
This was understood to be the meaning of tin-
text by Jonathan the paraphrast, and Kashi, in
Josephiis {Ant. v. 7, § 10), and by perhaps all the
early Christian fathers, as Origen, m Jo>mnem.
torn. vi. cap. 36 ; Chrysostom, Horn, ad pop.
Antioch. xiv. 3, Opp. ii. 145 ; Theodoret, Quaeit.
Digitized by
Google
JEPHUNNE
in Jud. xx. ; Jerome, Ep. ad JulAlS, Opp. i. 791,
&c. ; Augustine, Quaest. m Jud. riii. § 49, Opp.
iii. 1, p. 610. For the first eleven centuries of the
Christian era this was the current, perhaps the
universal, opinion of Jews and Christians. Yet
none of them extenuate the act of Jephthah.
Josephns calls it neither lawful nor pleasing to
God. Jewish writers say that he ought to have
referred it to the high-priest ; but either he failed
to do so, or the high-priest culpably omitted to
prevent the rash act. Origen strictly confines
his praise to the heroism of Jephthah's daughter.
Another interpretation was suggested by
Joseph Kimchi. He supposed that, instead of
being sacrificed, she was shut up in a house
which her father built for the purpose, and that
she was there visited by the daughters of Israel
four days in each year so long as she lived.
This interpretation has been adopted by many
eminent men, as by Levi ben Gersom and Bechai
among the Jews, and by Drusius, Grotius, Estius,
de Dieu, Bishop Hall, Waterland, Dr. Hales, and
others. And this opinion has found favour with
many modern critics (cp. Cossel in Herxog, BE.*
s. n. " Iefta " ; Kohlor, KSnig, Hauptprobi. p. 74 ;
Edersheim, Bible History, ii. 159, &c). Support
for these opinions respectively is deduced from
the original text and the customs of the day
(see them stated in the first edition of this work),
and theological opinions have sometimes had the
effect of leading men to prefer one view of
Jephthah's vow to another. The act itself is,
however, one which the Scripture relates in all
its baldness, and leaves judgment upon it un-
pronounced. There is no necessity to turn in
explanation of it to foreign analogies, such as
have been sought in the sacrifice of his son by
Idouieneus or in the intention of Agamemnon to
offer Iphigenia; still less is the act to be set
aside as mythological and unhistorical. The
commendation of Jephthah's faith (Heb. xi. 32)
leaves unaffected acts which, if reprobated to-day,
are not incompatible with the belief of the age
in which they are alleged to have occurred
(cp. Mozley, Ruling Ideas in Early Ages and
their relation to 0. T. faith, Lectures ii., iii. and
xi.).
The views of the modern school upon the
sources and text of Jephthah's history may be
seen summed up in Kittel, Oesch. d. HebrSer, ii.
80 sq., 1892. [W. L. B.] [F.]
JEPHUN'NE Cledwrrij; Jephone), Ecclus.
xlvi. 7. [Jkphunneh.]
JEPHUN'NEH (njD»; Jephone). 1. ('W-
a>ovrl\.) Father of Caleb the spy, who is usually
designated as " Caleb the son of Jephunneh."
He appears to have belonged to an Edomitish
tribe called Kenezites, from Kenaz their founder ;
bnt his father or other ancestors are not named.
[Caleb, 2; Kenaz.] (See Num. xiii. 6, tic,
xxxii. 12, &c.; Josh. xiv. 14, &c; 1 Ch. iv. 15.)
2. (B. 'lipiyd, A. "U<prfi\.) A descendant of
Asher, eldest of the three sons of Jether (1 Ch.
▼ii. 38). [A. C. H.]
JETt-AH (rrv, Tirach : in Gen. A. 'Ia>»8,
F. 'Idptt; Jare), the fourth of the thirteen sons
of Joktan (Gen. x. 26 ; 1 Ch. i. 20 [BA. oro.]),
who appear to represent the eponymous ancestors
or founders of a group of related tribes in Western
JERAHMEEL
1563
and Southern Arabia. The name Jerah, however,
has not been certainly identified, either local I r
or in Arab genealogical traditions. Bochart,
indeed, suggested that ITV was not the actual
name of the Joktanide clan in question, but
a Hebrew translation of it, and that the clan
was, in fact, the Bani Hilal, " Sons of the
New Moon," in Northern Yemen, whom he
further identified with the Aliloei mentioned
by Agatharchides {ap. Diod. Sic. iii. 45). But
the assumption of a translation instead of
a transcription of the name is unsatisfactory ;
and, in any case, T\"V is not Heb. for "New
Moon " (B^H), nor even "moon," but " month." *
And it is known that the Banu Hilal got their
name from an ancestor of the Prophet, belong-
ing to the tribe of Kais, and therefore have
nothing to do with the Alilaei (Caussin de
Perceval, Essai, Tab. Xa ; Abul-Fida, p. 194,
ed. Fleischer, cited by E. S. Poole).
In the Hebrew list, Jerah follows Hazar-
maveth, the modern Hadhramaut. J. 1).
Hichaelis, therefore, while adopting Bochart'*
main idea, compared -»JLM ■_ -e- QhubbuU-
Kamar, "The Coast of the Moon," and
-»SJ\ Jjk>-. G'abalu'l-Kamar, "The Moun-
tain of the Moon," both E. of Hadhramaut.
Mr. E. S. Poole compared -\ j> Yarakk, a
fortress of the Nig'ad, in Mahrah (Marasid, s. v.
Yarakh) ; Prof. D. H. Muller, Wardkh, an inha-
bited mountain in the district of al-'Aud, W.
of Hadhramaut (Hamdanfi, Q'azirat al-'Arab,
pp. 178 sq.). But we can hardly feel assured
of the Hebrew reading of the name, in face of
the LXX. variant Jarad or Jared ; and it is
possible that K. Niebuhr's hesitating comparison
of j j , Jarbn, a very ancient town of Hadhra-
maut, is correct {Arabien, p. 291). [C. J. B.]
JEKAH'ME-EL (fotplTV = Oof hath
mercy: B. 'Ipa/ic^A, 'Ispc/ie^A, 'IcptjtaqA, 'Po-
/uefjA; A. 'Upt/uiiK 'Upf/i^K: Jerameel).
1. First-born son of Hezron, the son of Pharez,
the son of Judab (1 Ch. ii. 9). His wives and
descendants ore given at length in vv. 25-33.
and nowhere else. [Azabiah, 13 ; Zabad.]
They inhabited the southern border of Judah.
[Jerahmeelites.]
2. flpapa^X.) A Merarite Levite ; the re-
presentative, at the time of the organisation of
the Divine service by king David, of the family
of Kish the son of Mahli (1 Ch. xxiv. 29 ; cp.
xxiii. 21).
8. ('I«j>«/m<\.) Son of Hammelecb, or as the
LXX., R.V., A.V. margin, render it, " son of the
king," i.e. a prince of the blood. He was em-
ployed by Jeboiakim to make Jeremiah and
Baruch prisoners, after the roll of Jeremiah's
prophecy had been burnt (Jer. xxxvi. [LXX.
xliii.]26). [A. C. H.] [C. H.]
• The kindred term flT Is " moon ; " although, Uke
- "T
the Assyrian orjti, Its formal equivalent, ryy doubtless
originally denoted "moon," and then " month."
Digitized by
Google
1564
JEHAHMEELITES
JEBAH'MEELITES, THE (^KDn"WJ:
'Itviuyd, i 'Upt/utk ; B. in xxx. 29, 'iapa^K't
A.'l<rpaft.riK(l,'Upafiri\ti: Jerameel). The tribe
descended from the first of the foregoing persons
( 1 Sam. xxvii. 10). Their cities were also named
amongst those to which David sent presents
from his Amalekite booty (xxx. 29), although
to Achish he had represented that he had
attacked them.
JER'ECHUS (Upt X os, B. 'Up4 X ov; B».
'Ufxixoi ; Ericut), 1 End. v. 22. [Jericho.]
JE'BED, R. V. JARED (1 £=*««»< > -
'IdptS; Jared). 1. One of the patriarchs before
the Flood, son of Mahalaleel and father of Enoch
(1 Ch. i. 2). In Genesis the name is given as
Jared.
3. (Jaret.) One of the descendants of Jndah
signalised as the " father — i.e. the founder — of
Oedor " (1 Ch. iv. 18). He was one of the sons
of Ezrah by his wife Ha-Jehudijah, i.e. the
Jewess. The Jews, however, give an allegorical
interpretation to the passage, and treat this and
other names therein as titles of Moses — Jered
because he caused the manna to descend. Here
— as noticed under Jabez — the pun, though
obvious in biblical Hebrew, where Jarad (the
root of Jordan) means " to descend," is concealed
in the rabbinical paraphrase, which has TVITIN,
— a word with the same meaning, but without
any relation to Jered, either for eye or ear.
[G.] [W.]
JEBE'HAI CD-V ; B. 'ltpa/ulu, A. 'Up/ii,
X. 'Upa/iti; Jermai), a layman ; one of the Bene-
Hashum, who was compelled by Ezra to put
away his foreign wife (Ezra x. 33). In the lists
of Esdras it is omitted.
JEBEMI'AH.BOOKOF. 1. ZYWe.-WDT
the usual form, but iTD"]*; occurs, besides the
heading to the Book, in xxvii. 1, xxviii. 5, 10, 11,
15, xxix. 1 ; so Dan. ix. 2 : LXX. *I«/»/Jcu ; Vulg.
-Jeremicu; St. Jerome and others, Ilieremias.
Conjectures as to the meaning of the name are
(a) " the Lord's exalted one " (St. Jerome, and
so Simonis, Onomast. p. 535) ; (6) " the Lord's
appointed one " (Gesen. Thes. s. v., "jecit, id
est, collocavit, constituit," referring it to the
>ense of the root which appears probably in Dan.
vii. 9, "placed," marg. catt down, R. V.);
(c) " the Lord throws (down) " (Hengst. Chrutto-
logic do A. Ii., Clark's Library, ii. 361, tracing
this use of the root to Ex. xv. 1, and making
the application in Jeremiah's case to be to the
work spoken of in i. 10). This last perhaps
accords most closely with the analogues n'33',
nHB', JVmt'; yet the ill omen which it suggests
is hardly in accordance with the fact that the
name was far from uncommon.
2. Authorship and Authenticity. — An un-
varying tradition ascribes the Book to Jeremiah
the Prophet, and the strong impress of the writer's
individuality, which is apparent throughout the
greater part, confirms us in this conclusion.*
* For the strange view which places the writing of
this and of the other Prophetical Books In the 2nd cent.
b.c, see E. Havet In Kevur de$ deux Morula, 1889, iv.
p. 616, fee. (answered by De Lagarde, MUtiuUungen,
JEBEMIAH
We must however at once except ch. lit because
of (i.) the last words of h. ; (ii.) a certain pecu-
liarity of style, e.g. the nse of the name Jehoia-
chin instead of Coniah or Jeconiah ; (iii.) the
contents of or. 31-34. Other portions in which
the authorship has been doubted or denied an
viii. 10-12;* x. 1-16;' xv. 11-14; xvii. 19-
27; xxv. 12-14; xxvii. 7, b 16-22 ; xxx.-xxxiii. ;
xxxix. 1, 2 ; xlviii., 1., Ii.
The chief of those who have denied or doubted
the genuineness of one or more of the above
passages are Berthold, Cheyne, Kwald, Graf,
Hitzig, Kuobel, Meier, Hovers, Naegelsbach,
Schnurrer, Struensee, Venema ; while amongst
their defenders are Hengstenberg, Keil, and
Payne Smith.
it would seem unlikely that Baruch was in
any sense the author of portions of the Book,
with the possible exception of the historical
appendix (lii.), carefully distinguished (we li.
64) from Jeremiah's own words.
Parts of the LXX. in this Book present start-
ling exceptions to its general rule of adherence
with tolerable fidelity to the Massoretic text
Hence has arisen the question, whether the
Heb. or the Greek text of Jeremiah is to be
considered the more authentic We may con-
veniently classify their divergencies under two
heads.
(1.) Matter. — In the LXX., besides a certain
amount of alteration of a kind to affect the
sense, while little is added, there is an immense
number of trifling omissions besides some of more
importance. The longest of these last — nose of
them, we may observe, of a character to be easily
omitted by accident — are xxix. 16-20; xxxiii.
14-26 ; xxxix. 4-13 ; liii. 28-30. On the whole
about an eighth of the Heb. text is wanting.
(2.) Arrangement. — The position of the pro-
phecies against foreign nations differs.' In the
LXX. instead of coming near the end of the
Book (xlvi.-li.) they follow upon xxv. 13, ami
therefore immediately precede the section of
kindred subject-matter which begins at xxv. V>.
Also the order of sequence of these prophetic
among themselves • differs.
it is not a case of two independent recensions,
for then (a) the striking differences would not
be confined to certain parts of the Book, and
(6) we shonld not find the peculiar form ef
Introduction (i. 1-3)/ virtually the same, and
lii. added in both. Further we must suppose
both forms of the Book to have existed very
early, as it would be impossible that one already
for any length of time in possession (a thinf
which would naturally take place in a very
vol. Iv.), and Maurice Vemea, Prrcit tVIHstuirt Jain
depuit let Oriyinet jtaqu'a I'Kpajut Pertatu, 18M.
» Omitted In LXX.
• And e. 11, on the special ground that it h in
Chaldee.
• Noticed as early as Origen, Ep. ad Afric., Migne.
p. 56 ; Hieron. Pratf. in Jertm.
• See t.g. NacgelBbach, in translation of L»n*e'i
Commentary, fcc. (T. and T. Clark, Edinb.), Arfmt
p. 13. The Heb. order Is preferable from Internal con-
siderations.
' Implying repeated alteration from the original
shape. Vt>. I, J are the natural beadrai of a propbeey
including only the utterances of Josiah's reign, r 3 i»
evidently added with a further group, but still does not
cover xl.-xllv.
Digitized by
Google
JEREMIAH
brief period with n Prophet, illustrious and
honoured as Jeremiah became) should admit
another so different to be on anything like an
equal footing.
Views as to the causes of variation may be
thus classified : ' (u) errors of copyists (St. Jerome,
Grabe), (6) negligence or caprice of LXX. (Spoho,
Naegelsbach, Wichelhaus, Keil, Graf), (c) two or
more recensions of the Hebrew (J. D. Michaelis,
Movers, Hitzig, Bleek, and Workman 11 holding
that that followed by the LXX. is nearer the
original text, while Ewald, ? Havernick, Schrader,
and Knenen consider that, while on the whole
the Massoretic text is to be preferred, the Greek
translation, in spite of manifold errors and
caprices, now and then gets nearer to the
original). Against the LXX. are pleaded (a) the
arbitrary character of an immense number of
the renderings, alike affecting letters, syllables,
words, and verses ; (6) the omissions, especially
those which do not materially affect the sense,
viz. the words "the prophet, "saith the Lord,"
"the Lord of hosts the God of Israel," &c.
Hence it has been suggested that Baruch, desiring
on the death of Jeremiah to return to Palestine
and to carry with him the original writings,
allowed several persons to transcribe the pro-
phecies m all haste, and that the LXX. preserves
for us this form of the Book. 1 On behalf of
the LXX. are pleaded (a) its more important
omissions (see above) as not of a character to be
accidentally left out ; (6) the use of cipher " in
the Heb. text (not recognised in the LXX.);
(c) the position given in the Greek text to the
prophecies directed against foreign nations, as
one which they are more likely to have occupied
in Jeremiah's roll. 1 On the whole it would
appear that the text which formed the basis of
the Greek translators' work was, both in accuracy
and in the arrangement of its matter, superior to
the Massoretic text, while the numerous errors
which disfigure the LXX. Version of the Book
are to be charged (we know not with what precise
distribution of blame) to slips on their own part,
and to errors, obscurities, lacunae, &c. in the
Heb. MSS. on which they worked.
3. Date and l'liwe. — This subject has been
of necessity discussed already under the heading
of authenticity. Either before, or very soon
after Jeremiah's death in Egypt (? a.d. 575 "),
Baruch, we may conjecture, put together the
Prophet's writings, and, as well through dis-
JEBKMIAH
1565
« This classification is taken in the main from srticle
Jeremiah (Chcyne) In 9th ed. of Bncycl. Brit.
'• See tbe careful treatise of the last-named writer
(Edlnb. 1889).
> See Speaker's Conn. (Payne Smith), Introd. to Jer.
k Oh. xxv. 26, li. 1, 41. and cp. v. 64. In defence «f
tbe probability of Jeremiah's use of a Kabballatic system
of writing (Atbssh) in these passages, see Plnmptre's
note on xxxii. 9 In Bp. Elltcott's o. T. Camm./or Eng-
lish Readtri.
> See Naegelsbach, Introd. p. xlil., with retf. to his
Commentary there given.
"> About ten years after his arrival in Egypt. The
traditional notices are slender and even Inconsistent.
Tbe Christian account is given by Tertulllan, adv.
ffnost. 8, " Jeremlas lapidatnr ; " so Hleron. adv. Jov. ii.
37. The Jewish is that Nebncbadneuar brought him
and Baruch from Egypt to Babylon (D711? TID
V'3 K2~f)i but Rashl (on xtlv. 14) says that he died
In Judaea.
like of the princes who had brought him
thither as in deferenee to his master's unvarying
opinion (ii. 36 ; xxxvii. 7 ; xliu 9-22), returned
with the Book to Palestine.
4. Person! addressed. — A. His own nation.
Even the reformation-work of Josiah seems to
have been but superficial. Jeremiah was called
upon to seek to convince of sin and stir up to a
sense of the requirements of the Divine Law the
followers of Baal and Astarte (i. 16; ii. 5, 11,
13, 20, 23, 27, 28 ; iii. 1 sq. ; vii. 18 ; ix. 14), and
of the unholy pleasures to which that worship
ministered (v. 7, 8), — men devoted to magical arts
(xxvii. 9) and steeped in habits of dishonesty
(v. 1, 26-28 ; vi. 13 ; vii. 8 ; ix. 3-6, 8), false
swearing (v. 2 ; xxiii. 10), violence (vi. 7 ; vii.
5, 6 ; xxi. 12), and infanticide (viii. 31 ; xix. 5 ;
xxxii. 35)."
Many of his rebukes are directly addressed to
the priests and false prophets. For Jeremiah,
unlike certain of his predecessors, had to meet
the united hostility of these two classes,* who,
as we see (v. 31 ; vi. 13; viii. 10 ; xxiii. 1 1).
played into each other's hands.' The maiu
object of the former was to ensure the external
prosperity of the Temple, as the substantial
symbol of the theocracy, and the source of their
own gains ; while the prophets, closely joined
with them by a common interest in the main-
tenance of the status quo, supported the priest-
hood by their optimistic teachings, which were
delivered with an air of the utmost confidence
and bolstered up by pretended revelations ob-
tained by incantation and magical arts (which
Dent, xviii. 10-14 had stringently forbidden), ami
uncontrolled by the Spirit of God (Jer. xiv. 14).
Jeremiah, " by each of his callings naturally led
to sympathize with both, was the doomed anta-
gonist of both." q For his language towards
them, besides the passages given above, see ii.
8, 26 ; vi. 14 sq. ; viii. 1, 13 ; xiii. 13 ; xiv.
13-17; xviii. 18; xxvi. 7, 12-15; xxvii. 9.
14, 16; xxix. 21-32; xxxii. 32; ixxiv. 19;
xxxvii. 19.
On the other hand, the " princes " ' were
friendly to Jeremiah in his earlier time (xxvi.),
and not unfriendly even in the fourth year of
Jehoiakim (xxxvi.). Later (xxxvii. 15 sq.) they
were decidedly hostile.
Lastly, from none of the kings did the Prophet
meet with any active or continuous opposition,
although the fate of the roll (xxxvi. 23) and the
treatment to which Zedekiah allowed the Prophet
to be subjected, show that the warnings which
he addressed to Jehoiakim and his successors by
no means always induced them to bow to the
authority which he claimed.
B. Heathen nations. Jeremiah addresses the
nations * through their ambassadors both by word
and acted symbol, warning them of the crushing
■ See also vii. 9, xxlx. 23, and many other passages.
o The " wise," Joined with these two as a third min-
isterial class In the Jewish state (xviii. 18, but cp. vii.
9), seem to have been naturally on friendly terms with
Jeremiah. See Canon Cheync's Jer. his Life and Timet,
p. 90.
P See Stanley, Jewish Church, II. 441, for contrast
between Jeremiah's position in this respect and that of
Isaiah or Amos.
i Stanley's Jewish Church, II. 440.
' Probably heads of prominent families.
• For this custom see Ewald, Hist, of Isr. iv. 196.
Digitized by
Google
1566
JEREMIAH
power of the growing empire of Babylon
(xxvii. 1-11). This was early in the reign of
Zedekiah. In the fourth year of Jehoiakim he had
addressed to the nations similar warnings, empha-
sized by the symbol of the wine-cup (ixv. 8-^38),
and to the same date belongs the greater part of
the prophecies relating to foreign nations, which
are comprised in xlvi.-xlix. The prophecy
against Babylon (1., li.) is probably later.
5. Contents and character. — A. Contents.
(i.) Jeremiah's early life. He was a priest and
son of Hilkiah (i. 1). If with some (e.g. St.
Clem. Alex., St. Jer., Theodoret, Kimchi, Abar-
banel, Eichhorn, Von Bohlen, Umbreit) we assume
that his father is identical with the high-priest '
who fire years (cp. i. 2 with 2 K. xxii. 3-8)
after Jeremiah's call " found the book of the
law in the house of the Lord," we can the more
clearly picture to ourselves the Prophet's train-
ing as son of the man who held not only the
chief position in religious matters, but also the
foremost place in Josiah's reformation. In
favour of this view are (i.) the respect with which
the Prophet was treated by the kings and the
princes of Judah, and (ii.) the fact that Baruch,
a man of good birth," and brother of Seraiah,
a prince (li. 59), was willing to be his scribe.
Against it is the fact that Hilkiah was descended
from Eleazar (1 Ch. vi. 4-13), but the priests of
Anathoth through Abiathar from Itbamar (1 K.
ii. 26 ; 1 Ch. xxir. 3). It is however not im-
possible, nor even, for aught we know, very
improbable, that members of both lines of de-
scent should reside in the same priestly city, and
it is certainly likely that the dominant family
would secure for its high-priest a dwelling in
a place so conveniently near (''three Roman
miles," St. Jer. on i. 1 ; " twenty Roman stadia,"
Jos. Ant. x. 7, § 3) to Jerusalem. 1
Jeremiah speaks of himself at the time of his
call as "a child " (TM, i. 6). The same word
is used of Joshua (Ex. xxxiii. 11) at a time when
he appears to have been forty-five years of age.'
In the case of Jeremiah, however, the length of
his prophetic ministry shows that he must have
been very youthful at its commencement. The
period from about B.C. 626 (thirteenth year of
Josiah) till B.C. 586 (destruction of Jerusalem)
gives us forty years, while he survived for a con-
siderable time the fall of the city.
That he was a Nazarite has been inferred by
some, but hardly with sufficient reason, from
(a) the reverence with which he regards the
Rechabites (xxxv.) ; (6) the improbability that
one trained in the house of a devout priest
would be unmindful of such passages as Is.
xxviii. 7, Amos ii. 11, 12; (c) Lam. iv. 7. In
this connexion it has been pointed out also that
a Rechabite is named Jeremiah (xxxv. 3).
The Biblical narrative suggests that Jeremiah
< So Targum of " Jonathan" on Lam. begins thus:
•'Jeremiah theprophet and chief priest (J<3"1 M3il31)
» - » -: - :
said."
u Josephus, Ant. X. 9, 1, i( eimrijfiov <r$&pa ouctac.
* Hilkiah Is not the only name common to the
historical and prophetic record. We have also Sballum
\xxxU. 7 ; 2 K. xxiii. U) and Ablkam (xxvi. 24 ; 2 K.
xxil.12).
» Solomon (1 K. 111. J) when about twenty years of
age calls himself | - gp "ijjj.
JEREMIAH
was prepared for his life-work rather by the
instruction and associations of Anathoth than by
any formal training in the " schools of the pro-
phets," and that he was thence called direct to
the task of declaring the will of God to Hii
disobedient people.*
(ii.) His relations to Joeiak (B.C 638-608).
His attachment to the person of Josiah, ai
shown by his lamentation* over his death in
battle (2 Ch. xxxv. 25), as well as the strong
sympathy with which he regarded the war
waged by the king against idolatry and iti
attendant defilements, neither hindered him from
looking with disquietude upon the traditionary
policy of seeking an alliance with Egypt (ii. 36),
nor yet prevented him from seeing that hitherto
it was but the surface of the nation's pollution
which had been touched. In fact, as far as ail
extant prophecies are concerned, Josiah's work
of reformation might have been wholly non-
existent, while on the other hand there is no
mention of Jeremiah in the historical record.
The mass of the people, and even the main
body of the priests and prophets themselves,
were unmoved, and it therefore behoved him
unceasingly to preach the message with which
he was charged.
During the gradual progress of this outward
and partial reformation, and five years before
its sudden and great development in connexion
with the discovery of " the book of the law,"
the Prophet's actual call occurred, and in s
form evidently altogether unlooked for (cp. Is.
vi. ; Ezek. i.). He shrinks from the prospect,
but the Lord reassures him, touches his month
and sends him forth as His Prophet.* The more
important portion of his task ia to consist is
rebuke and threatening, " to root out, and to
pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down"
(i. 10), while out of the ruins a better and more
hopeful state of things shall spring, " to build
and to plant " (ibid.).
Now and to the end of his ministry idolatry
is the foundation sin that he denounces. Is the
valley of Hinnom, close to Jerusalem, at any rats
up to the time of Josiah's reforms, children
were offered to Baal or Molech (vii. 31 ; xix. 5;
xxxii. 35 ; the two being identified in this last
passage) ; while " the queen of heaven " (vii 18;
xliv. 17, 18, 19, 25), the Atar-Samain of Asrar-
banipal's inscription,* received moon-shaped cakes
from female worshippers. The Prophet dwells
with perpetual iteration upon this indictment,
and upon the overthrow that must ensue.
Tokens of that overthrow are already to be seen
in the shape of drought and famine (v. 25;
xiv. 1 ). The power « from the north " (i. 13 sq. ;
iii. 18; iv. 6 ; vi. 22; x. 22; xiii. 20; xvi. 15;
xxiii. 8), a subsequently defined as the Chaldeans
• See Canon Cheyne, Jer., his life, *c pp. Sl-M.
• Possibly his earliest appearance as a writer. Son*,
but without sufficient grounds, identify Uun. Iv. vttb
this elegy.
>> Observe, however, that be is not called a NOJ nil
• T
the great crisis of xxv. 2.
« Bat Stade, XeitKhr. f. A. T. Witsauek. 1»«.
p. 123 sq., makes r\yyQ=dominim, i.e. a general ex-
pression for the heavenly powers (sun, moon, and ttanV
d These passages have been supposed by some to
refer to the Scythian invasion (Herod. I. 103. **■*
Digitized by
Google
JEREMIAH
(xxv. 9), shall consummate the work of
destruction. Nevertheless, for the people of
God, redemption shall at length succeed punish-
ment (iv. 27 ; v. 18; xvi. 14, 15 ; xxiii. 8; xxv..
12 ; xxvii. 22 ; xxix. 10 j xxx. 3 ; xxxii. 37); while
for their enemies victory shall be followed by
judgment (li.).
(iii.) His relations to the kings subsequent to
Josiah. There was now no longer even a sem-
blance of observance paid to Josiah's covenant ;
while those who attributed the king's death to
the anger of the gods, whose shrines he had
overthrown at the Prophet's instigation, were
naturally full of wrath against Jeremiah for the
supposed results of his policy.
Of Shallum's brief reign Jeremiah speaks
with kindness and sorrow (xxii. 10-12). Con-
trast the stem rebuke administered to his suc-
cessor («e. 13-19).
Jehoiakim, hitherto called Eliakim, the eldest
son, succeeds (2 K. xxiii. 34), and now Jere-
miah occupies a very important position. The
favour of the court was no longer, as in the days
of Joaiah, on the side of the godly. Self-indul-
gence, covetousness, the sheading of innocent
blood, violence, the exaction of forced labour
and of exorbitant tribute, these (xxii. 13, 14, 17)
were Jeboiakim's characteristics. The Prophet,
in charging him with these sins, exasperates also
the priests and false prophets. Between him
and them it is henceforth war a outrance.
Persecution from his own people (xi. 19) is now
(xxvi. 7-24, probably =vii.) followed by an
attempt at his judicial murder in Jerusalem.
Jeremiah illustrated his declaration that " all
these lands are given into the hands of Nebu-
chadnezzar," God's "servant" (xxv. 9, xxvii. 6 ;
cp. xliii. 10 and Ezek. xxix. 18-20), by the
symbol of the moulding and remoulding of the
potter's clay, and by the solemn breaking of an
earthen vessel in the valley of Hinnom, in pre-
sence of the chief of the priests and people
(rviii., xix.). This excited the wrath of Pashur,
son of Immer (to be distinguished from the
Pashur -son of Melchiah, of xxi. 1), who had
assumed to himself the functions of a prophet,
but "prophesied lies" (xx. 6) in the name
of the Lord. At his hands Jeremiah underwent
ignominious treatment (xx. 2), including appa-
rently imprisonment for a time.
In regard both to the history of the East and
to Jeremiah's prophetic life, the fourth year of
Jehoiakim (B.O. 604), as the year of Nebuchad-
nezzar's victory over Pharaoh-neco at Carche-
roish, was a turning-point.* There are few
things in history so remarkable as the rapidity
of the rise of the Chaldean power (Hab. i. 5, 6).
" In B.C. 609 Babylon had still two seemingly
vigorous rivals, Assyria and Egypt ; in ac. 604
it had the undisputed mastery of the East."'
JEBEMIAH
1567
Ch. xxv., Jeremiah's earliest closely dateu
prophecy (r. 1), was delivered apparently
between the news of the victory and the arrival
of the Chaldean army beneath the walls of
Jerusalem. The special detail which marks the
introduction to xxv., the definite date, the
application to himself of the title Prophet
(K'23) for the first time, and the compre-
hensive glance which he casts at his whole
previous ministry, alt show that he considers
this to form a decided crisis.* Accordingly he
apparently reckons the seventy years' servitude
(xxv. 11, xxix. 10; cp. xxvii. 7) as beginning
from this time.
Nebuchadnezzar plunders the Temple of its
sacred vessels, carries away Daniel and others to
Babylon (2 Ch. xxxvi. 6, 7 ; Dan. i. 3), and then,
hearing of hit father's illness, hastens his
return, In order to secure the throne. The
Jews failed to profit by the warning, and in the
fifth h year (B.C. J>93) of Jehoiakim (xxxvi.)
Jeremiah, himself hidden in some retreat from
the expected wrath of the king, sent his trusted
follower Baruch with a roll ' to be read in the
Temple on a fast day in the ears of all the
people. The substance of it was reported to the
king ; the roll was fetched by his order, and read
before him : whereupon, in spite of the inter-
cession of certain of the princes, Jehoiakim
burned it piece by piece. Baruch then at the
Prophet's dictation wrote and communicated to
the king another roll, containing in addition tu
the contents of the former a rebuke to him for
his impious act, and further announcements of
God's vengeance.
To this time is most fitly to be referred the
acted symbol of the linen girdle (xiii.). k Com-
mentators differ on the question whether Jere-
miah on this occasion actually visited the
Euphrates or not. On behalf of the former
view, which on the whole appears the more
probable (so Keil, Naegelsbach, Orelli), it is
pointed out that (i.) the narrative is apparently
quite straightforward and meant to be taken
literally ; (ii.) in fact Jeremiah may well have
been at or near Babylon in the later years of
seeing that Babylon is not north, but rather south-east of
Palestine. That Invasion, however, was too early (eirc.
B.c. 635) to be referred to here, as is also shown by the
language of Hi. 18, v. 19. The recollection of these In-
roads, and those of other savage bands, more or lees
subject to the Assyrian and Babylonian powers, may,
however, have affected the form (" from the north ") of
his prophecy.
• ••Epochemachend In Gesohlchte und Welsaagung,
Orelli in Strack's Kvtrtgtf. Cowm.
< Cheyne, Introd. to Jer., Pulpit Costs*, p. v.
i See remarks In Naegelsbach's Introd. p. S.
» The LXX. reads "eighth," »hlch agrees with the
statement of Joeephus that Jehoiakim paid tribute tu
Nebuchadnezzar In his eighth year, viewed In con-
nexion with 2 K. xxlv. 1, "In his days Nebuchadnezzar
king of Babylon came up, and Jehoiakim became bis
servant three years," te. till his rebellion towards ihe
close (eleventh year) of his reign. That rebellion was
naturally followed by the siege, which, however, actually
fell in the short reign of his successor. See Cheyne,
Pulpit Comm. on xxxvi. 9 (where, however, the order
of the vassalage and rebellion Is accidentally trans-
posed), and Gritz, Monatuckrift, ex., Bd. xxlll. p. 300.
1 The word (rfao) occurs only In Jeremiah and later
Books (Ezek. II. ». 111. 1 1 Zech. v. 1, 2). Ps. xl. 8 Is a
possible exception. The prophecy as read on this oc-
casion probably consisted of the main part of ch. xxv.
Cp. the contents of that chapter with the statement in
xxxvi. 29. So Cheyne, and Grate, Mmatuck. Bd.
xxlll. 298 sq.
* The date (at the close or Immediately after the
reign of Jehoiakim) is almo<t certainly settled by the
mention In v. 18 of •• the queen (mother)," NehusbU,
carried captive to Babylon with bT son Jeholacbln
(xxix. 2). Some, however, take her to be Jedldab (2 K.
xxii. 1), mother of Josiah.
Digitized by
Google
1568
JEBEMIAH
Jehoiakim's reign, as we have no account of him
during that period ; (iii.) Jonah and probably
Nahum had been there ; (iv.) Jeremiah may
hare desired for his country's sake to become
acquainted with its destined conquerors; (v.)
if his visit was subsequent to the first depor-
tation of Jews (third year of Jehoiakim, Dan. i. 1),
he may have had the further object of visiting
Ezekiel or Daniel. The former Prophet, as
associated with Jeremiah at Jerusalem during
the earlier part of Jehoiakim's reign, shows in
his teaching many traces of Jeremiah's in-
fluence ;' (vi.) the kindly feeling shown towards
him by Nebuchadnezzar at the capture of Jeru-
salem points to an earlier acquaintance. Against
the view are pleaded (by Graf, Rosenmiiller, and
others), (i.) the absence of the usual prefix " the
river"; (ii.) the silence of the narrative as to the
length of the journey ; (iii.) the absence of rocks
on the Euphrates ; (iv.) the needlessness of going
so far merely to prove that a girdle buried in
the ground would become unfit for use. Hence
KwaTd and Birch have both suggested, instead of
Euphrates, Forah (involving however a change
<>f the text from mB to 1T1B), a few miles
N.E. of Jerusalem and of Anathoth, Birch
(Quart- Statement, PEF. Oct. 1880, p. 236)
identifying it with the Parah of Josh, xviii. 23.
Others (e.g. Bochardt, Venema, Dathe, Hitzig)
hold that DIB = nTW< = Bethlehem, or the Beth-
lehem district with its limestone hills. It
is best, however, to take the word in its literal
sense. The river which runs through Babylon,
about to be the city of exile, is naturally chosen
as that on the banks of which the girdle should
rot. Jeremiah and Baruch probably found it
unsafe to return till the close of the reign of
Jehoiakim, who came to a violent end and a dis-
honoured burial in accordance with Jeremiah's
prophecy (xxii. 18, 19 ; cp. xxxvi. 30).
Jehoiachin (= Jeconiah of xxiv. 1, xxvii. 20,
xxviii. 4, xxix. 2; 1 Ch. iii. 16; Esth. ii. 6, and
=Coniah" of xxii. 24, 28, xxxvii. IX his son,
succeeded to the throne (B.O. 597) at the age of
eighteen" (2 K. xxiv. 8), and, like Jehoahaz,
reigned but three months. Of Jeremiah's prophe-
cies undoubtedly relating to this reign (excluding
therefore xiii.), we have only his lament over
the king's fate in xxii. 24-30.
Mattaniah, Josiah's youngest son, was placed
on the throne by the king of Babylon, and as-
sumed the name of Zedekiah, "the righteousness
of the Lord," apparently meant to identify him
with the teaching of xxiii. 6, however sad and
pathetic was to be the contrast with such aspira-
tions which was afforded by the history of his
reign. He was well meaning, bnt utterly weak,
a " poor roi faineant." * His whole reign was
spent in a policy of vacillation between the
course urged by the Prophet and the suggestions
of the princes. To this time belongs Jeremiah's
letter of advice (xxix. 4-23) to the exiles, in
which he counsels them to submit, and await
restoration. The letter is received at Babylon
with much indignation on the part of the false
i Cp. Ezek. xlil. and Jer. xxlil. » sq. ; Ezek. xvlil. 2
and Jer. xxxi. 2* ; Ezek. xxxiv. 11-13 and Jer. xxxtli.
m All three names mean. " The Lord will establish."
" 2 Ch. xxxvl. 9 says eight, probably by a scribe's
error.
" Cheyne's Jer., hit Lift, *c. p. 100.
JEBEMIAH
prophets (see xxix. 25—32, and cp. m. 24 ; 2 K.
xxv. 18). There was an impression prevalent
both at Jerusalem (xxviii. 1-11) and at Babylon
(xxix.), that Jehoiachin and the rest would soon
return from exile. It was probably in conse-
quence of this, and as an act of homage to
Nebuchadnezzar, that Zedekiah in the fourth
year of his reign (B.c. 593) visited Babylon
(li. 59, but the l.XX. text does not make him
visit that city). On that occasion Jeremiah
sends by Seraiah, Baruch's brother (cp. xxiii.
12), the prophecy (1., li. 1-58) of the over-
throw of the city that now holds his countrymen
captive.
A Chaldean army now (b.c. 589) approacheil
Jerusalem. The wealthiest of the people (in
particular probably those in the rural parti),
who had apparently long taken advantage of tin-
distressed condition of their land to enslave their
brethren, consented under this pressure (xxxiv.
8-10) to release them. But on the departon-
of the besieging army to meet that of Pharaoh-
Hophra, which was thought to be about to
attempt the raising of the siege, the princes with-
drew their boon from the manumitted (v. 11).
an act which Jeremiah denounced in the strongest
terms (m. 17-22). The Prophet had already
several years previously (xxvii. 2) appeared in the
streets with a yoke upon his neck to symbols*
the impending servitude of the nation ; and trhec
Hananiah, who had prophesied deliverance in
two years (xxviii. 3), had broken the yokt.
Jeremiah foretold his speedy death (tn>. 16, 17).
His attempt during a temporary absence of the
besiegers, by a visit to Anathoth, to secure him-
self in the possession of a portion of land near
that town (xxxvii. 12),' gave his enemies UV
opportunity of seizing Jiim and putting him it
prison as a deserter (ct>. 13-16). There he w»-
visited by Zedekiah, and after " many days " set
at liberty, and given a daily supply of food (c.21)
Although still declaring the speedy overthrew
of Jerusalem, he also foretold plainly its rettors-
tion (xxxii. 15; xxxiii. 11, 15-18), and gavr
practical proof of his belief that brighter davs
were in store for his countrymen.' 1 But the
captains, unmoved by these distant prospects
cast the Prophet into a miry cistern, to r*
presently rescued by Ebed-melech, an Ethiopian
eunuch (m. 7-13), whose foreign birth kept him
clear of all temptation to hostile feelings.
Another interview followed, first with the
feeble-minded king (xxxviii. 14), and then with
Pashur (son of Melchiah, to be distinguished
from the son of Immer of xx. 1), and Zephaniah
(xxi. 1 sq.), sent by the king to ask for «
further declaration of the future. To this date
belong the utterances of mingled warnings and
hope contained in chs. xxi.-xxiv.
At length in the eleventh year of Zedekiali
(B.C. 586) the city was sacked, the Temple burnt,
and the king and his attendants taken prisoner*
while in the act of flight (xxxix. : cp. Hi.; 2 E.
xxv.). At Riblah (xxxix. 5 ; cp. xxiii. * •*•
p This seems the best explanation. The Hebrew Is
difficult.
■i Bis purchase (cp. Llvy, xxvi. 1 1) of a portion of »
field for seventeen shekels (about £2 Is. Cd., bnt repre-
senting a much larger amount according to the present
value of money) shows as that Jeremiah could not even
then have been in needy circumstances.
Digitized by
Google
JEREMIAH
xxxiv. 3) Zedekiah's sons Are slain in his presence,
and, his eyes being then put ont (xxxix. 6, 7 ; cp.
Ezek. xii. 13), he is brought to Babylon and
immured in a dismal dungeon, apparently till
his death/ As for Jeremiah, he was rescued
from the court of the guard (A. V. " prison "),
taken in chains with the other captives to
Ramah, and offered his choice of remaining under
Gedaliah, the new governor, or living in an
honourable captivity at Babylon. The Prophet
adopted the former course, as we should expect,
inasmuch as Gedaliah was son of Ahikam and
grandson of Shaphan, the friend of Hilkiah the
high-priest (xl. 5 : cp. xxxvi. 10; 2 K. xxii. 12).
But within two months * Gedaliah was murdered
by Ishmael, a prince of the blood royal.
From Talipanhes, a town near the E. border of
Lower Egypt, whither he had evidently been
carried by his fellow-countrymen, we draw the
hut certain notice which we possess of his life
(between b.c 585 and 572). He declares that
Nebuchadnezzar's throne shall be set up at the
entry of Pharaoh's house (xliii. 9, 10),' and
makes a dying protest (xliv.) against the
idolatrous moon-worship practised by his
countrymen. We have no notice in the Scrip-
tures of his death.*
(iv.) Arrangement of the Contents. The pro-
phecies of Jeremiah cover a period of at least
some thirty years, and, in the shape in which
they have come down to us, in the main ap-
proximate to a chronological order, but with
some very marked exceptions, where the group-
ing of prophecies of various dates may be
accounted for by resemblances in subject-matter
or other considerations. Prophecies uttered in
the reign of Zedekiah occur in the midst of
those relating to Jehoiakim. The Jewish cap-
tives carried to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar are
addressed in words of comfort several chapters
earlier than the mention of the announce-
ment made to Jehoiakim that that exportation
is imminent, while most, if not all, of the pro-
phecies concerning foreign nations (xlvi.-li.)
were delivered before the final overthrow of the
city and kingdom.
The following is an approximation to a chro-
nological arrangement of the contents of the
Book*:—
' For the deportations recorded in Jeremiah and
2 Kings, see Gardiner's Introd. to Esektel In Bp.
Silicon's O. T. Omm. for ling. Header*.
* Grits, however, Mmatuch. Bd. 19, pp. 268 sq., shows
reasons for believlDg that tbe Interval was much longer,
and puts it at five years. See Pulpit Conn. (Cbeyne)
on xli. 1.
* For a very Interesting description of " Pharaoh's
house in Tahpanhes," see article in the Times (since
reprinted), June 18, 1886. See also for a translation of
a contemporary Egyptian Inscription, said to supply
evidence of an actual conquest of Egypt by Nebu-
chadnezzar, WIedeman In ZeitKXrift fur Aegypt.
Sprache, 1878, I. 2 sq., or Cbeyne on xlvi. 13 ; and
cp. Rev. P. Thomson, Brpotitor, 1st Ser. vol. x. (1879),
397 sq.
« See traditional (Christian and Jewish) notices
brought together In Comb. BMe for School), ftc,
Jeremiah, Appendix,' Note I. References to Jeremiah
in Apocryphal books are, Ecclus. xllx. 7 ; 2 Mace. 11.
1-7, xv. 12-16,
* For a very full analysis, see Naegelsbach, Introd.
p. 129.
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
JEREMIAH 1569
Chaps.
1.-XU Josiah.
xiv.-xx. .... Jehoiakim.
xxvl 1st year of Jehoiakim.
xxv. 4th „ „
xlvl.-xlix.r
xxxv., xxxvi. ...,,,. „
xlv
xiii Jehotacbln.
xxlx (? 1st year of) Zedekiah.
"vU
1-. H 4th year of Zedekiah.
xxvUi , „
xxi.-xxlv." ... 9th .. „
xxxiv „ „ „
xxxvli 9th (10th) year of Zedekiah.
XXX.-XXX111. . . . 10th year of Zedekiah.
xxxvlil ,.
lii 11th „
xxxix.-xliv. . . . Period of exile.
Such being the arrangement of the contents,
we are supplied by xxxvi. 2, 32 with a clue to
the explanation, and shown the nucleus of the
present Book, although, as we see from the
above Table, i.-xxrvi. cannot have been wholly
contained in the roll. It is probable that at
some earlier period than that treated of in
xxxvi., Jeremiah had written the substance of
one or more discourses, which would no doubt
be incorporated by him with what was new
in the roll.* Again, by the close of Zedekiah's
reign, much fresh matter was ready to be intro-
duced into the Book. The circumstances of the
times might well prevent it from being inserted
in chronological order. The duty of compiling
and issuing the prophecies fell, we may conjec-
ture, to Baruch, and so we have certain portions
of Jeremiah's later prophecies (xiii., xxi., &c.)
inserted in the earlier roll. Thus the very lack
of order, so far as it exists, serves a valuable
end, as making it at least probable that we
possess the Prophet's words, not as modelled and
fitted to men's notions by a subsequent genera-
tion, but as they fell from the inspired lips
themselves, and as put together in the same
troublous days in which they were spoken.
B. Character. — Jeremiah may well be con-
sidered as the most interesting of the Prophets,
because, unlike the others, he opens to us the
inmost recesses of his mind.* The various
qualities which made up the man are quickly
and easily gathered from his own lips. His
office was to utter and reiterate warnings,
though all the time sensible that the sentence
of condemnation was passed and intercession of
no avail (vii. 16 ; xiv. 11, 12 ; xv. 1). His work
was not to persuade, but rather to testify. And
yet he was by nature of a shy and timid dis-
position ; and, further, he seems, at one time at
least, to have asked himself, had he the creden-
tials granted to his predecessors and marking a
true Prophet? No miracle was wrought to
attest his words. No prediction of his was
J Except xlvL 13-28 . . . Period of exile.
„ xllx. 34-39. . . 1st year of Zedekiah.
■ Bat originally tpoken at various times. See xxii. 1.
* Perhaps with a certain amount of adaptation of
earlier notices (t.g. of tbe Scythian Invasion) to later
events.
* " His life Is at once tbe moat natural and the most
supernatural In tbe Old Testament." (Cbeyne '« Jer„ ox.
p. 36.)
5 H
Digitized by
Google
1570
JEREMIAH
fulfilled with speed. Such is the bitterness of
his sufferings that he resolves to keep silence,
and yet he cannot (xx. 8, 9). He has been
likened (a) to Cassandra, whose predictions,
though always true, failed to gain credence;
(6) to Phocion and to Demosthenes, who main-
tained that, if Athens were to escape worse
evils, she must submit to the growing power of
Macedon; (c) to Dante, inasmuch as Florence
was in relation to France and the Kmpire as
Palestine to Egypt and Babylon, while the poet,
like the Prophet, could only protest without
effect; (<f) to Milton and («) to Savonarola." Yet
throughout all he heartily loved his people
(viii. 21, 22 ; cp. 2 Mace. xv. 14), even extend-
ing this affection to the northern kingdom a
century after their exile (iii. II). 4
His style corresponds closely with what we
should expect from his nature and position. It
displays (a) absence of ornament ; • (6) frequent
repetition;' (c) numerous parallels in thought
and phraseology with prophetical and other
Books, especially with Deuteronomy; (<i) fre-
quent use of images by way of illustration,
including sometimes a peculiar way of mingling
the image and the thing signified ; («) onomato-
poeia and play on words; (/) insertion of a
bright thought among gloomy ones.
The following passages of Jeremiah either are
quoted in the N. T. (distinguished by italics),
or contain germs of N. T. thoughts: — iv. 3,
Matt. xiii. 7 sq. ; vii. 11, Matt. xxi. 13 (cp.
Luke xix. 46); viii. 8, Matt, xxiii. 3 sq. ;
viii. 13, Luke xiii. 6-9 (cp. Matt. xxi. 19);
ix. 4, Matt. x. 36 ; ix. 20, Luke xxiii. 27, 28 ;
ix. 24, 1 Cor. L 31, 2 Cor. x. 17 ; ix. 25, 26,
Rom. ii. 25-29 ; xi. 20, Rev. ii. 23 ; xii. 6, Matt,
xiii. 57 (cp. Luke iv. 24, John iv. 44); xiii. 16,
John xi. 10, xii. 35; xiv. 8, Acts xxviii. 20;
xvii. 16 (possibly, though with change in ap-
plication of the figure), Matt. iv. 19 ; xvii. 13,
John viii. 6; xxv. 10, Rev. xviii. 22, 23;
xxxi. 15, Matt. ii. 18 ; xxxi. 31-34, Heb. viii.
8-12 (cp. Matt. xxvi. 28 ; John vi. 45, 1 Cor.
xi. 25, 2 Cor. iii. 3-6) ; 1. 8, li. 6, 45, Rev.
xviii. 4 ; li. 7, Rev. xiv. 8, xvii. 4, 5 ; li. 25,
Kev. viii. 8.«
In our Lord's time one of the phases which
Messianic hope had assumed was the belief that
Jeremiah's work on earth was not yet done, and
Deut. xviii. 18 seems to have been thought to
refer to him. See Matt. xvi. 14, and cp. John
i. 21, vi. 14, vii. 40.
Jeremiah's attitude to the Ceremonial Late and
the Sabbath. — His unvarying theme is that in
(rod's sight the Moral always takes precedence
of the Ceremonial Law." This he applies to the
people's reverence for the Ark (iii. 16) and the
Tables of the Law (xxxi. 31 sq. ; cp. xxxii. 40),
to circumcision (iv. 4, vi. 10, ix. 26), to the
« See Cheyne, Jet., In., p. 203.
<> Naegelsbach, p. 7.
• Contrast the artificial style of H&bakkuk, as a
Prophet of about the same period, and see .for further
remarks on this point Ewald, Hist, of 1st. Iv. 283 sq.
' See Speaker's (feats*., Introd. to Jer., p. 328.
' For Matt, xxvll. 9, see Llghtfoot, On-. Btbr., and
Expositor, 3rd Series, vol. 01. (1888), p. 181.
* Laxity, however, tn Sabbath observance (cp. Esek.
xx. 12-24, Neb. xiii. 16-22) Is sharply rebuked In xrll.
19-27.
JEREMIAH
Temple (vii. 4, 10 sq. ; xi. 15; xvii. 3 ; xxvi. 6,
9, 12 ; xxvii. 16), to sacrifices (vi. 20, vii. 21 sq,
xi. 15, xiv. 12). His language in reference to
these last in vii. 21, 22 has been thought by
some (e.g. Graf, Kuenen) inconsistent with the
traditional date of their institution. But (i.)
regularly instituted sacrifices are expressly men-
tioned, xxxiii. 18 (tn. 14-26 of this ch. are
however omitted in LXX.), as well as referral
to in the passages quoted above and in xvii. 26,
xxxi. 14, xxxiii. 11 ; (it) Hosea (iv. 8. vi. 6, viii.
11-13) and Amos (iv. 4, 5 ; v. 21-25) and
Micah (vi. 6), all Prophets prior in date to
Jeremiah, testify the same ; (iii.) the frequent
censure of sacrifice, when offered as a perfunctory
task, shows that an institution, on the efficacy
of which men placed such reliance, was a power-
ful one ; (iv.) the discovery of the a book of tbe
law " (whatever portion of the " Book» of
Moses " it may have included) some, probably
many, years before this prophecy, together with
tbe feeling which it produced, is oppose! U
such a supposition. The passage is therefore.
like vi. 20 a, an exaggeration for the sake of
rhetorical effect. Jeremiah's phraseology ' seems
to make it clear that he had in his mind tbe
promulgation of the Decalogue. There we find
no direction concerning sacrifice, and, moreorer,
it was the only body of precepts which was
treasured in the Ark, and thus from the firs'.
received the place of honour. Cp. further for
the thought of this passage, 1 Sam. xv. 22;
Ps. xl. 6 «q., 1. 8-15, li. 18, 19; Prov. xxi. 27;
Is. lviii. 3 sq., lxvi. 3.
Other references in Jeremiah to the enact-
ments of the Law are : xvi. 6 (see also vii. 29,
xii. 5), cp. Lev. xix. 28, xxi. 5, Deut. xir. 1 ;
xxxii. 7, cp. Lev. xxv. 24, 25 ; xxxiv. 8, cp. Ex.
xxi. 2, Lev. xxv. 39-55, Deut. xv. 12. To these
may be added xxxiv. 18, 9, cp. Gem. xv. 10.
We may further note that in many of tbe
passages where the Law is mentioned, the Pro-
phet is more or less certainly describing the oral
teaching given by priests (Dent. xvii. 11) and
prophets to those who consulted them on points
of ritual or practice.' See for this sense ii. 8,
ix. 13, xviii. 18, xxvi. 4, 5.
The Messianic passages. — The most striking
illustration of the Prophet's tendency (remarked
on above) to insert a bright thought among
gloomy ones, is undoubtedly to be found in tbe
fact that at the most terrible period of bit
country's fortunes his Messianic hopes are
clearest in their expression. Those hopes are
gathered round (a) the Davidic house, (6) Jeru-
salem.'
" In those days " (iii. 16, v. 18, xxxiii. 1*
1. 20) was the ordinary phrase for the times "I
the Messiah. Cp. " the days come " in xxiii.
5sq.
The chief Messianic passages are deserving of
close study, as indicating the gradually increasing
clearness of the hope. They are as follows:
(i.) xvii. 25, 26 ; (ii.) xxiii. 5-8" ; (iii.) xix. 9;
' This appears from v. 23, where we find an expres-
sion, " In all the ways," which occurs elsewhere onlr
Immediately after •• tbe Ten Words " as given In Dn«-
(v. S3).
» See Cheyne on viii. 8.
> Ewald, v. 32.
» See Cheyne on t>. 6.
Digitized by
Google
JEREMIAH
(it.) xxi. 21, (v.) xxxiii. 14-18 (not however in
LXX.). A passage inadmissible to this list is
xxxi. 31-44 (so, too, xxxi. 22), except in so far
as its thought attains completion only in the
Incarnation of the Divine Son."
Jeremiah viewed as a type of Christ. — St.
Jerome (on Jer. xxiii. 9) says that this Prophet
prefigured Christ (i.) as leading a single life,
(ii.) as a Prophet, (iii.) as sanctified from the
womb, (iv.) in bis name, the Lord's exalted one.
To state the parallel further in the words of a
modern writer* : — " In both there is the same
early manifestation of the consciousness of a
Divine mission (Luke ii. 49) . . . His protests
against the priests and prophets are the fore-
runners of the woes against the scribes and
Pharisees (Matt, xxiii.). His lamentations over
the coining miseries of his country answer to
the tears that were shed over the Holy City by
the Son of Han. His sufferings come nearest,
of those of the whole army of martyrs, to those
of the Teacher, against Whom princes and priests
and elders and people were gathered together.
He saw more clearly than others that New
Covenant, with all its spiritual gifts of life and
power, which was proclaimed and ratified in the
death upon the Cross."
6. BIBLIOGRAPHY. (Works marked thus*
include the Lamentations.)
Patristic. — Origen, Homilies, Migne, xiii. ; Id.
Horn, on Jer., Venice, 1513.' St. Jerome (i.-
iixiL only), Migne, xxiv., and Version of
Origen' s Horn., Migne, xxv. *Ephrem Syrus,
Petrus Benedictus, Rome, 1740. St. Paterius,
Testimonia in J., Migne, lxxix. 'Theodoret,
Migne, Ixxxi. (omits Lain. v.). St. Isidorus
Hisp., Prooemia de J. libro, Migne, lxxxiii.
*Ra banns Maurus, Migne, cxi. Walafrid Strabo,
Migne, cxiv. St. Peter Dam., Migne, cxlv.
•Rupert v. Deutz, Migne, clxvii. A comm. by
St. Odo of Clugny, said (Watt's Bibiioth. Brit.)
to be preserved in the Clugny library.
Rabbinic. — Targum of Jonathan, with Kimchi,
in Rabb. Bible, first printed, Venice, 1517 ;
Ibid., with Rashi, Venice, 1524. Rashi on the
Prophets and other Books, Latine, J. K. Breit-
haupt, Gotha, 1714. 'Moses b. lssachar the
Levite, Prague, 1604. Abarbanel, Amst., 1461.
S. Schmidt, Frankf., 1706. Moses al-Sheikh,
Mar'oth Hattzob'oth (on later Prophets), Jess-
nitx, 1720; STtzudoth David and iCtzudoth
Tziyyon, Berlin, 1770. Meir b. Isaac Arama,
flepher Vrim v' Thummim, a comm. on Is. and J.,
Jer. i.-x. by David Ottenzoser, xi. to end by
Schalom Hacohen ; it also contains Rashi's and
Midlal Jophi's Comm., Fiirth, 1810. Abraham
Dob (Sir) Lebensohn, Biwim Chadashim, Wilna,
1858. Moses b. Shesheth, ed. by S. R. Driver,
London, 1871. See also • Jacob b. Isaac of
Jartowa, Proph. $ Hagiogr., Amst., 1699 ; Ibid.,
<*L by H. Arnheim, M. Sachs, J. Fuerst, and
L. Zonz, Furth, 1842-7.
Romanist.— *Th. Aquinas, Parma, 1852-1868.
Joy(e), Is. and J. tr. into Eng., Strasb. 1531 ;
JEREMIAH
1571
- See Bruce In Expositor, 1st Ser., vol. xl. (1880),
p. 66.
• In art. Jeremiah la lit edit, or this Diet, of Bible
( riumptte).
■* Tbts collection was also published under the name
or Cyril Alex, from a MS. of the Escurial by B.
O-rderius. Antw. 1640.
Id., J. tr., 1534. Joachim Floris (ssj. Abbas),
Ven., 1525, and Col., 1577. Theodoras Grami-
neus, Col., 1577. Franc. Zichemius, Col., 1559.
Hector Pintus, Leyden, 1561. 'Andreas Capella,
Tarracona, 1586. 'Franc Panicarola, Verona,
1586. Petrus Figueiro, Leyden, 1596. 'Martin.
Anton, del Rio (Jesuit), Leyden, 1608. 'Christof.
de Castro (Jesuit), Paris, 1609. Joh. Mal-
donatus, Paris, 1610. Joannes a Jesu Maria,
Col., 1611. Casp. Sanctius (Jesuit), Leyden,
1611. Bened. Mandina, Naples, 1620. 'Mich.
Ghislerus, Leyden, 1623. Fabricius Paulutius,
Rome, 1625. Thomas de Beira, Lisbon, 1633.
Guillebert, Paris, 1644. 'Thomas Malvenda,
Leyden, 1650. 'J. G. Carpzovius, Leipzig,
1731. T. A. Dereser, Frankf., 1869.
Reformed. — M. Bucer, Zurich, 1531. H.
Zwinglius, Zurich, 1531. *Joh. Oecolampadius,
Strasb., 1533. 'Bugenhagius, Wittenb., 1546.
'Calvin, Geneva, 1563, &c 'Nicolaus Sel-
neccerus, Leipzig, 1565. Victorious Strigelius,
Leipzig, 1566. *H. Bnllinger, Zurich, 1575.
Lucas Osiander, Tiib., 1578. Joh. Brent, Tub.,
1580. 'Ludov. Lnvaterus, Geneva, 1581. 'Dan.
Tossanus, Frankf., 1581. Joh. Pappus, Frankf.,
1593. Hugh Broughton, Geneva, 1606. 'Aman-
dus Polanus, Basel, 1608. Isaias, Jeremias,
Ezechiel et duodecim prophetae, hebraice et
latine, cura B. Ariae Montani, Antwerp, 1610.
♦Job. Piscator, Herborn, 1614. 'Job. Hiilse-
mann, Rudolphst., 1663. Joh. FiSrster, Wittenb.,
1672. Abraham Calorius, Frankf., 1673. Seb.
Schmidt, Strasb., 1685. Jac Altingius, Amst.,
1685. Joh. Clericus, Amst., 1696. Elbert
Noordbeck, Franeker. 1701. *W. Lowth, London,
1718 (2nd ed.). J. Friedrich Burscher, Leipzig,
1756. Hermann Venema, Lewarden, 1765.
Christ. Gottfr. Struensee, Halberstadt, 1777.
'Benj. Blayney, Oxford, 1784. »J. D. Michaelis,
ed. and enlarged by J. F. Schleusner, G8tt.,
1793. C. F. Schnurrer, Tub., 1793. G. L.
Spohn, i., Leipzig, 1794 ; ii., ed. by F. A. G.
Spohn, Leipzig, 1824. A. F. W. Leiste (in
Sylloge Commentatiotuan Theologarum), GStt.,
1794 ; Id., ed. and enlarged by Pott and Rupert),
Helmut,, 1801. Dathe, ed. by Rosenmuller,
Leipzig, 1796. Hensler, Leipzig, 1805. Eich-
horn, Die hebr. Proph. (zw. Band, Jer. u. s.
Zeitgenossen), 1819. J. F. Gaab, Tub., 1824.
Dahler (Jeremie), Strasb. 1825. Rosenmuller,
Leipzig, 1826. Maurer, Leipzig, 1835. A.
Kueper, Berlin, 1837. F. B. Koster, Leipzig,
1838. J. L. KOnig, Berlin, 1839. Hitzig
(Handbvch), Leipzig, 1841, and (Die proph.
BUcher d. A. T. Obersetxt) Leipzig, 1854-
NKgelsbach, Der proph. J. u. Babylon, Erlangen,
1850; Id., art. "Jercmia" in Herzog's Real-
Encycl. ; *ld., Der proph. J. (in Lange's Wbel-
toerk), Bielefeld and Leipzig, 1868, and SchafTs
Eng. ed., Edinburgh, 1871. Umbreit, Hamburg,
1842. 'Henderson, London, 1851, and Andover,
U.S.A. 1868. 'Arts. Jer. and Lam. in Kitto's
Cyclop., Edinb., 1856. Wilbelm Neumann,
Leipzig, 1858. S. Davidson, , London, 1862.
C. H. Graf, Leipzig, 1862. J. Diedrich, Neu-
Ruppin, 1863. Ernst Meir, Stuttg., 1863.
E. H. Plumptre (Sm. BM. Diet.), 1863. F. Bleek
(2nd ed.), Berlin, 1865, tr. by G. H. Venables,
London, 1869. Hitzig, 1866. Keil and Delitzsch,
1868 (and in T. and T. Clark's Library). G. R.
Noyes, Boston, U.S.A., 1868. H. Cowles, New
York, 1869. De Wette (8th ed.), Berlin, 1869.
5 H 2
Digitized by
Google
1572
JEREMIAH
•Chr. Wordsworth, London, 1869. *Payne
Smith (Speaker's Comm.), London, 1871. *J. M.
Fuller (Student's Comm. = Speaker's Comm.
abridged), London, 1872. »Keil, Leipzig, 1872 ;
Id., Clark'* Series, Edinb., 1873. F. KBatlin,
Berlin, 1879. Ant. Scholz, 1880. A. W. Streane
(in Comb. Bible for Schools), Camb., 1882.
T. K. Cheyne (in Pulpit Comm.), London, 1883.
E. H. Plumptre (in Bp. Ellicott's Comm.), Lon-
don, 1884. J. Enabenhauer, 1889. K. Marti,
Basel, 1889. C. J. Ball (in Expositor's Bible),
London, 1890. S. R. Driver (in Introd. to Lit.
of 0. T.), Edinburgh, 1891.
The following works may be added as bearing
on special branches of the subject, or on in-
dividual passages, or as otherwise illustrating
the Prophet's teaching : —
Quinquarboreus (Cinq-arbres), Targum of
Jonathan b. Uiziel,tT. in Latin with notes, 1549.
Th. Nao-george (Eirchmayer), Hieremias, Tra-
goedia nova, Basel, 1551. H. Bullinger, In J.
sermonem primum (i.-vi.), &c, Zurich, 1557.
Jeremias, Eebr. et Hispan., Thcssal., 1569.
•Calvin, Praelectiones in Jer. et Lam., Geneva,
1589. *John Eromayer (A.D. 1576-1643),
Paraphrase on Jer. and Lam. in Bible of Weimar.
•John Aylmer, Musae Sacrae (Jer., Lam., and
Jonah in Greek verse), Oxford, 1652. Th.
Gataker, Annotations on Jer., Utrecht, 1653.
Tillemont'(P. le Nain de, a.d. 1640-1713), Horn.
on Jer. Geo. Calixtus, Scholia proph. ex Praelect.
in Is., Jer., lie, Quedlinburg, 1715. Fr. Joubert
(a priest of Montpellier, 1689-1763), Explana-
tions of the Prophecies of Jer. J. A. H. Nagel,
Dissert, in var. lect. 25 oapp. priorum Jer., &c.,
Altorf, 1772. Scholtz u. Bauer, Scholia in
V. T., Nuremberg, 1783. Mich. Weber, Intem-
liestim emendandae lectionis euro e Jer. Ulustrata,
Wittenb., 1785. G. L. Spohn, J. votes e versione
Judaeorum Alex, emendatus, Leipzig, 1824.
Taco Roorda, Groningen, 1824. N. L. Zinzen-
dorf, /. tin Prediger der Oerechtigkeit, Berlin,
1830. Enobel, Jeremias Chaldaizans, 1831.
F. C. Movers, De utriusque recensione vat. J.
indole, &c, Hamburg, 1837. Heim u. Hoffmann,
Die vier grossen Proph. &c, Stuttg., 1839.
Rikliger, Ersch and ^Gruber's Encycl., art. " Je-
vemia." E. Eiihl, Das Verhaltniss der Massora
zur LXX. in J. F. Schwally, Die Beam d. Buches
J. gegen die ffeiden. Havernick, Einleitung, &c
Caspar", /, cm Zeugef. d. Aechtheit v. Is. xxxiv.,
&c, in Zeitschr. f. Luth. Theol. in Kirche, 1843.
Wichelhaus, De J. Versione Alex., Halle, 1846.
Stahelin, in Zeitschr. d. deutsch Morgenl. QesclL,
1849. E. Meier, Qesch. d. poet. Nat. Lit., &c,
Leipzig, 1856 (pp. 385-409). F. E. Vilmar, Der
proph. J., Jena, 1869, a preface to Beweis des
alaubens. A. Klthler, Die Wirksamkeit d. proph.
J., tie., in Beweis d. 01. Ant. Scholtz, Der Mas.
Text u. die LXX. Uebers. d. pr. J., Ratisbon,
1875. Guthe, De foederis notione Jeremiana,
Leipzig, 1877. K. Zimmer, Aramaismi Jer.,
Halle, 1880. L. A. Schneedorpher, Prague,
1881. W. Robertson Smith, The Prophets of
Israel, Use, Edinb., 1882. Graetz, a series of
arts, in Exegetische Stud, in Monatssch. f. Qesch.
u. Wits. d. Jud., 1883, pp. 49 sq. C. H. Cornill
on ch. hi. in Stade's Zeitschr. f. A. T. Wise.,
1884, pp. 105 sq. F. Field on viii. 22, in Journal
of Phil. No. xiv. (1884), pp. 114 sq. Stade on
xxxii. 11-14, in his Zeitschr., &c, 1885, pp. 175
aq. ; Id. on " the Queen of Heaven" in Zeitsch.
JEREMOTH
1886, pp. 123 sq. H. P. Smith's The Text of J.
in Hebraica, July 1887. T. K. Cheyne's Jere-
miah, his Life and Times, London, 1888. G. C.
Workman, Tlie Text of Jer. &c, Edinb., 1889.
S. Baer, Masoretic text, with preface by Fraax
Oelitzsch, Leipzig, 1890. W. Campe, Das Ver-
haltniss J. zu den Psalrnm, Halle, 1891.
[A. W. S.]
JEREMTAH. Seven other persons bearing
the same name as the Prophet are mentioned in
the O. T.
1. ("Upe/iias < Jeremias.) Jeremiah of Lib-
nan, father of Hamutal, wife of Josiah (2 K.
xxiii. 31).
2, 3, 4. The Greek MSS. vary much in the
spelling of the name (see Swete in loco). Three
warriors — two of the tribe of Gad — in David's
army (1 Ch. xii. 4, 10, 13).
5. (B. 'Itpiula.) One of the "mighty men
of valour " of the trans-Jordanic half-tribe of
Manasseh (1 Ch. v. 24).
6. (BA. 'Ufiui; in xii. 34, A. 'Uptpias.) A
priest of high rank, head of the second or third
of the twenty-one courses which are apparently
enumerated in Neh. x. 2-8. He is mentioned
again, ue. the course which was called after
him is, in Neh. xii. 1 ; and we are told at v. 12
that the personal name of the head of this
course in the days of Joiakim was Hanakiak.
This course, or its chief, took part in the dedica-
tion of the wall of Jerusalem (Neh. xii. 34).
7. CUpe/dr.) The father of Jaazaniah toe
Rechabite (Jer. xxxv. 3).
JEREMI'AS ('Ifseiifu, in Ecclus. A. 'Iijee-
plat; Jeremias, Hieremias). 1. The Greek
form of the name of Jeremiah the Prophet, used
in the E. T. of Ecclus. xlix. 6 ; 2 Hocc xv. 15;
Matt, xvu 14 (R. V. Jeremiah). ["Jeremiah ;
Jeremy.]
2. 1 Esd. ix. 34. [Jebkmaj.]
JERETfOTH (/ton' = heights). 1. (B.
'Iopeipatt, A. 'lapt/wiS ; Jerimoth). A Benjamite
chief, a son of the house of Beriah of Elpaal,
according to" an obscure genealogy of the age of
Hezekiah (1 Ch. viii. 14; cp. re. 12 and 18).
His family dwelt at Jerusalem, as distinguished
from the other division of the tribe, located at
Gibeon (v. 28).
2. (B. 'Af»iiu£0, A 'lapifuie ; Jerimoth.) A
Merarite Levite, son of Mushi (1 Ch. xxiii. 23);
in xxiv. 30 called Jerimoth [Jerimoth (4)].
3. (B. 'UptfUiB, 'Eptt/uSO; A 'UpqtoiS, 'Itpt-
tuft) : Jerimoth.) Son of Heman ; head of the
15th of the twenty-four courses of musicians in
the Divine service (1 Ch. xxv. 22). In v. 4 the
name is Jerimoth [Jerimoth (5)].
4. (B. 'laotifuU, A. 'Upiii&t, M. 'laptfoU;
Jerimoth.) One of the sons of Elam, and, 5. (B.
'Afiiiy, A. '\apn&0, K. 'Apsis}* ; Jerimuth), one at*
the sons of Zattu, who had taken strange wires;
but put them away, and offered each a ram for
a trespass offering, at the persuasion of Ezra
(Ezra x. 26, 27). In 1 Esd. ix. 27, 28 the
names are respectively Hieremoth and Jaju-
moth.
6. (B. Ulniubv, K. MijfiGk, A 'Priit&B ; Ramotk.)
The name which appears in the same list (Ezra
x.) as "and RAMOTH" (r. 29)— following the
correction of the Qeri — is in the original text
Digitized by
Google
JEREMY
Jeremoth, in which form also it stands in 1 Esd.
ix. 30, 'Upt/uU, A. V. Hiebemoth. [A. C. H.]
JEREMY ('Uptplas; in 2 Mace. ii. 7, A.
'Upf/itlas; Jeremiae, Hieremias), the Prophet
Jeremiah (1 Esd. i. 28, 32, 47, 57, ii. 1;
2 Esd. ii. 18 ; 2 Mace. ii. 1, 5, 7 ; Matt. ii. 17,
xxvii. 9, R. Y. Jeremiah). [Jeremiah ; Jere-
mias.] These abbreviated forms were much in
favour about the time that the A. Y. was trans-
lated. Elsewhere we find Esay for Isaiah ; and
in the Homilies such abbreviations as Zachary,
Toby, &c, are frequent.
JEREMY, EPISTLE OF. [Babbch, the
Book of.]
JEM' AH (injT, U. Teri-yahu,(?)=/ottndj-
Uon of Jehovah : B. 'ISoit, 'IqSeipov ; A. 'Wpid,
'Itttoo : Jeriau), a Kohathite Levite, chief of the
great house of Hebron when David organised
the service (1 Ch. xxiii. 19, xxiv. 23 : in the
latter passage the name of Hebron has been
omitted both in the Hebrew and LXX.). The
same man is mentioned again, though with a
slight difference in his name, as Jekijah.
JEBTBAI 0?^)» if=TVyV=Jehovah de-
fend*; 'lapi&l, B. 'laotfal, A. 'lapi&dt; Jeribai),
one of the Bene-Elnaam, named among the
heroes of David's guard in the supplemental list
of 1 Ch. (xi. 46).
JEB'ICHO 0m», J'recho, Num. xiii. 1;
also VV"P, Tricho, Josh. ii. 1, 2, 3 ; and ftfnj,
■Trkhoh, 1 K. xvi. 34; l*-?A Eriha «; « place
of fragrance," from rtt"l, Suach, " to breathe,"
rPTTI, M to smell ; " older commentators derive
it from (TV, Jareach, " the moon* ; " also from
nn, Kavach, " to be broad," as in a wide plain :
'UpixA; B. 'Uptixd, exc. Ezra ii. 34, 'Uptti;
A. 1eptix<&, '» 1 Ch. vi. 78, Ezra ii. 34, Neh.
iii. 2, vii. 36 ; Josephus, 'Upixovs ; Strabo,
'Itpucovs: Jericho), a city of high antiquity
and, for those days, of considerable importance,
situated near the foot of the mountains, in the
valley of the Jordan, and exactly over against
the point at which that river was crossed by the
Israelites under Joshua (Josh. iii. 16, xxiv. 11).
Such was either its vicinity, or the extent of
its territory, that Gilgal, which formed their
primary encampment, stood in its east border
(it. 19). That it had a king is a very secondary
consideration, for almost every small town had
one (xii. 9-24) ; in fact monarchy was the only
form of government known to those primitive
times — the government of the people of God
presenting a marked exception to prevailing
usage. But Jericho was further enclosed by
walls — a fenced city; its walls were so con-
siderable that at least one person (Rahab) had a
• Erika comes from the Hebrew by weakening of the
first letter, as In the case of Zertn from Jezreel, and
SAetwuk from Jeelmoth.
* In which case it would probably be a remnant of
the old Osnssnrtish worship of the heavenly bodies,
which has left Its traces In snch names as Chesil,
Betbabemesh, and others (see Idolatbt, p. 1433), which
nay have been the bead-quarters of the worship In-
dicated In the names they bear.
JERICHO
1573
house upon them (ii. 15), and its gates were
shut, as throughout the East still, " when it
was dark " (v. 5). Again, the spoil that was
found in it betokened its affluence — Ai, Mak-
kedah, Libnah, Lachish, Eglon, Hebron, Debir,
and even Hazor, evidently contained nothing
worth mentioning in comparison : besides sheep,
oxen, and asses, we hear of vessels of brass and
iron. These possibly may have been the first-
fruits of those brass foundries " in the plain of
Jordan " of which Solomon afterwards so largely
availed himself (2 Ch. iv. 17). Silver and gold
were • found in such abundance that one man
(Achan) could appropriate stealthily 200 shekels
(100 oz. avoird. : see Lewis, Heb. Sep. vi. 57) of
the former, and " a wedge of gold of 50 shekels
(25 oz.) weight." " A goodly Babylonish gar-
ment," purloined in the same dishonesty, may
be adduced as evidence of a then existing com-
merce between Jericho and the far East (Josh,
vi. 24, vii. 21). In tact, its situation alone — at
the edge of a fertile plain, and close to an
abundant supply of water — would bespeak its
importance in a country where these natural
advantages have been always so highly prized,
and in an age when people depended so much
more upon the indigenous resources of nature
than they are compelled to do now. It was also
close to the entrance to the important passes
leading up through the hills to Jerusalem and
Bethel. But Tor the curse of Joshua (vi. 26)
doubtless Jericho might have proved a more
formidable counter-charm to the city of David
than even Samaria.
Jericho is first mentioned in the formula " in
the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho "
(Num. xxii. 1, xxvi. 3, 63, xxxi. 12, xxxiii.
48, 50, xxxv. 1, xxxvi. 13; Josh. xiii. 32,
cp. xx. 8 ; 1 Ch. vi. 78) ; it was on the opposite
side of the Jordan to the inheritance of the two
and a half tribes (xxxiv. 15), over against Mount
Nebo (Deut. xxxii. 49; xxxiv. 1), and was seen
by Moses from the top of Pisgah (xxxiv. 3).
Joshua sent two spies to the city from Shittim :
they were lodged in the house of Rahab the
harlot upon the wall, and departed, having first
promised to save her and all that were found
in her house from destruction (ii. 1-21). In
the annihilation of the city that ensued this
promise was religiously observed. Her house
was recognised by the scarlet line bound in the
window from which the spies were let down,
and she and her relatives were taken out of it,
and " lodged without the camp " (v., vi.) ; but
it is nowhere said or implied that her house
escaped the general conflagration. That she
" dwelt in Israel." for the future ; that she
married Salmon, son of Naasson, " prince of the
children of Judah," and had by him Boaz, the
husband of Ruth and progenitor of David and
of our Lord ; and lastly, that she is the first
and only Gentile name that appears in the list
of the faithful of the O. T. given by St. Paul
(Josh. vi. 25 ; 1 Ch. ii. 10 ; Matt. i. 5 ; Heb.
xi. 31), all these facts surely indicate that she
did not continue to inhabit the accursed site:
and, if so, and in absence of all direct evidence
from Scripture, how could it ever have been
inferred that her house was left standing?
From Jericho, after its capture, spies were sent
to Ai (Josh. vii. 2\ which was to be destroyed
as that city had been (viii. 2). The fall of those
Digitized by
Google
1574
JEKIOHO
JEBICHO
two places produced a profound impression upon boundary of the children of Joseph (Josh. iri.
the princes of the country (ix. 3; x. IX of
whom sereral were to share the fate of the king
of Jericho (x. 28, 30).
Jericho is mentioned in connexion with the
1, 7) and of Benjamin, to which tribe it nt
allotted by Joshua (xviii. 12, 21). From this
time a long interval elapses before it sppeaiv
again upon the scene. It is only meidauslh-
mentioned in the life of David in connexion with
his embassy to the Ammonite king (2 Sam. x. 5 ;
1 Ch. xix. 5). And the solemn manner in which
its second foundation under Hiel the Bethelite
is recorded — upon whom the curse of Joshua is
said to have descended in fall force (1 K. xvi- W
— would certainly seem to imply that up to that
time its site had been uninhabited. It is trot
that mention is made of "a city of palm-trees
(Judg. i. 16 and iii. 13) in existence apparently
Digitized by
Google
JEBICHO
at the time when spoken of; and that Jericho is
twice — once before its first overthrow, and once
after its second foundation — designated by that
namo (see Dent, xxxiv. 3, and 2 Ch. xxviii. 15).
But the city mentioned in the Book of Judges
was probably not built on the site of the town
destroyed by Joshua. However, once actually
rebuV.., Jericho rose again slowly into conse-
quence. In its immediate vicinity the sons of
the prophets sought retirement from the world :
Elisha "healed the spring of the waters;"
and over and against it, beyond Jordan, Elijah
" went up by a whirlwind into heaven " (2 K.
ii. 1-22). In its plains Zedekiah fell into the
hands of the Chaldeans (2 K. xxv. 5 ; Jer.
xxxix. 5, lii. 8). By what may be called a re-
trospective account of it, we may infer that
Kiel's restoration had not utterly failed ; for in
the return nnder Zerubbabel the "children of
~?richo," 345 in number, are comprised (Ezra
i\. 34 ; Neh. vii. 36) ; and it is even implied
that they removed thither again, for the men
of Jericho assisted Nehemiah in rebuilding that
part of the wall of Jerusalem that was next to
the sheep-gate (Neh. iii. 2). Jericho was one of
the places to which messengers were sent by the
Jews of Judaea on the approach of Holofernes
(Judith iv. 4) ; and its fort was repaired by
Bacchides after his fight with Jonathan Macca-
baeus on the banks of the Jordan (1 Mace ix. 50).
It was whilst visiting Jericho that Simon
Maccabnens was treacherously murdered at
Ikicus (1 Mace. xvi. 11, 14). We now enter
upon its more modern phase. The Jericho of
the days of Joseph us was distant 150 stadia
from Jerusalem, and 50 from the Jordan. It
lay in a plain, overhung by a barren mountain
whose roots ran northwards towards Scytho-
polis, and southwards in the direction of Sodom
and the Dead Sea, These formed the western
boundaries of the plain. Eastwards, its barriers
were the mountains of Moab, which ran parallel
to the former. In the midst of the plain — the
great plain, as it was called — flowed the Jordan,
and at the top and bottom of it were two lakes :
Tiberias, proverbial for its sweetness, and Asphal-
tites for its bitterness. Away from the Jordan
it was parched and unhealthy during summer ;
but during winter, even when it snowed at
Jerusalem, the inhabitants here wore linen
garments. Hard by Jericho — bursting forth
close to the site of the old city, which Joshua
took on his entrance into Canaan — was a most
exuberant fountain, whose waters, before noted
tor their contrary properties, had received, pro-
ceeds Josephus, through Elisha's prayers, their
then wonderfully salutary and prolific efficacy.
Within its range — 70 stadia (Strabo says 100)
by 20 — the fertility of the soil was unexam-
pled ; palms of various names and properties,
some that produced honey scarce inferior to that
of the neighbourhood — opobalsamum, the choicest
of indigenous fruits— Cyprus (Ar. el-henna) and
myrobaJanum (zakkum) throve there beautifully,
and were thickly dotted about in pleasure-grounds
(B. J. iv. 8, §§ 2, 3). Wisdom herself did not
disdain comparison with "the rose-plants of
Jericho " (Ecclus. xxiv. 14). Well might Strabo
(Oeogr. xvi. 2, § 41, ed. Muller) conclude that
its revenues were considerable. By the Romans
Jericho was first visited under Pompey : he en-
camped there for a single night, and subse-
JERICHO
1575
quently destroyed two forts, Threx and Taurus,
that commanded its approaches (Strabo, ibid.
§ 40). Gabinius, in his re-settlement of Judaea,
made it one of the five seats of assembly (Joseph.
Ant. xiv. 5, § 4 ; B. J. i. 8, § 5). With Herod
the Great it rose to still greater prominence ;
it had been found full of treasure of all kinds, as
in the time of Joshua, so by Herod's Roman allies
who sacked it (ibid. i. 15, § 6) ; and its revenues
were eagerly sought, and rented by the wily
tyrant from Cleopatra, to whom Antony had
assigned them (Ant. xv. 4, § 2). Not long after-
wards he built a fort there, which he called
" Cypres " in honour of his mother (ibid. xvi. 5,
§ 2 ; B. J. i. 21, § 9) ; several palaces, some of
which he named after his friends (B. J. i. 21,
§ 4), and perhaps also an amphitheatre (Ant.
xvii. 6, § 5), and other public buildings. There
were also reservoirs for water, in one of which
he caused Aristobulus to be drowned (Ant.
xv. 3, § 3). If he did not make Jericho his
habitual residence, he at least retired to it to die
— and to be mourned, if he could have got his
plan carried out — and it was in the amphi-
theatre of Jericho that the news of his death
was announced to the assembled soldiers and
people by Salome (B. J. i. 33, § 8). Soon after-
wards the palace was burnt, and the town plun-
dered by one Simon, a revolutionary who had
been slave to Herod (Ant. xvii. 10, § 6); but
Archelaus rebuilt the former sumptuously —
founded a new town in the, plain, that bore his
own name — and, most important of all, diverted
water from a village called Neaera, to irrigate
the plain which he had planted with palms
(Ant. xvii. 13, § 1). Thus Jericho was once
more " a city of palms" when our Lord visited
it ; such as Herod the Great and Archelaus had
left it, such He saw it. As the city that had so
exceptionally contributed to His own ancestry
— as the city which had been the first to fall,
amidst so much ceremony, before " the captain
of the Lord's host, and His servant Joshua " —
we may well suppose that Hie eyes surveyed it
with unwonted interest. It is supposed to have
been on the rocky heights overhanging it (hence
called by tradition the Quarantana) that He
was assailed by the Tempter ; and over against
it, according to tradition likewise, He had been
previously baptized in the Jordan. Here He
restored sight to the blind (two certainly, per-
haps three, St. Matt. xx. 30; St. Mark x. 46:
this was on leaving Jericho. St. Luke fays, "As
He was come nigh unto Jericho," he, xviii. 35).
Here the descendant of Rahab did not disdain
the hospitality of Zacchaeus the publican — an
office which was likely to be lucrative enough in
so rich a city. Finally, between Jerusalem and
Jericho was laid the scene of His story of the
good Samaritan, which, if it is not to be regarded
as a real occurrence throughout, at least derives
interest from the fact, that robbers have ever
been the terror of that precipitous road ; and so
formidable had they proved only just before the
Christian era, that Pompey had been induced to
undertake the destruction of their strongholds
(Strabo, as before, xvi. 2, § 40 ; cp. Joseph. Ant.
xx. 6, § 1 et seq.). Dagon, or Docus (1 Mace.
xvi. 15; cp. ix. 50), where Ptolemy assassinated
his father-in-law, Simon the Maccabee, may
have been one of these.
Posterior to the Gospels the chronicle of
Digitized by
Google
1.H76
JERICHO
Jericho may be briefly told. After their victory
over Cestius, the Jews appointed Joseph son of
Simon governor of Jericho (B. J. ii. 20, § 4).
Vespasian found it one of the toparchies of
Judaea (B. J. iii. 3, § 5), but deserted by its
inhabitants in a great measure when he en-
camped there (to. iv. 8, § 2). He left a garri-
son on his departure — not necessarily the 10th
Legion, which is only stated to have marched
through Jericho — which was still there when
Titus advanced upon Jerusalem. Is it asked
how Jericho was destroyed? Evidently by
Vespasian ; for Josephus, rightly understood,
is not so silent as Dr. Robinson (Bibl. Bes. i.
566, 2nd ed.) thinks. The city pillaged and
burnt in B. J. iv. 9, § 1, was clearly Jericho
with its adjacent villages, and not Gerasa, as
may be seen at once by comparing the language
there with that of c 8, § 2, and the agent was
Vespasian. Eusebius and St. Jerome (OS.*
p. 267, 10; p. 163,31) say that it was destroyed
when Jerusalem was besieged by the Romans.
They further add that it was afterwards rebuilt
— they do not say by whom — and still existed
in their day; nor had the ruins of the two
preceding cities been obliterated. Could Hadrian
possibly have planted a colony there when he
passed through Judaea and founded Aelia?
(Dio Cass. Hist. Ixix. c. 11, ed. Sturz ; more
at large Chron. Paschal. 254, ed. Du Fresne).
The discovery which Origen made there of a
version of the 0. T. (the 5th in his Hexapla),
together with sundry MSS., Greek and Hebrew,
suggests that it could not have been wholly
without inhabitants (Euseb. E. H. vi. 16; S.
Kpiphan. Lib. de Pond, et ifensur. circa med.) ;
or again, as is perhaps more probable, did a
Christian settlement arise there under Constan-
tino, when Baptisms in the Jordan began to be
common? That Jericho became an episcopal
see about that time under Jerusalem appears
from more than one ancient Notitia (Qeograph.
8. a Carolo Paulo, 306, and the Parergon ap-
pended to it; cp. William of Tyre, Hist. lib.
xxiii. ad f.). Its Bishops subscribed to various
councils in the 4th, 5th, and 6th centuries (ibid.
and Le Quien's Oriens Christian, iii. 654). Jus-
tinian, we are told, restored a hospice there, and
likewise a church dedicated to the Virgin
(Procop. De Aedif. v. 9). As early as a.d. 333,
when the Bordeaux Pilgrim (ed. Wesseling)
visited it, a house existed above the fountain at
Old Jericho which was pointed out, after the
manner of those days, as the house of Rahab.
This was roofless when Arculfus saw it ; and not
only so, but the third city was likewise in
ruins, and the site was planted with corn and
vines (ii. § 12).* Had Jericho been visited by
an earthquake, as Antoninus reports (xiii. xiv.),
and as Syria certainly was, in the 27th year of
Justinian, A.D. 553 ? If so, we can well under-
stand the restorations already referred to ; and
when Antoninus adds that the house of Rahab
had now become a hospice and oratory, we
might almost pronounce that this was the very
hospice which had been restored by that emperor
(cp. Tbeodosius, § 16). Again, it may be asked,
« Antoninus (xlv.) mentions a strong wine which was
given to persons suffering from fever; and that the
grapes from a certain vine were sold at Jerusalem on
Ascension Day.
JEBICHO
did Christian Jericho receive no injury from the
Persian Romixan, the ferocious general of Chos-
roes II. A.D. 614 ? (Bar-Hebraei CAron. 99, Lat.
v. ed. Kirsch). It would rather seem that there
were more religious edifices in the 7th than in
the 6th century round about it. According to
Arculfus, one church marked the site of Gilgal ;
another the spot where our Lord was supposed to
have deposited His garments previously to His
Baptism ; a third within the precincts of a vast
monastery dedicated to St. John, situated upon
some rising ground overlooking the Jordan
(Arculfus, ii. §§ 12-14; cp. Antoninus, xi.-xv.,
and App. to Eng. ed. pub. by the P. P. Text Soc).
Under the Muslims Jericho became a place of
some importance. Ya'kubi (891 a.».) calls it
the capital of the Ohor, or Jordan Valley.
Mukaddasi (985 A.D.) identifies it with the
" City of the Giants," mentioned in the Kurin.
Excellent indigo was grown there ; bananas, date
palms, and flowers of fragrant odour were
plentiful ; snakes, scorpions, and fleas abounded ;
and the serpent whose flesh was used in the
preparation of the celebrated antidote for ve-
nomous bites (Theriaek) was common. The heat
was excessive, and the people, spoken of by
Arculfus as "diminutive men of the race of
Canaan," were brown-skinned and swarthy.
Yakut (1225 AJ>.) alludes to the number of
palm-trees, and adds that sugar-cane was largely
grown, and that the best sugar in the Ghor was
made there (Le Strange, Pal. under the Moslems,
pp. 396, 397). The beauty of the gardens and
the palms are also mentioned in 1294 A.D. by
Riccoldus de Monte Cruris.
Jericho does not seem to have been ever re-
stored as a town by the Crusaders ; it is called
by the Abbot Daniel (1106-7 A.D.) "only a
Saracen village, in which was the house of
Zacchaeus," probably the "square tower or
castle " first distinctly mentioned by Willibrand
in 1211 A.D. Its plains, however, had not ceased
to be prolific, and were extensively cultivated
and laid out in vineyards and gardens by the
monks (Phocas ap. Leon. Allat. Sv^uar. c 20,
p. 31). They seem to have been included in
the domains of the patriarchate of Jerusalem,
and as such were bestowed by Arnulf upon his
niece as a dowry (Wm. of Tyre, Hist xi. 15).
Twenty-five years afterwards we find Melisendis,
wife of king Fulco, assigning them to the coo-
vent of Bethany, which she had founded ajx
1137. After the fall of the Latin kingdom,
Jericho is described as a " vile place " (Brocardns,
A.D. 1230), and as a " poor nasty village "(Mann-
drell, A.D. 1697), and such it has since remained.
The site of ancient (the first) Jericho is at
Tell es-Sultdn, not quite 1} m. north of the
mouth of Wddy Kelt. The mound is from
20 ft. to 30 ft. high, and at its foot well up the
waters of 'Ain es-Sult&n, Elisha's fountain. The
mound, according to Sir C. Warren, is formed,
for the most part, of a light yellow clay, which,
on being touched, crumbles into an impalpable
powder ; there were large quantities of pottery,
and " two layers of bituminous stuff | to 2 in.
thick." The fountain runs out into a shallow
reservoir, and then flows away in numberless
channels to irrigate the plain to the east. North
of the mound are many traces of ruins, some of
which show that the place was occupied in early
Christian times; and to the E. and S.E. there
Digitized by
Google
JEJilCHO
nre extensive rains on the way to Eriha, which
is 1} m. distant. Behind Tell es- Sultan rises
Jebel Kurunbd, the " Mons Quarantana," or
" Mount of Temptation," — a precipitous cliff,
1000 ft. high, which is honeycombed with the
cells and chapels of early and mediaeval anchor-
ites. The second or Roman Jericho (the city of
the N. T. and of Josephus) was at the foot of
the hills close to the mouth of W. Kelt (see
TUn. Hieroool.). There are here mounds and a
large reservoir, but the palaces and other
buildings of Herod, having apparently been
constructed of soft friable stone, have completely
disappeared. The mounds were excavated by
Sir C. Warren, but nothing of importance was
discovered. The third or mediaeval Jericho,
now Eriha, is 1 j m. east of the last, and lies on
the N. bank of W. Kelt. It is a miserable mud
hamlet, with a few black tents pitched among
the houses, which are surrounded by hedges of
the thorny nebk. The inhabitants are a mixed
and very degraded race, and have not sufficient
energy to cultivate their own lands. Here is
the square tower, known as the "House of
Zacchaeus," and in its vicinity was at one time
shown the tree into which he had climbed
(Luke xix. 1-10). 1} m. eastward of Eriha
is Sirket Jiljulieh, marking the site of Gilgal.
The plain of Jericho was formerly irrigated by
an elaborate system of conduits and aqueducts.
The water was derived from six large springs, and
there were twelve separate aqueducts, of which
some are late Roman or Byzantine, and others
are either in whole or in part the work of
Crusaders or Saracens. Most of the water now
runs to waste, and the site of the celebrated
gardens is occupied by a dense jungle, covering
an area 1} miles square. .The palm, the opo-
balsamum, and the sugar-cane have disappeared,
but the natural fertility of the soil has not
changed. Figs, pomegranates, vines, indigo,
cotton, wheat, and barley grow luxuriantly
where cultivated : and amongst other shrubs and
plants are the Zizyphus spina Christi, the
Z. Lotus, the Balanites Aegt/ptiaca (Zakkum)
from which the false " balm of Gilead " or " oil
<>f Zacchaeus " is extracted ; the sweet-smelling
Acacia Farnesiana, the Acacia vera, the beautiful
parasite Loranthus indicus, the Agnus casti, a
large flowering bamboo, and the " Apple of
Sodom," Solanum Melongena, with its potato
blossom, and its bright yellow but poisonous
fruit. All these are products of a sub-tropical
climate, such as that which prevails in the Jor-
dan Valley, which at Jericho is 800 ft. below
the Mediterranean. Several curious native
traditions relating to the capture of Jericho by
Joshua have been collected by M. Clermont-
(ianneau (PEF. Mem. iii. 172, 173, 179, 201,
222 sq. ; Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 201 sq. ;
Ouerin, Samarie, i. 33-53, 132-149; Sepp, Jer.
u. d. H. Land, i. 720 sq. ; Baedeker-Socin, Hbk.).
[E. S. Ff.] [W.]
JEBICHO, PLAINS OP. 2 K. xxv. 5 ;
Jer. xxxix. 5, lii. 8. The part of the Jordan
Valley extending from the mountains behind
Jericho to the Jordan. [Jericho.]
JEEI'EL (^N*V = foundation of God; B.
'Pci^Ai A. 'Ic0«4a> Jeriel), a man of Issachar,
one of the six heads of the house of Tola at
JEBIOTH
1577
the time of the census in the time of David
(1 Ch. vii. 2).
JEBI'JAH (fPT = foundation of Jehovah;
B.T ovStias, A.'laplas; Jeria), in 1 Ch. xxvi. 31.
The same person as Jebiah.
JEBTMOTH (n'lD»"V = heights). 1. (B,
'A.ptitu&0, A. 'Itptuo&Q ; Jerimoth.) Son or de-
scendant of Bela, according to 1 Ch. vii. 7, and
founder of a Benjamite house, which existed in
the time of David (». 2). He is perhaps the
same as
2. (B. 'Aptipoie, A. 'laptnoie, tt. 'Aptyurfs ;
Jerimuth), who joined David at Ziklag (1 Ch.
xii. 5). [Bela.]
8. (flto'T, i'.«. Jeremoth; B. A«pij/u£0, A.
'Upiu&6 ; Jerimoth.) A son of Becher (1 Ch.
vii. 8), and head of another Benjamite house.
[Becher.]
4. (B. 'Apttu£8, A. 'UpiuAB ; Jerimoth.) Son
of Mushi, the son of Merari, and head of one of
the families of the Merarites which were counted
in the census of the Levites taken by David
(1 Ch. xxiv. 30). [See Jebemotb, 2.]
5. (B. 'Uptfuie, 'ZfKiu&e; A. 'Upiiu&e, 'lepi-
lioii: Jerimoth.) Son of Heman, head of the
loth ward t of musicians (1 Ch. xxv. 4, 22). In
the latter verse he is called Jeremoth. [Heman ;
Jeremoth (3).]
6. (B. 'EptifidO, A.'Upi/ioiB; Jerimoth.) Son
of Azriel, " ruler" (TJJ) of the tribe of Naph-
tali in the reign of David (1 Ch. xxvii. 19).
The same persons, called rulers, are in r. 22
called " princes" (Dnb) of the tribes of Israel.
7. (B. 'UpifwiS, A. 'Kpfioit ; Jerimoth.) Son
of king David, whose daughter Mahalath was
one of the wives of Rehoboam, ber cousin Abihail
being the other (2 Ch. xi. 18). As Jerimoth is
not named in the list of children by David's
wives in 1 Ch. iii. or xiv. 4-7, it is fair to infer
that he was the son of a concubine, and this in
fact is the Jewish tradition (Jerome, Quaestiones,
ad loc.). It is, however, questionable whether
Rehoboam would hare married the grandchild
of a concubine even of the great David. The
passage 2 Ch. xi. 18 is not qnite clear, since
the word "daughter" is a correction of
the Keri: the Keri, LXX., and Vulg. read 13,
».e. "son."
8. (B. 'UpdiidB, A. 'Upi/uiS; Jerimoth.) A
Levite in the reign of Hezekiah, one of the over-
seers of offerings and dedicated things placed in
the chambers of the Temple, who were under
Cononiah and Shimei the Levites, by command
of Hezekiah, and Azariah the high-priest (2 Ch.
xxxi. 13). [A.C. H.] [C.H.]
JEEI'OTH (Jlton? = curtain*; B. 'E\u49,
A. 'lepiiie ; Jerioth), according to our A. V. and
the LXX., one of the elder Caleb's wives (1 Ch.
ii. 18) ; but, according to the Vulgate, she was his
daughter by his first wife Azubah. The Hebrew
text seems evidently corrupt, and will not make
sense ; bnt the probability is that Jerioth was
a daughter of Caleb the son of Hezron. (In
this case we ought to read «"I31?P JO TW1
intW.) The Latin Version of Sante's Pagninus,
which makes Azubah and Jerioth both daughters
of Caleb, and the note of Vatablus, which makes
Digitized by
Google
1578
JEKOBOAM
Ishah (A. V. " wife ") a proper name and a
third daughter, are clearly wrong, as it appears
from v. 19 that Azubah was Caleb's wife. Cp.
Oettli in Strack u. Zocklcr's Kgf. Hdbk. in loco.
[A. C. H.] [C. H.]
JEROBO'AM (DIOT = Yarob'am; "Icpo-
fio&fi, Joseph. 'Upoflianos ; Jeroboam). The
name, if taken to mean whose people is many,
has nearly the same meaning as REHOBOAH,
enlarger of the people. M V. 1 ' prefers pleader for
the people. Both names appear for the first time
in the reign of Solomon, and were perhaps
suggested by the increase of the Jewish people
at that time.
1. The first king of the divided kingdom of
Israel (Riehm, B.C. 938-917). The ancient
authorities for his reign and his Wars were
" the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel " (1 K.
xir. 19), and "the visions of Iddo the seer
against Jeroboam the son of Nebat" (2 Ch.
ix. 29). The extant account of his life is given
in two versions, very different from each other.
The one usually followed is that contained in the
Hebrew text, and in one portion of the LXX.
The other is given in a separate account inserted
l.y the LXX. at 1 K. xi. 43 and xii. 24. The
latter was preferred by Ranke, the historian, to
the former, and is — in this article — taken as the
basis of the biography of this remarkable man.
Modern scholars prefer the Hebrew narrative
(cp. Kittel, Gcsch. d. Hebraer, ii. 178).
I. He was the son of an Ephraimite of the
name of Nebat ; * his father had died whilst he
was young ; but his mother, who had been a
person of loose character (LXX. f&prn, v. 24 b),
lived in widowhood, trusting apparently to
her son for support. Her name is variously
given as Zeruah (Heb.), or Sarira (LXX.
Sapturi, v. 24 b), and the place of their abode
on the mountains of Ephraim is given either as
Zeukda, or (LXX. XaptipA, v. 24 b) as Sarira :
in the latter case, indicating that there was
some connexion between the wife of Nebat and
her residence.
At the time when Solomon was constructing
the fortifications of Millo underneath the citadel
of Zion, his sagacious eye discovered the strength
and activity of a young Ephraimite who was
employed on the works, and he raised him to
the rank of superintendent over the taxes and
labours exacted from the tribe of Ephraim
(1 K. xi. 28). This was Jeroboam. He made
the most of his position. He completed the
fortifications, and was long afterwards known
as the man who had "enclosed the city of
David" (1 K. xi. 24; LXX. xii. 24b). He
then aspired to royal state. Like Absalom
before him, in like circumstances, though now
on a grander scale, in proportion to the enlarge-
ment of the royal establishment itself, he kept
300 chariots and horses (LXX. xii. 24 b), and at
last was perceived by Solomon to be aiming at
the monarchy.
These ambitious designs were probably fostered
• According to the old Jewish tradition preserved by
Jerome (Quaal. Btbr. 2 Sam. xvi. 10), Nebat, the father
of Jeroboam, was Identical with Shlmel of Gera, who
was the first to Insult David in his flight, and the
" first of all the house of Joseph " to congratulate him
on his retain.
JEBOBOAM
by the sight of the growing disaffection of the
great tribe over which he presided, as well as
by the alienation of the Prophetic order from
the house of Solomon. According to the version
of the story in the Hebrew text (Joseph. Ant.
viii. 7, § 7), this alienation was made evident to
Jeroboam very early in his career. He was
leaving Jerusalem, and he encountered on one of
the black-paved roads which ran out of the city,
Ahijah, " the prophet " of the ancient sanctuary
of Shiloh. Ahijah drew him aside from the
road into the field (LXX.), and, as soon as they
found themselves alone, the prophet, who was
dressed in a new outer garment, stripped it off,
and tore it into twelve shreds, ten of which he
gave to Jeroboam, with the assurance that on
condition of his obedience to His laws, God
would establish for him a kingdom and a
dynasty equal to that of David (1 K. xi. 29-40).
The attempts of Solomon to cnt short Jero-
boam's designs occasioned his flight into Egypt.
There he remained during the rest of Solomon's
reign — in the court of Shishak (LXX. Zovtro-
KfJ/i, xii. 24 c), or Sheshonq, the founder of a
new Egyptian dynasty, and therefore not allied
with Solomon, who is here first named in the
sacred narrative. On Solomon's death, he de-
manded Shishak's permission to return. The
Egyptian king seems, in his reluctance, to hare
offered any gift which Jeroboam chose, as a
reason for his remaining, and the consequence
was the marriage with Ano CA«S), the elder
sister of the Egyptian queen, Tahpenes (LXX
Thekemina, Bactfielva, v. 24 e), and of another
princess (LXX.) who had married the Edomite
chief, Hadad. A year elapsed, and a son, Abijah
('A/SuE, r. 24 e) (or Abijam), was born. Then
Jeroboam again requested permission to depart,
which was granted; and he returned with his
wife and child to his native place, Sarira or
Zereda, which he fortified, and which in conse-
quence became a centre for his fellow tribes-
men (1 K. xi. 41, LXX. xii. 24 f ). Still there
was no open act of insurrection, and it was in
this period of suspense (according to the LXX.
xii. 24 g) that a pathetic incident darkened his
domestic history. His infant son fell sick. The
anxious father sent his wife to inquire of God
concerning him. Jerusalem would have been
the obvious place to visit for this purpose. But
no doubt political reasons forbade. The ancient
sanctuary of Shiloh (2tjA&) was nearer at hand ;
and it so happened that a prophet was now re-
siding there, of the highest repute. It was
Ahijah ('Axeid, t>. 24 h)— the same who, accord-
ing to the common version of the story, had
already been in communication with Jeroboam,
but who, according to the authority we are
now following, appears for the first time on
this occasion. He was sixty years of age — but
was prematurely old, and his eyesight had
already failed him. He was living, as it would
seem, in poverty, with a boy who waited on
him, and with his own little children. For him
and for them, the wife of Jeroboam brought
such gifts as were thought likely to be accept-
able ; ten loaves, and two rolls (icoMvpia) for
the children (LXX. r. 24h), a bunch of raisin*
(LXX. <rra<pv\4ir, t'6.), and a jar of honey. She
had disguised herself, to avoid recognition ; and
perhaps these humble gifts were part of the
plan. But the blind prophet, at her first
Digitized by
Google
JEROBOAM
approach, knew who was coming; and bade
hi* boy go ont to meet her, and invite her to
his house without delay. There he warned her
of the nselessness of her gifts. There was a
doom on the house of Jeroboam, not to be
averted ; those who grew up in it and died
in the city would become the prey of the
hungry dogs; they who died in the country
would be devoured by the vultures. This child
alone would die before the calamities of the
house arrived : " They shall mourn for the
child, Woe, O Lord, for in him there is found a
good word regarding the Lord " (LXX. r. 24 m)
— or, according to the Hebrew version, "all
Israel shall mourn for him, and bury him ; for
he only of Jeroboam shall come to the grave,
because in him there is found some good thing
toward Jehovah the God of Israel in the house
of Jeroboam " (1 K. xiv. 13). The mother re-
turned. As she re-entered the town of Sarira
(Heb. Tirzah, 1 K. xiv. 17), the child died. The
loud wail of her attendant damsels greeted her
on the threshold (LXX. v. 24 n). The child was
buried, as Ahijah had foretold, with all the
state of the child of a royal house. " All Israel
mourned for him " (1 K. iiv. 18). This inci-
dent, if it really occurred at this time, seems to
have been the turning point in Jeroboam's career.
It drove him from his ancestral home, and it
gathered the sympathies of the tribe of Ephraim
round him. He left Sarira and came to Shechem
(ilKifia, v. 24 n). The Hebrew text describes that
he was sent for. The LXX. speaks of it as
his own act. However that may be, he was
thus at the head of the northern tribes, when
Kehoboam, after he had been on the throne for
somewhat more than a year, came up to be in-
augurated in that ancient capital. Then (if we
may take the account already given of Ahijah's
interview as something separate from this), for
the second time, and in a like manner, the
Divine intimation of his future greatness is
conveyed to him. The prophet Shemaiah
{lapalas) the Enlamite(?) (o 'EvXapxl, LXX.
v. 24 o) addressed to him the same acted parable,
in the ten shreds of a new unwashed garment
(LXX.). Then took place the conference with
Rekoboam (Jeroboam appearing in it, in the
Hebrew text, but not b in the LXX.), and the
final revolt ; ' which ended (expressly in the
Hebrew text, in the LXX. by implication) in
the elevation of Jeroboam to the throne of the
northern kingdom. Shemaiah remained on the
spot and deterred Rehoboam from an attack.
Jeroboam entered at once on the duties of his
new situation, and fortified Shechem as his
capital on the west, and Penuel (close by the
old Transjordanic capital of Mahanaim) on the
east (1 K. xii. 25).
II. Up to this point there had been nothing
to disturb the anticipations of the Prophetic
Order and of the mass of Israel as to the glory
of Jeroboam's future. But from this moment
one fatal error crept, not unnaturally, into bis
policy, which undermined his dynasty and
tarnished his name as the first king of Israel.
JEROBOAM
1579
*> This omission Is however borne out by the Hebrew
text, 1 K. xii. 20, " when all Israel heard that Jeroboam
was come again."
• The cry of revolt, I K. xll. 16, Is the same as that
In 2 Sam. xx. 1.
The political disruption of the kingdom was
complete; but its religious unity was as yet
unimpaired. He feared that the yearly pil-
grimages to Jerusalem would undo all the work
which he had effected, and he took the bold step
of rending it asunder. Two sanctuaries of
venerable antiquity existed already— one at the
southern, the other at the northern, extremity
of his dominions. These he elevated into seats
of the national worship, which should rival the
newly established Temple at Jerusalem. As
Abderrahman, caliph of Spain, arrested the
movement of his subjects to Mecca, by the
erection of the holy place of the Zecca at
Cordova, so Jeroboam trusted to the erection of
his shrines at Dan and Bethel. But he was not
satisfied without another deviation from the
Mosaic idea of the national unity. His long
stay in Egypt had familiarised him with the
outward forms under which the Divinity was
there represented ; and now, for the first time
since the Exodus, was an Egyptian element
introduced into the national worship of Pales-
tine. A golden figure of Mnevis, the sacred
calf of Heliopolis, was set up at each sanctuary,
with the address, " Behold thy God (' Elohim '
— cp. Neh. ix. 18) which brought thee up out of
the land of Egypt." The sanctuary of Dan, as
the most remote from Jerusalem, was estab-
lished first (1 K. xii. 30) with priests from the
distant tribes, whom he consecrated instead of
the Levites (xii. 31 ; xiii. 33). The more im-
portant one, as nearer the capital and in the
heart of the kingdom, was Bethel. The wor-
ship and the sanctuary continued till the end of
the northern kingdom. The priests were sup-
plied by a peculiar form of consecration — anv
one from the non-Levitical tribes could procure
the office on sacrificing a young bullock and
seven rams (1 K. xiii. 33 ; 2 Ch. xi. 15, xiii. 9).
For the dedication of this he copied the pre-
cedent of Solomon in choosing the Feast of
Tabernacles as the occasion ; but postponing it
for a month, probably in order to meet the
vintage of the most northern parts. On the
fifteenth day of this month (the 8th), he went
np in state to offer incense on the altar which
was before the calf. It was at this solemn and
critical moment that a prophet from Judah
suddenly appeared, whom Josephns with great
probability identifies with Iddo the Seer (he
calls him Iaddn, 'laS/iv, Ant. viii. 8, § 5 ; and
see Jerome, Qu. ffcbr. on 2 Ch. x. 4), who
denounced the altar, and foretold its desecration
by Josiah, and violent overthrow. It is not
clear from the account whether it is intended
that the overthrow took place then or in the
earthquake described by Amos (ix. 1). Another
sign is described as taking place instantly. The
king stretching ont his hand to arrest the
prophet felt it withered and paralysed, and
only at the prophet's prayer saw it restored,
and acknowledged his Divine mission (xiii. 6).
Josephus adds, but probably in conjecture from
the sacred narrative, that the prophet who
seduced Iddo on his return, did so in order to
prevent his obtaining too much influence over
Jeroboam, and endeavoured to explain away the
miracles to the king, by representing that the
altar fell because it was new, and that his hand
was paralysed from the fatigue of sacrificing.
A further allusion is made to this incident in
Digitized by
Google
1580
JEROBOAM
the narrative of Joseph us {Ant. viii. 15, §4),
where Zedekiah is represented as contrasting
the potency of Iddo in withering the hand of
Jeroboam with the powerlessness of Micaiah to
wither the hand of Zedekiah. The visit of Ano
to Ahijah, which the common Hebrew text
(1 K. xiv. 18) places after this event, and with
darker intimations in Ahijah's warning only
suitable to a later period, has already been
described.
Jeroboam was at constant war with the
house of Judah, but the only act distinctly
recorded is a battle with Abijah, son of Reho-
boam ; in which — in spite of a skilful ambush
made by Jeroboam, and of much superior force
— he was defeated, and for the time lost three
important cities, Bethel, Jeshanah, and Ephraim. 4
The calamity was severely felt ; he never re-
covered the blow, and soon after died, in the
twenty-second year of his reign (2 Ch. xiii. 20),
and was buried in his ancestral sepulchre (1 K.
xiv. 20). His son Kadab, or (LXX. NafldV)
Nebat (named after the grandfather), succeeded,
and in him the dynasty was closed. The name
of Jeroboam long remained under a cloud as the
king who " had caused Israel to sin." At the
time of the Reformation, it was a common
practice of Roman Catholic writers to institute
comparisons between his separation' from the
sanctuary of Judah, and that of Henry VIII.
from the see of Rome.
[In his Lectures on the Jewish Church (ii. 239,
1883) Dean Stanley analyses the intention of
Jeroboam in establishing his rites at Dan and
Bethel. He considers that the golden calves
were honestly designed as visible representations
of the Supreme Deity, with a view to pre-
serving the belief in the unity of God ; but that
with every desire thus to uphold the sanctity of
the First Commandment, he violated the Second,
tampering with the spiritual conception of the
national worship, and thus accustoming the
Israelites to the very sin against which it was
his object to provide a safeguard. So likewise
Kwald understands {Hist. Jsr? iv. 26, 1878).
The Speaker's Comm. (Xotes on 1 K. xii. 26,
28) gives Jeroboam unqualified blame ; and Keii
in his comments on this reign (Clark's F. T. L.
jxxiii., 185, 186) credits him with the sole
design of securing his own throne. — C. H.]
8. Jeroboam II., the son of his predecessor
Joash and the fourth of the dynasty of Jehu.
The most prosperous of the kings of Israel.
The contemporary accounts of his reign are,
(1) in the "Chronicles of the Kings of Israel "
(2 K. xiv. 28), which are lost, but of which the
substance is given in 2 K. xiv. 23-29 ; (2) in
the contemporary Prophets ■ Hosea and Amos,
and (perhaps) in the fragments found in Is. xv.,
xvi. It had been foretold in the reign of Jeho-
ahaz that a great deliverer should come, to
rescue Israel from the Syrian yoke (cp. 2 K.
xiii. 4, xiv. 26, 27), and this had been expanded
into a distinct prediction of Jonah, that there
should be a restoration of the widest dominion
of Solomon (xiv. 25). This "saviour" and
' The Tirguin on Ruth lv. 20 mentions that Jero-
boam had stationed guards on the roads, which guards
were slain by the people of Netoph&h ; but what is here
alluded to, or when It took place, we have at present no
clue to.
JEKOHAM
" restorer " was Jeroboam. He not only re-
pelled the Syrian invaders, but took their
capital city Damascus (2 K. xiv. 28; Amos i.
3-5), and recovered the whole of the ancient
dominion from Hamath to the Dead Sea (xiv.
25; Amos vi. 14). Ammon and Moab were
reconquered (Amos i. 13, ii. 1-3); the Trans-
jordanic tribes were restored to their territory
(2 K. xiii. 5; 1 Ch. v. 17-22).
But it was merely an outward restoration.
The sanctuary at Bethel was kept up in royal
state (Amos vii. 18), but drunkenness, licentious-
ness, and oppression prevailed in the country
(Amos ii. 6-8, iv. 1, vi. 6; Hos. i. 2, iv. 12-14),
and idolatry was united with the worship of
Jehovah (Hos. iv. 13, xiii. 6).
Amos prophesied the destruction of Jeroboam
and his house by the sword (Amos vii. 9, 17), and
Amaziah, the high-priest of Bethel, complained
to the king (Amos vii. 10-13). The effect does
not appear. Hosea (Hos. i. 1) also denounced
the crimes of the nation. The prediction of
Amos was not fulfilled as regarded the king
himself. He was buried with his ancestors in
state (2 K. xiv. 29).
Ewald {Hist, of Isr* iv. 124, note, 1878)
supposes that Jeroboam was the subject of
Ps. xiv. [A. P. S.]
JERO'HAM (prif-beloved ; Jeroham). 1.
(B. 'Uptfict]\, 'IoWp, "HodA ; A. 'Itpod/i, 'IepcaV,
'IcoojSod/t.) Father of Elkanah, the father of
Samuel, of the house of Kohath. His father is
called Eliab at 1 Ch. vi. 27, Eliel at c. 34, and
Elihn at 1 Sam. i. 1. Jeroham must have been
about the same age as Eli. [A. C. H.]
2. Clpoiji, B. 'IpadfiL, A. 'Upodfi.) A Benja-
mite, and the founder of a family of Bene-Jero-
ham (1 Ch. viii. 27). They were among the
leaders of that part of the tribe which lived in
Jerusalem, and which is here distinguished from
the part which inhabited Gideon. Probably the
same person is intended in
8. (Upo$tdu, B. 'Ipad/ii, A. 'Upoipi.) Father
(or progenitor) of Ibneiah, one of the leading
Benjamitea of Jerusalem (1 Ch. ix. 8; cp. ct. S
and 9).
4. ("Ipaifyi, A. 'Upwtn ; in Neh. B. omits, A.
'Itpodfi.) A descendant of Aaron, of the house
of Immer, the leader of the sixteenth coarse of
priests; son of Pashur and father of Adaiah
(1 Ch. ix. 12). He appears to be mentioned
again in Neh. xi. 12 (a record curiously and
puzzingly parallel to that of 1 Ch. ix., though
with some striking differences), though there he
is stated to belong to the house of Malchiah,
who was leader of the fifth course (and cp. Neh.
xi. 14).
5. {'IpodfL, B. "Pain, A. 'Upoi/ju) Jeroham
of Gedor ("Alin-jO), some of whose "sons"'
joined David when he was taking refuge from
Saul at Ziklag (1 Ch. xii. 7). The list purports
to be of Benjamites (see t>. 2, where the word
" even " is interpolated, and the last five words
belong to v. 3). But then how can the presence
of Korhites (r. 6), the descendants of Koran the
Levite, be accounted for ?
0. ClpudP, BA. 'Iapdju.) A Danite, whose
son or descendant Azareel was head of his tribe
in the time of David (1 Ch. xxvii. 22).
7. Qlmpdu.) Father of Azariah, one of the
Digitized by
Google
JEBUBBAAL
" captains of hundreds " in the time of Athaliah ;
one of those to whom Jehoiada the priest con-
fided his scheme for the restoration of Joash
(2 Ch. xxiii. 1). CO-] [W-]
JEBUB'BAAL (!»3"V, probably = he that
striveth with Baal\. Cp. the Phoen. TtOBP
[M-V. 11 ] : B. chiefly 'UpoPdaX, but also once each
'\tapo$daX, 'lapfldA, 'ApSadA,and in 1 Sam. xii.
11 'UpoPodp ; A. Sucaarfipioii tou BatfA, Judg.
vi. 32, 'lpoPda\ in vii. 1: Jerobaal), the sur-
name of Gideon which he acquired in con-
sequence of destroying the altar of Baal, when
his father defended him from the vengeance
of the Abi-ezrites. In the A. and R. V. of
Judg. Ti. 32, "he called him Jerubbaal," im-
plying that the surname was given by Joash,
means, in accordance with a well-known Hebrew
idiom, " one called him," i.e. he was called by
the men of his city. The LXX. in the same
passage have ticA\t<rtv e&rt, "he called it,"
i.e. the altar mentioned in the preceding verse ;
but as in all other passages they recognise
Jerubbaal as the name of Gideon, the reading
should probably be afrroV. In Judg. viii. 35 the
Vulg. strictly follows the Heb., Jerobaal Gedeon.
The Alex. Version omits the name altogether
from Judg. ix. 57. The name is also found in
Judg. vii. 1, viii. 29, ix. 1, 5, 16, 19, 24, 28,
and 1 Sam. xii. 11. It is not a little remavk-
able that Josephus (An*, v. 6) omits all men-
tion both of the change of name and of the
event it commemorates. Gideon's act was one
of putting away all sin and rebellion against
God from his own house, before he entered upon
the holy war to which God had called him.
' [W.A.W.] [C.H.]
JEBUB'BESHETH (nt?3"V; 'Iepo0od>;
Jerobaal), a name of Gideon (2 Sam. xi. 21).
A later generation probably abstained from pro-
nouncing the name (Ex. xxiii. 13) of a false god
(Baal), and therefore changed Gideon's name
(Judg. vi. 32) of Jerubbaal=Ae that strketh with
Baal, into Jerubbesheth = he that striveth with
shame (=the idol). Cp. similar changes (1 Ch.
viii. 33, 34) of Eshbaal for Ishbosheth, and
Meribbaal for Mephibosheth. See Ewald in
loco. [W.T.B.] [C.H.]
, JEBU'EL, THE WILDERNESS OF
(TtOT "1310 ; n ipbpos If ptfiK ; Jeruel), the
place in which Jehoshaphat was informed by
Jahaziel the Levite that he should encounter
the hordes of Ammon, Moab, and the Mehunim,
who were swarming round the south end of the
Dead Sea to the attack of Jerusalem : " Ye shall
find, them at the end of the valley (wady),
facing the wilderness of Jeruel " (2 Ch. xx.
16). The "wilderness" contained a watch-
tower (v. 24), from which many a similar
incursion had probably been descried. It was a
well-known spot, for it has the definite article.
Or the word (n|SSn) may mean a commanding
ridge,* below which "the " wilderness " lay open
to view. The name has not been met with, but
the " wilderness " was apparently a part of the
Jesbihon in the neighbourhood of Tekoa and
JERUSALEM.
1581
Berachah (perhaps Bereiiit), east of the road
between Urtis and Hebron. [G.] [W.]
JEBU'SALEM (D^W, i.e. Yerushalaim ;
or, in the more extended form, D^7{?1"Y, in
1 Ch. iii. 5, 2 Ch. xxv. 1, xxxii. 9, Esth. li. 6,
Jer. xxvi. 18, only ; in the Chaldee passages of
Ezra and Daniel, DTB^T, i.e. Tertshelem : LXX.
'Upoua-aXriii ; N. T. apparently indifferently
'UpovaaKiin and ra 'Ispoo-oAu/ui : Vulg. Cod.
Amiat. Bierusalem and Hierosolyma, but in
other old copies Jerusalem, Jerosotyma. In the
A. V. of 1611 it is " Ierusalem," in 0. T. and
Apocr. ; but in N. T. " Hierusalem ">*
CONTEXTS.
FAGS
The name 1581
Geographical position 1&S2
Topographical features 15**
Geology 1588
Roads 1588
Gates 1*88
Burial-grounds 1***
Woods'; Gardens 1589
Water Supply IW0
Streets, Houses 1693
Climate 1596
History :—
Before the Captivity 1596
After the Captivity 1605
The Siege of Titus 1622
AftertheSlege 16*6
Ancient Jerusalem 1631
Topography according to Josephus • 1632
Site of Temple 1634
TheAntoaia 1643
TheAcra 16"
Hlpplcos 16"
The Walls 1645
Population 1647
Pre-exllic Jerusalem 1648
Zlon 1650
Topography of the Book of Nehemiah
Site of the Holy Sepulchre .
Buildings— Constantine to Godfrey
Mediaeval Jerusalem ....
1651
1662
1666
1668
• «ri r!jt imfiintt, kr/oniviis f ifrxntt Joseph. Ant.
ix.l, v 2.
• Other names borne by Jerusalem are as follows:
1. Akikl, the *• lion of God," or, according to another
interpretation, the •* hearth of God " (Is. xxix. 1, 3, t ;
cp. Esek. xliii. 16). For the former signification cp.
Pa. lxxvi. 1, 2 (Stanley, S. <* P. p. 171). 2. i «y£a »»>«.
"the holy city," Matt. iv. 5 and xxvU. 63 only. Both
these passages would seem to refer to Zlon— the sacred
portion of the place. In which the Temple was situated.
It also occurs-^ w. * ay— Bev. xi. 2. 3. AelU Capito-
lina,tbe name bestowed by the Emperor Hadrian (Aellns
Hadrianus) on the city as rebuilt hy him, a.o. 135-136.
These two names of the emperor are Inscribed on the
well-known stone in the south wall of the Mosque el-
Akss, one of the few Roman relics about which there
can he no dispute. This name Is usually employed by
Eusebius (AUu») and Jerome, in their Onomattieon.
By Ptolemy it Is given as KmrtrwAiot (Beland, Pal.
p. 462). 4. The Arabic names are el-Kudl, " the holy,"
or Beit et-MukaMatm Beit d-Slukdi; "the holy
house," " the sanctuary." The first Is that in ordinary
use at present. The latter Is found in Arabic chronicles.
It is also called Iliyi (YakQt, iv. 692), and is referred
to In poetry as d-BcOdt, " the court " (Le Strange, Pal.
under the Moslem, p. 84). The name ak-Skertf, " the
venerable," or "the noble," Is also quoted by Schultens
in his Index Geogr. in Vit. Salad. 6. Yakut mentions
(i. 402, 111. 316, iv. 690) the forms Urishallum, VrU
Digitized by
Google
1582
JEEUSALEM
On the derivation and signification of the
name considerable difference exists among the
authorities. The Rabbis state that the name
Shalem was bestowed on it by Shem (identical
in their traditions with Melchizedek), and the
name Jireh by Abraham, after the deliverance
of Isaac on Mount Moriah,* and that the two
were afterwards combined, lest displeasure
should be felt by either of the two Saints at
the exclusive use of one (Beresh. Rab. in Otho,
Lex. Sab. s. v., also Lightfoot). Others, quoted
by Reland (p. 833), would make it mean " fear of
Salem," or " sight of peace." The suggestion of
Reland himself, adopted by Simonis (Onpm.
p. 467) and Ewald (Gach. iii. 155, note), is E*I"P
u?&, " inheritance of peace," but this is ques-
tioned by Gesenius (Thes. p. 6286) and Fiirst
(Handwb. p. 5476), who prefer Da? IT, the
"foundation of peace."* Another derivation,
proposed by the fertile Hitzig (Jesaia, p. 2), is
named by the two last great scholars only to
condemn it. Others again, looking to the name
of the Canaanite tribe who possessed the place
at the time of the conquest, would propose
Jebus-salem (Reland, p. 834), or even Jebus-
Solomon, as the name conferred on the city by
that monarch when he began his reign of tran-
quillity.
Another controversy relates to the termination
of the name — Jerushalaim — the Hebrew dual;
and which, by Simonis and Ewald, is unhesi-
tatingly referred to the double formation of the
city, while reasons are shown against this by
Reland and Gesenius. It is certain that on the
two occasions where the latter portion of the
name appears to be given for the whole (Gen.
xiv. 18 ; Ps. lxxvi. 2), it is Shalem, and not
Shalaim ; also that the five places where the
vowel-points of the Masorets are supported by
the letters of the original text, are of a late
date, when the idea of the double city, and its
reflection in the name, would have become
familiar to the Jews. In this conflict of
authorities the suggestion will perhaps occur to
a bystander that the original formation of the
name may have been anterior to the entrance of
the Israelites on Canaan, and that this was the
case seems clear from the cuneiform tablets
found in the ruins of Tell el-Amarna. Most of
these letters were written towards the close of
the reign of Amenflphis IV., a century before
the Israelites entered Canaan; and some of
them are from Ebed-tob (Abdu-dhabba), the
priest-king of Vru-'salim, Jerusalem. It would
appear that Jerusalem was the seat of the
worship and oracle of the god 'Salim, whose
ihalum. and Shailum as the names of the Holy City
in the days of the Jews. Edri&i also once gives It the
name Aurathalim (ed. JauberL, i. 346). 6. In the
cuneiform inscriptions one form of the name appears
as Ur-sa-ll-im-mu (Schrader, D. KcilimchTiflen u. d.
A. T. p. 161).
» The question of the identity of Moeiah with
Jerusalem will be examined under that head.
• Such mystical Interpretations as those of Origan,
TO wyevpa xaptro? avrutv (from nil and D?C)i or i*ptn>
cipijpip, where half the uame 1b interpreted as Greek
and half as Hebrew, curious as they are, cannot be
examined here. (See the catalogues preserved by
Jerome.)
JERUSALEM
temple stood on "the mountain" of Moriah,
and that the word signifies "the city of the
god 'Salim," i a " of the god of Peace " (Beconh
of the Past, Mew Series, v. 60, 61). Jerushalaim
then may be regarded as the Hebrew form of
the original archaic name. Centuries after-
wards, when Hebrews in their turn gave way
to Greeks, attempts were made to twist Jeru-
shalaim into a shape which should be intel-
ligible to Greek ears.' 'Ieso coAvprf, "the
holy Solyma " (Joseph. B. J. vi. 10), 'Upkr
2oAo/um>o{,* the "holy place of Solomon"
(Eupolemus, in Euseb. Pr. Ev. ix. 34), and the
curious fancy quoted by Josephus (c. Ap. i. 34,
35) from Lysimachus — 'UpAovha, " spoilers of
temples."
The subject of Jerusalem naturally divides
itself into three heads : —
I. The place itself: its origin, position, and
physical characteristics.
II. The annals of the city.
III. The topography of the town; the re-
lative localities of its various parts ; the sites of
the " Holy Places," ancient and modern, &c
I. The Place itself.
The arguments — if arguments they can be
called — for and against the identity of the
" Salem " of Melchizedek (Gen. xiv. 18) with
Jerusalem — the " Salem " of a late Psalmist (Ps.
lxxvi. 2) — are almost equally balanced. In
favour of it are the unhesitating statement of
Josephus {Ant. i. 10, § 2 ; vii. 3, § 2 ; B.J.ri.
10 f ) and Eusebius (OS.* p. 267, 18, 'Icpw
o-aAryt), the recurrence of the name Salem in the
Psalm just quoted, where it undoubtedly means
Jerusalem,* and the general consent in the identi-
fication. On the other hand is the no less positive
statement of Jerome, grounded on more reason
than he often vouchsafes for his statements'
(Ep. ad Evangelum, § 7), that " Salem was not
Jerusalem, as Josephus and all Christians (aorfn
omnet) believe it to be, but a town near Scytho-
polis, which to this day is called Salem, where
the magnificent ruins of the palace of Melchizedek
are still seen, and of which mention is made in >
subsequent passage of Genesis — ' Jacob came to
Salem, a city of Shechem " (Gen. xxxiii. 18)."
Elsewhere (OS* p. 282, 84 ; p. 180, 15) Eusebios
and he identify it with Shechem itself. This
question will be discussed under the head of
d Other instances of similar Greek forms given to
Hebrew names are 'Icpigu and 'Iepopof.
• Pbilo carries this a step further, and, bearing In
view only the sanctity of the place, be discards tae
Semitic member of the name, and calls it 'Upireix-
It is exactly the complement of iroAic ZoAvpa (Pansa-
nlas, vUi. 16).
< In this psssage he even goes so far as to say that
Melchizedek, •• the first priest of God," built there the
first temple, and changed the name of the city from
Soluma to Hieroeoluma.
f A contraction analogous to others with which we
are familiar In our own poetry; tg. Edin. or Bdtaa,
for Edinburgh.
■ Winer is wrong In stating (RWB. 11. ») «"■»
Jerome bases this statement on a Rabbinical tradition.
The tradition that he quotes, in y 6 of the same Ep»
Is as to the identity of Melchliedek with Shem.
1 R. V. translates "Jacob came in peace to the city of
Shechem
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
Salem. Here it ia sufficient to say (1) that
Jerusalem suits the circumstances of the narra-
tive as well as any place further north, or more
in the heart of the country. It would be quite
as much in Abram's road from the sources of
Jordan to his home under the oaks of Hebron,
and it would be quite as suitable for the visit of
the king of Sodom. (2) It is perhaps some con-
firmation of the identity, at any rate it is a
remarkable coincidence, that the king of Jeru-
salem in the time of Joshua should bear the title
Adoni-zedek — almost precisely the same as that
of Melchi-zedek. k
The question of the identity of Jerusalem
with " Cadytis, a large city of Syria," "almost
as large as Sardis," which is mentioned by
Herodotus (ii. 159, iii. 5) as having been taken
by Pharaoh-Necho, need not be investigated in
this place. 1 It is examined in Rawlinson's
Herod, n. 246 ; Blakesley's Herod. — Excursus on
Bk. iii. ch. 5 (both against the identification); and
in Kenrick's Egypt, ii. 406, and Did. of Gk. and
Rom. Geogr. ii. 17 (both for it).
Nor need we do more than refer to the tra-
ditions — if traditions they are, and not mere
individual speculations— of Tacitus (Hist. v. 2)
and Plutarch (7s. et Osir. ch. 31), of the founda-
tion of the city by a certain Hierosolymus, a
son of the Typhon (see Winer's note, i. 545).
All certain information as to the early history
of Jerusalem must be gathered from the books
of the Jewish historians alone.
It is during the conquest of the country that
Jerusalem first appears in definite form on the
scene in which it was destined to occupy so
prominent a position. The earliest notice is
probably that in Josh. xv. 8 and xviii. 16, 28,
describing the landmarks of the boundaries of
Judah and Benjamin. Here it is styled Ha-
Jebusi, i.e., as in K. V., " the Jebusite" (A. V.
Jebusi), after the name of its occupiers, just as
is the case with other places in these lists.
[Jebdbi.] Next, we find the form Jebus (Judg.
xix. 10, 11) — "Jebus, which is Jerusalem . . .
the city of the Jebusites ; " and lastly, in docu-
ments which profess to be of the same age as
the foregoing, we have Jerusalem (Josh. x. 1,
&c, xii. 10 ; Judg. i. 7, Ac.). 1 " To this we have
a parallel in Hebron, the other great city of
Southern Palestine, which bears the alternative
title of Kirjath-Arba in these very same
documents.
It is one of the obvious peculiarities of Jeru-
salem — but to which Dean Stanley appears to
have been the first to call attention — that it did
k From a passage In one of the Tell el-Amarna
tablets. It seems possible that the god of Jerusalem was
worshipped under the title of Ttedeq, or " Righteous-
ness " ; so that the names of the two kings would have
meant •• Tsedeq is lord," " Tsedeq Is king " (Recarit of
«*« Past, N. 8., v. 63). Cp. the Phoenician god, Sydek.
1 Kadytts may perhaps be Kadeah on the Orontes,
which would be on the road from Megtddo to Carchemlsh.
■ It would appear from the'TOI el-Amarna tablets
that the original name was Uru-'ialim, Jerusalem ; and
Professor Sayce has suggested {Records «/ the Pott,
Sew Series, v. 60) that It only received the name Jebus
alter Its conquest by the Hlttltes and Amorites. When
the Israelites entered Canaan, " tbey found Jerusalem a
stronghold of the Jebusite tribe of Amorites. It had
ceased for a while to be Jerusalem, and had become
Jebus, the • Jebusite ' city."
JERUSALEM
1583
not become the capital till a comparatively late
date in the career of the nation. Bethel,
Shcchem, Hebron, had their beginnings in the
earliest periods of national life; but Jerusalem
was not only not a chief city, it was not even
possessed by the Israelites till they had gone
through one complete stage of their life in
Palestine, and the second — the monarchy — hail
been fairly entered on (see Stanley, S. $ P.
p. 169).
The explanation of this is no doubt in some
measure to be found in the fact that the seats
of the government and the religion of the
nation were originally fixed farther north — first
at Shechem and Shiloh ; then at Gibeah, Nob,
and Gibeon ; but it is also no doubt partly due
to the natural strength of Jerusalem. The
heroes of Joshua's army who traced the boundary-
line which was to separate the possessions of
Judah and Benjamin, when, after passing the
spring of En-rogel, they went along the " ravine
of the son of Hinnom," and looked up to the
"southern shoulder of the Jebusite" (Josh,
xv. 7, 8), must have felt that to scale heights
so great and so steep would have fully tasked
even their tried prowess. We shall see, when
we glance through the annals of the city, that
it did effectually resist the tribes of Judah and
Simeon not many years later. But when, after
the death of Ishbosheth, David became king of
a united and powerful people, it was necessary
for him to leave the remote Hebron and ap-
proach nearer to the bulk of his dominions. At
the same time it was impossible to desert the
great tribe to which he belonged, and over
whom he had been reigning for seven years.
Out of this difficulty Jerusalem was the natural
escape, and accordingly at Jerusalem David fixed
the seat of his throne and the future sanctuary
of his nation.
The boundary between Judah and Benjamin,
the north boundary of the former and the
south of the latter, ran at the foot of the hill
on which the city stands, so that the city itself
was actually in Benjamin, while by crossing
the narrow ravine of Hinnom you set foot on
the territory of Judah.' That it was not far
enough to the north to command the continued
allegiance of the tribe of Ephraim, and the
others which lay above him, is obvious from
the fact of the separation which at last took
place. It is enough for the vindication of David
in having chosen it to remember that that
separation did not take place during the reigns
of himself or his son, and was at last precipitated
by misgovernment, combined with feeble short-
sightedness. And if not actually in the centre
■ This appeals from an examination of the two
corresponding documents. Josh. xv. 7, 8, and xviii.
16, 17. The tine was drawn from En-shemesh —
probably 'Ain Hand, below Bethany — to En-rogel — the
Fountain of the Virgin ; thence it went by the ravine of
Hinnom and the southern shoulder of the Jebusite— the
steep slope of the modern Zion ; climbed the heights on
the west of the ravine, and struck oft* to the spring at
Xephtoah. The other view, which Is made the most of
by Blunt in one of his Ingenious " coincidences " (Ft. ii.
17), and Is also favoured by Stanley (ft. * P. p. 176), Is
derived from a Jewish tradition, quoted by Lightfoot
(Prospect of the Temple, ch. 1), to the effect that the
Altars and Sanctuary were in Benjamin, the courts of
the Temple were in Judah.
Digitized by
Google
1584
JEKUSALKM
of Palestine, it was yet virtually so. " It was
on the ridge, the broadest and most strongly
marked ridge of the backbone of the complicated
hills which extend through the whole country
from the Plain of Esdraelon to the Desert.
Every wanderer, every conqueror, every traveller
who has trod the central route of Palestine
from N. to S. must have passed through the
table-land of Jerusalem. It was the watershed
between the streams, or rather the torrent-beds,
which find their way eastward to the Jordan
(correctly Dead Sea), and those which pats
westward" to the Mediterranean " (Stanley, S. $
P. p. 176).
This central position, as expressed in the
words of Ezekiel (v. 5), " I have set Jerusalem
in the midst of the nations and countries round
about her," led in later ages to a definite belief
that the city was actually in the centre of the
earth — in the words of Jerome, "umbilicus
terrae," the central boss or navel of the world °
(see the quotations in Reland, Pat. pp. 52 and
838 ; Joseph. B. J. iii. 3, § 5 ; also Stanley, S.
& P. p. 116).
At the same time it should not be overlooked
that, while thus central to the people of the
country, it had the advantage of being remote
from the great high road of the nations which
so frequently passed by Palestine, and therefore
enjoyed a certain immunity from disturbance.
The only practicable route for a great army,
with baggage, siege-trains, &c, moving between
Egypt and Assyria, was by the low plain which
bordered the sea-coast from Pelusium to Tyre.
From that plain the central table-land on which
Jerusalem stood was approached by valleys and
passes generally too intricate and precipitous
tor the passage of large bodies. Two roads
there were less rugged than the rest — that from
Jaffa and Lydda np the pass of the Bethhorons to
< libeon, and thence over the hills to the north
side of Jerusalem; and that from Gaza and
Uethshemesh up the long ascent to Solomon's
Pools, and thence by Rachel's Tomb, and the
Plain of Rephaim to the west side of the {city.
By these routes, with few, if any, exceptions,
armies seem to have approached the city. 1 ' On
the other hand, we shall find, in tracing the
annals of Jerusalem, that great forces frequently
passed between Egypt and Assyria, and battles
were fought in the plain by large armies,
nay, that sieges of the towns on the Medi-
terranean coast were conducted, lasting for
years, without apparently , affecting Jerusalem
the least.
Jerusalem stands in latitude 31° 46' 43"
North, and longitude 35° 13' 44" « East of
Greenwich. It is 33 miles distant from the sea,
and 18} from the Jordan; 19 from Hebron, and
• This is prettily expressed In a Rabbinical figure
quoted by Otho (JUx. 266) :—•■ The world Is like to an
eye: the white of the eye Is the ocean surrounding the
world; the black Is the world Itself; the pupil Is
Jerusalem; and the image in the pupil, the Temple."
p The principal roads from the maritime plain, and
the valley of the Jordan, to the hill-country, avoided the
narrow beds of the deep ravines, and, for obvious motives
of precaution against hostile attack and winter torrent*.
followed the crests of the Intervening spurs.
<> This position Is from the triangulatlon of the
I'KF. Survey, and depends on the Admiralty longitude of
Jaffa.
JEBU8ALEM
35 from Samaria. It is emphatically a mountain
city. Situated in the heart of the hill-country,
which extends from the plain of Eadraelon U
the southern limit of the Promised Land, sur-
rounded on all sides by limestone hills that art
seamed by countless ravines, and only approached
by rough mountain roads, its position is one of
great natural strength. The importance attached
to the surrounding hills as a protection from
hostile attack may be inferred from the word*
of Ps. cxxv. 2: "As the mountains are round
about Jerusalem, so the Lord is round about
His people." " In several respects," says Dean
Stanley, " its situation is singular among the
cities of Palestine. Its elevation is remarkable :
occasioned not from its being on the summit of
one of the numerous hills of Judaea, like most
of the towns and villages, but because it is on
the edge of one of the highest table-lands of the
country." From the north and from the south
the approach to Jerusalem is by a slight descent.
But " to the traveller approaching the city from
the E. or W. it most always have presented the
appearance beyond any other capital of the then
known world — we may say beyond any impor-
tant city that has ever existed on the earth—of
a mountain city; breathing, as compared with
the sultry plains of Jordan, a mountain sir;
enthroned, as compared with Jericho or Damas-
cus, Gaza or Tyre, on a mountain fastness"
(&* P. pp. 170-1).
The elevation of Jerusalem is a subject of
constant reference and exultation by the Jewish
writers. Their fervid poetry abounds with
allusions to its height,' to the ascent thither of
the tribes from all parts of the country. It was
the habitation of Jehovah, from which "He
looked upon all the inhabitants of the world "
(Pa. xxxiii. 14) : its kings were " higher than
the kings of the earth " (Ps. lxxxix. 27> h>
the later Jewish literature of narrative and de-
scription this poetry is reduced to prose, and in
the most exaggerated form. Jerusalem was s»
high that the flames of Jamnia were visible
from it (2 Mace xii. 9). From the tower ot
Psephinus, at the N.W. corner of the walk
could be discerned on the one hand the Mediter-
ranean Sea, on the other the country of Arabia
(Joseph. B. J. v. 4, § 3). Hebron could be seen
from the roofs of the Temple (Lightfoot, Char.
Cent. xlix.). The same thing can be traced in
Josephus's account of the environs of the city,
in which he has exaggerated what is in truth s
remarkable ravine, to a depth so enormous that
the head swam and the eyes failed in gazing into
its recesses {Ant. xv. 11, § 5).
In exemplification of these remarks it mar be
said that the highest point within the walls of
the city is 2,582 feet above the level of the sea.
The Mount of Olives rises slightly above this—
2,647 feet. Beyond the Mount of Olives, how-
ever, the descent is remarkable; Jericho— 14}
miles off— being no less than 3,467 feet below,
viz. 820 feet under the Mediterranean. On the
north, Bethel, at a distance of 10} miles, is 308
feet above Jerusalem. On the west Ramleh —
25 miles — is 2,230 feet below. On the south,
Hebron is 458 feet above. A table of the
heights of the various parts of the city and
environs is given further on.
' See the passages quoted by Stanley (S. A P. p. I' 1 )-
Digitized by
Google
JEBUSALEM
The situation of the city in reference to the
rest of Palestine has been described by Dr.
Robinson in a well-known passage, which is so
complete and graphic a statement of the case,
that we take the liberty of giving it entire.
" Jerusalem lies near the summit of a broad
mountain ridge. This ridge or mountainous
tract extends, without interruption, from the
plain of Esdraelon to a line drawn between the
south end of the Dead Sea and the S.E. corner
of the Mediterranean: or more properly, perhaps,
it may be regarded as extending as far south as
to Jebel 'Araif in the desert ; where it sinks
down at once to the lerel of the great western
plateau. This tract, which is everywhere not
less than from 20 to 25 geographical miles
in breadth, is in fact high uneven table-land.
It everywhere forms the precipitous western
wall of the great valley of the Jordan and
the Dead Sea ; while towards the west it
sinks down by an offset into a range of lower
hills, which lie between it and the great plain
along the coast of the Mediterranean. The
surface of this upper region is everywhere
rocky, uneven, and mountainous ; and is more-
over cut up by deep valleys which run east or
west on either side towards the Jordan or the
Mediterranean. The line of division, or water-
shed, between the waters of these valleys, — a
term which here applies almost exclusively to
the waters of the rainy season, — follows for the
most part the height of land along the ridge;
yet not so but that the heads of the valleys,
which run off in different directions, often in-
terlap for a considerable distance. Thus, for
example, a valley which descends to the Jordan
often has its head a mile or two westward of the
commencement of other valleys which run to
the western sea.
" From the great plain of Esdraelon onwards
towards the south, the mountainous country
rises gradually, forming the tract anciently
known as the mountains of Ephraim and Judah;
until in the vicinity of Hebron it attains an
elevation of nearly 3,000 Paris feet • above the
level of the Mediterranean Sea. Further north,
on a line drawn from the north end of the Dead
Sea towards the true west, the ridge has an
elevation of only about 2,500 Paris feet; and
here, close upon the water-shed, lies the city of
Jerusalem.
" Six or seven miles N. and N.W. of the city
ia spread out the open plain or basin round
about el-Jib (Gibeon), extending also towards
el-Blreh (Beeroth); the waters of which flow off
at its S.E. part through the deep valley here
called by the Arabs Wady Beit Hanina ; but to
which the monks and travellers have usually
given the name of the Valley of Turpentine, or
of the Terebinth, on the mistaken supposition
that it is the ancient Valley of Elah. This
great valley passes along in a S.W. direction an
Hour or more west of Jerusalem ; and finally
opens out from the mountains into the western
plain, at the distance of 6 or 8 hours S.W.
from the city, under the name of Wady es-Surdr.
The traveller, on his way from Ramleh to Jeru-
salem, descends into and crosses this deep valley
at the village of Kulonieh on its western side,
• The altitude of Hulkul, near Hebron, is 3,270 feet.
BIBLE Did. — VOL. i,
JEBUSALEM
1585
an hour and a half from the latter city. On
again reaching the high ground on its eastern
side, he enters upon au open tract sloping
gradually downwards towards the south and
east ; and sees before him, at the distance of a
mile and a half, the walls and domes of the
Holy City, and beyond them the higher ridge or
summit of the Mount of Olives.
"The traveller now descends gradually to-
wards the city along a broad swell of ground, 1
having at some distance on his left the shallow
northern part of the Valley of Jehoshaphat ; and
close at hand on his right the basin which forms
the beginning of the Valley of Hinnom. Upon
the broad and elevated promontory within the
fork of these two valleys, lies the Holy City.
All around are higher hills: on the east, the
Mount of Olives ; on the south, the Hill of Evil
Counsel, so called, rising directly from the Vale
of Hinnom; on the west, the ground rises
gently, as above described, to the borders of the
great Widy ; while on the north, a bend of the
ridge connected with the Mount of Olives bounds
the prospect at the distance of more than a mile.
Towards the S.W. the view is somewhat more
open; for here lies the plain of Rephaim, already
described, commencing just at the southern
brink of the Valley of Hinnom, and stretching
off S.W., where it runs to the western sea. In
the N.W., too, the eye reaches up along the
upper part of the Valley of Jehoshaphat ; and
from many points can discern the mosque of
Keby Samvil, situated on a lofty ridge beyond
the great Wady, at the distance of two hours "
(Robinson's BM. Researches, i. 258-260).
So much for the local and political relation of
Jerusalem to the country in general. To convey
an idea of its individual position, we may say
roughly, and with reference to the accompanying
plan (Plate I.), that the city occupies the lower
extremity of a small plateau which slopes gently
southward from the ridge that parts the waters
of the Mediterranean from those of the Dead Sea.
The little table-land is not more than 1000 acres
in extent, and on its west, south, and east sides
it is cut off from the surrounding country by
ravines more than usually deep and precipitous.
These ravines take their rise, within a short
distance of each other, in the higher ground to
the north-west of the city, and falling, at first
gradually, then rapidly, form a junction below
its south-east corner. The eastern one — the
Valley of the Kedron, commonly known as the
Valley of Jehoshaphat — after running eastward
for a mile and a half, changes its direction and
runs nearly due south. The western one — the
Valley of Hinnom — which, at its head, widens
out into a broad shallow basin, follows a
southerly course for a mile and a quarter, and
then turns eastward to meet the Valley of the
Kedron. After their junction the two valleys,
now called the Wady en-Nar, " Valley of Fire,"
run off through the Wilderness of Judaea to the
Dead Sea. How rapid is their descent may be
gathered from the fact that the point of junction
is 672 feet below the starting-point, though the
two points are scarcely one and three quarter
' The " broad swell of ground " Is now. In great part,
covered with houses ; but the features so clearly described
by Dr. Robinson can still be easily recognised.
5 I
Digitized by
Google
1586
JEEUSALEM
miles apart. Thus, while on the north there is
no materia) difference between the general lerel
of the country outside the walls and that of the
JEBU8ALEM
highest parts of the city; on the other three
sides the ravines fall so steeply, their character
is so trench-like, and they keep so close to the
firomontory. at whose feet they run, that they
eare upon the beholder almost the impression
of a ditcn at the foot of a fortress.
The platean thus encircled is itself intersected
/ a ravine which, ri
city, runs southward
by a ravine which, rising to the north of the
lward to join the Kedron Valley
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
at Silotm, and divides the central mass into two
spars of unequal size that terminate in abrupt
broken slopes. Of these two spurs, that on the
west — the Upper City of the Jews, the Mount
Zion of modern tradition — is the higher and
more massive ; that on the east — Mount Moriah,
the " Akra " or " Lower City " of Josephus, now
occupied by the great Muhammadan sanctuary
with its mosques, and domes — is at once con-
siderably lower and smaller, so that, to a spec-
tator from the south, the city appears to slope
sharply to the east." About 700 yards above
Siloam this central valley is joined, almost at
right angles, by a smaller one, which falls rapidly
in its course eastward from the vicinity of the
present Jaffa Gate. Opinions differ as to whether
the straight valley north and south, or its
southern half, with the branch just spoken of,
was the "Tyropoeon valley " of Josephus. The
question will be examined in Section HI. under
the head of the Topography of the Ancient City.
A fourth valley, the rugged nature of which
was only disclosed by excavation, rises in the
eastern half of the plateau, and falls into the
Kedron a short distance north of the Golden
Gate. Part of this depression — apparently " the
valley called Kedron," of Josephus — is still
preserved in the large reservoir, Birket ItraU,
usually called the Pool of Bethesda, near the St.
Stephen's Gate.
The Tyropoeon and the fourth valley are so
filled with the <Ubris of ancient Jerusalem that
neither their form nor their true course can now
be distinguished. The bed of the former is
sometimes more than 90 feet, and that of the
latter, where it underlies the north-east corner
of the Haram esKSherif, no less than 125 feet
below the present surface of the ground. The
rocky sides of the Kedron and Hinnom valleys,
which, below the city walls, were cut away in
cliffs from 10 to 20 feet high to give additional
security, are now so concealed by (Ubris that
they present the appearance of steep continuous
slopes, broken only by a few terraced gardens.
This rough sketch of the terrain of Jerusalem
will enable the reader to appreciate the two
great advantages of its position. On the one
hand the ravines which entrench it on the west,
south, and east — out of which, as has been said,
the rocky slopes of the city rise almost like the
walls of a fortress out of its ditches — must have
rendered it impregnable on those quarters to the
warfare of the old world. On the other hand,
iu junction with the more level ground on its
north and north-west sides afforded an oppor-
tunity of expansion, of which we know advantage
was taken, and which gave it remarkable
superiority over other cities of Palestine, and
especially of Jndah, which, though secure on
their hill-tops, were unable to expand beyond
them (Stanley, 8. # P., pp. 174-5).
The heights of the principal points in and
round the city, above the Mediterranean Sea, as
determined by the Ordnance Survey* in 1864-65,
are as follows : —
« The character of the ravines and the eastward
slope of the site are well shown In the Ordnance Survey
photographs of Jerusalem; and In Section 1, Plan No. 2,
p. 1*37.
* The levels are given on the O.S. maps of Jerusalem
on the 25 In. and 6 in. scales.
JERUSALEM 1587
Feet.
Water-parting N.W. of city a670
N.W. corner of the city (Saiat tl-JalHd) . . . 2570
Church of Holy Sepulchre 3473
Upper City (Armenian Monastery) 3544
Mount Moriah (Haram esh-SKeryf) 3419
Bridge over the Kedron, near Gethsemane . . . 2270
Pool of Siloam 2087
Bit jSyiio, at the confluence of Hinnom and
Kedron 1979
Mount of Olives, Church of Ascension on summit 2641
Hill of Evil Counsel 2549
From these figures it will be seen that the
spur on which the western half of the city is
built, is tolerably level from north to south ;
that the eastern hill is more than a hundred
feet lower; and that from the latter the de-
scent to the floor of the valley at its feet — the
Bir Eyvib — is a drop of 440 feet.
The Mount of Olives overtops even the highest
part of the city by nearly 100 feet, and the
Temple-hill by no less than 220. Its northern
and southern outliers — the Viri Galilaei, Scopus,
and Mount of Offence — bend round slightly
towards the city, and give the effect of
" standing round about Jerusalem." Especially
would this be the case to a worshipper in the
Temple. " It is true," says Dean Stanley, " that
this image is not realised, as most persons
familiar with European scenery would wish
and expect it to be realised. . . . Any one facing
Jerusalem westward, northward, or southward,
will always see the city itself on an elevation
higher than the hills in its immediate neighbour-
hood, its towers and walls standing out against
the sky, and not against any high backgronnd,
such as that which encloses the mountain towns
and villages of our own Cumbrian or West-
moreland valleys. Nor again is the plain on
which it stands enclosed by a continuous, though
distant, circle of mountains like Athens or
Innspruck. The mountains in the neighbour-
hood of Jerusalem are of unequal height, and
only in two or three instances — Neby-Samicil,
er-Ram, and Tuleii el-Ful — rising to any con-
siderable elevation. Still they act as a shelter ;
they must be surmounted before the traveller
can see, or the invader attack, the Holy City ;
and the distant line of Moab would always
seem to rise as a wall against invaders from the
remote east. It is these mountains, expressly
including those beyond the Jordan, which are
mentioned as ' standing round about Jerusalem '
in another and more terrible sense, when, on
the night of the assault of Jerusalem by the
Roman armies, they ' echoed back ' the screams
of the inhabitants of the captured city, and the
victorious shouts of the soldiers of Titus. The
situation of Jerusalem was thus not unlike, on
a small scale, to that of Rome, saving the great
difference that Rome was in a well-watered
plain, leading direct to the sea, whereas Jerusa-
lem was on a bare table-land, in the heart of
the country. But each was situated on its own
cluster of steep hills ; each had room for future
expansion in the surrounding level ; each, too,
had its nearer and more remote barriers of
protecting hills — Rome its Janicnlum hard by,
and its Apennine and Alban mountains in the
distance ; Jerusalem its Olivet hard by, and on
the outposts of its plain, Mizpeh, Gibeon, and
Ramah, and the ridge which divides it from
Bethlehem " (& ^ P. pp. 174-5).
513
Digitized by VjOOQIC
1588
JERUSALEM
Geology. — The strata of the limestone plateau
on which Jerusalem stands hare a general
easterly dip of about 10 degrees, and there is
therefore an ascending series from the western
hill to the Mount of Olives. Dr. Fraas (Am
(fern Orient., p. 50 sq.) has shown that the strata
consist of the following in descending order: — 1.
Nummulitic limestone, composed of soft white
limestone with bands of Bints and fossils, locally
known as Kakiti. 2. Upper Hippurite lime-
stone, or Nerinaean marble, composed of beds
of hard reddish and grey stone, capable of
taking a good polish, called Misseh. 3. Lower
Hippurite limestone, a soft easily-worked stone,
called Melekeh, a name which recalls the banc
royal of French quarrymen; and 4. Zone des
Ammonites rhotomagensis, composed of pink and
white strata of indurated chalk.
The Melekeh bed, which is from 30 to 40 feet
thick, underlies the whole city, and has played
an important part in its history. All the great
subterranean reservoirs, nearly all the tombs,
the Siloam aqueduct, and the caverns at the
village of Siloam have been hewn out of it ; and
the extensive underground quarries near the
Damascus Gate show that it was largely us«d
for building purposes. Many of the large
blocks in the walls of the Temple enclosure are
from this bed, and the stone where free from
flaws and not exposed to rain has worn well.
The Misseh beds, however, have yielded most of
the material for these walls, and the edges of
the stones are frequently as sharp and perfect
as when they left the mason's hands. The stone
from both beds weathers a dull grey, and this
gives the whole city an appearance of antiquity
which harmonizes well with its history (Lartet,
Qtologie de la Palestine, pp. 175, 176).
Roads. — There appear to have been four
main approaches to the city. 1. From the
Jordan valley by Jericho and the Mount of
Olives. This* was the route commonly taken
from the north and east of the country — as from
Galilee by our Lord (Luke xvii. 11 ; xviii. 35 ;
xix. 1, 29, 45, &c), from Damascus by Pompey
(Joseph. Ant. xiv. 3, § 4 ; 4, § 1), to Mahanaim
by David (2 Sam. xv., xvi.). It was also the
route from places in the central districts of the
country, as Samaria (2 Ch. xxviii. 15). The
latter part of the approach, over the Mount of
Olives, as generally followed at the present day,
is identical with what it was, at least in one
memorable instance, in the time of Christ. A
road there is over the crown of the hill, to the
north of the Church of the Ascension, but the
common route still runs more to the south,
round the shoulder of the principal summit
(see S. # P. p. 193). The insecure state of the
Jordan valley has thrown this route very much
into disuse, and has diverted the traffic from the
north to a road along the central ridge of the
country. 2. From Joppa, and the northern
portion of the great maritime plain. This road
led by the two Bethhorons up to the high
ground at Gibeon, whence it turned south, and
came to Jerusalem by Gibeah, and over the
ridge north of the city. This route is still
much used, though a shorter but more precipi-
tous road is usually taken by travellers between
Jerusalem and Jaffa. In tracing the annals we
shall find that it was the route by which large
bodies, such as armies, always approached the
JERUSALEM!
city from Caesarea and Ptolem&U on the north,
and sometimes from Gaza on the south. 3.
From Egypt and the Plain of Philistia. This
road 'ran by Bethshemesh, and thence up the
long slope to " Solomon's Pools," where it turned
northwards and, after passing Bethlehem, crossed
the Plain of Rephaim to Jerusalem. Another
road followed the Valley of Elah to Socoh, and
there branched off on the one hand to Bethlehem,
and on the other to Bethzur, on the road from
Hebron to Jerusalem. These roads were fre-
quently followed by the Philistines, who camped
on the Plain of Rephaim, and, at one time,
garrisoned Bethlehem. During the wars of the
Maccabees the contending armies appear to have
followed the more southerly road, passing by
Bethzur. 4. From Samaria and Shechem.
This road kept closely to the line of the water-
parting from N. to S., and passed by Bethel
It was apparently followed by the kings of
Israel in their campaigns against Judah. 5.
The communication with the mountainous
districts of the south was less complete. But
there was a road by Hebron and Beersheba to
Egypt, which seems to have been at one time
much used.
The roads out of Jerusalem were a special
subject of Solomon's care. He paved them with
black stone — possibly the basalt of the Trans-
jordanic districts, or the bituminous limestone
from the hills between the city and the Dead
Sea (Joseph. Ant. viii. 7, § 4).
Gates. — The situation of the various gates of
the city is examined in Section III. It may,
however, be desirable to supply here a complete
list of those which are named in the Bible and
Josephus, with the references to their occur-
rences : —
1. Gate of Ephraim. 2 E. xiv. 13 ; 2 Ch.
xxv. 23 ; Neh. viii. 16, xii. 39. This is perhaps
the same as the
2. Gate of Benjamin.? Jer. xx. 2, xxxvii.
13, xxxviii. 7 ; Zech. xiv. 10. If so, it was
400 cubits distant from the
3. Corner gate. 2 K. xiv. 13 ; 2 Ch. xxv. 23,
xxvi. 9 ; Jer. xxxi. 38 ; Zech. xiv. 10.
4. Gate of Joshua, governor of the city. 2 K.
xxiii. 8.
5. Gate between the two walls. 2 E. xxv. 4;
Jer. xxxix. 4, lii. 7.
6. Horse gate. Neh. iii. 28 ; 2 Ch. xxiii. 15 :
cp. 2 K. xi. 16 ; Jer. xxxi. 40 ; Joseph. Ant. ix.
?> § 3, gate of the king's mules.
7. Ravine gate (•'.». opening on the ravine of
Hinnom). 2 Ch. xxvi. 9; Neh. ii. 13, 15,
iii. 13.
8. Fish gate. 2 Ch. xxxiii. 14; Neh. iii 3,
xii. 39 ; Zeph. i. 10.
9. Dung gate. Neh. ii. 13; iii. 13, 14; iii.
31. Cp. the " place called Bethso " (B. J. r.
4 '§ 2 >- . ,„
10. Sheep gate. Neh. iii. 1, 32, in. 39;
John v. 2 in R. V.
11. East gate. Neh. iii. 29.
12. Miphkad (R. V. Ham-miphkad). Neh.
iU. 31.
13. Fountain gate (Siloam?). Neh. ii. 1*;
iii. 15 ; xii. 37.
r One of the gales on the east side of the ftrtim
Jerusalem was to be called the Gate of Benjamin
(Esse, xlviii. 31).
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
14. Water gate. Neb. iii. 26, via. 1, 3, 16 ;
zii 37.
15. Old gate. Neh. iii. 6; xii. 39.
16. Prison gate (R. V. Gate of the guard).
Neh. xii. 39.
17. Gate Harsith (son gate, or R. V. marg.
the gate of potsherds ; A. V . East gate). Jer.
xix. 2.
18. First gate. Zech. xiv. 10.
19. Middle gate. Jer. xxxix. 3.
20. Gate Gennath (garden). Joseph. B. J.
v.4,§2.
21. Essenes' gate. Joseph. B. J. v. 4, § 2.
22. Gate where water was brought into the
tower Hippicus (A J. v. 7, § 3> Perhaps the
same as the
23. Obscure gate, near Hippicus (A J. v.
To these should be added the following gates
of the Temple : —
Gate Sur. 2 E. xi. 6. Called also
Gate of the foundation. 2 Ch. xxiii. 5.
Gate of the guard, or behind the guard. 2 K.
xi. 6, 19. Called the
High (R. V. upper) gate. 2 Ch. xxiii. 20,
xxvii. 3 ; 2 K. xv. 35 : cp. Joseph. Ant. ix. 7, § 2.
Gate Shallecheth (R. V. marg. casting forth).
1 Ch. xxvi. 16.
East gate. Ezek. x. 19; xi. 1.
New gate. Jer. xxvi. 10, xxxvi. 10.
The following gates of Herod's Temple are
mentioned in the Bible, Josephus, and the
Mishna : —
Beautiful gate. Acts ill. z, 10.
East gate. Ant. xv. 11, } 7.
Gate leading to the king's palace. Ant. XT. 11, J 5.
Gates leading to the suburbs. Ant. xv. 11. $ 5.
Gate leading to the other city. Ant. xv. 11, y S.
Hnldau gates. Mid. i. 3, cp. Ant. xv. 11, } 5.
Gate Kipuuus. Mid. 1. 3.
Gate Tadl. Mid. 1. 3.
Gate Sbuahan. Mid. t. 3.
Gate meaner. Mid. i. 4.
Burial-grounds. — The main cemetery of the
city seems from an early date to .have been
where it is still— on the steep slopes of the
valley of the Kedron. Here it was that the
fragments of the idol abominations, destroyed
by Josiah, were cast on the "graves of the
children of the people " (2 K. xxiii. 6), and the
valley was always the receptacle for impurities
of all kinds. There Maachah's idol was burnt
by Asa (1 K. xv. 13); there, according to
Josephus, Athaliah was executed ; and there the
" filthiness " accumulated in the sanctuary, by
the false-worship of Ahaz, was discharged (2 Ch.
xxix. 5, 16). But in addition to this, and
although there is only a slight allusion in the
Bible to the fact (Jer. vii. 32), many of the
tombs now existing in the face of the ravine of
Hinnom, on the south of the city, must be as old
as Biblical times ; and, if so, show that this was
also used as a cemetery. The monument of
Ananus the high-priest (Joseph. A J. v. 12, § 2)
would seem to have been in this direction.
The tombs of the kings were in the city of
David, which, as will be shown in the concluding
section of this article, was on the eastern hill,
Moriah. The royal sepulchres were probably
chambers containing separate recesses for the suc-
cessive kings ; and it is possible that the chaoi-
JERU8ALEM
1589
bers were, as in many Phoenician tombs, at the
bottom of a deep shaft. [Tohbs.] Of some of
the kings it is recorded that, not being thought
worthy of a resting-place there, they were
buried in separate or private tombs in the city
of David (2 Ch. xxi. 20, xxiv. 25 ; 2 K. xv. 7).
Ahaz was not admitted to the city of David at
all, but was buried in Jerusalem (2 Ch. xxviii.
27); and Manasseh and Anion were buried in
the garden of Uzza (2 K. xxi. 18, 26). Other
spots also were used for burial. Somewhere to
the north of the Temple, and not far from the
wall, was the monument of king Alexander
(Joeeph. B. J. v. 7, § 3). Near the north-west
corner of the city was the monument of John
the high-priest (Joseph, v. 6, § 2, be.), and to the
north-east the "monument of the fuller" (Joseph.
B.J.v.'i, § 2). On the north, too, were the
monuments of Herod (v; 3, § 2) and of queeu
Helena (v. 2, § 2 ; 3, § 3), the former close to
the "Serpent's Pool."
Excepting in the Kedron and Hinnom valleys,
where the ancient tombs form large cemeteries,
the custom of burying in gardens appears to
have been very general. There are large
numbers of ancient tombs, isolated or in small
groups, on the plateau to the north of the city,
on the slopes of Olivet, and in the W. en-Nur,
below Bir Eyub. The only known rock-hewn
tombs within the city are those in and near
the Church of the Holy Sepulchre ; none have
yet been found on the eastern and western
hills.
Woods; Gardens. — We have very little evi-
dence as to the amount of wood and of culti-
vation that existed in the neighbourhood of
Jerusalem. The king's gardens of David and
Solomon seem to have been in the bottom formed
by the confluence of the Kedron and Hinnom
(Neh. iii. 15 ; Joseph. Ant. vii. 14, § 4 ; ix. 10,
§ 4). The gardens of Uzza (2 K. xxi. 18) and
of Joseph of Arimathea (John xix. 41) are
mentioned without any indication of position.
The Mount of Olives, as its name and those of
various places upon it seem to imply, was a
fruitful spot. At its foot was situated the
Garden of Gethsemane. At the time of the
final siege the space north of the wall of Agrippa
was covered with gardens, groves, and planta-
tions of fruit-trees, enclosed by hedges and walls ;
and to level these was one of Titus's first
operations (A J. v. 3, § 2). We know that the
gate Gennath (i.e. " of the garden "), in the first
wall, opened on this side of the city (A /. v. 4,
§ 2). The Valley of Hinnom was, in Jerome's
time, " a . pleasant and woody spot, full of de-
lightful' gardens watered from the fountain of
Siloah" (Cbmm. m Jer. vii. 30). In the Tal-
mud mention is- made of a certain rose-garden
outside the city, which was of great fame, but
no clue is given to its situation (Otho, Lex. Bab.
p. 266). [Garden.] The sieges of Jerusalem
were too frequent during its later history to
admit of any considerable growth of wood near
it, even if the thin soil which covers the rocky
substratum would allow of it. And the scarcity
of earth again necessitated the cutting down of
all the trees that could be found for the banks
and mounds with which the ancient sieges were
conducted. This is expressly said in the accounts
of the sieges of Pompey and Titus. In the
latter case the country was swept of its timber
Digitized by
Google
1590
JERUSALEM
for a distance of 8 or 9 miles from the city
(B. J. vi. 8, § 1, &c).
Water Supply. — Numerous traces remain of
the works connected with the ancient water
supply of the city. This supply was derived
from springs, wells, rain-water collected during
the rainy seasons and stored in reservoirs and
cisterns, and water brought from a distance by
aqueducts and preserved in tanks.
(1.) The only known spring is the 'Ain umm
ed-deraj, or " Virgin's fountain," in the Kedron
Valley close to the village of Siloam. The
water from this spring, which has an inter-
mittent flow, now passes through a rock-hewn
tunnel, that dates from the time of the Kings, to
the Upper Pool of Siloam. But the remains of
a rock-hewn conduit in the valley seem to
indicate that, at an earlier period, the water
was carried along the foot of the hill to the
Lower Pool of Siloam (Birket el-Hamra), where
JERUSALEM
it was probably stored for the irrigation of the
king's gardens [Siloam], At three other places,
— outside the Damascus Gate, and near the
Hammam esh-Shcfa, in the Tyropoeon Valley;
and in the fourth valley, near the Church of
St. Anne, — the topographical features and the
geological formation favour the existence of
small springs ; and at each water is known to
run to waste, during several months of the
year, beneath the rubbish that fills the valleys.
(2.) The principal veil is Bir Eyvb, "Job's
well," which is situated a little below the
junction of the Kedron and Hinnom valleys,
and is 125 ft. deep. It rarely runs dry, and
occasionally, after four or five days' continuous
rain, its waters overflow and run a few yarJa
down the valley. The esh-Shefa well, near the
Suk el-Kattanin, is only a shaft in the rubbish,
that gives access to a small basin in which the
water running down the Tyropoeon Valley,
Jertualem and SUnatn.
perhaps from a small spring, collects, and is
not an ancient well. On the western hill
there are several very old wells; but as they
derived their supply of water from infiltration
and are not deep, they could never have been of
much importance. On the eastern hill, beneath
the Sakhrah, there is the so-called Btr el-Ancah,
" well of spirits," but whether it be a well or
not is uncertain.
(3.) The chief supply of the early inhabitants
must have been rain-water, collected as at
present within the area of the town and stored
in cisterns. There seems to be an allusion to
this in 2 K. xviii. 31; and the remains of
cisterns are found in every part of the city.
The quantity preserved in this way would not,
however, have been sufficient for all purpose;,
and the question of improving the water snpply
must soon have forced itself upon the attention
of the people. The first step would naturally be
to construct reservoirs (KoAu/ufMSpeu, piscinae')
for catching the surface drainage of the valleys
that embrace and intersect the plateau ; and sites
would, where possible, be selected whence the
water could run down to the city by the force
of gravity alone. This plan appears to have
been adopted. Near the head of the Valley of
Hinnom is the Birhet Mantilla, which still holds
water, and lower down in the same valley is the
B. es-Sultan. In the upper part of the Kedron
Valley, to the north of the "Tombs of the
Kings," there is a reservoir, now filled with soil ;
and there was probably a pool, below the Virgin's
Fountain, in which the flood- waters of the Kedron
were stored for the irrigation of gardens at a
lower level. At the mouth of the Tyropoeon
Valley there are the Upper and Lower Pools of
Siloam, and there are some slight grounds for
supposing that there was a reservoir a little
higher up the valley, and another near its head
outside the Damascus Gate. In the fourth valley
are the B. Israil, and the pool near the Church
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
of St. Anne which was formerly called Bethesdn.
There are also, without the walls, the B. Sitti
Miriam, near St. Stephen's Gate ; and within the
walls the B. Hammdm el-Datrak, "Hezekiah's
Pool," which receives the surplus water of the
B. Mamilla, the "Twin Pools," beneath the
street at the N.W. corner of the Haram eih-
S/ierif, and the B. el-Bvrak constructed in the
rnbbish beneath "Wilson's Arch." Tradition
has also preserved the sites of two other pools —
near the Bab el-Kattanin in the west wall of the
//. esh-Sherif, and near the Jaffa Gate — but both
appear to have been of much later date than the
Roman siege.
(4.) The institution of the Temple services,
with their frequent ceremonial ablutions, must
have rendered a large and constant supply of
water necessary ; and this could only have been
secured by bringing it from a distance by
aqueducts. The principal supply was derived
from " Solomon's Pools," near Vrtas, about
7 miles from Jerusalem, and from springs in
the vicinity. The three pools are cleverly and
well constructed, and the great tunnel or Kariz,
about 4 miles long, in W. Biar, is one of the
most remarkable works in Palestine. The
water was conveyed from the pools to Jeru-
salem by the " Low Level Aqueduct," about 13
miles long, that crossed the Valley of Hinnom
above the B. cs-Sultan, which it probably filled,
and, winding round the western hill, passed over
the causeway and Wilson's Arch to Mount
Moriah and the Temple enclosure. Here it was
stored in large subterranean reservoirs, excavated
in the soft bed of limestone (meleheh) which,
at a depth of only 3 to 4 feet, underlies the
harder strata (nrissae). These storage reservoirs
may still be seen in the Haram esh-Sherif, and
one of them has a capacity of about 3,000,000
gallons. They were connected by an elaborate
system of conduits, and the overflow was
through one of the rock-hewn passages beneath
the Triple Gate. The tradition that ascribes
one at least of the pools, the aqueduct, and one
or more of the subterranean reservoirs to
Solomon, is probably correct. The supply was
afterwards increased by constructing a reservoir
in W. Arrtib, whence the water was conveyed to
" Solomon's Pools " by an aqueduct about 28
miles long, which was apparently made by
Pontius Pilate.' From the Pools the water
flowed through the " Low Level Aqueduct " to
the Temple enclosure, and this perhaps explains
Pilate's application of the Corban to the con-
struction of the new aqueduct.
Another aqueduct which exhibits a degree of
engineering skill that could scarcely be sur-
passed at the present day conveyed the water of
the "Sealed Fountain," above Solomon's Pools
to Jerusalem. This " High Level Aqueduct."
crossed the valley between Bethlehem and Mar
* Josephus (Ant. xvlil. 3, 6 2) gives the distance of
the source from which the water was derived as
200 stadia; and (B. J. ii. », $ 4) as 400 stadia. He
apparently refers in the flist case to the distance between
Solomon's Pools and W. Arrub, and In the latter to the
total distance from Jerusalem. The necessity for in-
creasing the supply was probably due to the diversion of
the waters of the ■' Sealed Fountain" above Solomon's
Pools, from the Temple enclosure to Herod's Palace on
the completion of the " High Level Aqueduct."
JERUSALEM
1591
Elyas by an inverted syphon, and was capable of
delivering water at an elevation of 20 ft. above
the sill of the Jaffa Gate. All trace of it is
lost on the "Plain of Rephaim," bnt it pro-
bably ran to the B. Mamilla, and thence to the
cisterns in the Citadel, near the Jaffa Gate, and
to "Hezekiah's Pool." This aqueduct was
apparently made by Herod to supply water to
his palace, and to the fountains and ponds which
were a marked feature of the palace gardens
(Joseph. B. J. v. 4, § 4) ; and it entered the citv
at the Tower Hippicus (B. J. v. 7, § 3). The
ancient conduit beneath Christ Church Rectory,
which was possibly made in the first instance to
convey the water of the B. Mamilla to the Temple
enclosure, appears to have connected the High
and Low Level aqueducts within the city.* A
third conduit passed through the grounds of the
Russian Convent, and entered the city near the
N.W. angle of the wall, but the source from
which it derived its supply is unknown (PEFQy.
Stat. 1891, p. 279). A fourth aqueduct, which
entered the city to the east of the Damascus Gate,
has been traced to the " Twin Pools," and thence
southwards to the wall of the Haram esh-Sherif
which has been built across it. The course of
this aqueduct is broken by the deep fosse
which lies between Jeremiah's Grotto and "the
Quarries," by the ditch which separated Antonia
from Bezetha, and by the wall of the Haram esh-
Sherif. It must therefore have been in existence
when these important works were executed, and
it is probably one of the oldest conduits in the
city. Whether it derived its supply from a
spring, or from a pool near the head of the
Tyropoeon Valley, is uncertain ; but it was
capable of supplying the whole of the eastern
hill, and apparently followed its western face at
a high level. Another rock-hewn conduit,
at a much lower level, was discovered by
Sir C. Warren on the west side of the Tyropoeon
ravine, beneath " Robinson's Arch." It is cut
through by the west wall of the Haram, and is
therefore older than the reconstruction of the
Temple by Herod. Apparently it was connected
with the conduit at the foot of the Hamman esh-
Shefa well, and carried water from a small
spring, or KarXz, in the Tyropoeon Valley, along
the base of the western hill. The tunnel con-
necting the Virgin's Fountain with the Pool of
Siloam has already been noticed. The following
altitudes above the sea indicate the quarters of
the city supplied by the several pools and
aqueducts : —
Western Bill. Feet.
Sill of Jaffa Gate .... 3628
High Level Aqueduct at Solomon's
Pools 2616
Outlet B. Mamula .... 2617
Eastern Bill.
Level of Haram Enclosure . . . 2419
Low Level Aqueduct at Solomon's
Pools 246T
Aqueduct east of Damascus Gate . 2462
Pool north of the Tombs of the Kings 2449
Aqueduct under Robinson's Arch . 2313
* This gave rise to the belief, in the Middle Ages,
that the Birket /trail was supplied with water by a
Fbnt Sion close to the Turrit David on the western hlU
(see Marino Sanuto's plan of Jerusalem in Tobler's
Planoarafhy of Jerusalem).
Digitized by
Google
1592
JERUSALEM
Overflow B. ItratL
Outlet B. a-Sultan
Stloun Pool
Feet.
3345
3363
3087
What has been said above may explain some
of the difficulties in understanding the allusions
in the Bible and Joaephus to the water-supply of
the city. Excepting the reference to Eh-bogel,
now the Virgin's Fountain, as a point on the
common boundary of Jodah and Benjamin (Josh,
xr. 2 ; xriii. 16), the earliest distinct allusion
to the water-supply is the command to Isaiah to
meet Ahaz " at the end of the conduit of the
JERUSALEM
upper pool, in the highway of the fuller's field*
(Is. rii. 3). The messengers sent by Sennacherib
to summons Hezekiah to surrender (2 K. xriii.
17 ; Is. xxxri. 2) stood by the same conduit
when they spoke to the people on the wall ; anil
if there be any connexion between the fuller's
field and the " monument of the fuller " men-
tioned by Josephus (B. J. v. 4, § 2), the conduit
must hare entered the city from the north.
Possibly it was the conduit east of the Damascus
Gate, and in this case the Upper Pool most h>«
been either that to the north of the "Tombs of
the Kings," or a pool at the head of the Tyro-
Pool of SfloanL
poeon Valley ; and the Assyrian messengers must
hare delivered their summons in front of the
citadel that occupied the ground upon which
the Macedonian Acra was afterwards built.* In
expectation of an attack from the Assyrians,
* According to another view, which derives some
support from the position generally assigned to the
"Camp of the Assyrians" in the N.W. quarter of the
present city, the Birket Manilla was the Upper Pool.
In the 7th century one of the city gates, to the west
of the existing Damascus Gate, was called Porta Viliat
(or Viae) FuUonit ( Arculfus, I. 1) ; but this may hare
been a late tradition.
Hezekiah is said to hare " stopped all the foun-
tains and the brook that ran through the midst
of the land " (2 Ch. xxxii. 4) ; he also on this or
upon another occasion stopped " the upper sprint;
of the waters of Gihon, and brought it straight
down to (or on) the west side of the city ol
David " (2 Ch. xxxii. 30) ; " made a pool and a
conduit, and brought water into the city * (2 k.
xx. 20); and "fortified his city, and brought
water into the midst thereof; he digged the hard
rock with iron, and made wells for water
(Ecclus. xlriii. 17). The work of Hezekiah is
also, apparently, alluded to in the passages *T«
gathered together the waters of the lower pool
Digitized by
Google
JEBUSALEM
(Is. xxii. 9), and " Ye made also a ditch between
the two walls for the water of the old pool "
(xxii. 11). Any identification of these springs
and pools most be purely conjectural ; the
" brook " (^PU) of 2 Ch. may be the overflow
from the Virgin's Fountain ;• the spring of Gihon
may be the Virgin's Fountain, brought down by
the rock-hewn tunnel to the Pool of Siloam at
the southern extremity of the eastern hill ; or it
may be a spring near the head of the Tyropoeon
Valley whose waters were brought down on the
west side of the same hill by the aqueduct east
of the Damascus Gate [Gihon]. The pool made
by Hezekiah was perhaps the B. Mamilla, and
the conduit that passing beneath the Jaffa Gate
and Christ Church Rectory to the Temple
enclosure ; the lower pool of Isaiah mar have
been the B. el-Hamra at Siloam, and the old pool
a reservoir higher up the Tyropoeon Valley.
Nehemiah mentions the Dragon Well, or
spring (Neh. ii. 13), possibly an outflow from
the " Low Level " aqueduct above the B. es-
Sultan; a fountain, apparently Siloam,' from
which one of the city gates took its name (Keh.
ii. 14; iii. 15; xii. 37); the Pool of Siloah (iii.
15) or Siloam (John ix. 7), which received the
" waters of Shiloah " (Is. viii. 6) [Siloam], and
is perhaps the King's Pool of Neh. ii. 14 ; and
the "pool that was made" (Neh. iii. 16),
apparently in the Kedron Valley below the
Virgin's Fountain, where Josephus (B. J. v. 4,
§ 2) places Solomon's Pool. The only other
pool mentioned in the Bible is Bethesda, which
appears to have been either the " Twin Pools,"
or the pool near the Church of St. Anne.
Josephus adds to the above the Serpent's Pool
{B. J. v. 3, § 2), now the B. Mamilla, which
may have derived its name from the serpentine
character of the High Level Aqueduct that dis-
charged water into it; the Pool Amygdalon
(B. J.r. 11, § 4), perhaps Tower (Wgdol) Pool,
from the three great towers in its immediate
vicinity, which is now " Hezekiah's Pool " ; and
the pool Struthius* (jB. J. v. 11, § 4), near
Antonia, now the "Twin Pools" at the N.W.
angle of the Haram esh-Sherif. The fountain
(«iryh) held by Simon (B. J. v. 6, § 1) is
apparently Siloam. Josephus alludes more than
once to the conduits and subterranean reservoirs
within and without the city ; and it was pro-
bably into one of the latter in the Temple
enclosure, the pit " in the court of the prison "
(Jer. xxxviii. 6), that Jeremiah was let down.
Aristeas mentions subterranean reservoirs,
•applied by a spring and rain-water, which
occupied a space of 5 stadia round the Temple,
and were connected by pipes of lead (Gal-
landii BM. Vet. Pair. ii. 805). Strabo (xvi. 2,
§ 40) describes Jerusalem as being well supplied
with water within, but externally parched with
drought; and Tacitus {Hist. v. 12) writes of the
JEBUSALEM
1593
< Can the "brook" be the stream passing through
" Solomon's," the "Low Level" aqueduct, the only
running water near Jerusalem ?
* Siloam is also called a spring by Josephus (B. J.
v. 4, $4 1.2; »,{<)•
• According to Bonar (Imp. Bib. Diet. s. v. Jeru-
nalem), " the Struthlus " or " sparrpw-jiool " may be
- flock-pool " or " sheep-pool " (niFnWi MKtoreth =
Bock).
fons perennis aquae, catati sub terra montis ; et
piscinae cisternacque servandis imbribus. There
are several allusions in the Talmud to the
plentiful supply of water in the Temple
enclosnre, and to the caverns, beneath the courts,
in which it was stored. Eusebius and Jerome
(08.* p. 266, 72 ; p. 189, 14) mention a " pool of
the fuller," probably Jiirket el-Hamra, near
Tophet and Aceldama ; and the Al/ircu SiS&iioi,
or "twin pools" of Bethesda (OS* p. 251, 15;
p. 142, 9), which the Bordeaux Pilgrim places
further in the city than two other large pools.
Constantine constructed reservoirs, one of which
still exists, near the basilica that he built at
Jerusalem (/tin. Hieros.). All later pilgrims
allude, with more or less fulness, to the
numerous pools and cisterns; and Antoninus
mentions (ixtii.) that in front of the ruins of
the Temple of Solomon, under the street, water
ran down to the fountain of Siloam.
It is evident, from what ha* been said, that
every effort was made to ensure a plentiful
supply of water ; and in the many sieges that
the city underwent, there are only two known
instances in which the besieged suffered from
want of water : that alluded to by Ezekiel (iv.
16, 17), and that by Antiochus (Joseph. Ant. xiii.
8, § 2). The mean annual rainfall which is such
an important element in the water supply is
22 • 76 inches (Dr. Chaplin in PEFQy. Stat. 1883,
P- 9 >
Streets, Houses, &c. — Of the nature of these
in the ancient city we hare only the most scat-
tered notices. The "East street," R.V. the
" broad place on the East " (2 Ch. xxix. 4) ; the
" street of the city," R. V. the " broad place
at the gate of the city " (xxxii. 6) ; the "street
facing the water gate," R. V. " the broad place
that was before the water gate " (Neh. viii. 1,
3, 16) or, according to the parallel account in
1 Esd. ix. 38, the " broad place (tbpixupov) of
the Temple towards the East " (cp. 2 Ch. xxix.
4 ; Joseph. Ant. xi. 5, § 5), perhaps the same as
the street of the house of God, K. V. the " broad
place before the house of God " (Ezra x. 9) ;
the "street of the gate of Ephraim," R. V. the
"broad place of the gate of E." (Neh. viii. 16) ;
and the " open place of the first gate towards
the East " (1 Esd. r. 47), must have been not
" streets " in our sense of the word, so much as
the open spaces found in Eastern towns round
the inside of the gates. This is evident, not
only from the word used, Bechob, which has the
force of breadth or room, but also from the
nature of the occurrences related in each case.
The same places are intended in Zech. viii. 5.
Streets, properly so called (Chutzoth), there
were (Jer. v. 1 ; xi. 13, etc.), bet the name of
only one, " the bakers' street " (Jer. xxxvii. 21),
is preserved to us. This is conjectured, from
the names, to have been near the tower of ovens
(Neh. xii. 38 ; " furnaces " is incorrect). Jeru-
salem, like other ancient cities, was probably
divided into quarters by main streets that passed
out to the country through gates, one of which
at least — the "Gate of Ephraim"— took its
name from the district to which the road led.
The principal streets must, from the nature of the
ground, have run from north to south, and these
must have been connected by cross-streets, form-
ing insulae, which were no doubt intersected by
numberless narrow winding lanes. Such in fact
Digitized by
Google
1594
JERUSALEM
was the arrangement of the streets in the 3rd
century B.C. ; and in character they were not
unlike those of Pompeii. There was a roadway
for camels, beasts of burthen, and mounted
persons ; and on either side of it a high trottoir
for the convenience of those on foot. Perhaps,
as the words of Aristeas (see p. 1608) seem to
suggest, the raised pavement was reserved for
the use of certain classes of the population. The
bazaars, always a prominent feature in an Oriental
city, are mentioned by Aristeas ; and Josephus
states (B. J. v. 8, § 1) that Titus breached the
second wall at the point where the cloth, brass,
and wool bazaars abutted on the wall. Josephus
frequently alludes to the maze of narrow lanes
{Ant. xiv. 16, § 2 ,—B. J. ii. 14, § 9 ; v. 8, § 1 ;
vi. 6, § 3, &c), and mentions a market-place
(B. J. i. 13, § 2) in which a fight took place
between the adherents of Herod and those of
Aristobulns; the "upper market-place" (ii. 14,
§ 9), plundered by the soldiers of Florns, which
must have been on the western hill (v. 4, § 1) ;
and the " timber market," ' apparently on the
eastern hill (ii. 19, § 4), which was burnt by
Cestius.
It may be inferred from the tendency of main
streets to preserve their original direction and
position through many centuries, and from the
peculiarity of the topographical features, that
the principal streets of the modern city repre-
sent those of Herodian, and perhaps in some
measure those of pre-exilic, Jerusalem. The
more important modern streets that appear to
retain the lines of older ones are : (1) The
street that follows the course of the Tyropoeon
Valley from the Damascus Gate to the Dung
Gate, and Siloam. (2) That which runs, almost
in a straight line, from the Damascus Gate to
the south wall of the city, and once passed
through a gate to the Valley of Hinnom.' This
street, there is some reason to believe, was at
one period, possibly the Herodian, adorned with
columns like the streets at Samaria, Gadara,
Gerasa,&c. (3) That leading southward from
the market-place, in front of the " Tower of
David," which apparently separated Herod's
palace and gardens from the remainder of the
town, apd ran to the postern and rock-hewn
steps in the English cemetery. (4) The two
streets leading northward from the Turkish
barracks, at the N.E. angle of the Haram, to
the Bab ez-Zahireh. One of these marks the
line of the road that, prior to the building of
the third wall, ran northward from Antonia,
without descending into the valley, and joined
the lower road, up the Tyropoeon Valley, near
the "Tombs of the Kings." This road may
possibly be the true Via Dolorosa (see p. 1656).
' The name lour iyofi, "Timber Market," Is
perhaps derived from ducaan, the rabbinical word for the
desk or pulpit from which the priests blessed and
addressed the people. There Is no other reference to a
timber market In Jerusalem, but the Rabbins speak
very frequently of the place called Dukana, where the
priests blessed the people when assembled together
(Bonar, In Imp. Bib. Diet., s. v. Jerusalem).
s The present Zlon Gate only dates from the rebuild-
ing of the walls In the 16th century; the earlier Zlon
Gate was at the end of the street, mentioned above,
which apparently led to the " Gate of the Essence " In the
old wait
JERUSALEM
(5) The Tank Bab es-Sihileh, which passes int«
the Haram over " Wilson's Arch," and retains,
in part, the line of the street leading from the
Temple to Herod's palace ; and (6) the street N.
of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, which
apparently connected the tower Psephinus with
Antonia.
To the houses we have even less clue. The
ease with which they were burned, and the
rapidity and extent of the fires during the
Roman siege (Joseph. B. J. i. 7, § 4 ; v. 6, § 1 ; vi.
6, § 3, &c), appear to indicate that they were
largely built of wood. On the other hand the
scarceness of timber, and the abundance of
excellent stone in the quarries close at hand,
seem to suggest houses of a more permanent
character. Possibly, whilst the residences of the
wealthy were substantially built, story upon
story, like those of Tyre and Zabulon (B. J. ii.
18, § 9), the mass of the population lived in
small rudely constructed houses clustered round
the palaces and public buildings.' Such public
buildings are frequently alluded to by Josephus ;
and one important point where the palace of
Agrippa and Berenice, the house of the high-
priest, and the Record Office were situated, is
called by him the " nerves of the city " (B. J.
ii. 17, § 6). The precise form and character of
pre-exilic Jerusalem is unknown ; but there is
no reason to suppose that the general aspect of
the city prior to its capture by Titus differed
very materially from that of the modern town,
shorn of the suburbs that have spread beyond the
walls during the last twenty-five years. No
doubt the ancient city did not exhibit that air of
mouldering dilapidation which is now so promi-
nent there — that sooty look which gives its
houses the appearance of " having been burnt
down many centuries ago" (Richardson in
S. fy P. p. 183), and which, as it is characteristic
of so many Eastern towns, must be ascribed to
Turkish neglect. In another respect, too, the
modern city must present a different aspect from
the ancient — the dull monotony of colour which,
at least during autumn, pervades the slopes of
the hills and ravines outside the walls. Mot
only is this the case on the west, where the
city does not relieve the view, but also on tbe
south. A dull leaden ashy hue overspreads all.
No doubt this is due, wholly or in part, to the
enormous quantities of deitria of stone and
mortar which have been shot over the precipices
after the numerous demolitions of the city. The
whole of the slopes south of the Haram area
(the ancient Ophel), and the modern Zion, and
the west side of the valley of Jehoshaphat,
especially south of the St. Stephen's Gate and
near the S.E. angle of the wall, are covered
with these d&ris, lying as soft and loose as
the day they were poured over, and presenting
the appearance of gigantic mounds of rubbish.'
In this point at least the ancient city stood in
favourable contrast with the modern, but in
some others the resemblance must have been
strong. The nature of the site compels the
walls in several places to retain their old posi-
h The houses appear to have closely adjoined the
Temple (Ant. xlv. 4, Q 2; 13, } 3).
> The character of the debrit as disclosed by Str
C. Warren's excavations varies In different localities
(Recovery of Jcrutalem, pp. »S-1SS).
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM.
1595
Digitized by VjOOQIC
1596
JERUSALEM
tions. The southern part of the summit of the
Upper city and the slopes of Ophel are now bare,
where previous to the final siege they were
covered with houses ; but, on the other hand,
the West and East and the western corner of the
North wall are approximately what they always
-were. And the look of the walls and gates,
■especially the Jaffa Gate, with the " Citadel "
Adjoining, is probably little changed from
what it was. True, the minarets, domes, and
spires, which give such a variety to the modern
town, mnst have been absent ; but their place
was supplied by the four great towers at the
north-west part of the wall, by the upper
stories and turrets of Herod's palace, the palace
of the Asmoneans, and the other public build-
ings; while the lofty fortress of Anton ia, tower-
ing far above the neighbouring buildings,* and
itself surmounted by the keep on its south-east
comer, must have formed a feature in the view
not altogether unlike (though more prominent
than) the " citadel " of the modern town. The
flat roofs and the absence of windows, which
give an Eastern city so startling an appearance to
a Western traveller, probably existed then as now.
But the greatest resemblance must have been
on the south-east side, towards the Mount of
Olives. Here the precinct of the Haram esh-
Sherif, with its domes and sacred buildings,
some of them clinging to the very spot formerly
occupied by the Temple, must preserve what we
may call the personal identity of this quarter
-of the city, but little changed in its general
features from what it was when the Temple
stood there. Nay, more : in the substructions
of the enclosure, those massive and venerable
Avails, which once to see is never to forget, is
the very masonry itself, its lower courses undis-
turbed, which was laid there by Herod the
Great, and by Agrippa, possibly even by still
older builders.
Climate. — The climate of Jerusalem differs
in no respect from that of the hill-country
of Judaea and Samaria. A long dry season,
lasting from May to October, is regularly
followed by a rainy season divided into three
periods : the early rain, miD ; the heavy winter
rain, Dt?J ; and the latter rain, E'lpTD. Snow falls
two years out of three, but soon melts. The
deepest fall in recent years was 17 in. in 1879.
The prevailing winds are from the west, and are
moist. The north winds are cold, the east dry,
and the south warm. In summer, when the
whole country is arid, the westerly winds dis-
charge the moisture, with which they are laden,
in copious dew. The sirocco blows from the S.E.
and lasts from three to twenty or even thirty
days. Earthquakes, but not of any great severity,
are occasionally felt. The results of twenty-two
years' continuous observations give : —
Mean.
Bar. . . . 37-398
Temp. . . 62-8
Katn . . . 33-76 in.
No. of rainy 1 .,
days . I
Max. Mln.
37-816 36-873
113° 35°
43-93 In. 13-37 in.
71 37
The mean monthly temperature is lowest in
February and highest in August. The unhealthy
v. II).
' Consplcuo fiutlglo turris Antonla" (T«c But.
JERUSALEM
period during which climatic diseases are most
prevalent extends from May to October inclusive
(Dr. Chaplin mPEFQy. Stat. 1883, pp. 8-40).
Environs of the City. — The various spots in
the neighbourhood of the city will be described
at length under their own names, and to them
the reader is accordingly referred. See Ek-
Rooel; Hinnom ; Kedron ; Olives, Mount of,
&C. &C.
II. The Annals op the Crrr.
In considering the annals of the city of Jeru-
salem, nothing strikes one so forcibly as the
number and severity of the sieges which it
underwent. We catch our earliest glimpse of it
in the brief notice of the 1st chapter of Judges,
which describes how the "children of Judah
smote it with the edge of the sword, and set the
city on fire ;" and almost the latest mention of
it in the New Testament is contained in the
solemn warnings in which Christ foretold how
Jerusalem should be "compassed with armies"
(Luke xxi. 20), and the abomination of desolation
be seen standing in the Holy Place (Matt. xxiv.
15). In the fifteen centuries which elapsed
between those two points the city was besieged
no fewer than seventeen times ; twice it was
razed to the ground ; and on two other occasions
its walls were levelled. In this respect it stands
without a parallel in any city ancient or modern.
The fact is one of great significance. The
number of the sieges testifies to the importance
of the town as a key to the whole country, and
as the depository of the accumulated treasures
of the Temple, no less forcibly than do the
severity of the contests and their protracted
length to the difficulties of the position and the
obstinate enthusiasm of the Jewish people. At
the same time the details of these operations,
scanty as they are, throw considerable light on
the difficult topography of the place ; and on
the whole they are in every way so character-
istic, that it has seemed not unfit to use them
as far as possible as a framework for the fol-
lowing rapid sketch of the history of the city.
The first siege appears to have taken place
almost immediately after the death of Joshua
(c. 1400 B.C.). Judah and Simeon had been
ordered by the divine oracle at Shiloh or Shechem
to commence the task of actual possession of
the portions distributed by Joshua. As they
traversed the region south of these, they en-
countered a large force of Canaanites at Bezek.
These they dispersed, took prisoner Adoni-bezek,
a ferocious petty chieftain, who was the terror
of the country, and swept on their southward
road. Jerusalem was soon reached. 1 It was
evidently too important, and also too near the
actual limits of Judah, to be passed by. " Thev
fought against it and took it, and smote it with
the edge of the sword, and set the city on fire "
(Judg. i. 8). To this brief notice Josephns
(Ant. v. 2, § 2) makes a material addition. H«-
tells us that the siege lasted some time (*br
XpoVe>) ; that the part which was taken at last,
and in which the slaughter was made, was the
lower city; but that the upper city was so
1 According to Josephns, they did not stuck Jeru-
salem till after they had taken many other tonns —
I vAtforas TC kapivm, &roAi4p«wi> "L
Digitized by
Google
Tutu I.
Plan of Site and Walla of Modem City.
lb fact p. 16»6.
Digitized by CjOOQIC
V
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
strong, " by reason of its walls and also of the
nature of the place," that they relinquished the
attempt and moved off to Hebron {Ant. v. 2,
§§ 2, 3> These few valuable words of the old
Jewish historian reveal one of those topographi-
cal peculiarities of the place — the possession of
an upper as well as a lower city — which differ-
enced it so remarkably from the other towns
of Palestine, which enabled it to survive so
many sieges and partial destructions, and which
in the former section we have endeavoured to
explain. It is not to be wondered at that these
characteristics, which must have been impressed
with peculiar force on the mind of Josephus
during the destruction of Jerusalem, of which
he had only lately been a witness, should have
recurred to him when writing the account of the
earlier sieges." There are, however, strong
grounds for supposing that the city of the
Jebusites was almost entirely confined to the
eastern hill. This question is discussed in
Section III. (p. 1648).
As long as the citadel remained in the hands
of the Jebusites, they practically had possession
of the whole ; and a Jebusite city in fact it
remained for a long period after this. The
Benjamites followed the men of Judah to Jeru-
salem, but with no better result. They could
not drive out the Jebusites, " but the Jebusites
dwell with the children of Benjamin in Jeru-
salem unto this day" (Judg. i. 21). At the
time of the sad story of the Levite (Judg. xix.)
— which the mention of Phinehas (xx. 28) fixes
as early in the period of the Judges — Benjamin
can hardly have had even so much footing as
the passage just quoted would indicate ; for the
Levite refuses to enter it, not because it was
hostile, but because it was "the city of a
stranger, and not of Israel." And this lasted
daring the whole period of the Judges, the reign
of Saul, and the reign of David at Hebron.
Owing to several circumstances — the residence
of the Ark at Shiloh ; Saul's connexion with
Gibeah, and David's with Ziklag and Hebron ;
the disunion of Benjamin and Judah, symbolised
by Saul's persecution of David — the tide of
affairs was drawn northwards and southwards,
and Jerusalem, with the places adjacent, was
left in possession of the Jebusites. But as soon
as a man was found to assume the rule over all
Israel, both north and south, so soon was it
necessary that the seat of government should be
moved from the remote Hebron nearer to the
centre of the country, and the choice of David
at once fell on the city of the Jebusites.
David advanced to the siege at the head of
the men of war of all the tribes who had come
to Hebron "to turn the kingdom of Saul to
him." They are stated as 280,000 men, choice
warriors of the flower of Israel (1 Ch. xii. 23-
39). No doubt they approached the city from
the south. The ravine of the Kedron, the Valley
of Hinnom, the hills south and south-east of the
town, the uplands on the west, must have
swarmed with these hardy warriors. As before,
the lower city was immediately taken, and, as
before, the citadel held out. The undaunted
Jebusites, believing in the impregnability of
JERUSALEM
1597
» See this noticed and contrasted with the situation
of the villages In other parts by Dean Stanley (S. A P.
pp. 161, 677, hc.\
their fortress, manned the battlements "with
lame and blind " * (Joseph. Ant. vii. 3, § 1) j or,
according to 2 Sam. v. 6 (R. V. marg., cp.
Luther's translation), taunted David, saying,
" Thou shalt not come in hither, the blind and
the lame shall drive thee away " (cp. 1 Ch. xi.
5, " Thou shalt not come hither "). But they
little understood the temper of the king or of
those he commanded. David's anger was tho-
roughly roused by the insult (ipyiaitls, Joseph.),
and he at once proclaimed to his host that the
first man who would scale the rocky side of the
fortress and kill a Jebusite should be made
chief captain of the host. A crowd of warriors
(irdtTf t, Joseph.) rushed forward to the attempt,
but Joab's superior agility gained him the day,'
and the citadel, the fastness of Zion, was taken
(c. 1046 B.C.). It is the first time that that
memorable name appears in the history.
David at once proceeded to secure himself in
his new acquisition. He enclosed the whole of
the city with a wall, and connected it with the
citadel. In the latter he took up his own
quarters, and the Zion of the Jebusites became
"the city of David."' [Zkw; Mh-lo.] The
rest of the town was left to the more immediate
care of the new captain of the host (Ant.
vii. 3, § 2).
The sensation caused by the fall of this im-
pregnable fortress must have been enormous.
It reached even to the distant Tyre, and before
long an embassy arrived from Hiram, the king
of Phoenicia, with the characteristic offerings of
artificers and materials to erect a palace for
David in his new abode. The palace was built,
and occupied by the fresh establishment of wives
and concubines which David acquired. Two
attempts were made — the one by the Philistines
alone (2 Sam. v. 17-21 ; 1 Ch. xiv. 8-12), the
other by the Philistines with all Syria and
Phoenicia (Joseph. Ant. vii. 4, § 1 ; 2 Sam. v. 22-
25) — to attack David in his new situation, but
they did not affect the city, and the actions
were fought in the " Valley of Giants," appa-
rently the open valley el-Bukei'a, west of Jeru-
salem, and extending towards Bethlehem. The
arrival of the Ark, however, was an event of
great importance. The old Tabernacle of
Bezaleel and Aholiab being now pitched on the
height of Gibeon, a new tent had been spread
by David in the " city ot David " for the recep-
tion of the Ark; and here, "in its place," it
11 The passage which forms the latter clause ot
» Sam. v. 8 is generally taken to mean that the blind
and the lame were excluded from the Temple. But
where is the proof that this was the fact? On one
occasion at least we know that " the blind and the
lame" came to Christ in the Temple, and He healed
them (Matt. xxt. 14). And indeed what bad the
Temple, which was not founded till long after this,
to do with the matter? The explanation, which is
In accordance with the accentuation of the Masorets,
would seem to be that it was a proverb used afterwards
with regard to any Impregnable fortress — "The blind
and the lame are there ; let him enter the place if he
can."
• A romantic legend Is preserved in the Midrath
TehiUin, on' Ps. xvill. 29, of the stratagem by which
Joab succeeded In reaching the top of the wall (see it
quoted In Efsenmenger, 1. 476-7).
r In the N. T. "the dty of David" means Beth-
Digitized by
Google
1598
JERUSALEM
was deposited with the most impressive cere-
monies, and Zion became at once the great sanc-
tuary of the nation. It now perhaps acquired
the name of Beth ha-har, the " house of the
mount," of which we catch a glimpse in the
LXX. addition to 2 Sam. it. 24. In this tent
the Ark remained, except for its short flight to
the foot of the Monnt of Olives with David
(xv. 2-4-29), until it was removed to its per-
manent resting-place in the Temple of Solomon.
In the " city of David," too, was the sepul-
chre of David, which became also that of most
of his successors.
The only works of ornament which we can
ascribe to David are the "royal gardens," as
they are called by Josephus, which appear to
have been formed by him in the level space
south-east of the city, formed by the confluence
of the valleys of Kedron and Hinnom, screened
from the sun during part of the day by the
shoulders of the enclosing mountains, and irri-
gated by the Virgin's Fountain and the flood-
waters of the Kedron stored in one or more
pools (Joseph. Ant. vii. 14, § 4 ; ix. 10, § 4).
Until the time of Solomon we hear of no
additions to the city. His three great works
were the Temple, with its east wall and cloister
(Joseph. B. J. v. 5, § 1), his own palace, and the
Wall of Jerusalem. The two former will be
best described elsewhere. [Palace ; SOLOMON ;
Temple.] Of the last there is an interesting
notice in Josephus {Ant. viii. 2, § 1 ; 6, § 1 ;
7, § 7), from which it appears that David's wall
was a mere rampart without towers, and only
of moderate strength and height. One of the
first acts of the new king was to make the walls
larger — probably extend them so as to include
both the western and the eastern hills — and
strengthen them (1 K. Hi. 1, with the explana-
tion of Josephus, viii. 2, § 1). But on the com-
pletion of the Temple he again turned his
attention to the walls, and both increased their
height and constructed very large towers along
them (ix. 15, and Joseph. Ant. viii. 6, § 1). An-
other work of his in Jerusalem was the repair or
fortification of Millo, whatever that strange
term may signify (1 K. ix. 15, 24). It was in
the works at Millo and the city of David — it is
uncertain whether the latter consisted of closing
breaches (as in A. V.) or filling a ditch round
the fortress (the Vulg. and others) — that Jero-
boam first came under the notice of Solomon
(1 K. xi. 27 ; cp. Ant. viii. 7, § 7). Another
was a palace for his Egyptian queen— of the
situation of which all we know is that it was
not in the city of David (1 K. vii. 8, ix. 24, with
the addition in 2 Ch. viii. 11); and was there-
fore, presumably, on the western hill. But
there must have been much besides these to fill
up the measure of " all that Solomon desired to
build in Jerusalem " (2 Ch. viii. 6) : the vast
harem for his 700 wives and 300 concubines,
and their establishment — the colleges for the
priests of the various religions of these women
— the stables for the 1400 chariots and 12,000
riding horses. Outside the city, probably on
the Mount of Olives, there remained, down to
the latest times of the monarchy (2 E. xxiii. 13),
the fanes which he had erected for the worship
of foreign gods (1 K. xi. 7), and which have
still left their name clinging to the " Mount of
Offence."
JERUSALEM
His ore of the roads leading to the city is
the subject of a special panegyric from Josephus
{Ant. viii. 7, § 4). They were, as before ob-
served, paved with black stone, perhaps the
hard basalt from the region of Argob, on the
east of Jordan, where he had a special resident
officer.
As long as Solomon lived, the visits of foreign
powers to Jerusalem were those of courtesy and
amity ; but with his death this was changed.
A city in the palaces of which all the vessels
were of pure gold ; where spices, precious stones,
rare woods, and curious animals were accumulated
in the greatest profusion ; where silver was no
more valued than the stones of the street, and
considered too mean a material for the com-
monest of the royal purposes — such a city,
governed by such a faineant prince as Rehoboam,
was too tempting a prey for the surrounding
kings. He bad only been on the throne four
years (c. 970 B.C.) before Shishak, king of
Egypt, invaded Judah with an enormous host,
took the fortified places,' and advanced to the
capital. Jerusalem was crowded with the chief
men of the realm who had taken refuge there
(2 Ch. xii. 5), but Rehoboam did not attempt
resistance. He opened his gates apparently on
a promise from Shishak that he would not
pillage (Joseph. Ant. viii. 10, § 3). However,
the promise was not kept, the treasures of the
Temple and palace were carried off, and special
mention is made of the golden bucklers (|JO)
which were hung by Solomon in the house of
the forest of Lebanon (1 K. xiv. 25, 26 ; 2 Ch.
xii. 9 ; cp. 1 K. x. 17). r
Jerusalem was again threatened in the reign
of Asa (grandson of Rehoboam), when Zerah the
Cushite, or king of Ethiopia (Joseph. Ant. viii. 12,
§ 1) [Cush], probably incited by the success of
Shishak, invaded the country with an enormous
horde of followers (2 Ch. xiv. 9). He came by
the road through the low country of Philistia,
where his chariots could find level ground. But
Asa was more faithful and more valiant than
Rehoboam had been. He did not remain to be
blockaded in Jerusalem, but went forth and met
the enemy at Mareshah, and repulsed him with
great slaughter (e. 940). The consequence of
this victory was a great reformation extending
throughout the kingdom, but most demonstra-
tive at Jerusalem. A. vast assembly of the men
of Judah and Benjamin, of Simeon, even of
Ephraim and Manasseh — now " strangers "
(D , "}J.)— was gathered at Jerusalem. Enormous
sacrifices were offered ; a prodigious enthusiasm
seized the crowded city, and amidst the clamour
of trumpets and shouting, oaths of loyalty to
Jehovah were exchanged, and threats of instant
death denounced on all who should forsake His
service. The Altar of Jehovah in front of the
porch of the Temple, which had fallen into
i On the walls of the ruined Temple of Kanuk are
long rows of embattled shields, within each of which is
the name of a vanquished Jewish city. One of the cities
called Judah-Melek, or " Jodah-Klng," may perhaps be
intended for Jerusalem.
r According to Josephus, he also carried off the arms
which David had taken from the king of Zobah ; but
these were afterwards in tbe Temple, and did service
at the proclamation of king Joash. [Ana, Saelet,
p.242.]
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
decay, was rebuilt ; the horrid idol of the queen-
mother — the mysterious Asherah, doubtless an
abomination of the Syrian worship of her grand-
mother — was torn down, ground to powder, and
burnt in the valley (nachal) of the Kedron. At
the same time the vessels of the Temple, which
had been plundered by Shishak, were replaced
from the spoil taken by Abijah from Ephraim,
and by Asa himself from the Cushites (2 Ch.
it. 8-19; 1 K. xv. 12-15). This prosperity
lasted for more than ten years, but at the end
of that interval the Temple was once more
despoiled, and the treasures so lately dedicated
to Jehovah were sent by Asa, who had himself
dedicated them, as bribes to Benhadad at
Damascus, where they probably enriched the
temple of Rimmon (2 Ch. xvi. 2, 3 ; 1 K. xv. 18).
Asa was buried in a tomb excavated by himself
in the royal sepulchres in the city of David.
The reign of his son Jehoshaphat, though of
great prosperity and splendour, is not remark-
able as regards the city of Jerusalem. We hear
of a " new court " to the Temple, but have no
clue to its situation or its builder (2 Ch. xx. 5).
An important addition to the government of
the city was made by Jehoshaphat in the esta-
blishment of courts for the decision of causes
both ecclesiastical and civil (2 Ch. xix. 8-11).
Jehoshaphat's son Jehoram was a prince of a
different temper. He began his reign (c. 887}
by a massacre of his brethren and of the chief
men of the kingdom. Instigated no doubt by
his wife Athaliah, he re-introduced the profligate
licentious worship of Ashtaroth and the high
C" :es (2 Ch. xxi. 11), and built a temple for
1 (2 Ch. xxiii. 17 ; Joseph. Ant. ix. 7, § 4).
Though a man of great vigour and courage, he
was overcome by an invasion of one of those
huge hordes which were now almost periodical.
The Philistines and Arabians attacked Jerusalem,
broke into the palace, spoiled it of all its trea-
sures, sacked the royal harem, killed or carried
off the king's wives, and all his sons but one.
This was the fourth siege. Two years after it
the king died, universally detested, and so strong
was the feeling against him that he was denied
a resting-place in the sepulchres of the kings,
but was buried without ceremony in a private
tomb in the city of David (2 Ch. xxi. 20).
The next events in Jerusalem were the
massacre of the royal children by Jehoram's
widow Athaliah, and the six years' reign of
that queen. During her sway the worship of
Baal was prevalent, and that of Jehovah pro-
portionately depressed. The Temple was not
only suffered to go without repair, but was even
mutilated by the sons of Athaliah, and its trea-
sures removed to the temple of Baal (2 Ch.
xxiv. 7). But with the increasing years of
Joash, the spirit of the adherents of Jehovah
returned, and the confederacy of Jehoiada the
priest with the chief men of Judah resulted in
the restoration of the true line. The king was
crowned and proclaimed in the Temple. Atha-
liah herself was hurried out from the sacred pre-
cincts to the valley of the Kedron (Joseph. Ant.
ix. 7, § 3), and was executed at " the entry of
the horse gate* to the king's house" (2 Ch.
JERUSALEM
1599
• The horse-gate is mentioned again In connexion
with Kedron by Jeremiah (xxxl. 40). Possibly the
name was perpetuated In the gate Susan (Sus = horse)
xxiii. 15, R. V. ; cp. 2 E. xi. 16). The temple
of Baal was demolished ; his altars and images
destroyed, his priests put to death, and the reli-
gion of Jehovah was once more the national
religion. But the restoration of the Temple
advanced but slowly, and it was not till three-
and-twenty years had elapsed, that through the
personal interference of the king the ravages of
the Baal worshippers were repaired (2 K. xii. 6-
16), and the necessary vessels and utensils fur-
nished for the service of the Temple (2 Ch.
xxiv. 14. But see 2 K. xii. 13 ; Joseph. Ant. iv.
8, § 2). But this zeal for Jehovah soon expired.
The solemn ceremonial of the burial of the good
priest in the royal tombs, among the kings, can
hardly have been forgotten before a general
relapse into idolatry took place, and his son
Zechariah was stoned with his family* in the
very court of the Temple for protesting.
The retribution invoked bv the dying martyr
quickly followed. Before the end of the year
(a. 838), Hazael, king of Syria, after possessing
himself of Gath, marched against the much
richer prize of Jerusalem. The visit was
averted by a timely offering of treasure from
the Temple and the royal palace (2 E. xii. 18 ;
2 Ch. xxiv. 23 ; Joseph. Ant. ix. 8, § 4), but not
before an action had been fought, in which a
large army of the Israelites was routed by a
very inferior force of Syrians, with the loss of a
great number of the principal people and of a
vast booty. Nor was this all. These reverses
so distressed the king as to bring on a dangerous
illness, in the midst of whiah he was assassinated
by two of his own servants, sons of two of the
foreign women who were common in the royal
harems. He was buried in the city of David,
though, like Jehoram, denied a resting-place in
the royal tombs (2 Ch. xxiv. 25). The pre-
dicted danger to the city was, however, only
postponed. Amaziah began his reign (B.C. 837)
with a promise of good; his first act showed
that while he knew how to avenge the murder
of his father, he could also restrain his wrath
within the bounds prescribed by the Law of
Jehovah. But with success came deterioration.
He returned from his victories over the Edom-
ites, and the massacre at Petra, with fresh idols
to odd to those which already defiled Jerusalem
— the images of the children of Seir, or of the
Amalekites (Josephus), which were erected and
worshipped by the king. His next act was a
challenge to Joash, the king of Israel, and now
the danger so narrowly escaped from Hazael
was actually encountered. The battle took
place at Bethshemesh of Judah, at the opening
of the second Temple, the only gate on the east side of
the outer wall, upon which, according to the Mlshna
{Middotk. 1. 3), the palace of Shushan or Susan was
portrayed (Lightfoot, Pntp. qf Templt, ill.).
1 From the expression in xxiv. 26, " sons of Je-
hoiada," we are perhaps warranted In believing that
Zecharlah'B brethren or his sons were put to death
with him. The LXX. and Vulg. have the word in the
singular number, "son;" but, on the other hand,
the Syr. and Arabic and the Targum all agree with
the Hebrew text, and it is specially mentioned in
Jerome's Qu. ffcbr. It Is perhaps supported by tbe
special notice taken of the exception made by Amaziah
In the case of tbe murderers of his father (2 K. xlv. * ;
2 Ch. xxv. 4). The case of Naboth is a parallel. [See
Elijah, p. 910.]
Digitized by
Google
1600
JERUSALEM
of the hills, about 14$ miles west of Jerusalem.
It ended in a total rout. Amaziah, forsaken by
his people, was taken prisoner by Joash, who
at once proceeded to Jerusalem and threatened
to put his captive to death before the walls, if
he and his army were not admitted. The gates
were thrown open, the treasures of the Temple
— still in the charge of the same family to
whom they had been committed by David — and
the king's private treasures were pillaged, and
for the first time the walls of the city were
injured. A clear breach was made in them of
400 cubits in length " from the gate of Ephraim
to the corner gate," and through this Joash
drove in triumph, with his captive in the
chariot, into the city.* This must have been on
the north side of the first wall, and probably
towards its eastern extremity.
The long reign of Uzziah (2 K. xv. 1-7; 2 Ch.
xxvi.) brought about a material improvement in
the fortunes of Jerusalem. He was a wise and
good * prince (Joseph, ix. 10, § 3), very warlike,
and a great builder. After some campaigns
against foreign enemies, he devoted himself to
the care of Jerusalem for the whole of his life
(Josephus). The walls were thoroughly re-
paired, the portion broken down by Joash was
rebuilt and fortified with towers at the corner
gate ; and other parts which had been allowed
to go to ruin — as the gate opening on the
Valley of Hinnom,' a spot called the " turn-
ing " (see Neh. iii. 19, 20, 24), and others — were
renewed and fortified, and furnished for the first
time with machines, then expressly invented for
shooting stones and arrows against besiegers.
Later in this reign happened the great earth-
quake, which, although unmentioned in the
historical books of the Bible, is described by
Josephus (ix. 10, § 4), and alluded to by the
prophets (Amos i. 1 ; Zech. xiv. 5) as a kind of
era (see Stanley, S. & P. pp. 184, 185). A serious
breach was made in the Temple itself, and below
the city a large fragment of rock, or landslip,
rolling down from the hill at En-rogel * blocked
up the roads, overwhelmed the king's gardens,
and rested against the bottom of the slope of
Olivet. After the leprosy of Uzziah, he left the
sacred precincts, and resided in the hospital or
lazar-house, outside the city, till his death.*
He was buried in the city of David with the
kings (2 K. xv. 7) ; not in the sepulchre itself,
but in a garden or field attached to the spot.
* This is an addition by Josephus (ix. 9, ( »). (Since
the time of Solomon, chariots would seem to have
become unknown In Jerusalem. At any rate we should
Infer, from the notice In 2 K. xiv. 20, that the royal
establishment could oot at that time boast of one.
* The story of bis leprosy at any rate shows his zeal
for Jehovah.
J a Ch. xxvl. ». The word rendered "the valley"
is tt'arit always employed for the valley on the west
and south of the town, as 7>rU is for that on the east.
* This will be the eastern hill, or Ophel, south of the
" Virgin's Fountain." Josephns calls the place Erogc
('Epeiy>i), and it has been suggested (Bonar, Imp. Bib.
Diet. s. v. Jerusalem) that this Is the Hebrew nil "ID
T -I
(,'Aragah), a garden, or spice-bed, and not En-rogel.
* niCBnn IV3- The interpretation given above
Is that of Klmchl, adopted by Qesenlos, Fflrst, and
Bertbeau. Keil (on 3 K. xv. 6) and Hengstenberg,
however, contend for a different meaning.
JEBU8ALEM
Jotham (c. 756) inherited his father's lags-
city, as well as his tastes for architecture and
warfare. His works in Jerusalem were building
the upper gateway to the Temple — apparently
a gate communicating with the palace (2 Ch.
xxiii. 20)— and also porticoes leading to the
same (Ant. ix. 11, § 2). He also built much on
Ophel — probably on the south of Moriah (2 K.
xv. 35 ; 2 Ch. xxvii. 3) — repaired the walls
wherever they were dilapidated, and strength-
ened them by very large and strong towers
(Joseph.). Before the death of Jotham (b.c. 740)
the clouds of the Syrian invasion began to
gather. They broke on the head of Aha/, his
successor: Rezin, king of Syria, and Pekah,
king of Israel, joined their armies and invested
Jerusalem (2 K. xvi. 5), where there appears to
have been a party in their favour (Is. viii. 6).
The fortifications of the two previous kings
enabled the city to hold out during a siege of
great length (<V1 woKiir x/mJtop, Joseph.). During
its progress Rezin made an expedition against
the distant town of Klath on the Red Sea, from
which he expelled the Jews, and handed it over
to the Syrians, or (R. V. marg.) Edomites (2 K.
xvi. 6 ; Ant. ix. 12, § 1). [Ahaz.] Finding on
his return that the place still held out, Resin
ravaged Judaea and returned to Damascus with
a multitude of captives, leaving Pekah to con-
tinue the blockade.
Ahaz, thinking himself a match for the
Israelite army, opened his gates and came
forth. A tremendous conflict ensued, in which
the three chiefs of the government next to the
king, and 120,000 of the able warriors of the
army of Judah, are stated to have been killed,
and Pekah returned to Samaria with a crowd
of captives, and a great quantity of spoil col-
lected from the Benjamite towns north of Jeru-
salem (Joseph.). Ahaz himself escaped, and there
is no mention in any of the records, of the city
having been plundered. The captives and the
spoil were, however, sent back by the people of
Samaria — a fact which, as it has no bearing on
the history of the city, need here only be re-
ferred to, because from the narrative it may
perhaps be inferred that the most convenient
route from Samaria to Jerusalem at that time
was not, as now, along the plateau of the coun-
try, but by the depths of the Jordan Valley,
and through Jericho (2 K. xvi. 5 ; 2 Ch. xiviii.
5-15 ; Joseph. Ant. ix. 12, § 2).
To oppose the confederacy which had so injured
him, Ahaz had recourse to Assyria. He appears
first to have sent an embassy to Tiglath-pileser
with presents of silver and gold taken from the
treasures of the Temple and the palace (2 E.
xvi. 8), which had been recruited during the
last two reigns, and with a promise of more if
the king would overrun Syria and Israel (Ant-
ix. 12, § 3). This Tiglath-pileser did. He
marched to Damascus, took the city, and killed
Rezin. While there, Ahaz visited him, to make
his formal submission of vassalage, 6 and gave
him the further presents. To collect these he
went so far as to lay hands on part of the per-
* This follows from the words of * K. xvUL 7; md
his name, under the form Jehoehas, appears in the
list of tributary princes in the Assyrian Inscriptions
(Schrader, Die XeilintdnifUn «. d. A. 1. p. 2tt ; Ssyce.
/rata Ugktfnm (Ac Ancient MmumaUi, p. 1U>
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
JERUSALEM
1601
manent works of the Temple — the original con-
structions of Solomon, which none of his pre-
decessors had been bold enough or needy enough
to touch. He cut off the richly-chased panels
which ornamented the brass bases of the cisterns,
dismounted the large tank or "sea" from the
brazen bulls, and supported it on a pedestal of
stone, and removed the " cover for the sabbath,"
and the ornamental stand on which the kings
were accustomed to sit in the Temple (2 K. xvi.
17, 18>
Whether the application to Assyria relieved
Ahaz from one or both of his enemies, is not
clear. From one passage it would seem that
Tiglath-pileser actually came to Jerusalem
(2 Oh. xxviii. 20). At any rate the intercourse
resulted in fresh idolatries, and fresh insults to
the Temple. A new brazen altar was made
after the profane fashion of one he had seen at
Damascus, and was set up in the centre of the
court of the Temple, to occupy the place and
perform the functions of the original Altar of
Solomon, now removed to a less prominent posi-
tion (see 2 K. xvi. 12—15, with the explanation
of Keil) ; the very sanctuary itself (7^ , 0> ■ n( '
Bnp>n) was polluted by idol-worship of some
kind or other (2 Ch. xxix. 5, 16). Horses
dedicated to the sun were stabled at the entrance
to the court, with their chariots (2 K. xxiii. 11).
Altars for sacrifice to the moon and stars were
erected on the fiat roofs of the Temple (ib. v. 12).
Such consecrated vessels as remained in the
House of Jehovah were taken thence, and either
transferred to the service of the idols (2 Ch.
xxix. 19) or cut up and re-manufactured ; the
lamps of the sanctuary were extinguished *
(xxix. 7), and for the first time the doors of the
Temple were closed to the worshippers (xxviii.
24), and their offerings seized for the idols
(Joseph. Ant. ix. 12, § 3). The famous sun-dial
was erected at this time, possibly in the Temple. 1
When Ahaz at last died, it is not wonderful that
a meaner fate was awarded him than that of
even the leprous CTzziah. He was excluded not
only from the royal sepulchres, but from the
precincts of Zion, and was buried " in the city —
in Jerusalem." * The very first act of Hezekiah
(b.c. 724) was to restore what his father had
desecrated (2 Ch. xxix. 3 ; and see v. 36, " sud-
denly "). The Levites were collected and in-
spirited; the Temple freed from its impurities
both actual and ceremonial ; the accumulated
abominations being discharged into the valley
of the Kedron. The full musical service of the
Temple was re-organised, with the instruments
and the hymns ordained by David and Asaph ;
and after a solemn sin-offering for the late
transgressions had been offered in the presence
of the king and princes, the public were allowed
• In the old Jewish Calendar the 18th of Ab was
kept as a fast, to commemorate the putting out of the
western light of the great candlestick by Ahaz.
' There Is an it priori probability that the dial
would be placed in a sacred precinct ; but may we not
infer, from comparing 2 K. xx. 4 with a, that it was
la the " middle court,'* and that the sight of it there as
be pumd tbruugh had suggested to Isaiah the "sign'*
which w«* to accompany the king's recovery ?
• Such is the express statement of 2 Ch. xxviii. 37.
The Book of Kings repeats its regular formula. Josephus
omits all notice of the burial.
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
to testify their acquiescence in the change by
bringing their own thank-offerings (2 Ch. xxix.
1-36). This was done on the 17th of the first
month of his reign. The regular time for
celebrating the Passover was therefore gone by.
But there was a law (Num. ix. 10, 11) which
allowed the Feast to be postponed for a month
on special occasions, and of this law Hezekiah
took advantage, in his anxiety to obtain from the
whole of his people a national testimony to
their allegiance to Jehovah and His laws (2 Ch.
xxx. 2, 3). Accordingly at the special invitation
of the king a vast multitude, not only from his
own dominions, but from the northern kingdom,
even from the remote Asher and Zebulun, as-
sembled at the capital. Their first act was to
uproot and efface all traces of the idolatry of
the preceding and former reigns. High-places,
altars, the mysterious and obscene symbols of
Baal and Asherah, the venerable brazen serpent
of Hoses itself, were torn down, broken to pieces,
and the fragments cast into the valley of the
Kedron' (2 Ch. xxx. 14; 2 K. xviii. 4). This
done, the Feast was kept for two weeks, and the
vast concourse dispersed. The permanent service
of the Temple was next thoroughly organised,
the subsistence of the officiating ministers
arranged, and provision made for storing the
supplies (2 Ch. xxxi. 2-21). It was probably
at this time that the decorations of the Temple
were renewed, and the gold or other precious
plating' which had been removed by former
kings re-applied to the doors and pillars (2 K.
xviii. 16).
And now approached the greatest crisis which
had yet occurred in the history of the city : the
dreaded Assyrian army was to appear before its
walls. Hezekiah had apparently entered into
an alliance with Merodach-baladan, king of
Babylon (2 K. xx. 12 ; Is. xxxix. 1), and, with
Edom and Moab, joined the Philistines in their
revolt against Assyria, then ruled by Sargon.
The Tartan was ordered to besiege Ashdod, and
another army, perhaps led by the great king in
person, pushed southwards through the mountain
passes, and halted at Nob, within sight of the
" daughter of Zion, the hill of Jerusalem " (Is.
x. 28-32). It has been suggested (Sayce, Fresh
Light from the And. Moots, pp. 117, 118) that
Jerusalem was taken in this the 14th year of
Hezekiah's reign (c 711 U.C.), and that its
capture is referred to in Is. x. 6, 12, 22, 24, 34,
and xxii. But this is in direct contradiction to
the promise made to Hezekiah (Is. xxxriii. 6 ;
cp. xxxix. 8), and there is no record of the
conquest of the city by Sargon in the Assyrian
inscriptions. Ten years later Jerusalem was
again threatened by an Assyrian army. Trusting
to the support of Tirhakah, king of Egypt,
Hezekiah threw off his allegiance to Assyria,
and re-asserted his supremacy over the cities of
Philistia. Sennacherib advanced to quell the
revolt (c. 701 B.C.), and from Lachiah sent
the Tartan or commander-in-chief, the Rab-
shakeh or prime minister, and the Rabsaris or
' And yet it would seem, from the account of Joslah's
reforms (2 K. xxiii. 11, 12), that many of Ahas's
Intrusions survived even the seal of Hezekiah.
s The word "gold" is- supplied by our translators:
but the word "overlaid'' (ilBi") shows that soma
metallic coating is intended.
5 K
Digitized by VjOOQIC
1602
JERUSALEM
JERUSALEM
chamberlain, with a large army to Jerusalem.
The details of the invasion will be found under
the separate heads of Hezekiah and Senna-
cherib. The Assyrian king states in an in-
scription (Schrader, Die Keitituchriften «. d. A.
T., pp. 288-294), that he shut up Hezekiah
" like a bird in a cage in Jerusalem, his rortl
city ; " and that he raised a line of forts against
him, and prevented any exit from the chief gate
of the city. This is probably an exaggeration,
for it is in contradiction to the words of Itaith
(xxxvii. 33), that the king of Assyria should not
shoot an arrow against Jerusalem, nor come
before it with shield, nor cast a bank against
it. It is certain, however, that the Assyrian
army was encamped before the walls, and that
the Rabshakeh held a conversation with Heze-
kiah's chief officers, outside the walls — probably
near the Turkish Barracks, on the eastern hill,
or near the Jaffa Gate — while the wall above was
crowded with the anxious inhabitants. At the
time of Titus's siege the name of " the Assyrian
Camp " was still attached to a spot north of the
old wall of the city in remembrance either of this
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
or the subsequent visit of Nebuchadnezzar (Joseph.
B. J. v. 12, § 2). Bat though untaken— though
the citadel was still the "virgin-daughter of
Zion " — yet Jerusalem did not escape unharmed.
Hezekiah's treasures had to be emptied, and the
costly ornaments he had added to the Temple
were stripped off to make up the tribute.
It was previous to one of these invasions, or
perhaps in the interval between them, that
Hezekiah took steps to place the city in a
thorough state of defence. The movement was
made a national one. A great concourse came
together. The springs round Jerusalem were
stopped — that is, their outflow was prevented,
and the water diverted underground to the
interior of the city (2 K. xx. 20 ; 2 Ch. xxxii. 4).
This was particularly the case with the spring
which perhaps formed the source of the stream
of the Kedron, h elsewhere called the " upper
spring of the waters of Gihon " (2 Ch. xxxii. 30 ;
A. V. most incorrectly, " water-course "). It
was led down by a subterraneous channel
"through the hard rock" (2 Ch. xxxii. 30;
Ecclus. xlviii. 17), to, or on, the west side of the
city of David (2 K. xx. 20) ; that is, into the
valley which separated the Mount Horiah and
Zion from the Upper City (see Water Supply,
p. 1593). This done, he carefully repaired the
walls of the city, furnished them with additional
towers, and built a second wall (2 Ch. xxxii. 5 ;
Is. xxii. 10). The water of the reservoir, called
the "old pool," was diverted to a new tank in
the city between the two walls 1 (Is. xxii. 11).
Nor was this all : as the struggle would cer-
tainly be one for life and death, he strengthened
the fortifications of the citadel (2 Ch. xxxii. 5,
"Millo;" Is. xxii. 9), and prepared abundance
of ammunition. He also organised the people,
and officered them, gathered them together in
the open place at the gate, and inspired them
with confidence in Jehovah (2 Ch. xxxii. 6).
The death of this good and great king was
indeed a national calamity, and so it was con-
sidered. He was buried in " the chiefest (R. V.
ascent) of the sepulchres of the sons of David,"
and a vast concourse from the country, as well
as of the citizens of Jerusalem, assembled to
join in the waitings at the funeral (2 Ch.
xxxii. 33).
The reign of Manasseh (B.C. 696) must have
been an eventful one in the annals of Jerusalem,
though only meagre indications of its events are
to be found in the documents. He began by
plunging into all the idolatries of his grand-
father — restoring all that Hezekiah had de-
stroyed, and desecrating the Temple and the city
with even more offensive idolatries than those of
Ahaz (2 Ch. xxxiii. 2-9 ; 2 K. xxi. 2-9). In
this career of wickedness he was stopped by an
invasion of the Assyrian army, by whom he was
The authority for this is the use here of the word
.vocaal, which is uniformly applied to the valley east
of the city, as OS is to that west and south ; but see
iIibox. Similar measures were taken by the Moslems
on the approach of the Crusaders (Will, of Tyre,
viil. 4, 7).
1 The reservoir between the Jaffa Gate and the
Church of the Sepulchre, now usually called the Fool
or Hezekiah, cannot be either of the works alluded
to above; but it is probably the Pool Amygdalon of
Josephus.
JERUSALEM
1603
taken prisoner and carried to Babylon, where
he remained for some time.* The rest of his
long reign was occupied in attempting to remedy
his former misdoings, and in the repair and
conservation of the city (Joseph. Ant. x. 3, § 2).
He built an outer wall to the city of David,
" from the west side of Gihon-in-the-valley to
the Fish gate," »'.«. apparently along the western
side of the Kedron Valley. He also continued
the works which had been begun by Jotham at
Ophel, and raised that fortress or structure to
a great height (2 Ch. xxxiii. 14). On his death
he was buried in a private tomb in the garden
attached to his palace, called also the garden of
Uzza (2 K. xxi. 18; 2 Ch. xxxiii. 20). Here
also was interred his son Amon after his violent
death, following an uneventful but idolatrous
reign of two years (2 Ch. xxxiii. 21-25 ; 2 K.
xxi. 19-26).
The reign of Josiah (B.C. 639) was marked by
a more strenuous zeal for Jehovah than even that
of Hezekiah had been. He began his reign at
eight years of age, and by his 20th year (12th
of his reign — 2 Ch. xxxiv. 3) commenced a
thorough removal of the idolatrous abuses of
Manasseh and Amon, and even some of Ahaz,
which must have escaped the purgations of
Hezekiah 1 (2 K. xxiii. 12). As on former
occasions, these abominations were broken up
small and carried down to the bed of the
Kedron — which seems to have served almost the
purpose of a common sewer — and there calcined
and dispersed. The cemetery, which still paves
the sides of that valley, had already begun to
exist, and the fragments of the broken altars
and statues were scattered on the graves that
they might be effectually defiled, and thus
prevented from further use. On the opposite
side of the valley, somewhere on the Mount of
Olives, were the erections which Solomon had
put up for the deities of his foreign wives. Not
one of these was spared ; they were all annihi-
lated, and dead bones scattered over the places
where they had stood. These things occupied
six years, at the expiration of which, in the
first month of the 18th year of his reign (2 Ch.
xxxv. 1 ; 2 K. xxiii. 23), a solemn Passover was
held, emphatically recorded to have been the
greatest since the time of Samuel (2 Ch. xxxv.
18). This seems to have been the crowning
ceremony of the purification of the Temple ; and
it was at once followed by a thorough renova-
tion of the fabric (2 Ch. xxxiv. 8 ; 2 K. xxii. 5>
The cost was met by offerings collected at the
doors (2 K. xxii. 4), and also throughout the
country (Joseph. Ant. x. 4, § 1), not only of
Judah and Benjamin, but also of Ephraim and the
other northern tribes (2 Ch. xxxiv. 9). It was
during these repairs that the Book of the Law
was found; and shortly after all the people
k In the Assyrian inscriptions M&nasseh Is mentioned
among the tributaries of both Esarhaddon and Assur-
banlpal (Schrader, DU KalinKhrifttn u. d. A. T.
pp. 3M-367).
> The narrative In Kings appears to place the destruc-
tion of the images after the king's solemn covenant in
the Temple, i.e. after the completion of the repairs.
But, on the other hand, there are the dates given in
3 Ch. xxxiv. 8, xxxv. 1, 19, which fix the Passover to
the 14th of the 1st month of his 18th year, too early in
the year for the repair which was begun in the same
year to have preceded it.
5 K 2
Digitized by
Google
1604
JERUSALEM
were convened to Jerusalem to hear it read, and
to renew the national covenant with Jehovah.*
The mention of Hnldah the prophetess (2 Ch.
xxxiv. 22; 2 K. xxii. 14) introduces us to a
part of the city called " the Mishnch " (flj^er!,
A. V. " college," or R. V. " second quarter ")"•
The name also survives in the Book of Zephaniah,
a prophet of this reign (i. 10), who seems to
recognise " the Fish gate," " the second quarter,"
and " the hills " as the three prominent features
of the city.
Josiah's death took place at a distance from
Jerusalem; but he was brought there for his
burial, and was placed in " his own sepulchre "
(2 K. ixiii. 30), or "in the sepulchre of his
fathers " (2 Ch. xxxv. 24 ; Joseph. Ant. x. 5, § 1),
perhaps that already tenanted by Mauasseh and
Amon. (See 1 Esd. i. 31.)
Josiah's rash opposition to Pharaoh-necho cost
him his life, his son his throne, and Jerusalem
much suffering. Before Jehoahaz (B.C. 608) had
been reigning three months, the Egyptian king
found opportunity to send to Jerusalem from
Riblah, where he was then encamped, a force
sufficient to depose and take him prisoner, to
put his brother Eliakim on the throne, and to
exact a heavy fine from the city and country,
which was paid in advance by the new king,
and afterwards extorted by taxation (2 K. xxiiL
33, 35).
The fall of the city was now rapidly ap-
proaching. Daring the reign of Jehoiakim —
such was the new name which at Necho's order
Eliakim had assumed — Jerusalem was visited
by Nebuchadnezzar, with the Babylonian army
lately victorious over the Egyptians at Car-
chemish. The visit was possibly repeated once,
or even twice.* A siege there must have been ;
but of this we have no account. We may infer
how severe was the pressure on the surrounding
country, from the fact that the very Bedawtn
were driven within the walls by " the fear of
the Chaldeans and of the Syrians " (Jer. xxxv.
11). We may also infer that the Temple was
entered, since Nebuchadnezzar carried off some
of the vessels therefrom for his temple at Babylon
(2 Ch. xxxvi. 7), and that Jehoiakim was treated
with great indignity (•'&. 6). In the latter part
of this reign we discern the country harassed
and pillaged by marauding bands from the east
of Jordan (2 K. xxiv. 2).
Jehoiakim was succeeded by his son Jehoia-
chin (B.C. 597). Hardly had his short reign
begun before the terrible army of Babylon re-
appeared before the city, again commanded by
Nebuchadnezzar (2 K. xxiv. 10, 11). Jehoia-
chin's disposition appears to have made him shrink
from inflicting on the city the horrors of a long
siege (B. J. vi. 2, § 1), and he therefore sur-
rendered in the third month of his reign. The
» This narrative has some Interesting correspondences
with that of Joash's coronation (3 K. xl.). Amongst
these is the singular expression the king stood "on the
pillar." In the present case Joeephus understands this
as an official spot— im to9 0ijiumc.
• See Keil on 2 K. xxit. 14.
• It seems impossible to reconcile the accounts of this
period in Kings, Chronicles, and Jeremiah, with Josephus
and the other sources. For one view, see Jehoiakim.
For an opposite one, see Bawlinson'a Mcredottu, 1.
609-51*.
JERUSALEM
treasures of the palace and Temple were pillaged ;
certain golden articles of Solomon's original
establishment, which had escaped the plunder
and desecrations of the previous reigns, were
cut up (2 K. xxiv. 13); and the more desirable
objects out of the Temple carried off (Jer. nvii.
19). The first deportation that we hear of from
the city now took place. The king, his wives,
and the queen-mother, with their eunuchs and
whole establishment, the princes, 7,000 warriors,
and 1,000 artificers— in all 10,000 souls— were
carried off to Babylon (2 K. xxiv. 14-16). The
uncle of Jehoiachin was made king in his stead,
by the name of Zedekiah, under a solemn oath
("by God") of allegiance (2 Ch. ixxvi. 13;
Ezek. xvii. 13, 14, 18). Had he been content to
remain quiet under the rule of Babylon, the
city might have stood many years longer; but
he was not. He appears to have been tempted
with the chance of relief afforded by the acces-
sion of Pharaoh-hophra, and to have applied to
him for assistance (Ezek. xvii. 15). Upon this
Nebuchadnezzar marched in person to Jerusalem,
arriving in the 9th year of Zedekiah, on the
10th day of the 10th month" (B.C. 588), and st
once began a regular siege, at the same tint
wasting the country far and near (Jer. xxxiv. 7).
The siege was conducted by erecting forts on
lofty mounds round the city, from which, on the
usual Assyrian plan,* missiles were discharged into
the town, and the walls and houses in that
battered by rams (Jer. xxxii. 24, xxxiii. 4, lit 4;
Ezek. xxi. 22 ; Joseph. Ant. x. 8, § 1). The city
was also surrounded with troops (Jer. lii. 7)
The siege was once abandoned, owing to the
approach of the Egyptian army (Jer. xnvii, 5,
11), and daring the interval the gates of the
city were re-opened (ib. v. 13). But the relief wis
only temporary, and in the 11th of Zedekiah
(B.C. 586), On the 9th day of the 4th month
(Jer. lii. 6), being just a year and a half from
the first investment, the city was taken. Ne-
buchadnezzar had in the meantime retired from
Jerusalem to Riblah to watch the more im-
portant siege of Tyre, then in the last year of
its progress. The besieged seem to have suffered
severely both from hunger and disease (Jer.
xxxii. 24), but chiefly from the former (2 K.
xxv. 3; Jer. lii. 6; Lam. v. 10). But they
would perhaps have held oat longer hsd not s
breach in the wall been effected on the day
named. It was at midnight (Joseph.). The
whole city was wrapt in the pitchy darkness'
characteristic of an Eastern town, and nothing
was known by the Jews of what had happened
till the generals of the army entered the Temple
(Joseph.) and took their seats in the middle
gate ■ (Jer. xxxix. 3 ; Joseph. Ant. x. 8, § 2). Then
the alarm was given to Zedekiah, and collecting
his remaining warriors, they stole out of the city
by a gate at the south side, in the great bend
of the wall above Siloam, passed by the royal
s> According to Josephus (Ant. x. 7, 4 «). this ;<lai»
was the commencement of the final portion of the siege-
But there is nothing in the Bible records to support
this.
i For the sieges, see Layard's Nineveh, ii. 366, kc.
' The moon being but nine days old, there can have
been little or no moonlight at this hour.
• This was the regular Assyrian custom at the con-
clusion of a siege (Layard, Nineveh, ii. 315).
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
gardens, and took the road to the Jordan Valley.
At break of day information of the flight was
brought to the Chaldeans by some deserters.
A rapid pursuit was made : Zedekiah was over-
taken near Jericho, his people were dispersed,
and he himself raptured and reserved for a
miserable fate at Riblah. Meantime the wretched
inhabitants suffered all the horrors of assault
and sack: the men were slaughtered, old and
young, prince and peasant, the women violated
in Mount Zion itself (Lam. ii. 4 ; v. 11, 12).
On the 7th day of the following month (2 E.
zxv. 8), Nebuzaradan, the commander of the
king's body-guard, who seems to have been
charged with Nebuchadnezzar's instructions as
to what should be done with the city, arrived.
Two days were passed, probably in collecting
the captives and booty ; and on the 10th (Jer.
lii. 12) the Temple, the royal palace, and all the
more important buildings of the city were set
on fire, and the walls thrown down and left as
heaps of disordered rubbish on the ground (Neh.
iv. 2). The spoil of the city consisted ap-
parently of little more than the furniture of
the Temple. A few small vessels in gold ' and
silver, and some other things in brass, were
carried away whole — the former under the
especial eye of Nebuzaradan himself (2 K. xxv.
15 ; cp. Jer. xxvii. 19). But the larger objects,
Solomon's hnge brazen basin or sea with its
twelve bulls, the ten bases, the two magnificent
pillars, Jachin and Boaz, too heavy and too
cumbrous for transport, were broken up. The
pillars were almost the only parts of Solomon's
original construction which had not been muti-
lated by the sacrilegious hands of some Baal-
worshipping monarch or other, and there is
quite a touch of pathos in the way in which the
Chronicler lingers over his recollections of their
height, their size, and their ornaments— capitals,
wreathen work, and pomegranates, "all of
brass."
The previous deportations, and the sufferings
endured in the siege, must to a great extent
have drained the place of its able-bodied people,
and thus the captives on this occasion were but
few and unimportant. The high-priest and
four other officers of the Temple, the com-
manders of the fighting men, five " people of the
court, the mustering officer of the army, and
sixty selected private persons, were reserved to
be submitted to the king at Riblah. The
daughters of Zedekiah, with their children and
establishment (Jer. xli. 10, 16 ; cp. Ant. x. 9,
§ 4), and Jeremiah the Prophet (Jer. xl. 5), were
placed by Nebuzaradan at Mizpah under the
charge of Gedaliah ben-Ahikam, who had been
appointed as superintendent of the few poor
labouring people left to carry on the necessary
husbandry and vine-dressing. In addition to
these were some small bodies of men in arms,
who had perhaps escaped from the city before
the blockade, or in the interval of the siege, and
who were hovering on the outskirts of the
country watching what might turn up (Jer. xl.
7, 8). [Ishvael, 6.] The remainder of the
population — numbering, with the seventy-two
• Josephus (x. 8, } 5) says the candlestick and the
golden table of shewbread were taken now ; but these
were doubtless carried off on the previous occasion.
« Jeremiah (111. 26) says " seven."
JERUSALEM
1605
above named, 832 souls (Jer. lii. 29) — were
marched off to Babylon. About two months
after this Gedaliah was murdered by Ishmael,
and then the few people of consideration left
with Jeremiah went into Egypt. Thus the
land was practically deserted of all but the
very poorest class. Even these were not allowed
to remain in quiet. Five years afterwards — the
23rd of Nebuchadnezzar's reign — the insatiable
Nebuzaradan, on his way to Egypt (Joseph. Ant.
x. 9, §7), again visited the ruins, and swept
off 745 more of the wretched peasants (Jer.
lii. 30).
Thus Jerusalem at last had fallen, and the
Temple, set up under such fair auspices, was a
heap of blackened ruins.* The spot, however,
was none the less sacred because the edifice was
destroyed, and it was still the resort of devotees,
sometimes from great distances, who brought
their offerings — in strange heathenish guise
indeed, but still with a true feeling — to weep
and wail over the holy place (Jer. xli. 5). It
was still the centre of hope to the people in
Captivity, and the time soon arrived for their
return to it. The decree of Cyrus authorizing
the rebuilding of the " house of Jehovah, God
of Israel, which is in Jerusalem," was issued
B.o. 536. In consequence thereof a very
large caravan of Jews arrived in the country.
The expedition comprised all classes — the royal
family, priests, Levites, inferior ministers, lay
people belonging to various towns and families
— and numbered 42,360' in all. They were well
provided with treasure for the necessary outlay ;
and — a more precious burden still — they bore
the vessels of the old Temple which had been
preserved at Babylon, and were now destined
again to find a home at Jerusalem (Ezra v. 14,
vL5>
A short time was occupied in settling in their
former cities, but on the 1st day of the 7th
month (Ezra iii. 6) a general assembly was called
together at Jerusalem in " the open place of the
first gate towards the east " (1 Esd. v. 47) ; the
Altar was set up, and the daily morning and
evening sacrifices commenced.* Other festivals
were re-instituted, and we have a record of the
celebration of at least one anniversary of the
day of the first assembly at Jerusalem (Neh.
viii. 1, &c.). Arrangements were made for stone
and timber for the fabric, and in the 2nd year
after their return (B.C. 534), on the 1st day of
* The events of this period are kept in memory by
the Jews of the present day by various commemorative
fasts, which were Instituted Immediately after the
■occurrences themselves. These are:— the 10th Tebetb,
the day of the Investment of the city by Nebuchadnezzar ;
the loth Ab, destruction of the Temple by Nebuzaradan,
and subsequently by Titus ; the 3rd Tlarl, murder or
Oedaliah j 9th Tebeth, when Eieklel and the other
captives at Babylon received the news of the destruction
of the Temple. The entrance of the Cbaldees into the
city Is commemorated on the 17th Tamuz, the day of
the breach of the Antonla by Titus. The modem dates
will be found In the Jewish almanack tat the year.
J Josephus says 42,462.
• The Feast of Tabernacles Is also said to have been
celebrated at this time (Ezra 111. 4 ; Joseph. Ant. xl. 4,
y 1); but this is In direct opposition to Neb. vlll. IT,
which states that It was first celebrated when Ezra was
present (cp. «. 13), which he was not on the former
occasion.
Digitized by
Google
1606
JERUSALEM
the 2nd month (1 Esd. v. 57), the foundation of
the Temple was laid amidst the songs and music
of the priests and Levites (according to the old
rites of David), the tears of the old men and
the shouts of the young. But the work was
destined to suffer material interruptions. The
chiefs of the people by whom Samaria had been
colonised, finding that the Jews refused their
offers of assistance (Ezra iv. 2), annoyed and hin-
dered them in every possible way ; and by this
and some natural drawbacks — such as violent
storms of wind by which some of the work had
been blown down (Hag. i. 9), drought and con-
sequent failure of crops, and mortality amongst
both animals and men — the work was protracted
through the rest of the reign of Cyrus, and that
of Ahasuerus, till the accession of Artaxerxes
(Darius I.) to the throne of Persia (B.C. 522).
The Samaritans then sent to the court at Baby-
lon a formal memorial (a measure already tried
without success in the preceding reign), repre-
senting that the inevitable consequence of the
restoration of the city would be its revolt from
the empire. This produced its effect, and the
building entirely ceased for a time. In the
meantime houses of some pretension began to
spring up — " ceiled houses " (Hag. i. 4), — and
the enthusiasm of the builders of the Temple
cooled (ib. t>. 9). But after two years the delay
became intolerable to the leaders, and the work
was recommenced at all hazards, amidst the en-
couragements and rebukes of the two Prophets,
Zechariah and Haggai, on the 24th day of the
6th month of Darius' 2nd year. Another at-
tempt at interruption was made by the Persian
governor of the district west of the Euphrates *
(Ezra v. 3), but the result was only a con-
firmation by Darius of the privileges granted by
his predecessor (vi. 613), and an order to render
all possible assistance. The work now went on
apace, and the Temple was finished and dedicated *
in the 6th year of Darius (B.C. 616) on the 3rd
(or 23rd, 1 Esd. vii. 5) of Adar — the last month,
and on the 14th day of the new year the first
Passover was celebrated. The new Temple
was 60 cubits less in altitude than that of
Solomon (Joseph. Ant. xv. 11, § 1); but its
dimensions and form— of which there are only
scanty notices — will be best considered elsewhere.
[Temple.] All this time the walls of the city
remained as the Assyrians had left them (Neh.
ii. 12, &c). A period of 58 years now passed
of which no accounts are preserved to us ; but
at the end of that time, in the year 457, Ezra
arrived from Babylon with a caravan of priests,
Levites, Nethinims, and lay people, among the
latter some members of the royal family, in all
1777 persons (Ezra vii. viii.), and with valuable
offerings from the Persian king and his court, as
well as from the Jews who still remained in
Babylonia (ib. vii. 14, viii. 25). He left Babylon
on the 1st day of the year and reached Jeru-
salem on the 1st of the 5th month (Ezra vii. 9,
viii. 32).
* mnj 131? = beyond the river, but in A.V.
rendered "on this aide." as If speaking from Jerusalem
(see Kwald, tv. 110, n.).
* Psalm xxx. by Its title purports to hive been used
on this occasion (Ewald, Dichttr, I. 210, 223). Kwald
also suggests that Ps. Ixvill. was anally used lor this
festival (Getc*. Iv. 127, n.).
; JERUSALEM
Ezra at once set himself to correct some irre-
gularities into which the community had fallen.
The chief of them was the practice of marrying
the native women of the old Canaanite nations.
The people were assembled at three days' notice,
and harangued by Ezra — so urgent was the
case — in the midst of a pouring rain, and in
very cold weather, in the broad place, or court,
before (i.e. east of) the Temple (Ezra x. 9;
1 Esd. ix. 6). His exhortations were at once
acceded to, a form of trespass-offering was
arranged, and no less than seventeen priests, ten
Levites, and eighty-six laymen renounced their
foreign wives, and gave up an intercourse which
had been to their fathers the cause and the
accompaniment of almost all their misfortunes.
The matter took three months to carry oat, and
was completed on the 1st day of the new year?
but the practice was not wholly eradicated
(Neh. xiii. 23), though it never was pursued at
before the Captivity.
We now pass another period of eleven years
until the arrival of Nehemiah, about B.C. 445.
He had been moved to come to Jerusalem by the
accounts given him of the wretchedness of the
community, and of the state of rain in which
the walls of the city continued (Neh. i. 3).
Arrived there, he kept his intentions quiet for
three days, but on the night of the third be
went out by himself, and, as far as the ruhu
would allow, made the circuit of the place
(ii. 11-16). On the following day he collected
the chief people and proposed the immediate re-
building of the walls. One spirit seized them.
Priests, rulers, Levites, private persons, citizens
of distant towns,* as well as those dwelling on
the spot, all put their hand vigorously to the
work. And notwithstanding the taunts and
threats of Sanballat, the ruler of the Samaritans,
and Tobiah the Ammonite, in consequence of
which one-half of the people had to remain
armed while the other half built, the work was
completed in fifty-two days, on the 25th of BoL
The wall thus rebuilt was that of the city of
Jerusalem as well as the city of David or Zion,
as will be shown in the next section, where the
account of the rebuilding is examined in detail
(Section III.). At this time the city must have
presented a forlorn appearance ; but few houses
were built, and large spaces remained unoccu-
pied, or occupied but with the ruins of the
Assyrian destructions (Neh. vii. 4). In this
respect it was not unlike much of the modern
city. The solemn dedication of the wall, recorded
in Neh. xii. 27-43, probably took place at a
later period, when the works had been com-
pletely finished.
Whether Ezra was here at this time is uncer-
tain.' [Ezra, p. 1041.] But we meet him dur-
ing the government of Nehemiah, especially on
one interesting occasion — the anniversary, it
would appear, of the first return of Zerubbabel's
caravan — on the 1st of the 7th month (Neh.
• Among these we find Jericho, Bethzur, near Hebron,
Gibson, Bethhoron, perhaps Samaria, and the other side
of Jordan (see iv. 12, referring to those who lived near
Sanballat and Tobiah).
* The name occurs among those who assisted In tbe
dedication of the wall (xii. 33); but so as to make us
believe that It was some inferior person of the same
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
viii. 1). He there appears as the venerable and
venerated instructor of the people in the for-
gotten Law of Moses, amongst other reforms re-
instituting the Feast of Tabernacles, which we
incidentally learn had not been celebrated since
the time that the Israelites originally entered on
the land (viii. 17).
Nehemiah remained in the city for twelve
years (v. 14, iiii. 6), during which time he held
the office and maintained the state of governor
of the province (v. 14) from his own private
resources (v. 15). He was indefatigable in his
regulation and maintenance of the order and
dignity both of the city (vii. 3, xi. 1, xiii. 15,
&c.) and Temple (x. 32, 39, xil. 44); abolished
the excessive rates of usury by which the richer
citizens had grievously oppressed the poor
(v. 6-12); kept up the genealogical registers,
at once so characteristic of, and important to,
the Jewish nation (vii. 5, xi., xii.) ; and in
various other ways showed himself an able and
active governor, and possessing a complete
ascendency over his fellow-citizens. At the
end of this time he returned to Babylon ; but it
does not appear that his absence was more than
a short one,* and he was soon again at his post,
as vigilant and energetic as ever (xiii. 7). Of
his death we have no record.
The foreign tendencies of the high-priest
Eliashib and his family had already given
Nehemiah some concern (xiii. 4, 28) ; and when
the checks exercised by his vigilance and good
sense were removed, they quickly led to serious
disorders, unfortunately the only occurrences
which have come down to us during the next
epoch. Eliashib's son Joiada, who succeeded
him in the high-priesthood (apparently a few
years before the death of Nehemiah), had two
sons, the one Jonathan (Neh. xii. 11) or Johanan
(Neh. xii. 22 ; Joseph. Ant. xi. 7, § 1), the other
Joshua (Joseph, ibid.). Joshua had made interest
with the general of the Persian army that he
should displace his brother in the priesthood:
the two quarrelled, and Joshua was killed by
Johanan in the Temple (B.C. c. 366) : a horrible
occurrence, and even aggravated by its conse-
quences; for the Persian general made it the
excuse not only to pollute the sanctuary (caoi)
by entering it, on the ground that he was cer-
tainly less unclean than the body of the mur-
dered man — but also to extort a tribute of 50
darics on every lamb offered in the daily sacri-
fice for the next seven years (Joseph. Ant.
ibid.).
Johanan in his turn had two sons, Jaddua
(Neh. iii. 11, 22) and Manasseh (Joseph. Ant.
xi. 7, § 2). Manasseh married the daughter of
Sanballat the Horonite,' and eventually became
the first priest of the Samaritan temple on
Gerizim (Joseph. Ant. xi. 8, §§ 2, 4). But at
first he seems to have been associated in the
priesthood of Jerusalem with his brother (Joseph.
JERUSALEM
1807
• Prideaux says five years; but his reasons are
not satisfactory, and would apply to ten as well as to
five.
' According to Neh. xiii. 28, the man who married
Sanballat's daughter was "son of Joiada;" but this
Is in direct contradiction to the circumstantial state-
ments of Josephus, followed in the text ; and the word
" son " is often used In Hebrew for " grandson," or even
a more remote descendant (see, t.g., Casm).
fL*riX*iy rrjs fyxtcpwrvVqs), and to have relin-
quished it only on being forced to do so on
account of his connexion with Sanballat. The
foreign marriages against which Ezra and Nehe-
miah had acted so energetically had again be-
come common among both the priests and lay-
men. A movement was made by a reforming
party against the practice; but either it had
obtained a firmer hold than before, or there was
nothing to replace the personal influence of
Nehemiah, for the movement only resulted in a
large number going over with Manasseh to the
Samaritans (Joseph. Ant. xi. 8, §§ 2, 4). Dur-
ing the high-priesthood of Jaddua occurred the
famous visit of Alexander the Great to Jeru-
salem. Alexander had invaded the north of
Syria, beaten Darius's army at the Granicus, and
again at Issus, and then, having besieged Tyre,
sent a letter to Jaddua inviting his allegiance,
and desiring, assistance in men and provisions.
The answer o( the high-priest was, that to
Darius his allegiance had been given, and that
to Darius he would remain faithful while he
lived. Tyre was taken in July B.C. 331 (Ken-
rick's Phoenicia, p. 431), and then the Macedonians
moved along the fiat strip of the coast of Pales-
tine to Gaza, which in its turn was taken in
October. The road to Egypt being thus secured,
Alexander had leisure to visit Jerusalem, and
deal in person with the people who had ventured
to oppose him. This he did apparently by the
route through Beth-horon and Gibeon. The
" Sapha " at which he was met by the high-
priest must be Scopus — the high ridge to the
north of the city, which is crossed by the
northern road, and from which the first view —
and that a full one— of the city and Temple is
procured. The result to the Jews of the visit
was an exemption from tribute in the Sabbatical
year : a privilege which they retained for long.'
We hear nothing more of Jerusalem until it
was taken by Ptolemy Soter, about B.C. 320,
during his incursion into Syria. The account
given by Josephus (Ant. xii. 1 ; c. Apion. i. § 22),
partly from Agatharchides, and partly from
some other source, is extremely meagre, nor is
it quite consistent with itself. But we can
discern one point to which more than one
parallel is found in the later history — that the
city fell into the hands of Ptolemy because the
Jews would not fight on the Sabbath. Great
hardships seem to have been experienced by the
Jews after this conquest, and a large number
were transported to Egypt and to Northern
Africa.
A stormy period succeeded, that of the strug-
gles between Antigonua and Ptolemy for the
possession of Syria, which lasted until the defeat
of the former at Ipsus (b.c. 301), after which
s The details of this story, and the arguments for
and against its authenticity, are given under Alex-
ander ; see also Hioh-frikst. It should be observed
that the part of the Temple which Alexander entered,
and where he sacrificed to God, was not the rao«. Into
which Bagoas bad forced himself after the murder of
Joshua, but the icpoV— the court only (Joseph. Ant.
xi. 8, $ 5). The Jewish tradition la that be was induced
to put off his shoes before treading the sacred ground
of the court, by being told that they would slip on
the polished marble (Jttp. Taanith, In Belaud, Antiq.
i. 8, 5).
Digitized by
Google
1608
JERUSALEM
the country came into the possession of Ptolemy.
The contention, however, was confined to the
maritime region of Palestine,' and Jerusalem
appears to hare escaped. Scanty as is the in-
formation we possess concerning the city, it yet
indicates a state of prosperity ; the only out-
ward mark of dependence being an annual tax
of twenty talents of silver payable by the high-
priests. Simon the Just, who followed his
father Onias in the high-priesthood (c. B.C.
300), is one of the favourite heroes of the Jews.
Under his care the sanctuary (coot) was repaired,
and some retaining walls of great height added
round the Temple, possibly to gain a larger
surface on the top of the hill (Ecclus. 1. 1, 2).
The large cistern or " sea " of the Temple, which
hitherto would seem to have been but tempo-
rarily or roughly constructed, was sheathed in
brass 1 (ib. v. 3); the walls of the city were more
strongly fortified to guard against such attacks
as those of Ptolemy (ib. o. 4) ; and the Temple
service was maintained with great pomp and
ceremonial (ib. vv. 11-21). His death was marked
by evil omens of various kinds presaging dis-
asters k (Otho, Lex. Sab. " Messias "). Simon's
brother Eleazar succeeded him as high-priest
(b.c. 291), and Antigonus of Socho as president
of the Sanhedrin 1 (Prideaux). The disasters
presaged did not immediately arrive, at least in
the grosser forms anticipated. The intercourse
with Greeks was fast eradicating the national
character, but it was at any rate a peaceful
intercourse during the reigns of the Ptolemies
who succeeded Soter, viz. Philadelphus (B.C.
285) and Euergetes (it.c. 247). It was Philadel-
phus who, according to the story preserved by
Joseph us, had the translation of the Septuagint ■*
made, in connexion with which be sent Aristeas
to Jerusalem during the priesthood of Eleazar.
He also bestowed on the Temple very rich gifts,
consisting of a table for the shewbread, of won-
derful workmanship, basins, bowls, phials, &c,
and other articles both for the private and public
use of the priests (Joseph. Ant. xii. 2, §§ 5—10,
15). A description of Jerusalem at this period
under the name of Aristeas still survives,* which
• Dtod. Sic. xix. ; Hecataeus In Joseph, c. Apion. 1. 22.
1 So the A. V., apparently following a different text
from either LXX. or Vulgate, which state that the
reservoir was made smaller. But the passage Is
probably corrupt.
• One of the chief of these was that the scapegoat was
not, as formerly, dashed in pieces by bis tall from the
rock, but got off alive Into the desert, where he was
eaten fry the Saracmi.
1 Simon the Just was the last of the Illustrious men
who formed "the Great Synagogue." Antigonus was
the first of the Tanaim, or expounders of the written
law, whose dicta are embodied in the Mlshna. From
8adoc, one of Antigonus's scholars, Is said to have
sprung the sect of the Sadducees (Prideaux, 11. 2;
Ewald, Oetch. iv. 313). It is remarkable that Anti-
gonus Is the first Jew we meet with bearing a Greek
name.
■ The legend of the translation by seventy-two
Interpreters is no longer believed ; but it probably rests
on some foundation of fact. The sculpture of the table
and bowls (lilies and vines, without any figures) seems
to have been founded on the descriptions In the Law.
In 5 Mace. ii. 14, &c, it is said to have had also a map
of Egypt upon It.
■ It la to be found In the Appendix to Havercamp's
Jottpkui, and In Gallandli BM. Vet. Pair. Ii. 80S. An
JERUSALEM
supplies a lively picture of both Temple and
city. The Temple was "enclosed with three
walls 70 cubits high, and of proportionate thick-
ness The spacious courts were paved
with marble, and beneath them lay immense
reservoirs of water, which by mechanical con-
trivance was made to rush forth, and thus wash
away the blood of the sacrifices." The city was
" of moderate extent, being about 40 stadia in
circuit." The main streets appear to have run
north and south ; some a along the brow . . .
others lower down but parallel, following the
course of the valley, with cross streets connect-
ing them." They were " furnished with raised
pavements," such as may still be seen in some
Oriental towns, either for the convenience of
those on foot, or, if we may believe Aristeas, to
enable the passengers to avoid contact with
persons or things ceremonially unclean. The
bazaars were then, as now, a prominent feature of
the city. There were to be found gold, precious
stones, and spices brought by caravans from the
East, and other articles imported from the West
by way of Joppa, Gaza, and Ptolemais, which
served as its commodious harbour. It is not
impossible that among these Phoenician impor-
tations from the West may have figured the
dyes and the tin of the remote Britain.
Eleazar was succeeded (c. B.C. 276) by his
uncle Manasseh, brother to Onias I. ; and he
again (c. 250) by Onias II. Onias was a son
of the great Simon the Just ; but he inherited
none of his father's virtues, and his ill-timed
avarice at length endangered the prosperity of
Jerusalem. The payment of the annual tax
to the court of Egypt having been for several
years evaded, Ptolemy Euergetes, about 226,
sent a commissioner to Jerusalem to enforce the
arrears (Joseph. Ant. xii. 4, § 1; Prideaux).
Onias, now in his second childhood (Ant. xii. 4,
§ 3), was easily prevailed on by his nephew
Joseph to allow him to return with the com-
missioner to Alexandria, to endeavour to arrange
the matter with the king. Joseph, a man evi-
dently of great ability,* not only procured the
remission of the tax in question,* but also per-
suaded Ptolemy to grant him the lucrative
privilege of farming the whole revenue of
Judaea, Samaria, Coele-Syria, and Phoenicia — a
privilege which he retained till the province was
taken from the Ptolemies by Antiochus the
Great. Hitherto the family of the high-priest
had been the most powerful in the country ; but
Joseph had now founded one able to compete
with it, and the contention and rivalry between
the two — manifesting itself at one time in
enormous bribes to the court, at another in
fierce quarrels at home — at last led to the inter-
ference of the chief power with the affairs of a
city which, if wisely and quietly governed,
might never have been molested.
Onias II. died about 217, and was succeeded
by Simon II. In 221 Ptolemy Philopator had
succeeded Euergetes on the throne of Egypt. He
had only been king three years when Antiochus
extract Is given In article " Jerusalem " {Diet, of Qtogr.
it 26, 26).
• The story of the stratagem by which be made Us
fortune Is told In Prideaux (anno 226), and in Human's
Hut. of the Jews (II. 34).
P At least we hear nothing of it afterwards.
Digitized by
Google
JEBUSALEM
JERUSALEM
1609
theQreatattemptedtotakeSyriafrom him. Anti-
ochua partly succeeded, but in a battle at Raphia,
aouth of Gaza, fought in the year 217 (the same
as that of Hannibal at Thrasymene), he was
completely routed and forced to fly to Antioch.
Ptolemy shortly after visited Jerusalem. He
offered sacrifice in the court of the Temple, and
would have entered the sanctuary, had he not
been prevented by the firmness of the high-
priest Simon, and also by a aupernatural terror
which struck him and stretched him paralysed on
the pavement of the court (3 Mace. ii. 22).i This
repulse Ptolemy sever forgave, and the Jews
of Alexandria suffered severely in consequence.
Like the rest of Palestine, Jerusalem now be-
came alternately a prey to each of the contend-
ing parties (Joseph. Ant. zii. 3, § 3). In 203 it
was taken by Antiochus. In 199 it was retaken
by Scopas, the Alexandrian general, who left a
garrison in the citadel. In the following year
Antiochus again beat the Egyptians, and then
<■ The Third Book of the Maccabees, though so called,
has no reference to the Maccabean heroes, bat Is taken
up with the relation of this visit of Ptolemj to Jeru-
salem, and Its consequences to the Jews.
Digitized by
Google
1610
JERUSALEM
the Jews, who had suffered most from the Utter,
gladly opened their gates to his army, and as-
sisted them in reducing the Egyptian garrison.
This service Antiochus requited by large pre-
sents of money and articles for sacrifice, by an
order to Ptolemy to furnish cedar and other
materials for cloisters and other additions to
the Temple, and by material relief from taxa-
tion. He also published a decree affirming the
sacredness of the Temple from the intrusion of
strangers, and forbidding any infractions of the
Jewish law (Joseph. Ant. xii. 3, §§ 3, 4).
Simon was followed in 195 by Onias III. In
187 Antiochus the Great died, and was suc-
ceeded by his son Seleucus Soter (Joseph. Ant.
xii. 4, § 10). Jerusalem was now in much
apparent prosperity. Onias was greatly re-
spected, and governed with a firm hand ; and
the decree of the late king was so far observed,
that the whole expenditure of the sacrifices was
borne by Seleucus (2 Mace. iii. 1-3). But the
city soon began to be much disturbed by the
disputes between Hyrcanus, the illegitimate son
of Joseph the collector, and his elder and legiti-
mate brothers, on the subject of the division of
the property left by their father. The high-
priest Onias, after some hesitation, seems to
have taken the part of Hyrcanus, whose wealth
— after the suicide of Hyrcanus (about B.C. 180)
— be secured in the treasury of the Temple.
The office of governor (wpoordrijOof the Temple
was now held by one Simon, who is supposed to
have been one of the legitimate brothers of
Hyrcanus. By this man Seleucus was induced
to send Heliodorus to Jerusalem to get posses-
sion of the treasure of Hyrcanus. How the at-
tempt failed, and the money was for the time
preserved from pillage, may be seen in 2 Mace,
iii. 24-30, and in the well-known picture of
Rnffaelle Sanzio.
In 175 Seleucus Soter died, and the kingdom
of Syria came to his brother, the infamous
Antiochus Epiphanes. His first act towards
Jerusalem was to sell the office of high-priest —
still filled by the good Onias III. — to Onias'
brother Joshua (2 Mace. iv. 7 ; Ant. xii. 5, § 1).
Greek manners had made many a step at Jeru-
salem, and the new high-priest was not likely
to discourage their further progress. His first
act was to Grecise his own name, and to become
"Jason;" his next to set up a gymnasium —
that is, a place where the young men of the
town were trained naked — to introduce the
Greek dress, Greek sports, and Greek appella-
tions. Mow (1 Mace i. 13, &c. ; 2 Mace. iv. 9,
12) for the first time we hear of an attempt to
efface the distinguishing mark of a Jew — again
to " become uncircumcised." The priests quickly
followed the example of their chief (2 Mace,
iv. 14), and the Temple service was neglected.
A special deputation of the youth of Jerusalem
— " Antiochians " they were now called — was
sent with offerings from the Temple of Jehovah
to the festival of Hercules at Tyre. In 172
Jerusalem was visited by Antiochus. He entered
the city at night by torch-light and amid the
acclamations of Jason and his party, and after a
short stay he returned ' (2 Mace. iv. 22). And
' This vtolt is omitted in 1 Mace. Josephus men-
tions it, but uys that it was marked by a great
slaughter of the Jewish party and by plunder (Ant.
JERUSALEM
now the treachery of Jason was to be requited
to him. His younger brother, also called Onias,
who had assumed the Greek name of Menelaus,
in his turn bought the high-priesthood from
Antiochus, and drove Jason out to the other
side of the Jordan (2 Mace iv. 26). To pay the
price of the office, Menelaus had laid hands on
the consecrated plate of the Temple. This be-
came known, and a riot was the consequence
(2 Mace. iv. 32, 39, 40).
During the absence of Antiochus in Egypt,
Jason suddenly appeared before Jerusalem with
a thousand men, and whether by the fury of his
attack, or from his having friends in the city,
he entered the walls, drove Menelaus into the
citadel, and slaughtered the citizens without
mercy. Jason seems to have failed to obtain
any of the valuables of the Temple, and shortly
after retreated beyond Jordan, where he miser-
ably perished (2 Mace v. 7-10). But the news
of these tumults reaching Antiochus on his way
from Egypt brought him again to Jerusalem
(B.C. 170). He appears to have entered the city
without much difficulty.' An indiscriminate
massacre of the adherents of Ptolemy followed,
and then a general pillage of the contents oi
the Temple. Under the guidance of Menelaus,
Antiochus went into the Sanctuary, and took
from thence the golden altar, the candlestick,
the magnificent table of shewbread, and all the
vessels and utensils, with 1800 talents out of
the treasury. These things occupied three days.
He then quitted for Antioch, carrying off, besides
his booty, a large train of captives, and leaving,
as governor of the city, a Phrygian named
Philip, a man of a more savage disposition than
himself (1 Mace i. 20-24; 2 Mace. v. 11-22;
Joseph. Ant. xii. 5, § 3 ; B. J. i. 1, § 1). But
something worse was reserved for Jerusalem
than pillage, death, and slavery, worse than
even the pollution of the presence of this mon-
ster in the holy place of Jehovah. Nothing less
than the total extermination of the Jews was
resolved on, and in two years (B.C. 168) an army
was sent under Apollonius to carry the resolve
into effect. He waited till the Sabbath, and
then for the second time the entry was made
while the people were engaged in their devo-
tions. Another great slaughter took place ; the
city was now in its turn pillaged and burnt, and
the walls destroyed (2 Mace. v. 24-26).
The foreign garrison took up its quarters in
what had from the earliest times been the
strongest part of the place — the ancient city
of David (1 Mace. i. 33, vii. 32), and built a
citadel on an eminence adjoining' the North
wall of the Temple, and so high as to overlook
it (Ant. xii. 5, § 4). This hill was now fortified
with a very strong wall with towers, and within
it the garrison secured their booty, cattle, and
xii. 5, y 3). This, however, does not agree with the
festal character given to it In 2 Mace., and follow ed
above.
• There is a great discrepancy between the accounts of
1 Mace., 2 Mace., and Josephus.
' This may be inferred from many of the expressions
concerning this citadel ; but Josephus expressly uses
the word ««■«««> (Ant. xiL 9, $ 3), and says It was on
an eminence in the lower city, i.e. tbe Eastern hill,
as contradistinguished from the Western hill or upper
city.
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
other provisions, the women of their prisoners,
and a certain number of the inhabitant! of the
city friendly to them.
Antiochus next issued an edict to compel
heathen worship in all hie dominions, and one
Athenaeus was sent to Jerusalem to enforce
compliance. As a first step, the Temple was
reconsecrated to Zeus Olympius (2 Hacc. vi. 2).
The worship of idols (1 Mace. i. 47), with its
loose and obscene accompaniments (2 Mace. vi. 4),
was introduced there — an altar to Zeus was set
up on the brazen altar of Jehovah, pig's-flesh
offered thereon, and the broth or liquor sprinkled
about the Temple (Joseph. Ant. xiii. 8, § 2).
And while the Jews were compelled not only to
tolerate, but to take an active part in these
foreign abominations, the observance of their
own rites and ceremonies — sacrifice, the sabbath,
circumcision — was absolutely forbidden. Many
no doubt complied (Ant. xii. 5, § 4) ; bnt many
also resisted, and the torments inflicted, and the
heroism displayed in the streets of Jerusalem at
this time, almost surpass belief. But though a
severe, it was a wholesome discipline, and under
its rough teaching the old spirit of the people
began to revive.
The battles of the Maccabees were fought on
the outskirts of the country, and it was not till
the defeat of Lysias at Bethzur that they
thought it safe to venture into the recesses of
the central hills. Then they immediately turned
their steps to Jerusalem. On ascending the
Mount Moriah, and entering the quadrangle of
the Temple, a sight met their eyes, which proved
at once how complete had been the desecration,
and how short-lived the triumph of the idola-
ters ; for while the altar still stood there with
its abominable burden, the gates in ashes, the
priests' chambers in ruins, and, as they reached
the inner court, the very sanctuary itself open
and empty — yet the place had been so long
disused that the whole precincts were full of
vegetation, " the shrubs grew in the courts as
in a forest." The precincts were at once
cleansed, the polluted altar put aside, a new one
constructed, and the holy vessels of the sanc-
tuary replaced, and on the third anniversary of
the desecration — the 25th of the month Chisleu,
in the year B.C. 165 — the Temple was dedicated
with a feast which lasted for eight days.* After
this the outer wall of the Temple * was very
much strengthened (1 Mace. iv. 60), and it was
in fact converted into a fortress (cp. vi. 26,
61, 62), and occupied by a garrison (iv. 61).
The Acra was still held by the soldiers of An-
tiochus. One of the first acts of Judas on enter-
ing the Temple had been to detach a party to
watch them, and two years later (B.C. 163) so
frequent had their sallies and annoyances become
— particularly an attempt on one occasion to
confine the worshippers within the Temple en-
closure ' (1 Mace. vi. 18) — that Judas collected
• The Feast of the Dedication Is alluded to in John x.
22. Chisleu was the mid-winter month.
■In 1 Hacc. Iv. 80 It Is said that they builded up
" Mount Sion ; " but in the parallel passages, vi. 7, 26,
the word used is " sanctuary," or rather " holy places/'
ayuurfia. The meaning probably is the entire enclosure.
Josephus (Ant. xii. 1, $ 1) says " the city."
' trvy/cXifavm r&r 'ItrpaqK KVKjup tuv ayimv. The
B. V., "shut up the Israelites round about the sanc-
JEEUSALEM
1611
his people to take it, and began a siege with
banks and engines. In the meantime Antiochus
had died (b.c. 164), and was succeeded by his
son Antiochus Eupator, a youth. The garrison
in the Acra, finding themselves pressed by
Judas, managed to communicate with the king,
who brought an army from Antioch and at-
tacked Bethzur, one of the fortified positions
of the Maccabees. This obliged Judas to give
up the siege of the Acra, and to march south-
wards against the intruder (1 Mace. vi. 32;
Joseph. Ant. xii. 9, § 4). Antiochos's army
proved too much for his little force ; his brother
Eleazar was killed, and he was compelled to fall
back on Jerusalem and shut himself up in the
Temple. Thither Lysias, Antiochus's general —
and later, Antiochus himself — followed him
(vi. 48, 51, 57, 62) and commenced an active
siege. How long it lasted we are not informed,
but the provisions of the besieged were rapidly
becoming exhausted, and famine had driven
many to make their escape (vi. 54), when news
of an insurrection elsewhere induced Lysias to
advise Antiochus to offer terms to Judas (vi.
55-58). The terms, which were accepted by
him, were liberty to live after their own laws,
and immunity to their persons and their fortress.
On inspection, however, Antiochus found the
place so strong that he refused to keep this part
of the agreement ; and before he left, the walls
were pulled down (vi. 62 ; Ant. xii. 9, § 7).
Judas apparently remained in Jerusalem for
the next twelve months. During this time
Antiochus and Lysias had been killed, and the
throne seized by Demetrius (B.C. 162), and the
new king had dispatched Bacchides and Alcimus,
the then high-priest — a man of Grecian prin-
ciples — with a large force, to Jerusalem. Judas
was again within the walls of the Temple, which
in the interval he must have rebuilt. He could
not be tempted forth, but sixty of the Assideans
were treacherously murdered by the Syrians,
who then moved off, first to a short distance
from the city, and finally back to Antioch
(1 Mace. vii. 1-25 ; Ant. xii. 10, §§ 1-3). Deme-
trius then sent another army under Nicanor, but
with no better success. An action was fought
at Caphar-salama, an unknown place not far
from the city. Judas was victorious, and Nicanor
escaped and took refuge in the Acra at Jeru-
salem. Shortly after Nicanor came down from
the fortress and paid a visit to the Temple, where
he insulted the priests (1 Mace. vii. 33, 34;
2 Mace xiv. 31-33). He also caused the death
of P.azis, one of the elders of Jerusalem, a man
greatly esteemed, who killed himself in the
most horrible manner, rather than fall into
his hands (2 Mace. xiv. 37-46). He then pro-
cured some reinforcements, met Judas at Adasa,
now Kh. 'Adaseh, 8 miles south of Gophna, was-
killed, and his army thoroughly beaten. Nica-
nor's head and right arm were brought to Jeru-
salem. The head was nailed on the wall of the
Acra, and the hand and arm on a conspicuous
spot facing the Temple (2 Mace. xv. 30-35),
where their memory was perhaps perpetuated
in the name of the gate Nicanor, the eastern
entrance to the Great Court (Reland, Antiq.
i. 9, 4).
tuary," does not here give the sense, which seems to be
as above.
Digitized by
Google
1612
JERUSALEM
The death of Judas took place in 161. After
it Bacchides and Alcimus again established them-
selves at Jerusalem in the Acra (Joseph. Ant. xiii.
1, § S), and, in the intervals of their contests
with Jonathan and Simon, added much to its
fortifications, furnished it with provisions, and
confined there the children of the chief people
of Judaea as hostages for their good behaviour
(1 Mace. ix. 50-53). In the second month
(May) of 160 the high-priest Alcimus began to
make some alterations in the Temple, apparently
doing away with the enclosure between one
court and another, and in particular demolishing
some wall or building to which peculiar sanctity
was attached as •' the work of the prophets "
(1 Mace. ix. 54). The object of these alterations
was doubtless to lessen the distinction between
Jew and Gentile. But they had hardly been
commenced before he was taken suddenly ill and
died.
Bacchides now returned to Antioch, and Jeru-
salem remained without molestation for a period
of seven years. It does not appear that the
Maccabees resided there ; part of the time they
were at Michmash, in the entangled country
about 8 miles north of Jerusalem, and part of
the time fighting with Bacchides at Beth-basi
in the Jordan Valley near Jericho. All this
time the Acra was held by the Macedonian
garrison {Ant. xiii. 4, § 9) and the malcontent
Jews, who still held the hostages taken from
the other part of the community (1 Mace, x. 6).
In the year 153 Alexander Balas, the real or
pretended son of Antiochus Epiphanes, having
landed at Ptolemais, Demetrius sent a com-
munication to Jonathan with the view of keeping
him attached to his cause (1 Mace. x. 1, &c. ;
Ant. xiii. 2, § 1). Upon this Jonathan moved
up to Jerusalem, rescued the hostages from the
Acra, and began to repair the city. The de-
structions of the last few years were remedied,
the wall round Mount Zion particularly being
rebuilt in the most substantial manner, as a
regular fortification (x. 11). From this time
forward Jonathan received privileges and pro-
fessions of confidence from both sides. First,
Alexander authorized him to assume the office of
high-priest, which had not been filled up since
the death of Alcimus (cp. Ant. xx. 10, § 1).
This he took at the Feast of Tabernacles, in the
autumn of the year 153, and at the same time
collected soldiers and ammunition (1 Mace. x. 21).
Next, Demetrius, amongst other immunities
granted to the country, recognised Jerusalem
and its environs as again "holy and free,"
relinquished all right to the Acra — which was
henceforward to be subject to the high-priest
(x. 31, 32)— endowed the Temple with the
revenues of Ptolemais, and also with 15,000
shekels of silver charged in other places, and
ordered not only the payment of the same sum,
in regard to former years, but the release of an
annual tax of 5,000 shekels hitherto exacted
from the priests. Lastly, he authorized the
repairs of the holy place, and the building
and fortifying of the walls of Jerusalem to
•be charged to the royal accounts, and gave
the privilege of sanctuary to all persons, even
mere debtors, taking refuge in the Temple or in
its precincts (1 Maccx. 31, 32, 39-45).
The contentions between Alexander and Deme-
trius, in which he was actively engaged, pre-
JERUSALEM
vented Jonathan from taking advantage of these
grants till the year 145. He then began to
invest the Acra (xi. 20 ; Ant. xiii. 4, § 9), but,
owing partly to the strength of the place, and
partly to the constant dissensions abroad, the
siege made little progress during fully two
years. It was obvious that no progress could
be made so long as the inmates of the Acra
could get into the city or the country, and there
buy provisions (xiii. 49), as hitherto was the
case; and, therefore, at the first opportunity,
Jonathan built a wall or bank at the base of the
citadel-hill, so as to cut off all communication
with the city, and completed the investment on
all sides (xii. 36 ; cp. xiii. 49). At the same
time the wall of the Temple enclosure was
repaired and strengthened, especially on the
east side, towards the valley of Kedron. In the
meantime Jonathan was killed at Ptolemais, and
Simon succeeded him both as chief and as high-
priest (xiii. 8, 42). The investment of the
Acra proved successful, but three years still
elapsed before this enormously strong place
could be reduced, and at last the garrison capi-
tulated only from famine (xiii. 49 ; cp. v. 21).
Simon entered it on the 23rd of the 2nd month
B.C. 142. The fortress was then entirely de-
molished, and the eminence on which it stood
lowered, so that the Temple might be higher
than it. The last operation occupied three
years (Ant. xiii. 6, § 7). The valley between
Acra and the " third hill " was probably filled
up at this time (B. J. v. 4, § 1). A fort was
then built on the north side of, and in clow
proximity to,* the Temple, so as directly to com-
mand the site of the Acra, and here Simon and
his immediate followers resided (xiii. 52). This
was the Baris — so called after the Hebrew word
Birah — which, after having been rebuilt by Herod
and called Antonia, became so prominent a
feature of the city. Simon's other achieve-
ments, and his alliance with the Romans, most
be reserved for another place. We hear of no
further occurrences at Jerusalem during his life
except the placing of two brass tablets, com-
memorating his exploits on Mount Zion, in the
precinct of the sanctuary (xiv. 27, 48). In 135
Simon was murdered at Docus, 'in Dik, near
Jericho, and then all was again confusion in
Jerusalem (xvi. 15, 16).
One of the first steps of his son John Hyrcanus
was to secure both the city and the Temple
(Joseph. Ant. xiii. 7, § 4). The people were
favourable to him, and repulsed Ptolemy, Simon's
murderer, when he attempted to enter (Joseph.
Ant. xiii. 7, § 4 ; B. J. i. 2, § 3). Hyrcanus
was made high-priest. Shortly after this,
Antiochus Sidetes, king of Syria, brought an
army into Southern Palestine, ravaged and
burnt the country, and attacked Jerusalem. To
invest the city, and cut off all chance of escape,
it was encircled by a girdle of seven camps.
The active operations of the siege were carried
on as usual at the north, where the ground
within and without the walls was on nearly the
same level. Here a hundred towers of attack
were erected, each of three stories, from which
projectiles were cast into the city, and a iouble
a It was perhaps joined to tie north wall of the
Temple (»./.!. «.}«)•
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
ditch, broad and deep, was excavated before
them to protect them from the suddea sallies
which the besieged were constantly making. On
one occasion the wall of the city was under-
mined, the supporting timber burnt, and thus a
temporary breach effected (5 Mace. xxi. 5). For
the first and last time we hear of a want of
water inside the city, but from this a seasonable
rain relieved them. In other respects the be-
sieged seem to have been very well off. Hyr-
canus however, with more prudence than hu-
manity, anticipating a long siege, turned out of
the city all the infirm and non-fighting people.
The Feast of Tabernacles had now arrived, and,
at the request of Hyrcanus, Antiochus, with a
moderation which gained him the title of " the
Pious," agreed to a truce. This led to further
negotiations, which ended in the siege being
relinquished. Antiochus wished to place a garri-
son in the city, but this the late experience of
the Jews forbade, and hostages and a payment
were substituted. The money for this subsidy
was obtained by Hyrcanus from the sepulchre of
David, the outer chamber of which he is said to
have opened, and to have taken 3000 talents of
the treasure which had been buried with David
and had hitherto escaped undiscovered (Ant. vii.
15, § 3 ; xiii. 8, § 4; B. J. i. 2, § 5). After
Antiochus's departure Hyrcanus carefully re-
paired the damage done to the walls (5 Mace,
xxi. 18) ; and it may have been at this time that
he enlarged the Baris or fortress adjoining the
Temple, which had been founded by his father,
and which he used for his own residence and for
the custody of his sacred vestments worn as
high-priest (Joseph. Ant. xviii. 4, § 3).
During the rest of his long and successful
reign John Hyrcanus resided at Jerusalem, ably
administering the government from thence, and
regularly fulfilling the duties of the high-priest
(see 5 Mace, xxiii. 3 ; Joseph. Ant. xiii. 10, § 3).
The great sects of Pharisees and Sadducees first
appear in prominence at this period. Hyrcanus,
as a Maccabee, had belonged to the Pharisees,
but an occurrence which happened near the end
of his reign caused him to desert them and join
the Sadducees, and even to persecute his former
friends (see the story in Joseph. Ant. xiii. 10,
§ 5; 5 Mace. xxv. 7-11; Milman, ii. 73). He
died in peace and honour (Ant. xiii. 10, § 7).
There is no mention of his burial, but it is
nearly certain that the " monument of John the
high-priest," which stood near the north-west
corner of the city and is so frequently referred
to in the account of the final siege, was his
tomb; at least no other high-priest of the
name of John is mentioned. [Hiqh-peiest,
p. 1368.]
Hyrcanus was succeeded (B.C. 107) by his son
Aristobulus.* Like his predecessors, he was
high-priest ; but, unlike them, he assumed the
title as well as the power of a king (Joseph.
Ant. xiii. 11, § 1 ; 5 Mace, xxvii. 1> Aristo-
bulus resided in the Baris (Ant. xiii. 11, § 2).
A passage, or vaulted gateway, dark and sub-
terraneous (B. J. i. 3, § 3), led from the Baris
to the Temple ; this passage, or gateway, was
• The adoption of Greek names by the family of the
Maccabees, originally the great opponents of everything
Greek, shows how much and how unconsciously the
Jews were now departing from their ancient istandarde.
JERUSALEM
1613
called "Strato's Tower," and here Antigonus,
brother of Aristobulus, was murdered by his
order." Aristobulus died very tragically im-
mediately after, having reigned but one year.
His brother Alexander Jannaeus (b.o. 105), who
succeeded him, was mainly engaged in wars at a
distance from Jerusalem, returning thither how-
ever in the intervals (Ant. xiii. 12, § 3, ad fin.).
About the year 95 the animosities of the Phari-
sees and Sadducees came to an alarming ex-
plosion. Like his father, Alexander belonged to
the Sadducees. The Pharisees had never for-
given Hyrcanus for having deserted them, and
at the Feast of Tabernacles, as the king was
officiating, they invited the people to pelt him
with the citrons which they carried in the
feast (Joseph. Ant. xiii. 13, § 5; cp. 10, § 5;
Reland, Ant. iv. 5, § 9). Alexander retaliated,
and 6,000 persons were at that time killed
by his orders. But the dissensions lasted for six
years, and no fewer than 50,000 are said to have
lost their lives (Ant. xiii. 13, § 5; 5 Mace,
xxix. 2). These severities made him extremely
unpopular with both parties, and led to their
inviting the aid of Demetrius Euchaerus, king of
Syria, against him. The actions between them
were fought at a distance from Jerusalem ; but
the city did not escape a share in the horrors of
war ; for when, after some fluctuations, Alex-
ander returned successful, he crucified publicly
800 of his opponents, and had their wives and
children butchered before their eyes, while he
and his concubines feasted in sight of the whole
scene (Ant. xiii. 14, § 2). Such an iron sway
as this was enough to crush all opposition, and
Alexander reigned till the year 79 without
farther disturbances. He died while besieging
a fortress called Ragaba, somewhere beyond
Jordan. He is commemorated as having, at the
time of his disputes with the people, erected a
wooden screen round the altar and the sanctuary
(vain), as far as the parapet of the priests'
court, to prevent access to him as he was
ministering • (Ant. xiii. 13, § 5). The "monu-
ment of king Alexander" was doubtless his
tomb. It stood somewhere near, but outside, the
north wall of the Temple (B. J. v. 7, § 3). In
spite of opposition the Pharisees were now by
far the most powerful party in Jerusalem, and
Alexander had therefore before his death in-
structed his queen, Alexandra — whom he left to
succeed him with two sons — to commit herself
to them. She did so, and the consequence was
that though the feuds between the two great
parties continued at their height, yet the go-
vernment, being supported by the strongest,
was always secure. The elder of the two sons,
Hyrcanus, was made high-priest, and Aristobulus
had the command of the army. The queen
lived till the year 70. On her death, Hyrcanus
attempted to take the crown, but was opposed
by his brother, to whom in three months he
yielded its possession, Aristobulus becoming
•> For the story of his death, and the accomplishment
of the prediction that, he should die In Strato's Tower—
i.t. Caesarca— compare the well-known story of the death
of Henry TV. in Jerusalem, i.e. the Jerusalem Chamber
at Westminster.
• Josephos's words are not very clear: — Rpv^uerov
(vAii'DP vrpi roy pv/ihr iuu jby vabv {laAAoperoc ft^XP 1
tov Spiyxoi, tis 6r nitmt ffiv rote iiptiav «un«Vai.
Digitized by
Google
1614
JEBUSALEM
king in the year 69. Before Alexandra's death
she had imprisoned the family of Aristobulus in
the Baria (£. J. i. 5, § 4). There too Hyrcanus
took refuge during the negotiations with his
brother about the kingdom, and from thence
had attacked and vanquished his opponents who
were collected in the Temple (Ant. liv. 1, § 2).
Joseph us here speaks of it as the Acropolis,* and
(xiii. 16, § 5) as being above the Temple (tnrlp
rod itpov). After the reconciliation Aristobulus
took possession of the royal palace (r& fhurlKtia).
This can hardly be other than the " palace of
the Asmoneans," of which Josephus gives some
notices at a subsequent part of the history (Ant.
xx. 8, § 11 ; B. J. ii. 16, §3). From these it
appears that it was situated west of the Temple,
on the east side of the npper city (the modern
Zion), immediately facing the Temple enclosure,
and at the west end of the bridge which led from
the Temple to the Xystus.
The brothers soon quarrelled again, when
Hyrcanus called to his assistance Aretas, king
of Damascus. Before this new enemy Aristo-
bulus fled to Jerusalem and took refuge within
the fortifications of the Temple. And now was
witnessed the strange anomaly of the high-priest
in alliance with a heathen king besieging the
priests in the Temple. Suddenly a new actor
appears on the scene ; the siege is interrupted
and eventually raised by the interference of
Scaurus, one of Pompey's lieutenants, to whom
Aristobulus paid 400 talents for the relief.
This was in the year 65. Shortly after Pom-
pey himself arrived at Damascus. Both the
brothers came before him in person (Ant. xiv.
3, § 2), and were received with moderation and
civility. Aristobulus could not make up his
mind to submit, and after a good deal of shuffling
betook himself to Jerusalem and prepared for
resistance. Pompey advanced by way of Jericho.
As he approached Jerusalem, Aristobulus, who
found the city too much divided for effectual
resistance, met him and offered a large sum of
money and surrender. Pompey sent forward
Gabinius to take possession of the place ; but
the bolder party among the adherents of
Aristobulus had meantime gained the ascendency,
and he found the gates closed. Pompey on this
threw the king into chains and advanced on
Jerusalem. Hyrcanus was in possession of the
city and received the invader with open arms.
The Temple on the other hand was held by the
party of Aristobulus, which included the priests
(xiv. 4, § 3). They cut off the bridges and
causeways which connected the Temple with the
town, and prepared for an obstinate defence.
Pompey put a garrison into the palace of the
Asmoneans, and into other positions in the upper
city, and fortified the houses adjacent to the
Temple. The north side was the most practic-
able, and there he commenced his attack. But
even there the Temple was protected by an
artificial ditch in addition to a very deep natural
valley, above which rose a wall defended by
lofty towers (Ant. xiv. 4, § 2; B.J. i. 7, § 1).
Pompey appears to have stationed some part
of his force on the high ground south-west of
the city (Joseph. B. J. v. 12, § 2), but he him-
* He also here applies to it the term ^povpiov (Ant.
xiii. 16, $ 5 ; B. J. 1. 5, $ 1), which he commonly uses
for smaller fortresses.
JEBUSALEM
self commanded in person at the north. The
first efforts of his soldiers were devoted to filling
up the ditch * and the valley, and to constructing
the banks on which to place the military engines,
for which purpose they cut down all the timber
in the environs. These had in the meantime
been sent for from Tyre, and as soon as the
banks were sufficiently raised the balistae were
set to work to throw stones over the wall into
the crowded courts of the Temple ; and lofty
towers were erected, from which to discharge
arrows and other missiles. But these opera-
tions were not carried on without great difficulty,
for the wall of the Temple was thronged with
slingers, who most seriously interfered with the
progress of the Romans. Pompey, however,
remarked that on the seventh day the Jews
regularly desisted from fighting (Ant xiv. 4,
§ 2 ; Strab. xvi. p. 763), and this afforded the
Romans a great advantage, for it gave them the
opportunity of moving the engines and towers
nearer the walls, filling up the trenches, adding
to the banks, and in other ways making good
the damage of the past six days without the
slightest molestation. In fact Josephus gives it
as his opinion, that but for the opportunity
thus afforded, the necessary works never could
have ! been completed. In the Temple itself,
however fierce the attack, the daily sacrifices
and other ceremonials, down to the minutest
detail, were never interrupted, and the priests
pursued their duties undeterred, even when men
were struck down near them by the stones and
arrows of the besiegers. At the end of three
months the besiegers had approached so close to
the wall that the battering-rams could be
worked, and a breach was effected in the largest
of the towers, through which the Romans
entered, and, after an obstinate resistance and
loss of life, remained masters of the Temple.
Many Jews were killed by their countrymen of
Hyrcanus's party who had entered with the
Romans ; some in their confusion set fire to the
houses which abutted on a portion of the
Temple walls, and perished in the flames, while
others threw themselves over the precipices
(B. J. i 7, § 4). The whole number slain is
reported by Josephus at 12,000 (Ant xiv. 4, §4).
During the assault the priests maintained the
same calm demeanour which they had displayed
during the siege, and were actually slain st
their duties while pouring their drink-offerings
and burning their incense (B. J. i. 7, § 4). It
should be observed that in the account of this
siege the Baris is not once mentioned; the
attack was on the Temple alone, instead of on
the fortress, as in Titus's siege. The inference
is that at this time it was either in the hands
of the followers of Hyrcanus, or was a small
and unimportant adjunct to the main fortifica-
tions of the Temple.
Pompey and many of his people explored the
recesses of the Temple, and the distress of the
Jews was greatly aggravated by their holy
places being thus exposed to intrusion and
profanation (B. J. i. 7, § 6). In the sanctuary
were found the great golden vessels — the table
of shewbread, the candlestick, the censers, and
other articles proper to that place. But what
• The sixe of the ditch is sjlven by Strabo as «0 to*
deep and 150 wide (xvi. p. 163).
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
moat astonished the intruders, on passing beyond
the sanctuary, and exploring the total darkness
of the Holy of Holies, was to find in the
adytum neither image nor shrine. It evidently
caused much remark (" inde vulgatum "), and
was the one fact regarding the Temple which
the historian thought worthy of preservation —
" nulla intus deum effigie ; vacuam sedem et
inania arcana " (Tacitus, Hist. v. 9). Pompey's
conduct on this occasion does him great credit.
He left the treasures thus exposed to his view —
even the spices and the money in the treasury —
untouched ; and his examination over, he ordered
the Temple to be cleansed and purified from the
bodies of the slain, and the daily worship to be
resumed. Hyrcanus was continued in his high-
priesthood, but without the title of king (Ant.
xx. 10) ; a tribute was laid upon the city, the
walla were entirely demolished (jtaTcurxiaat
. ... ret TtixV irdjro, Strabo, xvi. p. 763), and
Pompey took his departure for Rome, carrying
with him Aristobulus, his sons Alexander and
Antigonns, and his two daughters. The Temple
was taken in the year 63, in the 3rd month
(Sivan), on the day of a great fast (Ant. xiv. 4,
§ 3) ; probably that for Jeroboam, which was
held on the 23rd of that month.
During the next few years nothing occurred
to affect Jerusalem, the struggles which de-
solated the unhappy Palestine during that time
having taken place away from its vicinity. In
56 it was made the seat of one of the five
senates or Sanhedrin, to which under the
constitution of Gabinius the civil power of the
country was for a time committed. Two years
afterwards (B.O. 54) the rapacious Crassus
visited the city on his way to Parthia, and
plundered it not only of the money which
Pompey had spared, but of a considerable
treasure accumulated from the contributions of
Jews throughout the world, in all a snm of
10,000 talents, or about 2,000,000/. sterling.
The pillage was aggravated by the fact of his
having first received from the priest in charge
of the treasure a moat costly beam of solid gold,
on condition that everything else should be
apared (Ant. xiv. 7, § 1).
During this time Hyrcanus remained at
Jerusalem, acting under the advice of Antipater
the Iduinean, his chief minister. The assistance
which they rendered to Hithridates, the ally of
Julius Caesar, in the Egyptian campaign of
48-47, induced Caesar to confirm Hyrcanus in
the high-priesthood, and to restore him to the
civil government under the title of Ethnarch
(Ant. xiv. 10). At the same time he rewarded
Antipater with the procuratorship of Judaea
(Ant. xiv. 8, § 5), and allowed the walls of the
city to be rebuilt (Ant. xiv. 10, § 5). The year
47 is also memorable for the first appearance of
Antipater's son Herod in Jerusalem, when, a
youth of fifteen (or more probably ' twenty-five),
he characteristically overawed the assembled
Sanhedrin. In B.C. 43 Antipater was murdered
in the palace of Hyrcanus by one Malichus, who
was very soon after himself slain by Herod (Ant.
xiv. 11, §§ 4, 6). The tumults and revolts con-
sequent on these murders kept Jerusalem in
commotion for some time (B. J. i. 12). But a
more serious danger was at hand. Antigonus,
JERUSALEM
1615
the younger and now the only surviving son of
Aristobulus, suddenly appeared in the country
supported by a Parthian army. Many of the
Jews of the district about Carmel and Joppa'
flocked to him, and he instantly made for
Jerusalem, giving out that his only object was
to pay a visit of devotion to the Temple (5 Mace.
xlix. 5). So sudden was his approach, that he
got into the city and reached the king's palace
without resistance. Here however he was met
by Hyrcanus and Phasaelus (Herod's brother)
with a strong party of soldiers. A fight ensued
in the market-place, which ended in Antigonns
being driven over the bridge into the Temple,
where he was constantly harassed and annoyed
by Hyrcanus and Phasaelus from the city.
Pentecost arrived, and the city and the im-
mediate environs of the Temple were crowded
with peasants and others who had come up to
keep the feast. Herod too arrived, and with a
small party occupied the palace. Phasaelus
kept the wall. Some of Antigonus' people seem
(though the account is very obscure) to have
got into the suburbs to the north of the city-
Here Herod and Phasaelus attacked, dispersed,
and cut them up. At the earnest request of
Antigonus, Pacorus, the Parthian general, and
500 horse were admitted, ostensibly to mediate.
The result was, that Phasaelus and Hyrcanus
were outwitted, and Herod overpowered, and
the Parthians got possession of the place. Anti-
gonus was made king, and as Hyrcanus knelt a
suppliant before him, the new king — with all
the wrongs which his father and himself had
suffered full in his mind — bit off the ears of his
uncle, so as effectually to incapacitate him from
ever again taking the high-priesthood. Pha-
saelus killed himself in prison. Herod alone
escaped (Ant. xiv. 13).
Thus did Jerusalem (B.C. 40) find itself in the
hands of the Parthians.
In a few months Herod returned from Rome
king of Judaea, and in the beginning of 39
appeared before Jerusalem with a force of
Romans, commanded by Silo, and pitched his
camp on the west side of the city (B. J. i. 15,
§ 5). Other occurrences, however, called him
away from the siege at this time, and for more
than two years he was occupied elsewhere. In
the meantime Antigonus held the city, and had
dismissed his Parthian allies. In 37 Herod
appeared again, now driven to fury by the
death of bis favourite brother, Joseph, whose
dead body Antigonus had shamefully mutilated
(B. J. i. 17, § 2). He came, as Pompey had
done, from Jericho, and, like Pompey, he pitched
his camp and made his attack on the north aide
of the Temple. The general circumstances of
the siege aeem also very much to have resembled
the former, except that there were now ap-
parently two walls north of the Temple, and
that the driving of mines was a great feature in
the siege operations (B. J. i. 18, § 1 ; Ant. xiv.
16, § 2). The Jews distinguished themselves
by the same reckless courage as before ; and
although it is not expressly said that the services
of the Temple were carried on with such minute
regularity as when they excited the astonish-
' See the reasons urged by Prideaux, ad toe
s At that time, and even as late as the Crusades,
called the .Woodland or the Forest country (Apvpoi.
Joseph, int. xiv. 13, } 3>
Digitized by
Google
1616
JERUSALEM
ment of Pompey, yet we may infer it from the
fact that, daring the hottest of the operations,
the besieged desired a short trace in which to
bring in animals for sacrifice (Ant. xiv. 16, § 2).
In one respect — the factions which raged among
the besieged — this siege somewhat foreshadows
that of Titns.
For a short time after the commencement of
the operations Herod absented himself for his
marriage at Samaria with Mariamne. On his
return he was joined by Sosius, the Roman
governor of Syria, with a force of from 50,000
to 60,000 men, and the siege was then resumed
in earnest (Ant. xiv. 16).
The first wall was taken in forty days, and
the second in fifteen more. k Then the outer
court of the Temple and the lower city were
taken, and the Jews were driven into the inner
parts of the Temple and to the upper city. At
this point some delay seems to have arisen, as
the siege is distinctly said to have occupied in
all five months (B. J. i. 18, § 2 ; see also Ant.
xiv. 16, § 2). At last, losing patience, Herod
allowed the place to be stormed ; and an indis-
criminate massacre ensued, especially in the
crowded narrow streets, which was only termi-
nated at his argent and repeated solicitations.'
Herod and his men entered first, and, in his
anxiety to prevent any plunder and desecration
of the Temple, he himself hastened to the
entrance of the sanctuary, and there, standing
with a drawn sword in his hand, threatened to
cut down any of the Roman soldiers who at-
tempted to enter.
Through all this time, the Baris had remained
impregnable : there Antigonus had taken refuge,
and thence, when the whole of the city was in
the power of the conquerors, he descended, and
in an abject manner craved his life from Sosius.
It -was granted, bat only to be taken from him
later at the order of Antony.
Antigonus was thus disposed of, but the As-
monean party was still strong both in numbers
and influence. Herod's first care was to put it
down. The chiefs of the party, including the
whole of the Sanhedrin but two, k were put to
death, and their property, with that of others
whose lives were spared, was seized. The appoint-
ment of the high-priest was the next considera-
tion. Hyrcanus returned from Parthia soon
after the conclusion of the siege ; but even if his
mutilation had not incapacitated him for the
office, it would have been unwise to appoint a
member of the popular family. Herod therefore
bestowed the office (B.C. 36) on one Ananel, a
former adherent of his and a Babylonian Jew
(Ant. xv. 3, § IX a man without interest or
influence in the politics of Jerusalem (xv. 2, § 4).
Ananel was soon displaced through the machi-
nations of Alexandra, mother of Herod's wife
Mariamne, who prevailed on him to appoint her
son Ariatobulus, a youth of sixteen. But the
k These periods probably date from the return of
Herod with Soslns, and the resumption of more active
hostilities.
1 True, be was one of the same race who at a former
sack of Jerusalem had cried, " Down with it, down with
It even to the ground I " But timed had altered since
then.
k These two were Hillel and Sbammal, renowned in
the Jewish literature as the founders of the two great
rival schools of doctrine and practice.
JERUSALEM
young Asmonean was too warmly received by
the people (B. J. i. 22, § 2) for Herod to allow
him to remain. Hardly had he celebrated hit
first feast before he was murdered at Jericho,
and then Ananel resumed the office (Ant. it.
3, § 3).
The intrigues and tragedies of the next thirty
years are too complicated and too long to be
treated of here. A general sketch of the events
of Herod's life will be found under his name,
and other opportunities will occur for noticing
them. Moreover, a great part of these occur-
rences have no special connexion with Jerusalem,
and therefore have no place in a brief notice
like the present of those things which more
immediately concern the city.
In many respects this period was a repetition
of that of the Maccabees and Antiochus Epi-
phanes. True, Herod was more politic, and more
prudent, and also probably had more sympathy
with the Jewish character than Antiochus. But
the spirit of stern resistance to innovation and
of devotion to the Law of Jehovah burnt no less
fiercely in the breasts of the people than it had
done before ; and it is curious to remark how
every attempt on Herod's part to introduce foreign
customs was met by ontbreak, and how futile
were all the benefits which he conferred both
on the temporal and ecclesiastical welfare of the
people when these obnoxious intrusions were in
question. 1
In the year 34 the city was probably visited
by Cleopatra, who, having accompanied Antony
to the Euphrates, was now returning to Egypt
through her estates at Jericho (Ant. xv. 4,
§2).
In the spring of 31, the year of the battle of
Actium, Judaea was visited by an earthquake,
the effects of which appear to have been indeed
tremendous : 10,000 (Ant. xv. 5, § 2) or, ac-
cording to another account (B. J. i. 19, § 3),
20,000 persons were killed by the fall of build-
ings, and an immense quantity of cattle. The
panic at Jerusalem was very severe ; but it was
calmed by the arguments of Herod, then depart-
ing to a campaign on the east of Jordan for the
interests of Cleopatra.
The following year was distinguished by the
death of Hyrcanus, who, though more than
eighty years old, was killed by Herod, ostensibly
for a treasonable correspondence with the Ara-
bians, but really to remove the last remnant of
the Asmonean race, who, in the fluctuations of
the times, and in Herod's absence from his
kingdom, might have been dangerous to him.
He appears to have resided at Jerusalem since
his return; and his accusation was brought
before the Sanhedrin (Ant. xv. 6, §§ 1-3).
Mariamne was put to death in the year 29,
whether in Jerusalem or in the Alexandreion, in
which she had been placed with her mother
when Herod left for his interview with Octavius,
is not certain. But Alexandra was now in
Jerusalem again; and in Herod's absence, ill, at
Samaria (Sebaste), she began to plot for pos-
session of the Baris, and of another fortress
situated in the city. The attempt, however,
cost her her life. The same year saw the execu-
1 The principles and results of the whole of this later
period axe ably summed up In Merivale's JSomant, ill.
ch. at.
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
tion of Costob&rus, hnsband of Herod's sister
Salome, and of several other persons of distinc-
tion (Ant. xv. 7, §§ 8-10).
Herod now began to encourage foreign practices
and usages, probably with the view of " counter-
balancing by a strong Grecian party the turbu-
lent and exclusive spirit of the Jews." Amongst
his acts of this description was the building of a
theatre ■ at Jerusalem (Ant. xv. 8, § 1). Of its
situation no information is given, nor have any
certain indications yet been discovered. It was
ornamented with the names of the victories of
Octavius, and with trophies of arms conquered
in the wars of Herod. Quinquennial games in
honour of Caesar were instituted on the most
magnificent scale, with racing, boxing, musical
contests, fights of gladiators and wild beasts.
The zealous Jews took fire at these innovations,
but their wrath was specially excited by the
trophies round the theatre at Jerusalem, which
they believed to contain figures of men. Even
when shown that their suspicions were ground-
less, they remained discontented. The spirit of
the old Maccabees was still alive, and Herod
only narrowly escaped assassination, while his
would-be assassins endured torments and death
with the greatest heroism. At this time he
occupied the old palace of the Asmoneans, which
crowned the eastern face of the upper city, and
stood adjoining the Xystus at the end of the
bridge which formed the communication between
the north part of the Temple and the upper city
(xv. 8, § 5; cp. xx. 8, § 11, and B. J. ii. 16, §3).
This palace was not yet so magnificent as he
afterwards made it, but it was already most
richly furnished (iv. 9, § 2). Herod had now
also completed the reconstruction of the Baris —
the fortress built by John Hyrcanus on the
foundations of that of Simon Maccabaeus — which
he had enlarged and strengthened at great ex-
pense, and named Antonia, after his friend Hark
Antony .■ A description of this celebrated for-
tress will be given in treating of the Temple,
with which, as reconstructed by Herod, it was
closely connected. It stood near the N.W.
corner of the Temple, with which it was con-
nected by cloisters. See Section III. p. 1643.
JERUSALEM
1617
°> The theatre is perhaps the hippodrome (B. J. il. 3,
1) which lay to the south of the Temple, and of which
there appear to be traces to the south of the M Double
Gate." The remains of a theatre, which faced the
Temple, have been found on the steep slope of a hill on
the right bank of the Wady en-Nar, below BW EyOb,
PSFQy. Stat. 1887, p. 161 ; but this can scarcely be one
of those mentioned by Jaeephus.
The amphitheatre " in the plain" mentioned in this
passage Is commonly supposed to have been also at
Jerusalem (Barclay, City of Great King, p. 174, and
others'); but this Is not a necessary inference. The
word motor is generally used of the plain of the Jordan
near Jericho, where we know there was an amphi-
theatre (B. J.\.33,t) 8). From another passage (£. J.
1. 21 , y 8) It appears there was one at Caesarea. Still the
comparatively level ground north of Jerusalem is called
" the plain " in B. J. ii. 1, y 3 ; and even as late as the
15th century it was apparently known as the Meid&n
(P. Fabri), or as the plain of the Sdkirah (Le Strange,
Palestine under the Moslems, p. 220).
• The name was probably not bestowed later than
B.C. 34 or 33 — the date of Herod's closest relations with
Antony: and we may therefore infer that the alterations
to the fortress had been at least seven or eight years in
progress.
BIBLE WOT VOL. 1.
The year 25— the next after the attempt on
Herod's life in the theatre — was one of great
misfortunes. A long drought, followed by un-
productive seasons, involved Judaea in famine,
and its usual consequence, a dreadful pestilence
(Ant. xv. 9, § 1). Herod took a noble and at
the same time a most politic course. He sent
to Egypt for corn, sacrificing for the purchase
the costly decorations of his palace and his
silver and gold plate. He was thus able to
make regular distribution of corn and clothing,
on an enormous scale, for the present necessities
of the people, as well as to supply seed for the
neit year's crop (Ant. xv. 9, § 2). The result
of this was to remove to a gTeat degree the
animosity occasioned by his proceedings in the
previous year.
In this year or the next Herod took another
wife, the daughter of an obscure priest of
Jerusalem named Simon. Shortly before the
marriage Simon was made high-priest in the
room of Joshua, or Jesus, the son of Phanens,
who appears to have succeeded Ananel, and was
now deposed to make way for Herod's future
father-in-law (Ant. xv. 9, § 3). It was probably
on the occasion of this marriage that he bnilt a
new and extensive palace* immediately adjoining
the old wall, at the north-west corner of the
upper city (jB. /. v. 4, § 4), about the spot now
occupied by the Citadel and Barracks, in which,
as memorials of his connexion with Caesar and
Agrippa, a large apartment — superior in size to
the Sanctuary of the Temple — was named after
each (B. J. i. 21, § 1). This palace was very
strongly fortified; it communicated with the
three great towers on the wall erected shortly
after, and it became the citadel, the special
fortress (toW eypoiowv, B. J. v. 5, § 8), of the
upper city. A road led to it from one of the
gates in the west wall of the Temple enclosure
(Ant. iv. 14, § 5). But all Herod's works in
Jerusalem were eclipsed by the rebuilding of
the Temple in more than its former extent and
magnificence. He announced his intention in
the year 19, probably when the people were
collected in Jerusalem at the Passover. At
first it met with some opposition from the fear
that what he had begun he would not be able
to finish, and the consequent risk involved in
demolishing the old Temple. This he overcame
by engaging to make all the necessary prepa-
rations before pulling down any part of the
existing buildings. Two years appear to have
been occupied in these preparations — among
which Joseph us mentions the teaching of some
of the priests and Levites to work as masons
and carpenters — and then the work began (xv.
11, § 2). Both Sanctuary and Cloisters — the
latter double in extent and far larger and loftier
than before— were built from the very founda-
tions (B. J. i. 21, § 1 ; Ant. xv. 11, § 3).
[Temple.] The Holy House itself (ra4s)-—!.e.
the Porch, Sanctuary, and Holy of Holies — was
finished in a year and a half (xv. 11, § 6). Its
completion on the anniversary of Herod's inau-
guration, B.c. 16, was celebrated by lavish sacri-
fices and a great feast. Immediately after this
Herod made a journey to Rome to fetch home
• The old palace of the Asmoneans continued to be
known as " the royal palace," to fiaattaior (Ant. xx. 8,
,11).
51
Digitized by
Google
1618
JEBUSALEM
his two ions, Alexander and Aristobnlus — with
whom he returned to Jerusalem, apparently in
the spring of 15 (Ant. xvi. 1, § 2). In the
autumn of this year he was visited by his friend
Marcos Agrippa, the favourite of Augustus.
Agrippa was well received by the people of
Jerusalem, whom he propitiated by a sacrifice of
a hundred oxen and by a magnificent entertain-
ment (Ant. xvi. 2, § 1). Herod left again in
the beginning of 14 to join Agrippa in the
Black Sea. On his return, in the autumn or
winter of the same year, he addressed the people
assembled at Jerusalem — for the Feast of Taber-
nacles — and remitted them a fourth of the
annual tax (xv. 2, § 4). Another journey was
followed by a similar assembly in the year 11,
at which time Herod announced Antipater as
his immediate successor (xvi. 4, § 6; B. J. i.
23, § 4).
About B.C. 9 — eight years from the com-
mencement — the court and cloisters of the
Temple were finished (Ant. xv. 11, § 5), and
the bridge leading to the south cloister was
doubtless now built with that massive masonry
of which some remains still survive (see the
woodcut, p. 1638). At this time equally magni-
ficent works were being carried on in another
part of the city, viz. in the old wall at the
north-west corner, contiguous to the palace,
where three towers of great size and magnifi-
cence were erected on the wall, and one as an
outwork to the north. The latter was called
Psephinus (B. J. v. 4, §§2, 3, 4); the three
former were Hippicus, after one of his friends —
Phasaelus, after his brother — and Mariamne,
after his qneen (Ant. xvi. 5, § 2 ; B. J. r. 4,
§ 3). For their positions, see Section III. p. 1644.
Phasaelus appears to have been erected first of
the three (Ant. xvii. 10, § 2), though it cannot
have been begun at the time of Phasaelus's
death, as that took place some years before
Jerusalem came into Herod's hands.
About this time occurred — if it occurred at
all, which seems more than doubtful (Prideaux,
Anno 134)— Herod's unsuccessful attempt to
plunder the sepulchre of David of the remainder
of the treasures left there by Hyrcanus (Joseph.
Ant. xvi. 7, § 1).
In or about the year 7 occurred the affair of
the golden eagle, — a parallel to that of the
theatre, and, like that, important, as showing
how strongly the Maccabean spirit of resistance
to innovations on the Jewish Law still existed,
and how vain were any concessions in the other
direction in the presence of such innovations.
Herod had fixed a large golden eagle, the
symbol of the Roman empire, of which Judaea
was now a province, over the entrance to the
Sanctuary, probably at the same time that he
inscribed the name of Agrippa on the gate
(B. J. i. 21, §8). As a breach of the second
commandment — not as a badge of dependence —
this had excited the indignation of the Jews,
and especially of two of the chief rabbis, who in-
stigated their disciples to tear it down. A false
report of the king's death was made the occasion
of doing this in open day, and in the presence of
a large number of people. Being taken before
Herod, the rabbis defended their conduct and
were burnt alive. The high-priest Matthias
was deposed, and Joazar took his place.
This was the state of things in Jerusalem
JERUSALEM
when Herod died, in the year 4 B.C. of the
common chronology (Dionysian era), but really
a few months after the birth of Christ (see
p. 1663).
The government of Judaea, and therefore ef
Jerusalem, had by the will of Herod been be-
queathed to Archelaus. He lost no time after
the burial of his father in presenting himself
in the Temple, and addressing the people on the
affairs of the kingdom— a display of confidence
and moderation, strongly in contrast to the
demeanour of the late king. It produced an
instant effect on the excited minds of the Jews,
still smarting from the failure of the affair of
the eagle, and from the chastisement it had
brought upon them; and Archelaus was be-
sieged with clamours for the liberation of the
numerous persons imprisoned by the late king,
and for remission of the taxes. As the people
collected for the evening sacrifice the matter
became more serious, and assumed the form of
a public demonstration, of lamentation for the
two martyrs, Judas and Matthias, and indigna-
tion against the intruded high-priest. So loud
and shrill were the cries of lament that they
were heard over the whole city. Archelaus
meanwhile temporised and promised redress
when his government should be confirmed by
Rome. The Passover was close at hand, and
the city was fast filling with the multitudes of
rustics and of pilgrims ({k rris inrtpoplos), who
crowded to the great Feast (B. J. ii. 1, §3;
Ant. xvii. 9, § 3). These strangers not being
able or willing to find admittance into the
houses, pitched their tents (tooj ainASi ifficvrtf
kotos) on the open ground around the Temple
(Ant. ibid.). Meanwhile the tumult in the
Temple itself was maintained and increased
daily; a multitude of fanatics never left the
courts, but continued there, incessantly clamour-
ing and imprecating.
Longer delay in dealing with such a state of
things would have been madness ; a small party
of soldiers had already been roughly handled by
the mob (B. J. ii. 1, § 3), and Archelaus at last
did what his father would have done at first.
He despatched the whole garrison, horse and
foot, the foot-soldiers by way of the city to
clear the Temple, the horse-soldiers by a detour
round the level ground north of the town, to
surprise the pilgrims on the eastern slopes of
Moriah, and prevent their rushing to the
succour of the fanatics in the Temple. The
movement succeeded : three thousand were cut
up and the whole concourse dispersed over the
country.
During Archelaus' absence at Rome, Jeru-
salem was in charge of Sabinus, the Roman
procurator of the province, and the tumults —
ostensibly on the occasion of some exactions of
Sabinus, but doubtless with the same real
ground as before— were renewed with worse
results. At the next Feast, Pentecost, the
throng of strangers was enormous. They
formed regular encampments round the Temple
and on the western hill of the upper city, and
besieged the Romans, who appear to have
occupied Antonia * and Herod's palace with its
p Sabinus, who was no doubt living in Herod's palace
when the outbreak occurred, appears to have been
taken by surprise and to have been unable to resch the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
JERUSALEM
three towers (Ant. xvii. 9, § 3 ; 10, § 1 ; S.J.
ii. 2, §2). At last the soldiers in the Antonia
made a sally and cot their way into the Temple.
The struggle was desperate, a great many Jews
were killed, the cloisters of the outer court
burnt down, and the sacred treasury plundered
of immense sums. But no reverses could quell
the fury of the insurgents, and matters were
not appeased till Varus, the prefect of the
province, arrived from the north with a large
force and dispersed the strangers. On this
quiet was restored.
In the year 3 B.C. Archelaus returned from
Rome ethnarch of the southern province. He
immediately displaced Joazar, whom his father
had made high-priest after the affair of the
eagle, and put Joazar's brother Eleazar in his
stead. This is the only event affecting Jeru-
salem that is recorded in the ten years between
the return of Archelaus and his summary de-
parture to trial at Rome (a.d. 6).
Judaea was now reduced to an ordinary
Roman province; the procurator of which
resided, not at Jerusalem, but at Caesarea on
the coast (Joseph. Ant. xviii. 3, § 1). The first
appointed was Coponius, who accompanied
Quirinui to the country immediately on the
disgrace of Archelaus. Quirinus (the Cvrenius
of the N. T.) — now for the second time prefect
of Syria — was charged with the unpopular
measure of the enrolment or assessment of the
inhabitants of Judaea. Notwithstanding the
riots which took place elsewhere, at Jerusalem
the enrolment was allowed to proceed without
resistance, owing to the prudence of Joazar
{Ant. xviii. 1, §1), again high-priest for a
short time. One of the first acts of the new
governor had been to take formal possession of
the state vestments of the high-priest, worn
on the three Festivals and on the Day of
Atonement. Since the building of the Baris
by the Maccabees these robes had always been
kept there, a custom continued since its recon-
struction by Herod. But henceforward they
were to be put up after use in an underground
stone chamber, under the seal of the priests, and
in charge of the captain of the guard. Seven
days before use they were brought out, to
be consigned again to the chamber after
the ceremony was over (Joseph. Ant. iviii. 4,
§ 3 >- ....
Two incidents at once most opposite in their
character, and in their significance to that age
and to ourselves, occurred during the procu-
ratorsbip of Coponius. First, in the year 8, the
finding of Christ in the Temple. Annas had
been made high-priest about a year before.
The second occurrence must have been a most
distressing one to the Jews, unless they had
become inured to such things. But of this we
cannot so exactly fix the date. It was nothing
less than the pollution of the Temple by some
Samaritans, who secretly brought human bones
and strewed them about the cloisters during
the night of the Passover.' Up to this time
Antonia where the legion was quartered. He conse-
quently ascended toe tower Phasielus, which adjoined
the palace, and thence gave the signal for the attack on
the Temple.
4 The mode of pollution adopted bj Joslah towards
the Idolatrous ehrlnas (see p. 1603).
JERUSALEM
1619
the Samaritans had been admitted to the
Temple ; they were henceforth excluded.
In or about a.d. 10, Coponius was succeeded
by M. Ambivius, and he by Annius Rufus. In
14 Augustus died, and with Tiberius came a
new procurator — Val. Gratus, who held office
till 26, when he was replaced by Pontius Pilate.
During this period the high-priests had been
numerous,' but it is only necessary here to say
that when Pilate arrived at his government the
office was held by Joseph Caiaphas, who had
been appointed but a few months before. The
freedom from disturbance which marks the
preceding twenty years at Jerusalem, was
probably due to the absence of the Roman
troops, who were quartered at Caesarea out of
the way of the fierce fanatics of the Temple.
But Pilate transferred the winter quarters of
the army to Jerusalem (Ant. xviii. 3, § 1), and
the very first day there was a collision. The
offence was given by the Roman standards — the
images of the emperor and of the eagle — which
by former commanders had been kept out of the
city. A representation was made to Pilate ;
and so obstinate was the temper of the Jews on
the point, that he yielded, and the standards
were withdrawn (Ant. ibid.). He afterwards,
as if to try how far he might go, consecrated
some gilt shields — not containing figures, but
inscribed simply with the name of the deity and
of the donor — and hung them in the palace at
Jerusalem. This act again aroused the re-
sistance of the Jews ; and on appeal to Tiberius
they were removed (Philo, xpbr Taiov, Mangey,
U.589).
Another riot was caused by his appropriation
of the Corban — a sacred revenue arising from
the redemption of vows — to the cost of an
aqueduct which he constructed for bringing
water to the city from a distance of 200 (Ant.
xviii. 3, §2) or 400 (B. J. ii. 9, §4) stadia.
This aqueduct is that leading from W&dy Arr&b to
"Solomon's Pools" at Urt&t, and thence to the
Temple hill ( Water Supply, p. 1591).
a.d. 29. At the Passover of this year our
Lord made His first recorded visit to the city
since His boyhood (John ii. 13).
A.D. 33. At the Passover of this year,
occurred His Crucifixion and Resurrection.
In A.D. 37, Pilate having been recalled to
Rome, Jerusalem was visited by Vitellius, the
prefect of Syria, at the time of the Passover.
Vitellius conferred two great benefits on the
city. He remitted the duties levied on produce,
and he allowed the Jews again to have the free
custody of the high-priest's vestments. He re-
moved Caiaphas from the high-priesthood, and
gave it to Jonathan son of Annas. He then
departed, apparently leaving a Roman officer
(tyoipapx *) m charge of the Antonia (Ant.
xviii. 4, § 3). Vitellius was again at Jerusalem
this year, probably in the autumn, with Herod
the tetrarch (xviii. 5, § 3) ; while there he again
changed the high-priest, substituting for Jo-
nathan, Theophilus his brother. The news of
the death of Tiberius and the accession of
Caligula reached Jerusalem at this time. Mar-
cellus was appointed procurator by the new
' Their names and succession will be bund under
Hioh Priest, pp. 1368-a. See also Amus.
S L 2
Digitized by
Google
1620
JERUSALEM
emperor. Id the following year Stephen was
stoned. The Christians were greatly persecuted,
and all, except the Apostles, driven oat of Jeru-
salem (Acts viii. 1, zi. 19).
In- A.D. 40 Vitellias was superseded by P.
Petronius, who arrived in Palestine with an
order to place in the Temple a statue of
Caligula. This order was ultimately, by the
intercession of Agrippa, countermanded, but not
until it had roused the whole people as one man
{Ant. xviii. 8, §§ 2-9 ; and see the admirable
narrative of Milman, Hist, of Jews, bk. x.).
With the accession of Claudius in 41 came an
edict of toleration to the Jews. Agrippa
arrived in Palestine to take possession of his
kingdom, and one of his first acts was to visit
the Temple, where he offered sacrifice and
dedicated the golden chain which the late
emperor had presented him after his release
from captivity. It was hung over the treasury
(Ant. xix. 6, § 1). Simon was made high-
priest ; the house-tax was remitted.
Agrippa resided very much at Jerusalem, and
added materially to its prosperity and con-
venience. The city had for some time been
extending itself towards the north, and a large
subnrb had come into existence on the high
ground north of the Temple, and outside of the
" second wall," which enclosed the portion of the
city immediately west of the street el- Wad.
Hitherto the outer portion of this suburb—
which was called Bezetha, or " New town,"
and had grown up very rapidly — was unpro-
tected by any formal wall, and practically lay
open to attack.' This defenceless condition
attracted the attention of Agrippa, who, like the
first Herod, was a great builder, and he com-
menced enclosing it in so substantial and mag-
nificent a manner as to excite the suspicions of
the Prefect, at whose instance it was stopped by
Claudius {Ant. ziz. 7, § 2; B. J. ii. 11, § 6;
v. 4, § 2). Subsequently the Jews seem to have
purchased permission to complete the work
(Tac. Hist. v. 12 ; Joseph. B. J. T. 4, § Z ad fin.).
This new wall, the outermost of the three which
enclosed the city on the north, started from the
old wall at the Tower Hippicus, close to the
Jaffa Gate. It ran northward, bending by a
large circuit to the east, and at last, returning
southward, joined the old wall at the "valley
called Kedron." Thus it enclosed not only the
new suburb, but also the valley north-east of the
Temple, which up to the present date had lain
open to the country.
The year 43 is memorable as that of St. Paul's
first visit to Jerusalem after his conversion.
The year 44 began with the murder of St.
James by Agrippa (Acts xii. 1), followed at the
Passover by the imprisonment and escape of
St. Peter. Shortly after Agrippa himself died.
Cuspius Fadus arrived from Rome as procurator,
and Longinus as prefect of Syria. An attempt
was made by the Romans to regain possession of
the pontifical robes ; but on reference to the
emperor the attempt was abandoned. In 45
commenced a severe famine which lasted two
years (Ewald, Oesch. vi. 409, note). To the
• The statements of Josephos are not qnlte recon-
cilable. In one passage he says distinctly that Bezelha
lay quite naked (B. J. v. 4, J 2), In another that it had
some kind of wall {Ant. xix. 7. $ I).
JERUSALEM
people of Jerusalem it was alleviated by the
presence of Helena, queen of Adiabene, a convert
to the Jewish faith, who visited the city in 46
and imported corn and dried fruit, which she
distributed to the poor {Ant. xx. 2, § 5 ; 5, § 2).
During her stay Helena constructed, at a dis-
tance of three stadia from the city, a tomb,
marked by three pyramids, to which her
remains, with those of her son, were afterwardi
brought {Ant. xx. 4, § 3). It was situated to
the north, and is one of the points referred to by
Josephus in his description of the course of the
third wall {B. J. v. 4, § 2). At the end of this
year St. Paul arrived in Jerusalem for the
second time.
A.D. 48. Fadus was succeeded by Ventidiai
Cumanus. A frightful tumult happened at
the Passover of this year, caused, as on former
occasions, by the presence of the Roman soldiers
in the Antonia and in the courts and cloisters
of the Temple during the Festival. Ten (or,
according to another account, twenty) thousand
are said to have met their deaths, not by the
sword, but trodden to death in the crash
through the narrow lanes which led from the
Temple down into the city {Ant. xz. 5, § 3;
B. J. ii. 12, § 1). Cumanus was recalled, and
Felix appointed in his room {Ant. zz. 7, § 1 ;
B. J. ii. 12, § 8), partly at the instance of
Jonathan, the then high-priest {Ant. xx. 8, § 5).
A set of ferocious fanatics, whom Josephus calls
Sicarii, had lately begun to make their appearance
in the city, whose creed it was to rob and murder
all whom they judged hostile to Jewish interests.
Felix, weary of the remonstrances of Jonathan
on his vicious life, employed some of these
wretches to assassinate him. He was killed in
the Temple, while sacrificing. The murder wu
never inquired into, and, emboldened by this,
the Sicarii repeated their horrid act, thus
adding, in the eyes of the Jews, the awful crime
of sacrilege to that of murder {B. J. ii. 13, § 3 ;
Ant. ibid.). The city, too, was filled with
impostors pretending to inspiration, but inspired
only with hatred to all government and order.
Nor was the disorder confined to the lower
classes : the chief people of the city, the very
high-priests themselves, robbed the threshing-
floors of the tithes common to all the priests,
and led parties of rioters to open tumult and
fighting in the streets {Ant. xz. 8, § 8). In
fact, not only Jerusalem, but the whole country
far and wide, was in the most frightful con-
fusion and insecurity.
At length a riot of the most serious descrip-
tion at Caesarea caused the recall of Felix, and
in the end of 60 or the beginning of 61 PoRCIOS
Festus succeeded him as procurator. Festos
was an able and upright officer {B. J. ii. 14,
§ 1), and at the same time conciliatory towards
the Jews (Acts xxv. 9). In the brief period of
his administration he kept down the robbers
with a strong hand, and gave the province a
short breathing time. His interview with St.
Paul (Acts xxv., xxvi.) took place, not at Jeru-
salem, but at Caesarea. On one occasion both
Festus and Agrippa came into collision with the
Jews at Jerusalem. Agrippa — who had been
appointed king by Nero in 52 — had added an
apartment to the old Aamonean palace on the
eastern brow of the upper city, which com-
manded a full view into the interior of the
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
courts of the Temple {Ant. xx. 8, § 11). This
view the Jews intercepted by building a wall on
the exhcdra of the western wall of the inner
court of the Temple.' But the wall not only
intercepted the view of Agrippa, it also interfered
with the view from the western cloisters of the
outer court where the Roman guard was stationed
during the festivals. Both Agrippa and Festos
interfered, and required it to be pulled down ;
but the Jews pleaded that once built it was a part
of the Temple, and entreated to be allowed to
appeal to Nero. Nero allowed their plea, but
retained as hostages the high-priest and trea-
surer, who had headed the deputation. Agrippa
appointed Joseph, called Cabi, to the vacant
priesthood. In 62 (probably) Festus died, and
was succeeded by Albinus ; and very shortly
afterwards Joseph was replaced in the high-
priesthood by Annas or Ananas, son of the Annas
before whom our Lord was taken. Before the
arrival of Albinus a persecution was commenced
against the Christians at the instance of the new
high-priest, a rigid Sadducee, and St. James and
others were arraigned before the Sanhedrin
(Joseph. Ant. xx. 9, § 1). They were " delivered
to be stoned," but St. James at any rate appears
not to have been killed till a few years later.
The act gave great offence to all, and cost Annas
bis office after he had held it but three months.
Jesus (Joshua), the son of Damneus, succeeded
him. Albinus began his rule by endeavouring
to keep down the Sicarii and other disturbers of
the peace ; and indeed he preserved throughout
a show of justice and vigour (Ant. xx. 11, § 1),
though in secret greedy and rapacious. But
before his recall he pursued his end more openly,
and priests, people, and governors alike seem to
have been bent on rapine and bloodshed : rival
high-priests beaded bodies of rioters, and stoned
each other, and in the words of Josephns, " all
things grew from worse to worse " (Ant. xx. 9,
§ 4). The evils were aggravated by two occur-
rences — first, the release by Albinus, before his
departure, of all the smaller criminals in the
prisons (Ant. xx. 9, § 5) ; and secondly, the
sudden discharge of an immense body of work-
men, on the completion of the repairs to the
Temple (xx. 9, § 7). An endeavour was made
to remedy the latter by inducing Agrippa to
rebuild the eastern cloister; but he refused to
undertake a work of such magnitude, though he
consented to pave the city with white stone.
The repairs of a part of the sanctuary that had
fallen down, and the renewal of the foundations
of some portions, were deferred for the present,
but the materials were collected and stored in
one of the courts (B. J. v. 1, § 5).
Bad as Albinus had been, Gessius Floras, who
succeeded him in 65, was worse. In fact, even
Tacitus admits that the endurance of the
oppressed Jews could last no longer— duravit
patientia Judacis usque ad Qessium Florum
(Hiat. v. 10). So great was his rapacity, that
whole cities and districts were desolated, and
the robbers openly allowed to purchase im-
' No one In Jerusalem might build so high that his
house could overlook the Temple. It was the subject
of a distinct prohibition by the Doctors. See Maimo-
nldes, quoted by Utho, Lex. Hob. 266. Probably this
furnished one reason for so hostile a step to so friendly
a person as Agrippa.
JERUSALEM
1621
munity in plunder. At the Passover, probably
in 66, when Cestius Gallus, the prefect of Syria,
visited Jerusalem, the whole assembled people "
besought him for redress; but without effect.
Floras' next attempt was to obtain some of the
treasure from the Temple. He demanded 17
talents in the name of the emperor. The
demand produced a frantic disturbance, in the
midst of which he approached the city with both
cavalry and foot-soldiers. That night Floras took
up his quarters in the royal palace — that of Herod
near the " Jaffa Gate." On the following morn-
ing he took his seat on the Bema, and the high-
priest and other principal people being brought
before him, he demanded that the leaders of the
late riot should be given up. On their refusal
he ordered his soldiers to plunder the upper city.
This order was but too faithfully carried out ;
every house was entered and pillaged, and the
Jews driven out. In their attempt to get
through the narrow streets many were caught
and slain, others were brought before Floras,
scourged, and then crucified. No grade or class
was exempt. Jews who bore the Roman
equestrian order were among the victims treated
with most indignity. Queen Bernice herself
(B. J. ii. 15, § 1) — residing at that time in the
Asmonean palace, in the very midst of the
slaughter — was so affected by the scene, as to
intercede in person and barefoot before Floras,
but without avail, and in returning she was
herself nearly killed, and only escaped by taking
refuge in her palnce and calling her guards
about her. The further details of this dreadful
tumult must be passed over.* Floras was foiled
in an attempt to force his way through the city
to the Antonia — whence he would have had
nearer access to the treasures — and finding that
the Jews had broken down the cloisters which
joined the fortress to the Temple, and so de-
stroyed the means of communication between
them, he relinquished the attempt and withdrew
to Caesarea (B. J. ii. 15, § 6).
Cestius Gallus, the prefect, now found it
necessary to visit the city in person. He sent
one of his lieutenants to announce him, but
before he himself arrived events had become past
remedy. Agrippa had shortly before returned
from Alexandria, and had done much to calm
the people. At his instance they rebuilt the
part of the cloisters which had been demolished,
and collected the tribute in arrear, but the mere
suggestion from him that they should obey
Florus until he was replaced, produced such a
storm that he was obliged to leave the city
(B. J. ii. 16, § 5 ; 17, § 1). The seditious party
in the Temple, led by young Eleazar, son of
Ananias, rejected the offerings of the Roman
emperor, which since the time of Julius Caesar
had been regularly made. This, as a direct
renunciation of allegiance, was the true begin-
ning of the war with Rome (B. J. ii. 17, § 2).
Such acts were not done without resistance from
the older and wiser people. But remonstrance
was unavailing ; the innovators would listen to
no representations. The peace party, therefore,
despatched some of their number to Florus and
• Josephns says three millions in number I But this
must be a great exaggeration.
* The whole tragic story is most forcibly told by
Mllman (II. 21B-2M).
Digitized by
Google
1622
JERUSALEM
to Agrippa, and the latter sent 3,000 horse-
soldiers to assist in keeping order.
Hostilities at once began. The peace party,
headed by the high-priest, and fortified by
Agrippa's soldiers, threw themselves into the
upper city. The insurgents held the Temple
and the lower city. In the Antonia was a small
Roman garrison. Fierce contests lasted for
seven days, each side endeavouring to take pos-
session of the part held by the other. At last
the insurgents, who behaved with the greatest
ferocity, and were reinforced by a number of
Sicarii, were triumphant. They gained the
upper city, driving all be Tore them — some of
the high-priests and leaders into vaults and
subterranean passages ; others, amongst whom
were Ananias, the high-priest, with the soldiers,
into Herod's palace. The Asmonean palace,
the high-priest's house, and the repository of
the Archives — in Josephus's language, " the
nerves of the city " (B. J. ii. 17, § 6>— were
set on fire. Antonia was next attacked, and in
two days they had effected an entrance, sabred
the garrison, and burnt the fortress. The
balistae and catapults found there were preserved
for future use (v. 6, § 3). The soldiers in
Herod's palace were next besieged; but so
strong were the walls, and so stout the re-
sistance, that it was three weeks before an
entrance could be effected. The soldiers were
at last forced from the palace into the three
great towers on the adjoining wall with great
loss ; and ultimately were all murdered in the
roost treacherous manner. The high-priest and
his brother were discovered hidden in the aque-
duct of the palace ; they were instantly put to
death. Thus the insurgents were now com-
pletely masters of both city and Temple. Bnt
they were not to remain so long. After the
action at Gabao (Gibeon), which checked the
advance of the Roman army under Cestius
Gallus, dissensions began to arise, and it soon
became known that there was still a large
moderate party. Cestius took advantage of
this to move his camp to Scopus, whence, after
waiting three days in the vain hope that the
Jews would submit, he advanced upon the city.
He made his way through Bezetha, the new
suburb north of the Temple/ and through the
wood-market, SokSv iyopa (see p. 1594), burning
everything as he went (B. J. ii. 19, § 4 ; v. 7,
§ 2), and at last encamped in the upper city,
opposite the palace, and close to the second wall.
The Jews retired to the inner part of the city
and to the Temple. For five days Cestius
assaulted the wall without success; on the
sixth he resolved to make one more attempt,
this time at a different spot — the north wall of
the Temple, east of and behind the Antonia.
The Jews, however, fought with such fury from
the top of the cloisters, that he could effect
nothing, and when night came he drew off to
his camp at Scopus. Thither the insurgents
followed him, and in three days gave him one
of the most complete defeats that a Roman
army had ever undergone. His catapults and
» It is remarkable that nothing Is said of any resist-
ance to his passage through the great wall of Agrippa,
which encircled Bezetha. Apparently there were
breaches In It which were afterwards repaired by
Ananus (/». S. if. 20, 6 3 ; 22, $ 1).
JERUSALEM
balistae were taken from him, and reserred by
the Jews for the final siege (v. 6, § 3). This
occurred on the 8th of Harchesvan (beginning
of November), 66.
The war with Rome was now inevitable, and
it was evident that the siege of Jerusalem was
only a question of time. An.nm, the high-
priest, a moderate and prudent man, took the
lead ; the walls were repaired, arms and warlike
instruments and machines of all kinds fabricated,
and other preparations made. In this atti-
tude of expectation — with occasional diversions,
such as the expedition to Ascalon (£. J. iii. 2,
§§ 1, 2), and the skirmishes with Simon Bar-
Gioras (ii. 22, § 2) — the city remained while
Vespasian was reducing the north of the country,
and till the fall of Giscala (Oct or Nov. 67),
when John, the son of Levi, escaped thence to
Jerusalem, to become one of the most prominent
persons in the future conflict.
From the arrival of John, two years and a
half elapsed till Titus appeared before the walls
of Jerusalem. The whole of that time" was
occupied in contests between the moderate party,
whose desire was to take such a course as might
yet preserve the nationality of the Jews and the
existence of the city, and the Zealots or fanatics,
the assertors of national independence, who
scouted the idea of compromise, and resolved
to regain their freedom or perish. The Zealots,
being utterly unscrupulous, and resorting to
massacre on the least resistance, soon triumphed,
and at last reigned paramount, with no re-
sistance bnt such as sprang from their own
internal factions. For the repulsive details of
this frightful period of contention and outrage,
the reader must be referred to other works-*
It will be sufficient to say that at the beginning
of 70, when Titus made his appearance, the Zealots
themselves were divided into two parties : that
of John of Giscala and Eleaiar, who held the
Temple and its courts, the Antonia, Ophla,
and the " valley called Kedron," in which the
Birket Isratl is situated — 8,400 men; that of
Simon Bar-Gioras, whose head-quarters were in
the tower Phasaelus (v. 4, § 3), and who held
the upper city, from the present Coenaculum to
the KaTat Jalx'id, the third wall, and Bezetha,
the fountain of Siloam, and the lower city on
the eastern hill— 10,000 men, and 5,000 Idu-
means (B. J. v. 6, § 1), in all a force of between
23,000 and 24,000 soldiers trained in the civil
encounters of the last two years to great skill
and thorough recklessness.* The numbers of
the other inhabitants, swelled as they were by
the strangers and pilgrims who flocked from the
country to the Passover, it is extremely difficult
to decide. Tacitus, doubtless from some Roman
source, gives the whole at 600,000. Josephus
states that 1,100,000 perished during the siege
• Dean Hitman's Hittory 0/ the Jew, bks. xiv., zv„
xvi. ; and Merivale's Hittory of the Romans, vi. ch. 69.
To both of these works the writer begs leave to express
bis obligations throughout the above meagre sketch of
"the most soul-stirring struggle of all ancient history.*
Of course the materials for all modern accounts are In
Joeephus only, excepting the few touches — strong, but
not always accurate — in the 6th book of Tacitus'
Hittoria.
* These are the numbers given by Josephus ; but it la
probable that they are greatly exaggerated.
Digitized by
Google
JEBUSALEM
(5. /. vi. 9, § 3 ; cp. v. 13, § 7), and that
more than 40,000 were allowed to depart into
the country (vi. 8, § 2), in addition to an
" immense number " sold to the army, and who
of coarse form a proportion of the 97,000
" carried captive daring the whole war " (vi. 9,
§ 3). We may therefore take Josephns's com-
JEKUSALEM
1623
pntation of the numbers at abont 1,200,000.
Reasons are given in the third section of this
article for believing that even the smaller of
these numbers is very greatly in excess, and
that the population cannot have exceeded 70.000
(see p. 1647).
Titus's force consisted of fonr legions, and
some auxiliaries — probably about 30,000 men
{B. J. v. 1, § 6). These were disposed on their
first arrival in three camps — the 12th and 15th
legions at Scopus, seven stadia north of the city ;
the 5th, three stadia to the rear ; and the 10th
on the top of the Mount of Olives (v. 2, §§ 3, 5),
to guard the road to the Jordan Valley. The
army was well furnished with artillery and
machines of the latest and most approved in-
vention — " cuncta expugnandis urbibus, reperta
apud veteres, ant novis ingeniis," says Tacitus
(Hist. v. 13) ; and those of the 10th legion arc
specially mentioned for their excellence (S. J.
v. 6, § 3). The first operation was to level the
Digitized by
Google
1624
JERUSALEM
ground between Scopus and the north wall of
the city — fell the timber, destroy the fences of
the gardens .which fringed the wall, and cnt
away the rocky protuberances. This occupied
fonr days. After it was done the three legions
were marched forward from Scopus, and en-
camped near the north-west corner of the walls,
stretching from the Tower Psephinns to opposite
Hippicus. The first step was to get possession
of the outer wall. The point of attack chosen
was in Simon's portion of the city, at a low and
comparatively weak place near the monument
of John Hyrcanus (v. 6, § 2), and close to the
junction of the three walls. Round this spot
the three legions erected banks, from which
they opened batteries, pushing np the rams and
other engines of attack to the foot of the wall.
One of the rams, more powerful than the rest,
went among the Jews by the sobriquet of Nik6n, b
"the conqueror." Three large towers, 75 feet
high, were also erected, overtopping the wall.
Simon and hi* men did not suffer these works to
go on without molestation. The catapults, both
those taken from Cestius and those found in
the Antonia, were set up on the wall, and con-
stant desperate sallies were made. At last the
Jews began to tire of their fruitless assaults.
They saw that the wall must fall, and, as they
had done during Nebuchadnezzar's siege, they
left their' posts at night and went home. A
breach; was made by the redoubtable Nikon on
the 7th Artemisius (c. April 15) ; and here the
Romans entered, driving the Jews before them
to the second wall. A great length of the
wall was then broken down ; such parts of
Rezetha as had escaped destruction by Cestius
were levelled, and a new camp was formed
within the city, on the spot formerly occupied
by the Assyrians, and still known as the
" Assyrian camp."*
This was a great step in advance. Titus now
occupied the ground within the third wall, from
the neighbourhood of John's monument to the
valley of the Kedron ; and was in a position to
attack the second wall. A battering-ram was
poshed forward to the middle tower of the
north side of the wall ; and a war of missiles
raged almost continuously from the Temple on
the east to the Tower Hippicus on the west.
Simon was no less reckless in assault, and no
less fertile in stratagem, than before ; but, not-
withstanding all his efforts, in five days a breach
was again effected. The district into which the
Romans had now penetrated was that between
the wall of 'the Haram and Christian street,
occupied then, as it is still, by an intricate mass
of narrow and tortuous lanes, and containing
the markets of the city — no doubt very like the
present bazaars. Titus's breach was where the
b 6 Nucmt ••• avi tow wivra wear (B. J. V. 7, $ 2).
It has been suggested (Bonar, Imp. Bib. Diet. s. v.
Jerusalem) that in this case, as in pome others, Josephua
has translated. Inaccurately. It is possible that the
Jaws named the battering-ram *' the smiter," from |"J23
(to smite), So also they probably cried out pN X3i
"the stone cometb," and not pn K3, "the son
eometh " (vlot foxtrot, B. J. r. 6, i 3) at the approach
of the formidable missile from the Roman balista.
• Compare Mahaueh-Dan, "camp of Das" (Judg.
xvlU. 1«).
JERUSALEM
wool, cloth, and brass bazaars came np to the
wall (v. 8, § 1). This district was held by the
Jews with the greatest tenacity. Knowing, as
they did, every turn of the lanes and alleys,
they had an immense advantage over the Romans,
and it was only after four days' incessant fighting,
much loss, and one thorough repulse, that the
Romans were able to make good their position.
However, at last Simon was obliged to retreat,
and then Titus demolished the wall. This was
the second step in the siege.
Meantime some shots had been interchanged
in the direction of the Antonia, but no serious
attack was made. Before beginning there in
earnest, Titus resolved to give his troops a few
days' rest, and the Jews a short opportunity for
reflection. He therefore called in the 10th
legion from the Mount of Olives, and reviewed
the whole army on the ground within the third
wall — full in view of both the Temple and the
upper city, every wall and house in which were
crowded with spectators (B. Jt v. 9, § 1). But
the opportunity was thrown away upon the
Jews, and after four days orders were given to
recommence the attack. Hitherto the assault
had been almost entirely on the city! it was
now to be simultaneous on city and Temple.
Accordingly four banks were constructed for
the battering-rams, two in front of Antonia and
two in front of the first wall, near the monu-
ment of John Hyrcanus. The first two were
erected by the 5th and 12th legions near the
pool Struthius — probably the present touterrams
at the N.W. corner of the Haram j the re-
maining two by the 10th and 15th, at the pool
called Amygdalon — apparently that now known
as the Pool of Hezekiah — and at the high-priest's
monument (v. 11, § 4). These banks seem to
have been constructed in the usual manner with
earth, stones, and wood. They absorbed the
incessant labour of seventeen days, and were
completed on the 29th Artemisius (c. May 7).
John in the meantime had not been idle ; he had
employed the seventeen days' respite in driving
mines, through the solid limestone of the hill,*
from within the fortress (v. 11, § 4; vi 1, § 3)
to below the banks. The ground above the
mines was supported with beams of wood, and
the galleries partially filled with inflammable
materials. When the banks were quite complete,
and the engines placed upon them, the timber
of the galleries was fired, the superincumbent
ground gave way, and the labour of the Romans
.was totally destroyed. At the other point
Simon had maintained a resistance with all his
former intrepidity, and more than his former
success. He had now greatly increased the
number of his machines, and his people were
much more expert in handling them than before,
so that he was able to impede materially the
progress of the works. And when they were
completed, and the battering-rams had begun
to make a sensible impression on the wall,
he made a furious assault on them, and suc-
ceeded in firing the rams, with their protecting
framework of hurdles, seriously damaging the
* The thin strata of hard limestone (mitsea) over-
lying the thick stratum of softer stone (meUkeh) offered
peculiar facilities for mining operations at this point
(nee Geology, p. 1688).
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
other engines, and destroying the banks (v. 11,
§§5,6).
It now became plain to Titos that some other
measures for the redaction of the place must be
adopted. It would appear that hitherto the
southern and western parts of the city had not
been closely invested, and on that side a certain
amount of communication was kept up with the
country, which, unless stopped, might prolong
the siege indefinitely (£. J. v. 12, § 1 ; 10, § 3 ;
11, §1; 12, §3). The number who thus
escaped is stated by Josephus at more than five
hundred a day (v. 11, § 1). A council of war
was therefore held, and it was resolved to en-
compass the whole place with a wall, and then
recommence the assault. The wall began at
the Roman camp— probably in the N.W. quarter
of the present city. From thence it went to
the lower part of Bezetha — about St. Stephen's
Gate; then across Kedron to the Mount of
Olives ; thence south by a rock called Peri-
stereon, the "Pigeon's rock," — possibly in the
modern village of Siloam — to the Mount of
Offence. It then turned to the west; again
crossed the Eedron, ascended its right bank, by
the tomb of Ananus, the high-priest, to the
Mount of Evil Counsel, and then, passing by a
village called iptfiir<)m> o'ik6s (perhaps Beth-
Rabinoth in the Hebrew), ran outside of
Herod's monument to its starting-point at the
camp. Its entire length was 39 furlongs, —
very near 5 miles ; and it contained thirteen
stations or guard-houses. The whole strength
of the army was employed on the work, and it
was completed in the short space of three days.
The siege was then vigorously pressed. The
attack on the first wall was abandoned, and the
whole force concentrated on the Antonia (12,
§4). Four new banks of greater size than
before were constructed ; and as all the timber
in the neighbourhood had been already cut
down, the materials had to be procured from
a distance of 11 miles (vi. 1, § 1). Twenty-one
days were occupied in completing the banks.
Their position is not specified, but it is evident,
from the allusion to John's mining operations,
that they were erected at, or near the site of,
those which had been destroyed by the Jews
during the previous attack (vi. 1, §3). At
length, on the 1st Panemus or Tamuz (c.
June 7), the fire from the balistae and catapults
commenced, under cover of which the rams were
set to work, and that night a part of the wall
fell at a spot where the foundations had been
weakened by the mines employed against the
former attacks. Still this was but an ontwork,
and between it and the fortress itself a new
wall was discovered, which John had taken the
precaution to build. At length, after two
desperate attempts, this wall and that of the
inner fortress were scaled by a bold surprise,
and on the 5th* Panemus (June 11) the Antonia
was in the hands of the Romans (vi. 1, § 7).
Another week was occupied in breaking down
the outer walls of the fortress for the passage
JERUSALEM
1625
' Joeephns contradicts himself about this date, since In
vi. 2, $ l, he saya that the 17th Panemus was the "very
day" that Antonia was entered. The date given In the
text agrees best with the narrative. But, on the other
hand, the 17th is the day commemorated In the Jewish
Calendar.
of the machines, and a further delay took place
in erecting new banks, on the fresh level, for
the bombardment and battery of the Temple.
During the whole of this time — the miseries of
which are commemorated in the traditional
name of yomin deeka, "days of wretchedness,"
applied by the Jews to the period between the
17th Tamuz and the 9th Ab — the most des-
perate hand-to-hand encounters took place,
some in the cloisters connecting the Antonia
with the Temple, some in the Temple cloisters
themselves, the Romans endeavouring to force
their way in, the Jews preventing them. But
the Romans gradually gained ground. First
the western, and then the whole of the northern
external cloister was burnt (27th and 28th
Pan.), and then the wall enclosing the court of
Israel and the Holy House itself. In the
interval, on the 17th Panemus, the daily
sacrifice had failed, owing to the want of
officiating priests; a circumstance which had
greatly distressed the people, and was taken
advantage of by Titus to make a further though
fruitless invitation to surrender. At length, on
the 10th day of Lous or Ab (July 15), by the
wanton act of a soldier, contrary to the inten-
tion of Titus, and in spite of every exertion he
could make to stop it, the sanctuary itself was
fired (vi. 4, §§ 5-7). It was, by one of those rare
coincidences that sometimes occur, the very
same month and day of the month that the first
Temple had been burnt by Nebuchadnezzar
(vi. 4, §8). John, and such of his party as
escaped the flames and the carnage, made their
way to the upper city. The whole of the
cloisters that had hitherto escaped, including
the magnificent triple colonnade of Herod on
the south of the Temple, the treasury chambers,
and the rooms round the outer courts, were
now all burnt and demolished. Only the
edifice of the sanctuary itself still remained. On-
its solid masonry the fire had had comparatively
little effect, and there were still hidden in its
recesses a few faithful priests who had contrived
to rescue the most valuable of the utensils,
vessels, and spices of the sanctuary (vi. 6, § 1 ;
8, §3).
The Temple was at lost gained ; but it
seemed as if half the work remained to be done.
The upper city, higher than Moriah, enclosed
by the first wall, and on all sides precipitous
except at the north, where it was defended by
the wall and towers of Herod, was still to be
taken. Titus first tried a parley — he standing
on the east end of the bridge between the
Temple and the upper city, and John and Simon
on the west end. His terms, however, were
rejected, and no alternative was left him but to
force on the siege. The whole of the lower city
— the crowded lanes of which we have so often
heard — was burnt, in the teeth of a frantic
resistance from the Zealots (vi. 7, § 1), together
with the council-house, the repository of the
records (doubtless occupied by Simon since its
former destruction), the palace of Helena, the
place called Ophlas, and the houses as far as
Siloam on the lower slopes of the Temple mount.
It took eighteen days to erect the necessary
works for the siege ; the four legions were once-
more stationed at the west or north-west corner
where Herod's palace abutted on the wall, and
where the three magnificent and impregnable
Digitized by
Google
1626
JERUSALEM
JERUSALEM
towers of Hippicus, Phasaelus, and Mariamne
rose conspicuous (vi. 8, § 1, and § 4 ad fin.).
This was the main attack. Opposite the
Temple, the precipitous nature of the slopes
of the upper city rendered it unlikely that any
serious attempt would be made by the Jews,
and this part accordingly, between the bridge
and the Xystus, was left to the auxiliaries.
Com tw.-u-iuu-j uf Vespasian, recording the capture of Jerusalem.
BtK Head of Veapaaian, laureate: IMP. CAKSAB VESPASIAN AVG. p. M. TB. p.p.p. COS.
in 11- r Palm-tree : us left captive (Simon), on right womau (Judaea) wwping -.
IVDAEA CAPTA. B. C
The attack was commenced on the 7th of
Gorpiaeus (c. Aug. 11), and by the next day
a breach was made in the wall, and the Romans
At last entered the city. During the attack
John and Simon appear to hare stationed them-
selves in the towers just alluded to; and had
they remained there, they would probably hare
been able to make terms, as the towers were
considered impregnable (vi. 8, § 4). But on
the first signs of a breach, they took flight,
and, traversing the city, descended into the
valley of Hinnom below Siloam, and endeavoured
to make their escape. On being repulsed they
took refuge apart in some of the subterraneous
caverns or sewers of the city. John shortly
after surrendered himself; bnt Simon held out
for several weeks, and did not make his ap-
pearance until after Titus had quitted the city.
They were reserved for the Triumph at Rome.
The city being taken, such parts as had
escaped the former conflagrations were burned,
and the whole of both city and Temple was
ordered to be demolished, excepting the west
wall of the upper city, and Herod's three great
towers at the north-west corner, which were
left standing as memorials of the massive nature
of the fortifications.
Of the Jews, the aged and infirm were killed;
the children under seventeen were sold as
slaves ; the rest were sent, some to the
Egyptian mines, some to the provincial amphi-
theatres, and some to grace the Triumph of the
Conqueror.' Titus then departed, leaving the
10th legion nnder the command of Terentius
Rufus to carry out the work of demolition.
Of this Josephus assures us that " the whole'
' The prisoners were collected for this final partition
In the Court of the Women. Josephus states that
during the process 11,000 died I It Is a good Instance
of the exaggeration in which he indulges on these
matters ; for taking the largest estimate of the Court of
the Women (Ligbtfoot's), It contained 35,000 square
feet, i.e. little more than 3 square feet for each of those
who died, not to speak of the living.
« The word used by Josephus — mpipoXix ttjs troAem
—-amy mean either the whole place, or the enclosing
was so thoroughly levelled and dug up that no
one visiting it would believe it had ever been
inhabited " (B. J, vii. 1, § 1). [G.] [W.]
From its destruction by Titws to the pretext
time. — For more than fifty years after its de-
struction by Titus, Jerusalem disappears from
history. During the revolts of the Jews in
Cyrenaica, Egypt, Cyprus, and Mesopotamia,
which disturbed the latter years of
Trajan, the recovery of their city
was never attempted. There is
indeed reason to believe that Lucuas,
the head of the insurgents in Egypt,
led his followers into Palestine,
where they were defeated by the
Roman general Turbo, but Jeru-
salem is not once mentioned as the
scene of their operations. Of its
annals during this period we know
nothing. Three towers and part of
the western wall alone remained of
its strong fortifications to protect
the cohorts who occupied the con-
quered city, and the soldiers' hats
were long the only buildings on its
site. But in the reign of Hadrian it again emerged
from its obscurity, and became the centre of an
insurrection, which the best blood of Rome was
shed to subdue. In despair of keeping the Jews
in subjection by other means, the Emperor had
formed a design to restore Jerusalem, and thus
prevent it from ever becoming a rallying-point
for this turbulent race. In furtherance of his
plan he had sent thither a colonyof veterans,
in numbers sufficient for the defence of a position
so strong by nature against the then known
modes of attack. To this measure Dio Cassias
(Ixix. 12) attributes a renewal of the insurrec-
tion, while Eusebius asserts that it waa not
carried into execution till the outbreak was
quelled. Be this as it may, the embers of
revolt, long smouldering, burst into a flame
soon after Hadrian's departure from the East
in a.d. 132. The contemptuous indifference of
the Romans, or the secrecy of their own plans,
enabled the Jews to organise a wide-spread
conspiracy. Bar Cocheba, their leader, — the
third, according to Rabbinical writers, of a
dynasty of the same name, princes of the
Captivity, — was crowned king at Bother by the
Jews who thronged to him, and by the populace
was regarded as the Messiah. His armour-
bearer, R. Akiba, claimed descent from Sisera,
and hated the Romans with the fierce rancour
of his adopted nation. All the Jews in Palestine
flocked to his standard. At an early period in
the revolt they became masters of Jerusalem,
and attempted to rebuild the Temple. The
exact date of this attempt is uncertain, but the
fact is inferred from allusions in Chrysostom
{Or. 3 in Judaeos), Micephorus {H. E.'ii\. 24),
and George Cedrenus {Hist. Comp. 249), and the
collateral evidence of a coin of the period.
Hadrian, alarmed at the rapid spread of the in-
wall*, or the precinct of the Temple. The statements of
the Talmud perhaps Imply that the foundations of the
Temple only were dug up (see the quotations m
Schwarx, p. 385) ; and even these seem to have been in
existence in the time of Chrysostom (Ad Judaea**
in, 431). That the demolition of the walls was in many
places only partial Is attested by existing remains.
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
aurrection, and the ineffectual efforts of his troops
to suppress it, summoned from Britain Julius
Severus, the greatest general of his time, to
take the command of the army of Judaea.
Two years were spent in a fierce guerilla war-
fare before Jerusalem was taken, after a des-
perate defence in which Bar Cocheba perished.
The courage of the defenders was shaken by the
falling in of the vaults on Mount Zion, and the
Romans became masters of the position (Milman,
Hist, of Jews, iii. 122). But the war did not
end with the capture of the city. The Jews in
great force had occupied the fortress of Bether,
and there maintained a struggle with all the
tenacity of despair against tho repeated onsets
of the Romans. At length, worn out by famine
and disease, they yielded on the 9th of the
month Ab, A.D. 135, and the grandson of
Bar Cocheba was among the slain. The
slaughter was frightful. The Romans, say
the Rabbinical historians, waded to their horse-
bridles in blood, which flowed with the fury of
a mountain torrent. The corpses of the slain,
according to the same veracious authorities,
extended for more than thirteen miles, and re-
mained unburied till the reign of Antoninus.
Five hundred and eighty thousand are said to
have fallen by the sword, while the number of
victims to the attendant calamities of war was
countless. On the side of the Romans the loss
was enormous, and so dearly bought was their
victory, that Hadrian, in his letter to the
Senate, announcing the conclusion of the war,
did not adopt the usual congratulatory phrase.
Bar Cocheba has left traces of his occupation of
Jerusalem in coins which were struck during
the first two years of the war. Four silver
coins, three of them undoubtedly belonging to
Trajan, have been discovered, res tamped with
Samaritan characters. But the rebel-leader,
amply supplied with the precious metals by the
contributions of his followers, afterwards coined
his own money. The mint was probably during
the first two years of the war at Jerusalem ;
the coins struck during that period bearing the
inscription " to the freedom of Jerusalem," or
" Jerusalem the holy." They are mentioned in
both Talmuds.
Hadrian's first policy, after the suppression
of the revolt, was to obliterate the existence of
Jerusalem as a city. The ruins which Titus had
left were razed to the ground, and the plough
passed over the foundations of the Temple. A
colony of Roman citizens occupied the new city
which rose from the ashes of Jerusalem, and
their number was afterwards augmented by the
Emperor's veteran legionaries. A temple to the
Capitoline Jupiter was erected on the site of
the sacred edifice of the Jews, and among the
ornaments of the new city were a theatre, two
market-places (Srmttrta), a building called t«-
Tpdmn<pov, and another called K<f8pa. k The city
was divided into seven quarters, each of which
had its own warden. Mount Zion lay without
the walls (Jerome, Mic. iii. 12 ; Ilin. Hteros.
p. 592, ed. Wesseling). That the northern wall
enclosed the so-called sacred places, though
* The Ckronieon Alexandrinum (p. 2M) mentions
to too ftwioVia, (tai t& Qiittpov, jeat t% TptKtxft-ipov, kox ri>
T*rpAwn<t>ov, xau ib dcotacairvAop lb npiv oropa£tff*fvoe
JERUSALEM
162?
asserted by Deyling, is regarded by Munter as a
fable of a later date. A temple to Astarte, the
Phoenician Venus, on the site afterwards identi-
fied with the Sepulchre, appears on coins, with
four columns and the inscription C. A. C, Colonia
Aelia Capitolma, but it is doubtful whether it
was erected at this time. The worship of
Serapis was introduced from Egypt. A statue
of the emperor was raised on the site of the
Holy of Holies (Niceph. H. E. iii. 24) ; and it
must have been near the same spot that the
Bordeaux Pilgrim saw two statues of Hadrian,
not far from the " lapis pertusus " which the
Jews of his day yearly visited and anointed
with oil (/tin. Hieros. p. 591).
It was not, however, till the following year,
A.D. 136, that Hadrian, on celebrating his Vi-
cennalia, bestowed upon the new city the name
of Aelia Capitolina, combining with his own
family title the name of Jupiter of the Capitol,
the guardian deity of the colony. Christians
and pagans alone were allowed to reside. Jews
were forbidden to enter on pain of death, and
this prohibition, though occasionally relaxed,
remained in force in the time of Tertullian.
But the conqueror, though stern, did not descend
to wanton mockery. The swine sculptured by
the Emperor's command over the gate leading
to Bethlehem (Euseb. Chron. Hadr. Ann. xx.),
was not intended as an insult to the conquered
race to bar their entrance to the city of their
fathers, but was one of the sigrut militaria of
the Roman army. About the middle of the 4th
century the Jews were allowed to visit the
neighbourhood, and afterwards, once a year, to
enter the city itself, and weep over it on the
anniversary of its capture. Jerome (on Zeph.
i. 15) has drawn a vivid picture of the wretched
crowds of Jews who in his day assembled at the
wailing-place by the west wall of the Temple
to bemoan the loss of their ancestral greatness.
On the 9th of the month Ab might be seen the
aged and decrepit of both sexes, with tattered
garments and dishevelled hair, who met to weep
over the downfall of Jerusalem, and purchased
permission of the soldiery to prolong their
lamentations (" et miles mercedem postulat ut
illis flere plus liceat ").
So completely were all traces of the ancient
city obliterated that its very name was in pro-
cess of time forgotten. It was not till after
Constantine built the ifartyrion on the supposed
site of the Crucifixion, that its ancient appella-
tion was revived. In the 7th canon of the Council
of Nicaea the Bishop of Aelia is mentioned ; but
Macarius, in subscribing to the canons, de-
signated himself bishop of Jerusalem. The
name Aelia occurs as late as Adamnanus (A.D.
697), and is even found in Edrisi and Mejr ed-
Din about 1495.
After the inauguration of the new colony of
Aelia the annals of the city again relapse into
in obscurity which is only represented in history
by a list of twenty-three Christian Bishops,
who filled up the interval between the election
of Marcus, the first of the series, and Macarius
in the reign of Constantine. Already in the
3rd century the Holy Places had become object*
of enthusiasm, and the pilgrimage of Alexander,
a Bishop in Cappadocia, and afterwards of Jeru-
salem, is matter of history. In the following
century such pilgrimages became more common.
Digitized by
Google
1628
JERUSALEM
The aged Empress Helena, mother of Constan-
tine, visited Palestine in A.D. 326, and, according
to tradition, erected magnificent churches at
Bethlehem and on the Moant of Olives. Her
son, fired with the same zeal, swept away the
shrine of Astarte, which occupied the supposed
site of the Resurrection, and founded in its
stead a " house of prayer on a scale of rich and
imperial costliness." On the east of this was a
large court, the eastern side being formed by
the Basilica, erected on the spot where the Cross
was said to have been found. The latter of
these buildings is that known as the Martyrion ;
the former was the church of the Anastasis, or
Resurrection: their locality will be considered
in the following section (p. 1653). The Mar-
tyrion was completed a.d. 335, and its dedi-
cation celebrated by a great Council of Bishops,
first at Tyre and afterwards at Jerusalem, at
which Eusebius was present. In the reign of
Julian (a.d. 362) the Jews, with the permission
and at the instigation of the Emperor, made an
abortive attempt to rebuild the Temple. From
whatever motive, Julian had formed the design
of restoring the Jewish worship on Mount
Moriah to its pristine splendour, and during his
absence in the East the execution of his project
was entrusted to his favourite, Alypius of Anti-
och. Materials of every kind were provided at
the Emperor's expense, and so great was the
enthusiasm of the Jews that their women took
part in the work, and in the laps of their gar-
ments carried off the earth which covered the
rnins of the Temple. But a sudden whirlwind
and earthquake shattered the stones of the
former foundations; the workmen fled for
shelter to one of the neighbouring churches (M
t« r&r nXfoiov Itpuv, Greg. Naz. Or. iv. Ill),
the doors of which were closed against them by
an invisible hand, and a fire issuing from the
Temple-mount raged the whole day and con-
sumed their tools. Numbers perished in the
flames. Some who escaped took refuge in a
portico near at hand, which fell at night and
crushed them as they slept (Theodor. H. E. iii.
15 ; Sozomen, v. 21 ; see also Ambros. Epist. ad
Theodosium, lib. ii. ep. 17). Whatever may
have been the colouring which this story re-
ceived as it passed through the hands of the
ecclesiastical historians, the impartial narrative
of Ammianus Marcelliuus (xxiii. 1), the friend
and companion in arms of the Emperor, leaves
no reasonable doubt of the truth of the main
facts that the work was interrupted by fire,
which all attributed to supernatural agency.
In the time of Chrysostom the foundations of
the Temple still remained, to which the orator
could appeal (Ad Judaeos, iii. 431 ; Paris, 1636).
The event was regarded as a judgment of God
upon the impious attempt of Julian to falsify
the predictions of Christ : a position which
Bishop Warburton defends with great skill in his
treatise on the subject.
During the 4th and 5th centuries Jerusalem
became the centre of attraction for pilgrims
from all regions'; and its bishops contended
1 One of these pilgrims, S. Silvia, c. 385 AJ>., gives
a most Interesting picture of the ritual of the Church at
Jerusalem towards the close of the 4th century (see Pil-
grimage of S. Silvia, translated by Bev. J. H. Bernard
for P. P. Text Society).
JEBTJSALEM
with those of Caesarea for the supremacy ; but
it was not till after the Council of Chalcedon
(451-453) that it was made an independent
patriarchate. In the theological controversies
which followed the decision of that Council with
regard to the two natures of Christ, Jerusalem
bore its share with other Oriental churches, and
two of its Bishops were deposed by Monophysite
fanatics. The Synod of Jerusalem in A.D. 53S
confirmed the decree of the Synod of Constanti-
nople against the Monophysites.
In A.D. 438 the Empress Eudocia visited
Jerusalem, and there, when exiled from Con-
stantinople, she passed the last sixteen years of
her life. She founded churches, monasteries,
and almshouses, and rebuilt the walls of the
city (Soc H. E. vii. 47 ; Evag. B. E. I 20-22);
and two of her works — the basilica of St.
Stephen, in which she was buried, and the city
wall enclosing the Fountain of Siloam — are
mentioned by Antoninus (xxv.). To this
period, one of great building activity, may
perhaps be assigned the Church of St. Sophia,
or of the Praetorium, and the Churches of St.
Mary (in probaticd), the pinnacle of the Temple,
Siloam, &c, which are mentioned by writers in
the 6th century (see the Breviarium, Theodo-
sius, and Antoninus).
In 529 the Emperor Justinian founded at
Jerusalem a splendid church in honour of the
Virgin, which has been identified by some
writers with the building known in modern
times as the Mosque el-Aksa, but of which
probably no remains now exist (see p. 1657).
Procopius, the historian, ascribes to the same
emperor the erection of ten or eleven monas-
teries in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem ana
Jericho. Eutychius adds that he built a hospital
for strangers in Jerusalem, and that the church
above mentioned was began by the patriarch
Elias, and completed by Justinian. Later in the
same century Gregory the Great (590-604) sent
the abbot Probus to Jerusalem with a large sum
of money, and endowed a hospital for pilgrims,
which Robinson suggests is the same as that no*
used by the Muslims for the like purpose, and
called by the Arabs et- Taktyeh. It was however,
more probably, close to the Church of the Holy
Sepulchre, perhaps on the site afterwards granted
to the merchants of Amalfi.
For nearly five centuries the city had been
free from the horrors of war. The merchants of
the Mediterranean sent their ships to the coasts
of Syria, and Jerusalem became a centre of
trade as well as of devotion. But this rest
was roughly broken by the invading Persian
army under Chosroes II., who swept through
Syria, drove the imperial troops before them,
and, after the capture of Antioch and Damascus,
marched upon Jerusalem. A multitude of Jews
from Tiberias and Galilee followed in their train.
The city was invested, and taken by assault in
June 614 ; thousands of the monks and clergy
were slain ; the suburbs were burnt, churches
demolished, and that of the Holy Sepulchre
injured, if not consumed, by fire.* The invading
army in their retreat carried with them the
patriarch Zacharias, and the wood of the true
Cross, besides multitudes of captives. During
k 'Efjurtirparot to Arfnrorucbr llmgAta *ai Oi «p»/wf rl *
Tov AtoS root' (ChroR. Altx. p. 385).
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
the exile of the patriarch, his vicar Modesto*,
supplied with money and workmen by the muni-
ficent John Eleemon, patriarch of Alexandria,
restored the churches of the Resurrection and
Calvary, and also that of the Assumption. 1
After a struggle of fourteen years the imperial
arms were again victorious, and in 628 Heraclius
entered Jerusalem on foot, at the head of a
triumphal procession, bearing the true Cross on
his shoulder. The restoration of the churches
is with greater probability attributed by William
of Tvre to the liberality of the emperor (Hist.
i. 1)'.
The dominion of the Christians in the Holy
City was now rapidly drawing to a close. After
an obstinate defence of four months, in the
depth of winter, against the impetuous attacks
of the Arabs, the patriarch Sophronius sur-
rendered to the Khalif Omar in person a.d. 637.
The valour of the besieged extorted unwilling
admiration from the victors, and obtained for
them terms unequalled for leniency in the
history of Arab conquest. The Khalif, after
ratifying the terms of capitulation, which se-
cured to the Christians liberty of worship in the
churches which they had, but prohibited the
erection of more, entered the city, and was met at
the gates by the patriarch. Sophronius received
him with the uncourteous exclamation, " Verily
this is the abomination of desolation, spoken of
by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy
place!" and the chronicler does not forget
to record the ragged dress and " satanic hy-
pocrisy " of the hardy Khalif (Cedreuus, Hist.
Camp. 426). Omar then, in company with the
patriarch, visited the Church of the Resurrec-
tion, and at the Muslim time of prayer knelt
down on the eastern steps of the Basilica,
refusing to pray within the buildings, in order
that the possession of them might be secured
to the Christians. Tradition relates that he
requested a site whereon to erect a mosque
for the Muhammadan worship, and that the
patriarch assigned him the spot occupied by the
reputed stone of Jacob's vision : over this he is
said to have built the mosque afterwards known
by his name (Eutych. Citron, ii. 285 ; Ockley,
Hist, of Sar. pp. 205-214, Bohn), and which tra-
dition still points out in the S.E. corner of the
Aksa. Henceforth Jerusalem became for Muslims,
as well as Christians, a sacred place, and the
Mosque of Omar shared the honours of pilgrim-
age with the renowned Kaaba of Mecca.
Towards the close of the 7th century the
Khalif Abd ul-Melik, wishing, from political mo-
tives, to set up another place of pilgrimage to
replace the Kaaba, brought the Sakhrah within
the precinctB of the Moslem Sanctuary, and
either built the existing " Dome of the Rock "
over it, or, more probably, restored and covered
by a dome a previously existing church. His
son El-Walid completed the work by extending
the Haram to the north so as to bring the Dome
of the Rock into the centre of the sacred area
(Eutychius, Annal. ii. 365, 373).
In the reign of Charlemagne (771-814) am-
1 According to Eutychius {Annal. ii. 219) the churches
restored were those of the Resurrection, of the Sepulchre,
of the Calvary, and of St. Constantino. A description of
the churches is given by Arculfus, Who visited Jerusalem
towards the close of the 1th century.
JERUSALEM
1629
bassadors were sent by the emperor of the
West to distribute alms in the Holy City, and
on their return were accompanied by envoys
from the enlightened Khalif Harun er-Rashid,
bearing to Charlemagne the keys of Calvary and
of the Holy Sepulchre. But these amenities were
not of long continuance. The dissensions which
ensued upon the death of the Khalif spread to
Jerusalem, and churches and convents suffered
in the general anarchy. About the same period
the feud between the Joktanite and Ishmaelite
Arabs assumed an alarming aspect. The former,
after devastating the neighbouring region, made
an attempt upon Jerusalem, but were repulsed
by the signal valour of its garrison. In the
reign of the Khalif El-Mamun the buildings of
the Haram esh-Sherif were thoroughly restored
at great cost ; and in that of El-Motasem Jeru-
salem was held for a time by the rebel chief
Tamun Abu-Hareb.
With the fall of the Abossides the Holy City
passed into the hands of the Fatimite conqueror
Muez, who fixed the seat of his empire at Musr
el-Kahirah, the modern Cairo (a.d. 969). Under
the Fatimite dynasty the sufferings" of the
Christians in Jerusalem reached their height,
when el-H£kim, the third of his line, ascended
the throne (A.D. 996). The Church of the Holy
Sepulchre, which had been twice dismantled and
burnt within the previous seventy years (Eutych.
Ann. ii. 529, 530 ; Cedren. Hist. Camp. p. 661),
was again demolished (Ademari Chron. a.d. 1010),
and its successor was not completed till A.D.
1048. A small chapel ("oratoria valde modica,"
Will. Tyr. viii. 3) supplied the place of the
magnificent Basilica on Golgotha.
The pilgrimages to Jerusalem in the 11th
century became a source of revenue to the Mus-
lims, who exacted a tax of a byzant from every
visitor to the Holy Sepulchre. Among the
most remarkable pilgrimages of this century
were those of Robert of Normandy (1035), Liet-
bert of Cambray (1054), and the German Bishops
(1065).
In 1077 Jerusalem was pillaged by Atsiz the
Kharezmian, commander of the array sent by
Melik Shah against the Syrian dominions of the
Khalif. About the year 1084 it was bestowed
by Tutush, the brother of Melik Shah, upon
Urtuk, chief of a Turkman horde under his
command. From this time till 1091 Urtuk was
Emir of the city, and on his death it was held
as a kind of fief by his sons el-Gh&zi and Suk-
m&n, whose severity to the Christians became
the proximate cause of the Crusades. Rudhwan,
son of Tutush, made an ineffectual attack upon
Jerusalem in 1096. The city was ultimately
taken, after a siege of forty days, by Afdal, viztr
of the Khalif of Egypt, and for eleven months
had been governed by the Emir Iftikar ed-Dau-
leh, when, on the 7th of June, 1099, the
Crusading army appeared before the walls.
After the fall of Antioch in the preceding year
the remains of their numerous host marched
along between Lebanon and the sea, passing
™ It Is worthy of notice that Mukaddasi (a.d. 9S6)
describes the Christians and Jews as having the upper
band at Jerusalem; and it was probably about this
period that the merchants of Amain wero allowed to
found a monastery near the Holy Sepulchre (William of
Tyre, xvli!. 4, 6).
Digitized by
Google
1C30
JERUSALEM
Bybloa, Beirut, and Tyre on their road, and so
through Lydda, Ramlch, and the ancient Em-
mang-Nicopolis, to Jerusalem. The Crusaders,
40,000 in number, but with little more than
20,000 effective troops, reconnoitred the city, and
determined to attack it on the north. Their
camp extended from the Gate of St. Stephen
(Damascus Gate) to that beneath the Tower of
David. Godfrey of Lorraine occupied the extreme
left (East) ; next him was Count Robert of Flan-
ders ; Robert of Normandy held the third place ;
and Tancred was posted at the N.W. corner tower,
afterwards called by his name. Raymond of
Toulouse originally encamped against the west
gate, but afterwards withdrew half his force to
the part between the city and the church of
Zion. At the tidings of their approach the
Khalif of Egypt gave orders for the repair of
JERUSALEM
the towers and walls ; the fountains and wells
for five or six miles round (WilL Tyr. vii. 23),
with the exception of Siloam, were stopped, as
in the days of Hezekiah, when the city was
invested by the Assyrians. On the fifth day
after their arrival the Crusaders attacked the
city and drove the Saracens from the outworks,
but were compelled to suspend their opera-
tions till the arrival of the Genoese engineers.
Another month was consumed in constructing
engines to attack the walls, and meanwhile toe
besiegers suffered all the horrors of thirst in a
burning sun. At length the engines were
completed and the day fixed for the assault.
On the night of the 13th of July Godfrey had
changed his plan of attack, and removed his
engines to a weaker part of the wall between
tbe Gate of St. Stephen (Damascus Gate) and the
Si. Btephrai G»le.
corner tower overlooking the valley of Jehosha-
phat on the north. At break of day the city
was assaulted in three points at once. Tancred
and Raymond of Toulouse attacked the walls
opposite their own positions. Night only
separated the combatants, and was spent by
both armies in preparations for the morrow's
contest. Next day, after seven hours' hard
fighting, the drawbridge from Godfrey's tower
was let down. Godfrey was first npon the wall,
followed by the Count of Flanders and the Duke
of Normandy ; the northern gate was thrown
open, and at 3 o'clock on Friday the 15th of
July Jerusalem was in the hands of the
Crusaders. Raymond of Toulouse entered with-
out opposition by the Zion gate. The carnage
was terrible: 10,000 Muslims fell within the
sacred enclosure. Order was gradually restored,
and Godfrey of Bouillon elected king (Will.
Tyr. viii.). Churches were established, and for
eighty-eight years Jerusalem remained in the
hands of the Christians. In 1187 it was retaken
by Saladin after a siege of several weeks. Fire
years afterwards (1192), in anticipation 'of an
attack by Richard of England, the fortifications
were strengthened and new walls built, and the
supplv of water again cut off (Barhebr. Chron.
p. 421). During the winter of 1191-2 the work
was prosecuted with the utmost vigour. Fifty
skilled masons, sent by Alaeddin of Mosul,
rendered able assistance, and two thousand
Christian captives were pressed into the service.
The Sultan rode ronnd the fortifications each
day encouraging the workmen, and even brought
them stones on his horse's saddle. His sons,
his brother el-Melik el-Adil, and the Emirs
ably seconded his efforts, and within six months
the works were completed, solid and durable as
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
a rock (Wilken, XreuzzOge, it. 457, 458). The
walls and towers were demolished by order of
the Saltan el-Helik el-Mo'azzem of Damascus
in 1219, and in this defenceless condition the
city was ceded to the Christians by virtue of
the treaty with the Emperor Frederick II. An
attempt to rebuild the walls in 1239 was frus-
trated by an assault by David of Kerak, who
dismantled the city anew. In 1243 it again
came into the hands of the Christians, and in
the following year sustained a siege by the wild
Kharezmian hordes, who slaughtered the priests
and monks who had taken refuge in tbe'Church
of the Holy Sepulchre, and after plundering
the city withdrew to Gaza. After their de-
parture Jerusalem again reverted to the Mu-
hammadans, in whose hands it still remains.
The defeat of the Christians at Gaza was followed
by the occupation of the Holy City by the forces
of the Sultan of Egypt.
In 1277 Jerusalem was nominally annexed to
the kingdom of Sicily. In 1517 it passed under
the sway of the Ottoman Sultan Selim I., whose
successor Suleiman built the present walls of
the city in 1542. Muhammad AH, the Pasha
of Egypt, took possession of it in 1832. In
1834 it was seized and held for a time by the
Fellahin during the insurrection, and in 1840,
after the bombardment of Acre, was again
restored to the Sultan.
Such in brief is a sketch of the chequered
fortunes of the Holy City since its destruction
by Titus. The details will be found in Gibbon's
Decline and Fall ; Prof. Robinson's Bibl. Res. i.
365-407; the Rev. G. Williams' Holy City,
vol. i. ; Wilken's Gesch. der Kreuzzuge ; Dey-
ling's Diss, da Aelioe Capitolinae orig. et historia ;
Bp. Hunter's History of the Jewish War under
Trajan and Hadrian, translated in Robinson's
Bibliotheca Sacra, pp. 393-455; Besant and
Palmer's Jerusalem the City of Herod and Sala-
din ; and Le Strange's Palestine under the Mos-
lems. [W.A.W.] [W.]
III. Topography op the City.
There is perhaps no city in the ancient world
the topography of which ought to be so easily
determined as that of Jerusalem. In the first
place, the city was always small, and surrounded
by deep valleys ; whilst the form of the ground
within its limits was so strongly marked that
there should apparently be no great difficulty
in ascertaining its general extent, or in fixing
its more prominent features. On the other
hand we have in the works of Josephus a more
full and complete topographical description of
this city than of almost any other in the ancient
world. It is certain that he was intimately
acquainted with the localities he describes ; and
as his copious descriptions can be tested by com-
paring them with the details of the siege by
Titus which he afterwards narrates, there ought
to be no difficulty in settling at least all the
main points. Nor would there ever hare been
any, but for the circumstance that, for a long
period after the destruction of the city by Titus,
the place was practically deserted by its original
inhabitants, and the continuity of tradition con-
sequently broken ; and that after this, when
it again appears in history, it is as a sacred city,
and at a period the most uncritical of any known
JERUSALEM
1631
in the modern history of the world. During at
least ten centuries of what are called most
properly the Dark ages, it was thought necessary
to find a locality for every event mentioned in
the sacred Scriptures which had taken place
within or near its walls. These were in most
instances fixed arbitrarily, there being no con-
stant tradition to gnide the topographer, so that
the confusion which has arisen has become per-
plexing, to a degree that can only be appreciated
by those who have attempted to unravel the
tangled thread ; and now that long centuries of
constant tradition have added sanctity to the
localities, it is extremely difficult to shake one-
self free from its influence, and to investigate
the subject in that critical spirit which is
necessary to elicit the truth so long buried in
obscurity. The question is further complicated
by the enormous quantity of rubbish, the debris
of ancient Jerusalem, which has turned the
deep Tyropoeon ravine into a shallow depression,
has completely covered the "Upper Market
Place" and the "Via Dolorosa," and has
obliterated many of the ancient landmarks.
It is only by piecing together the results of
excavation, and by a careful comparison of the
ample historical materials with the local indica-
tions, that we can hope to arrive at a solution
of the many difficult problems connected with
the topography of ancient Jerusalem. Much
has already been done, but there are still no
satisfactory data for the determination of some
of the most important points at issue. It is
true that we now know within very narrow
limits the position of the Tower Hippicus, and
the course of the walls leading thence east-
ward to the Temple enclosure, and southward
above the Valley of Hinnom. But the sites
of the Temple, of the Tombs of the Kings, and of
the Tower Psephinus, as well as the courses
of the second and third walls, and of the first
wall above Siloam, are still uncertain, and will
remain so until the excavations carried out by
Sir C. Warren* for the Palestine Exploration
Fund are resumed.
Numerous attempts have been made to solve
the disputed questions, but so uncertain are the
data available that the views advanced differ
widely from each other in many essential
features. The two sites of greatest interest are
those of the Temple, and of the Church of the
Holy Sepulchre. The Temple, according to
Messrs. Fergusson, Thrupp and Lew in, Prof.
Robertson Smith, and others, occupied a square
of about 600 ft. at the S.W. angle of the Haram
esh-Sherif, and this is the view adopted in the
present article. On the other hand, Dr. Robin-
son, Rev. G. Williams, Sir C. Warren, Major
Conder, and all French and German authorities,
maintain that it was near the centre of that
enclosure. Four distinct views have been ad-
vanced with regard to the site of the Holy
Sepulchre.
1. The first of these theories is the most
obvious, and has at all events the great merit
of simplicity. It consists in the belief that all
the sacred localities were correctly ascertained
in the early ages of Christianity ; and, what is
• The final results of Sir C. Warren's excavations are
given in PEP. Mem., Jerusalem vol., with the portfolio
of plans and sections.
Digitized by
Google
1632
JEBUSAXEM
still more important, that none hare been
changed during the dark agea that followed,
or in the numerous revolutions to which the
city ha* been exposed : consequently inferring
that all which the traditions of the Middle Ages
have handed down to us may be implicitly
relied upon. The advantages of this theory are
so manifest, that it is little wonder that it
should be so popular and find so many advocates.
The first persou who ventured publicly to
express his dissent from this view was Korte, a
German printer, who travelled in Palestine
about the year 1728. On visiting Jerusalem,
he was struck with the apparent impossibility
of reconciling the site of the present Church of
the Holy Sepulchre with the exigencies of the
Bible narrative, and on his return home he pub-
lished a work denying the authenticity of the
so-called sacred localities. His heresies excited
very little attention at the time, or for long
afterwards ; but the spirit of enquiry which
has sprung up during the present century has
revived the controversy which has so long been
dormant, and many pious and earnest men, both
Protestant and Catholic, have expressed with
more or leas distinctness the difficulties they
feel in reconciling the assumed localities with
the indications in the Bible. The arguments in
favour of the present localities being the correct
ones, were well summed up by the Rev. George
Williams in his work on the Holy City, and with
the assistance of Professor Willis all was said
that could be urged in favour of their authen-
ticity. The admitted difficulties of the case
were explained with great ingenuity ; but no
new facts were brought forward to counter-
balance the significance of those urged on the
other side.
2. Dr. Robinson, on the other hand, in his
elaborate works on Palestine, brought together
all the arguments which existed in his day
against the authenticity of the mediaeval sites
and traditions. The result of his researches was
the conclusion that the site of the Holy Sepulchre
was now, and must in all probability for ever
remain, a mystery. The effect was, that those
who were opposed to his views clung all the
more firmly to those they before entertained,
preferring a site and a sepulchre which had
been hallowed by the tradition of ages rather
than launch forth on the shoreless sea of specula-
tion which Dr. Robinson's negative conclusion
opened out before them.
3. The third theory is that which was put
forward by Mr. James Fergusson.* It agrees
generally with the views nrged by all those,
from Korte to Robinson, who doubt the authen-
ticity of the present site of the sepulchre ; but
instead of acquiescing in the view taken by the
latter, it goes on to assert, that the building
within the Haram esh-Sherif, known as the
Kubbet et-Sakhrah, " Dome of the Rock," is the
identical church which Constantine erected over
the Rock that contained the Tomb of Christ ;
and that the site of the Holy Sepulchre was
transferred from the eastern to the western hill
after the death of el-Hakem in the first half of
the 11th century. Mr. Fergusson supported
• In his "Esssy on the Ancient Topography of
Jerusalem ; " his *' Temples of the Jews," his article in
the first edition of this Dictionary, snd other works.
JERUSALEM
his views by arguments drawn from the archi-
tectural details of the " Dome of the Rock," ami
his great reputation as a writer upon architecture
gave them an importance which they would net
otherwise have possessed. They were never re-
ceived with much favour, and, when tint
enounced, gave rise to bitter controversy.
4. The fourth theory is that the site sow
occupied by the Church of the Holy Sepulchre
is that which Constantine believed to be the
scene of Christ's Crucifixion and burial, and the
one upon which he built his churches ; bat that
the true site of the Crucifixion must be looked
for outside the north wall of the modern city,
either on the hill above "Jeremiah's Grotto,"
or on the hill to the east. The first of tit*
views has been brought prominently to notiee
by Major Conder and the late General Gordon ;
the second, and perhaps the more correct vie*,
is that which was held by Bishop Gobat of
Jerusalem.
The most satisfactory way of investigating tht
subject will probably be to commence at the
time of the greatest prosperity of Jerusalem,
immediately before its downfall, which alio
happens to be the period when we hare the
greatest amount of knowledge regarding its
features. If we can determine what was then
its extent, and fix the more important localities
at that period, there will be no great difficulty
in ascertaining the proper sites for the events
which may have happened either before or after.
All that now remains of the ancient city of
course existed then ; and the descriptions of
Josephns, in so far as they are to be trusted,
apply to the city at he then saw it ; so that the
evidence is at that period more complete sad
satisfactory than at any other time, snd the
city itself being then at its greatest extent, it
necessarily included all that existed either before
or afterwards.
It will not be necessary here to dwell upon
the much disputed point of the veracity of the
historian on whose testimony we must princi-
pally rely in this matter. It will be sufficient
to remark that every new discovery, every im-
proved plan that has been made, has served more
and more to confirm the testimony of Josephns.
and to give a higher idea of the accuracy of
his local knowledge. In no one instance has he
yet been convicted of any material error in
describing localities in plan. Many difficulties
which were thought at one time to be insuper-
able have disappeared with a more careful
investigation of the data ; and now that the city
has been carefully mapped * and partially ex-
plored by excavation, there seems s greater
probability of our being able to reconcile all his
descriptions with the appearance of the existing
localities. So much indeed is this the esse that
one cannot help suspecting that, though writing
at Rome, Josephus had before him data which
checked and gnided him in all that be said as to
horizontal dimensions. This becomes more pro-
bable when we consider how moderate all these
are, and how consistent with existing remains,
and compare them with his exaggerated state-
ments whenever he speaks of height* or it-
► The results of the most recent surveys are embodied
in the plans of the Ordnance Survey of Jerusalem
(Revised edition).
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
scribes the arrangement of buildings which had
been destroyed in the siege, and of which it may
be supposed no record or correct description
then existed. He seems to have felt himself at
liberty to indulge his national vanity in respect
to these, but to have been checked when speak-
ing of what still existed, and could never be
falsified. The consequence is, that in almost all
instances we may rely on anything he says with
regard to the plan of Jerusalem, and as to any-
thing that existed or could be tested at the time
he wrote, but must receive with the greatest
caution any assertion with regard to what did
not then remain, or respecting which no
accurate evidence could be adduced to refute his
statement.
In attempting to follow the description of
Josephus it is necessary, in the first place, to
cunsider how far his remarks on the topogra-
phical features an in accordance with local
indications ; and in the next to fix the positions
of the Temple and the Tower Hippicus.
1. Topography. — Jerusalem stands, as already
stated (p. 1585), on the southern extremity of a
small plateau which is intersected by two
ravines, and almost encircled by the valleys of
the Kedron and of Hinnom. Within the limits
of the city walls the ravines are almost filled
with, and their slopes, where not precipitous,
are completely covered by, the ruins of ancient
Jerusalem ; whilst, even at the higher levels,
the rubbish has in places accumulated to a
height of more than 30 feet. The natural
features of the ground are thus partially con-
cealed; and their true forms and relative im-
portance to each other can only be ascertained
by excavation. Thus far excavation has thrown
much light on the character of the larger
features ; but the original form of the ground is
still undetermined at several important points,
and little is yet known of those minor features
which must have influenced the trace of the
fortifications, the selection of sites for important
buildings, and the direction of the streets.' The
most marked feature of the Jerusalem plateau is
the ravine, the larger of the two, which breaks
it up into two spurs of unequal size. The western
spur is broad-backed, and much straighter and
higher than the eastern spur, — a narrow rocky
ridge, with steep almost precipitous sides, —
which sweeps round in a bold curve (Joseph. 4/»-
tplicupToi) facing the west. The ravine itself
rises as a broad shallow depression outside the
1 >amascus Gate, and, gradually contracting as it
descends, runs in a south-east direction to
Wilson's Arch. Hereabouts it is joined by a
small ravine' or gully, which, rising near the
Jaffa Gate on the west, indicates very clearly
the line of the first or old wall, and the limits
of that portion of the western hill called by
.losephus " the Upper Market Place." A little
below Wilson's Arch the ravine changes its
direction to the south, and falls rapidly to its
junction with the Kedron Valley below the Pool
of Siloam. It was this well-marked topogra-
phical feature, and not the little gully running
JERUSALEM
1633
* The plan of Jerusalem represents the original form
of the ground as nearly as it can be reconstructed from
existing data.
' The character of this ravine Is not yet clearly
known.
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
down from the Jaffa Gate, which Josephus had
in his mind when he wrote (B. J. r. 4, § 1) that
Jerusalem "was built on two hills opposite to
one another, but divided in the middle by a
ravine " ; and that this ravine, called the Tyro-
poeon, extended as for as Siloam, and " separated
the hill of the Upper City from that of the
Lower." Of these hills he writes (see Plate II.
and Plan No. 2, sections 1, 2, 3, p. 1637) that
externally, except on the north, they were
bounded by inaccessible ravines, and that the
one which " contained the Upper City was much
higher, and in length more direct, whilst the
other, "which was called Acra, and supported the
Lower City, was curved like the moon in her
third quarter" (bnQUvpTos). The language
could scarcely be more precise. The second
ravine rises in the eastern half of the plateau, to
the N. of " Jeremiah's Grotto," and pursuing a
S.E. course enters the Valley of the Kedron to
the north of the Golden Gate. This ravine, of
which the exact form has not yet been ascer-
tained, is apparently the "Valley called Kedron "
("ri)r KtSpuya KaAovntvrjy (pdparyya), which is
mentioned by Josephus as having, with the
Temple and Ophla, been occupied during the
Roman siege by John, and which must there-
fore have been within the walls (B. J. v. 6,
§ 1) ; as the point at which the wall of Agrippa
joined the old wall (4, § 2) ; and as being below
the N.E. angle of the Temple cloisters (vi. 3, § 2).
The western hill or spur is divided into two
parts, which differ somewhat in character, by
the gully running eastward from the Jaffa Gate.
The ground south of the gully falls abruptly on
the W. and S. to the Valley of Hinnom, and on
these sides the hill was made practically in-
accessible by cutting the rock vertically down-
wards so as to leave cliffs or scarps with here
and there narrow flights of rock-hewn steps.
On the east side there is a natural cliff, and at
its foot, bordering the Tyropoeon Valley, lies a
strip of comparatively level ground. Above the
cliff stood the Palace of the Asmoneans, in
which Agrippa lived (B. J. ii. 16, § 3 ; 17, § 5) ;
and along its edge, perhaps, ran a wall for
the defence of the Upper City. On the lower
ground at the foot of the cliff, possibly the
Parbar of 1 Ch. xxvi. 18 and "the suburbs"
of Josephus (Ant. xv. 11, § 5), was the Xystus
(B. J. ii. 16, § 3; v. 4, § 2; vi. 6, § 2).
On the north side lay the gully, which was
apparently rugged and deep towards the east,
and connected with the Valley of Hinnom, on
the west, by a rock-hewn ditch, which is now,
in part, represented by the ditch of the citadel
near the Jaffa Gate. This portion of the western
hill was thus protected on all sides by natural or
artificial scarps of rock, and it was, as Josephus
correctly states (B.J. vi. 8, § 1), "so precipitous
that it could not possibly be taken without
raising earthworks." The ground immediately
to the north of the gully falls sharply, but not
abruptly, to the Valley of Hinnom on the west,
and more gradually towards the Tyropoeon
Valley on the east; its form is that of a small
spur projecting eastward between the gully ami
the Tyropoeon. Near the middle of the spur
stands the Church of the Holy Sepulchre ; and
some authorities maintain that at its eastern
extremity there was at one time a large knoll, or
mamelon, upon which the Macedonian Acra wax
5 M
Digitized by
Google
1634
JERUSALEM
built. There is, however, no conclusive evidence
of the existence of a knoll at this spot, and the
lower portion of the spar would rather seem to
be the "third hill," which, according to
Josephus (B. J. v. 4, § 1), was opposite to
(hvrucpi'), but naturally lower than Acra, and
formerly parted from it by a broad valley.
This valley, filled up by the Asmoneans when
they levelled the Acra, is apparently that part
of the Tyropoeon immediately west of the Bab
m-Nazir of the Haram. The high ground to
the west, between the Jaffa Gate and KaVat
Jalud, is called by Josephus (B. J. ii. 19, § 4)
" the Upper City," whilst the lower ground to
the east, or " third hill," was probably occupied
by " the other city," * to which one of the gates of
the Temple enclosure led (Ant. zv. 11, § 5). All
the higher ground of the western hill was thus
called "the Upper City," whilst the lower
slopes were known on the S. as " the suburbs,"
and on the N. as " the third hill." At KaVat
Jalud the wall is protected by a shallow rock-
liewn ditch which runs eastward towards the
Damascus Gate, and southwards towards the
Jaffa Gate ; bat it is evident, as indeed may be
inferred from Josephus, that the defences on this
side of the city were weak, and not to be com-
l>ared with those of the " Upper Market Place "
to the south.
The eastern hill runs in a S.E. direction from
the knoll above "Jeremiah's Grotto" to the
Triple Gate of the Haram, and thence southerly
to its termination near the Pool of Siloam. Its
crest was originally continuous, but the rock
has been cat away in several places, and this has
given an appearance of prominence and isolation
to certain points, such as the Sakhrah, which
they did not at one time possess. On the east
the ground falls abruptly to the " Valley called
Kedron," and to the Kedron itself, and on the west
it falls no less steeply to the Tyropoeon ; whilst
tm the south, in the vicinity of Siloam, the rock
has apparently been scarped for purposes of de-
fence. The exact form of the hill, however, is
not known at several important points, and this
is more especially the case where the features are
concealed by the massive masonry of the sacred
enclosure of the Muslims, — the Haram esh-Sherif.
Between "Jeremiah's Grotto," on the north, and
the city wall there is a broad and deep rock-
hewn ditch, which is connected with and^origin-
ally formed part of the extensive subterranean
quarries known as the " Cotton Grotto," and
called by Josephus (B. J. v. 4, § 2) "the Royal
caverns " (Plan No. 2, section 2). To the south of
the ditch lies that part of the hill named Bezetha,
which extends southwards to the " Ecce Homo
Arch," where the continuity of the ridge is
Kgain broken by the rock-hewn ditch that
separated Bezetha from the Castle of Antonia.
About 90 ft. south of this ditch the rock has
been cut away to a depth of some 23 ft.,
leaving an isolated mass of rock upon which
the Turkish Barracks now stand. Further
south there are traces of a third ditch, which
was cut across the ridge at its narrowest point,
and is perhaps alluded to by Josephus in his
account of the attack upon the Temple by
• Probably so called because It lay between the second
and the first walls, and formed a separate quarter of
the city.
JERUSALEM
Pompey (Ani. xiv. 4, § 2 ; B.J. i. 7, § 2). The
space between the second and third ditches was
occupied by the Macedonian Acra, and later by
the Castle of Antonia. About 600 ft., or, accord-
ing to some views, directly south of the third
ditch, lay the Temple, and beyond its southern
cloisters the hill was thickly covered with houses
as far as Siloam. The position of Bezetha, which
Josephus calls "the fourth hill " of Jerusalem,
is clearly defined. It was opposite to the Castle
of Antonia, and separated from it by a rock-hewn
ditch; the Antonia lay between it and the
Temple, and it was the highest of all the hills,
and the only one that shut out the view of the
Temple from the north (£. J. ii. 15, § 5 ; 19,
§ 4 ; v. 4, § 2 ; 5, § 8). This description can
only apply to the northern part of the eastern
hill ; it would appear, however, that in a wider
sense Bezetha was held to include the quarter
called Coenopolis or " New Town," enclosed by
the wall of Agrippa, which spread beyond the
limits of the hill. Acra is the name given by
Josephus (A J. i. 1, § 4 ; v. 4, § 1 ; 6, § 1) to
the hill upon which the Lower City was built;
and it was no doubt so called from the Mace-
donian fortress (Acra) which stood upon it, in
close proximity to the Temple (Ant. xii. 5, { 4).
The hill was gibbous in form, and separated
from the Upper City by a valley which reached
as far as Siloam, — a description that applies per-
fectly to the eastern hill (see Plate II.). Although
the term Acra included that portion of the hill
upon which the Macedonian fortress and the
Temple stood, it was more especially applied to
the quarter of the city lying between the Temple
cloisters and Siloam (B. J. v. 6, § 1 ; vi. 6, § 3 ;
7, § 2). Josephus may possibly include the low-
lying ground, elsewhere called " the suburbs,"
within the limits of the Lower City ; but there
is no single instance in which he speaks of that
portion of the city which occupied the " third "
hill, and lay between the second and first walls,'
as Acra, or the Lower City.
The hill to the east of the " Valley called
Kedron," on which the Church of St. Anne now
stands, is not mentioned by Josephus. It can
never have been of much importance, and the wall
was apparently extended in this direction for the
protection of the two large pools in the valley,
and not with the object of enclosing the hill.
2. Site of the Temple.— Without any ex-
ception all topographers are agreed that the
Temple stood within the limits of the great
enclosure now known as the Haram eth-Sherif,
though few are agreed as to the portion of that
space which it covered. It is certain that the
Holy House and Altar in the times of Zerubbabel
and Herod occupied the site of the Temple snd
altar of Solomon (Joseph. Ant. xi. 4, § 1 ;
Maimonides, Beth Hob. ii. 2) ; and that if the
position of the outer court of the Temple, as
rebuilt by Herod, could be determined, there
would be no difficulty in fixing, within narrow
limits, the sites of the original Temple and
Altar of the Jews. Of Herod's Temple there are
two independent descriptions : one in the works
* The omission of any allusion to Acra, or to the
Lower City, In the account of the capture of the second
wall, and the events which Immediately followed it, is
Inexplicable if Acra were In the position assigned to It
by some authorities.
Digitized by
Google
JEBDSALEM
1635
Ko. 1.— Flan of Hum «h-Sbwif. (From the Ordnaao* SorvftjJ'
5 M 2
Digitized by
Google
1636
JERUSALEM
of Josephus, the other in the treatise Middoth.
There are also remains of Herodian and, perhaps,
of older masonry in the retaining walls of the
Ilsram, and many rock-hewn tanks and conduits.
Joseph us, who was personally familiar with the
Temple and its precinct*, treats fully of the
arrangement and dimensions of the several
courts and buildings. In so far as the plan of
the Temple is concerned, he appears to be
singularly accurate ; but when he has to describe
elevation, he shows a marked tendency to ex-
aggeration. The writers of the Mishna made a
special study of the Temple measurements, and
quota the recollections of men who had taken
part, as Levites, in the Temple services. Bat
they wrote long after the fall of Jerusalem;
none of them had seen the Temple, and their
description of it, in the Hiddoth, is less full in
several particulars than that of the Jewish
historian. They may be more accurate in
matters of detail, such as the height and breadth
of steps ; but in all that relates to the genera]
arrangement and external dimensions of the
sacred buildings, their evidence cannot have
the same weight as the direct testimony of
Josephus.
The Haram esh-Sherif (Plan No. 1) is a quad-
rangular enclosure, with walls of massive
masonry, within which lies the central portion
of the eastern hill. The sides are unequal,
but two of the angles, at the S.W. and N.E.
corners, are right angles. The west side
measures 1590 feet, the east 1525 feet, the
south 921 feet, and the north 1036 feet.
The included area is about 35 acres. The
surface has been roughly levelled, partly by
filling up hollows, partly by cutting away the
rock, and partly by building supporting vaults
of masonry. The general level is 2,419 feet
;ibove the Mediterranean ; but in front of the
Golden Gate there is a deep hollow ; and in the
centre there is a raised platform, above which
the Sakhrah rises to an altitude of 2,440 feet.
The crest of the bill runs southward across the
Haram from a point about 60 feet east of the
N.W. angle, where its altitude is 2,462 feet, to
the Triple Gate in the south wall, where it has
an altitude of 2,378 feet. If the hill were
stripped of the mask that conceals it, and re-
stored to its original form, it would appear as a
ridge of bare rock, with abrupt slopes on either
side. The narrowest point would be a little
east of Bab en-Naztr, and the broadest part that
covered by the platform. At the N.W. corner
of the Haram the rock has been cut away so as
to leave a scarp 23 feet high beneath the Turkish
Barracks, and the upper strata have been com-
pletely removed as far as the raised platform.
This excavation is no doubt that made by the
Asmoneans, when they levelled the hill upon
which the Acra stood {Ant. xiii. 6, § 7). About
90 feet north of the scarp is the ditch, 165 feet
wide, that separated Antonia from Bezetha;
and 280 feet south of it, where the ridge is
narrowest, there appears to have been a ditch,
153 feet wide, which may possibly have formed
part of the defences of the Acra, and have been
filled up by Herod when he built the Castle of
Antonia.
The raised platform probably dates from the
erection of the "Dome of the Rock," above the
Sakhrah, as it was evidently designed to give
JERUSALEM
additional importance to that building. It is
quadrilateral in form, and has unequal rides."
Its surface is from 15 feet to 19 feet above the
general level, and its area is about 5} acres.
The rock is visible on the surface at the N.W.
corner, and the Sakhrah, which is a portion of
the ridge, rises 4 feet 9 inches above the plat,
form. The length of the Sakhrah is about 56 feet,
and its breadth about 40 feet ; and beneath it is
a small cave, under the floor of which, according
to Muslim tradition, there is a well, the Bb el-
Arwih, or " Well of the Spirits." The "Dome
of the Rock " is generally considered to be the
work of the Khalif Abd ul-Melik : but it seems
rather to be the " Church of St. Sophia " which,
in the 6th century, stood upon the supposed
site of the Praetorium (Ant. Mart, xxiii. ; Tneo-
dosius, vii. ; Brev. dt Hierotol.). Possibly the
church was built at the close of the 5th or
commencement of the 6th century, and wu
restored and turned into a mosque in the 7th
century, when Abd ul-Melik enlarged the pre-
cincts of the Muslim sanctuary, and brought
the Sakhrah within its limits (Eutych. ias.
ii. 365).
The N.E. corner of the Haram has been
formed by filling up a deep ravine, " the ravine
called Kedron " of Josephus (A J. v. 4, § 2 ; 6,
§ 1 ; vi. 3, § 2), which here crosses the enclosure.
There are several indications, such as the ac-
cumulation of rubbish on the N. side of the
Golden Gate, that the ravine was wholly or
partially filled up at a comparatively recent
date — perhaps by El-Walid, son of Abd ul-Melik,
when he enlarged the Haram so as to bring
the Sakhrah into the centre of the sacred am
(Eutych. Ann. ii. 873). The bed of the ravine
is 144 feet below the present surface, and its
sides most be steep and rocky. The S.W.
corner is also made ground, and its surface is
from 82 feet to 129 feet above the bed of the
Tyropoeon valley which runs beneath it. Here
there is every reason to believe that the hollow
space was filled up solidly when Herod enlarged
the Temple enclosure. At the S.E. corner, on
the other hand, the ground is supported byt
series of weak vaults of masonry, which m*T
possibly be as old as the time of Justinian.
Amongst the most remarkable features of the
Haram are the rock-hewn cisterns in which the
water required for the Temple services wu
stored. They are from 25 feet to 50 feet deep,
and it is estimated that more than twelve
million gallons of water could be stored in
them. The largest, called the "Great Sea,"
would hold between two and three million
gallons. The cisterns were supplied by the
aqueduct from Solomon's Pools, which crossed
the Tyropoeon Valley on the causeway, and then
ran in a S.E. direction towards the fountain
El-Kat. The cisterns were connected with each
other by conduits, and there was apparently sn
overflow beneath the Triple Gate. It may be
remarked, as bearing upon the site of the
Temple, that all the large rock-hewn cisterns
except one are situated to the south of the
raised platform.
The retaining walls of the Haram have s
height of from 30 feet to 170 feet, and they sre
■ The north side 616 feet, the south 41« feet, the west
552 feet, and the east 528 feet.
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
1637
x
o
z
o
o
IE
I
o
o
IE
I
1-
•a
I
I
8-
8"
6.
II
3-
Digitized by
Google
1638
JEBUSALEM
perhaps the finest examples of mural masonry in
the world. Partially concealed as they are,
here by 60 feet, there by 130 feet of rubbish,
they still fill the traveller with admiration ;
and their great height and the magnificence of
their masonry almost justify the glowing terms
in which they are described by Josephus {Ant.
xv. 11, §§ 1-5; B. J. v. 5, § 1). The stones
are of great size, 1 and aet so closely together
that the blade of a pen-knife can hardly be
inserted between them. Those of the older
masonry have a chiselled draft round their
margins, and their faces are either finely dressed,
or, when not intended to be seen, left rough.
The grey stones of to-day were originally white,
and the massive masonry of the Temple plat-
form, when fresh from the builder's hands,
most, under the brilliant sun of Palestine, have
presented a most imposing and dazzling ap-
pearance. The wtat wall (Plan Mo. 3, Eleva-
tion 6, p. 1642) has only been examined for 600
feet from the S.W. angle, but it is apparently of
one building period throughout, and is probably
the work of Herod. The architect conceived
the bold scheme of extending the Temple area
westward across the bed of the Tyropoeon ; and,
in laying the foundations of the massive re-
taining wall, he cut through an ancient rock-
hewn conduit (p. 1591). The wall formed the
western limit of the Temple enclosure and
of the Antonia; and above the level of the
Haram it appears to have been ornamented with
pilasters similar to those of the wall of the
Haram at Hebron.' It also closed the west
end of the ditch within the Haram, which was
probably filled in when the wall was built
The remains of four ancient approaches to the
BoUnmi'i Arch. (8.W. tnaio of Haram.)
enclosure have been discovered in connexion
with the west wall — over " Robinson's Arch,"
through the passage from " Barclay's Gate,"
over the eauseway and "Wilson's Arch," and
» One stone 38 ft. 9 In. long, 4 ft. high, and 10 ft.
deep, has been built into the wall at a height of 86 ft.
from the surface.
J The close resemblance between the masonry of the
Haram at Hebron, and that of the west wall of the
Haram at Jerusalem, seems to Indicate that they were
built by the same person — Herod. Pilasters are shown
in the Comte de Vogue's restoration of the Temple
(U Temjlt ie Jcrutalem, Planch. xvL).
JERUSALEM
through the passage from "Warren's Gate."
The first and third must have been on a level
with the outer court of the Temple ; the second
and fourth pierced the retaining wall at a lower
level, and reached the surface by steps or a ramp.
In the south wall (Plan No. 3, Section 4) the
older masonry is of two, if not three, different
periods. From the S.W. angle to the "Doable
Gate " it is probably Herodian ; beyond this point
it is marked by a course of stones of doable
height, and is supposed by Sir C. Warren to be
the work of Solomon, but by others to be possibly
as late as the reign of Justinian. The wall is
pierced by two ancient gatewaya : the " Doable
Gate," which opens into a vestibule, whence a
passage leads to the surface of the Haram ; and
the " Triple Gate," which, in its original form,
was a double gate with a passage to the en-
closure similar to that from the " Double Gate."
Beneath the " Triple Gate " are rock-hewn
passages through which the blood from the
Altar and the overflow from the cisterns may
have passed to the Kedron Valley (see Midioth,
iii. 2).* At the S.E. angle there appears to
have been a massive tower, 108 feet sqaare, of
older date than the adjoining portions of the
wall, and it was on the stones at the bate of
this tower that Sir C. Warren found the Phoeni-
cian letters which were considered by Hr. E.
Deutsch to be " partly letters, partly numerals,
and partly special mason's or quarry signs." At
this point a small vase * was found in a hols cot
out of the rock, where it may possibly have bees
placed when the wall was built. The etut wall
(Plan No. 3, Elevation 5) has only been examined
for 161 feet from the S.E. angle, and 179 feet
from the N.E. angle; between these two points,
or for a distance of 1185 feet, the masonry has
nowhere been seen below the surface of the
ground. There is, however, some reason to
suppose that between the S.E. angle and a
point 50 feet or 60 feet north of the Golden
Gate the wall is older than it is to the north
of the latter point. About 132 feet south of
the N.E. angle the wall is carried serosa the
bed of the "ravine called Kedron," and it
is here 168 feet high. The only entrance to
the Haram ou the east side, of which traces
remain, is the "Golden Gate," 1 ' — a Byzantine
structure of uncertain date, which hat been
closed for several centuries. Its floor is from
30 feet to 40 feet above the natural surface of
the ground, and it appears to have had in front
of it a terrace whence there was a descent to
the Kedron by steps. The north boundary of
the Haram is formed partly by the rock-scarp
at the N.W. angle, and partly by the wall, o!
unknown but presumably late date, that forms
the southern side of the Birket Jtratl. The
Haram eih-Sherif a thus girt on three sides by
walls which, if entirely exposed to view, would
> According to Rabbi Obadlah of Bartenors, the blood
and water was sold to the gardeners tor use as
manure.
• This vase Is said by various authorities to be of
"a common Oraeco-PhoenlcJan type," to be posaflaj
" as old as the 4th or 6th century B.C.," and to date from
the period of the Jewish monarchy.
* There was, apparently, a second gate In tl» east
wall before It was remodelled by Saltan Sttlelman, but
Its position Is unknown.
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
present unbroken faces of solid masonry from
920 feet to 1590 feet long, and, for a large
portion of those distances, from 100 feet to 160
feet in height.* On the north side alone there
is no imposing mass of masonry, but here, in
the time of Josephus, lay the' deep, rugged
"ravine called Kedron," unfilled by the ac-
cumulations of centuries, and the great Castle
of Antonia rising high above the surrounding
buildings.
The difficulty experienced in fixing the exact
position of the Temple (Upiby) arises from the
(act that it has completely disappeared,' — not
MH©ENAAAAOrENHEEnO
PEYEZOAEMTGZTQYflE
RTQEPONTTOAKTOYKAI
riEFIBOAOYOl AA N AH
$0HEAYTQ!AtTlOZE£
TAIAIATOEZAKOAOY
0EINOANATON
Inscription from Herod's Temple.
one stone has been left upon another. The
local indications have been so differently inter-
preted by the numerous writers on the subject,
that it is maintained on the one hand that the
Temple occupied the S.W. corner of the Haram,
and on the other that it stood near the centre
of the enclosure. Both views are surrounded
by difficulties that can only be completely solved
by excavation.
(1.) According to Josephus (Ant. xv. 11, § 3 ;
B. J. vi. 5, § 4) and the Mishna (Middoth, ii. 1),
the Temple was a square, and the only right
angles in the ancient masonry of the Haram are
the S.W. and N.E. angles. The masonry of the
S.W. angle, and of the wall for some distance
to the north and east, is generally admitted to
JERUSALEM
1639
be Herodian, and it must have formed part of
the west and south walls of the Temple en-
closure. If the Temple was in the centre of the
Haram, Herod's object in building this massive
wall at great cost and labour, and in the face of
considerable engineering difficulties, is not clear ;
but it is easily explained on the supposition that
the Temple (yobs) stood near the S.W. angle,
and that he could not otherwise obtain a firm
foundation for the cloisters that he added on
its west and south sides. Josephus states
directly and indirectly that each side of the
Temple was a stadium (Ant. xv. 11, §§ 3, 5), or
400 cubits (Ant. xx. 9, § 7). Now 588 feet
east of the S.W. angle is the "Triple Gate,"
where the ground commences to fall rapidly to-
wards the east, and the solid character of the area
gives place to a series of vaults erected in com-
paratively recent times (Plan No. 3, Section 4) ;
and 586 feet north of the same point is " Wilson's
Arch," which marks the position of one of the
principal approaches to the Temple. These
dimensions differ, it is true, from a stadium ; but
it is impossible to suppose, as some contend,
that the statement of Josephus refers to the whole
Haram area, which is approximately 1} stadia
wide and 2 s long. Further, Josephus mentions
(Ant. xv. 11, § 5) that on the south front of
the Temple stood the Royal Cloister, Stoa
Basilica, with three aisles, which reached " from
the east valley unto that on the west, for it was
impossible it should reach any further " (west-
ward). This cloister was 1 stadium long, and had
" pillars that stood in four rows, one over against
the other all along ; " the number of pillars was
162, and their capitals were of the Corinthian
order. The breadth of each side aisle was 30
feet, and of the central aisle 45 feet ; and these
dimensions agree very closely with the position
and width of " Robinson's Arch," which must
have led to the central aisle. It is quite
certain that the Stoa terminated at the " Triple
Gate," for, as shown in the annexed diagram,
Section of vaults in S.K. angle of Haram.
It could never have extended over the weak,
irregularly spaced vaults at the S.E. angle of
the Haram. "Had it done so, some piers or
foundations must have remained to indicate
• Detailed descriptions of the masonry of the Haram
wall will be found in PBF. Men., Jerusalem vol. ; and
in The Matmry qf the Haram Wall, by Sir C. Wilson,
PEFQy. Stat. 1B80, pp. 9-86.
< The only authentic relic of Herod's Temple Is the
Unlet with a Greek inscription forbidding strangers.
how it was supported, but there is absolutely
nothing." It may convey some idea of the
dimensions of this the most remarkable feature
of Herod's Temple, "if we compare it with
under pain of death, to pass the balustrade (rptffaxm )
round the Temple (iepoV), which was discovered' by
M. Clermont-Oanneau in 1871 (Une itHe du Temple dr.
Jinualtmi PSFQy. Stat. 1871, p. 132> This inscrip-
tion affords strong evidence of the general accuracy of
Josephus.
Digitized by
Google
1640
JERUSALEM
JERUSALEM
York, the largest of oar English cathedrals.
If the transepts of that church were removed
from the centre and added to the ends, we should
have a building of about the same length, and
nearly also of the same section, and, barring the
style, not differing much in material and con-
struction " (Fergusson, Templts of the Jews,
pp. 75, 83). Again, Josephus states (Ant. iv.
11, § 5) that on the west side of the enclosure
there were four gates, and this agrees with the
existing remains. The first gate, which "led to
the king's palace, and went to a passage over
the intermediate valley," must have been above
Wilson's Arch, which connects the Haram with
the remains of the old causeway across the
valley (Plan No. 2, Section 3). The road from
Herod's palace, now represented by " David's
Street," which passed over the causeway and
bridge, must have been one of the principal
approaches to the Temple; and the tradition
that places the " Beautiful Gate " at the Beh
ta-SSsileh, above Wilson's Arch, may perhaps
be correct. This may also be the Gate Kipunus,
the only entrance on the west side mentioned in
the Mishna (Middoth, i. 3). Two other gates led
to the suburbs, or Parbar, apparently the strip of
low-lying and comparatively level ground which
lay between the cliff of the Upper City and
the wall of the Temple enclosure (Plan No. 2,
Section 1 ; No. 3, Section 4). These gates are
represented by Barclay's Gate, at the entrance of
a subway leading, apparently, to the Court of
the Gentiles ; and the gate above Robinson's
Arch, whence there was probably a descent to
the valley, partly by a viaduct, and partly by
steps or a ramp. The fourth gate leading " to
the other city («« tV &Wr\v ic6\a>), where
the road descended down into the valley by a
great number of steps, and thence up again by
the ascent," was apparently Warren's Gate,
through which the "other city" lying between
the causeway and the second wall could be
easily reached from the cloisters connecting
Antonia with the Temple. The south front of
the Temple, Josephus says, had " gates at about
the middle," and these still exist as the "Double
Gate," from which a double passage leads up to
the Haram area by a gentle incline. It is
certain that the Double Gate and the vestibule
within are really parts of the substructures of
the Stoa Basilica which Herod added to the
Temple, and they probably represent the Gate
Huldah, which led direct to the Water Gate of
the Inner Temple, and thence to the Altar
(Middoth, i. 3, 4 ; Lightfoot, p. 350). If, as
the Mishna seems to indicate, there were two
Huldah or "Mole" Gates* in the south wall,
the second must have been at the Triple Gate,
whence a passage leads upwards at an angle
that would have brought it to the surface
in front of the central point of the eastern
cloister of the Temple. The gates Shushan in
the east and Tadi in the north wall (Middoth,
i. 3) are not mentioned by Josephus, possibly
• According to Lightfoot (i. 10M), the Huldah Gates
were so placed asto be at equal distances from each other
and from the two ends of the walls. This is only
approximately correct of the Double and Triple Gates,
which divide the south wall of the Haram Into three
sections, respectively 363 feet, 356 feet, and 311 feet.
because they did not lead to the inhabited
quarters of the city.
The south-west corner of the Haram hat •
perfectly level surface, and is solid throughout
except where pierced by gateways, and where
hollowed out into cisterns such as are known to
have existed beneath the Temple courts (Water
Supply, p. 1591). A large proportion of it ismaile
ground, and within its limits are nearly all the
large cisterns. This agrees with the description
which Josephus gives (Ant. viii. 3, § 9 ; xv. 11,
§ 3 ; B. J. v. 5, § 1) of the construction of the
Temple platform; and the statement in the
Mishna (Parah, iii. 3), that " the mountain of
the house and the courts were hollow under-
neath," lest there should be a hidden gnm
beneath. Josephus also writes (B. J. v. 3, § 1)
of the " subterranean caverns of the Temple."
The Temple was connected with the Upper
City by a bridge, which also led to the X Vitus
(Ant. xiv. 4, § 2;— B. J. i. 7, § 2; ii. 16,'§3;
vi. 6, § 2), at or close to the point at which the
first wall joined the western cloister (B. J. v. 4,
§ 2). This bridge must have been that connecting
the Temple with the causeway at Wilson's Arch,
where the first wall ended, and the Xystns m
apparently commensurate with the west side of
the Temple.
It may be inferred from the absence of sbt
indication in Josephus that the Antonia, which
stood on a higher level than the Temple,
ever served as a vantage-ground for the dis-
charge of missiles against the defenders of the
Temple cloisters, that the Castle and the Temple
were at least a bow-shot distant from each
other. It would also appear (B. J. i. 7, §4)
that, at the time of Pompey's siege, there ws>
an interval of open ground between the Temple
and the north wall of the enclosure, which, at
that time, seems to have run along the north
side of the platform on which the " Dome of the
Jowl' wailiog plane.
Rock" studs, and above the "Valley called
Kedron " (Ant. xiv. 4, § 2 ; B. J. i. 7, § 3> Jo-
sephus, moreover, states (Ant. ix. 8, § 11) that
the Jews erected a high wall upon the cshedra
of the west wall of the inner Temple, to shut oat
the view of the sacrifices from Agrippa's palace,
on the brow of the western hill ; and it may be
added that the aqueduct from "Solomon's Pools,"
which pastes over the causeway to the Haram,
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
runs towards the S.E. after its entrance. All
that has been said above is in favour of the
position assigned to the Temple at the S.W.
angle; and it may be remarked that, in this
case, the present " Wailing Place " of the Jews
wonld be opposite to the site of the Holy of
Holies, and in closer proximity to it than any
other spot outside the enclosure.
The earlier pilgrims mention the site of the
Temple without distinct reference to its position ;
but it may be inferred from Antoninus (xxiii.)
that the "Dome of the Rock," which he identifies
with the Praetorium, was not considered to be
within the Temple area. It is known from
Arcnlfns (i.) and Theophanes (Chron. 281) that
the first Muslim mosque was built on what was
pointed out to Omar as the site of the Temple,
and from Eutychius (ii. 289) that that mosque
lay to the south of the Sakhrah, " which was
not embraced in the precincts of the Muslim
sanctuary till the reign of Abd ul-Melik " (ii.
365). In accordance with this, is the modern
Muslim tradition which points to the Mosque of
Omar, above the south wall of Haram, as the
spot where Omar first prayed.
According to the above view, the Temple
enclosure occupied a square of about 588 feet in
the S.W. corner of the Haram. On the west
there were approaches over Wilson's and Robin-
son's Arches to the northern and southern
cloisters, and through " Barclay's Gate " to the
Court of the Gentiles. On the south there was
an ascent from the old City of David to the
Temple enclosure by the passage from the
" Double Gate," and to the central gate of the
eastern cloister by the ancient passage from the
Triple Gate.' It has been objected to this con-
clusion, that if the Temple were only 600 feet
square, it would be impossible to find space
within its walls for all the courts and buildings
mentioned by Josephus and in the Talmud.
This difficulty, however, has no real foundation
in fact, and the mode in which the interior may
have been arranged so as to meet all the exi-
gencies of the case will be explained in treating
of the Temple. It has also been urged that the
S.W. corner is the lowest part of the Haram ;
but it is nowhere stated that the Temple was
built upon a mount or isolated eminence. Jose-
phus says (B. J. v. 5, § 1) that it was erected
upon a strong hill (M \6<pov ttaprtpov, where
\6fos simply refers to the eastern hill, Moriah) ;
and the Antonia certainly stood on higher ground
(Ant. xiii. 16, § 5 ; xv. 11, § 4 ;— B. J. v. 5, § 8)
and on the " top of the hill " (B. J. vi. 1, § 5).
It is more important to notice that Josephus
states that the eastern cloister of the outer
court was situated in a deep valley (Ant. xx. 9,
§ 7), and (B. J. vi. 3, § 2) that the K.E. angle
of the cloisters was above the "Valley called
Kedron," apparently the ravine that crosses the
N.E. angle of the Haram. These statements
' The distance from the S.W. angle to the north side
of M Wilson's Arch/' and to the east side of the ancient
passage from the " Triple Gate," is. In each case,
630 feet ; and, if we may suppose the Temple to have
been a square of 630 feet, the roadway over " Wilson's
Arch " would have led directly to the northern cloister,
and the passage from the "Triple Gate" would have
risen to the surface near the centre of the eastern
cloister.
JERUSALEM
1641
cannot easily be reconciled with the view that
the Temple was at the S.W. corner of the
Haram ; nnless we may suppose that Josephus
refers here to the outer enclosure (Plate II.).
According to the Mishna (Middoth, ii. 1), the
" mountain of the house " was 500 cubits by
500 cubits, but it is possible that these dimen-
sions are due to a misconception of the statement
of Ezekiel (xlii. 16-20), that the boundaries of
the sanctuary were 500 reeds each way. It is
further stated that " the mount was far larger
than 500 cubits square, but only so much was
taken in for the holy ground " (Piak. Tesaph ad
Midd. quoted by Lightfoot, i. 1050). The Temple,
it is evident, only occupied a portion of the area
enclosed by Herod. There was open ground
upon which the people pitched their tents at the
time of the Passover (Ant. xvii. 9, § 3); and
even at an earlier period there was a " broad
place," or open space, to the east of the Temple
(2 Ch. xxix. 4, Ezra x. 9 ; cp. Ant. xi. 5, § 5),
and in front of the Water Gate (Neh. viii. 1).
Some portions of the enclosure appear to have
been built over, as houses are mentioned in close
proximity to the Temple (Ant. xiv. 4, § 2 ; 13,
§ 3 ;—B. J. i. 13, § 2 ; t. 1, § 4 : cp. Ezek. xliii.
8) ; and the " Valley called Kedron," where the
outcrop of the tneleteh stratum must have offered
great facilities for the excavation of tombs,
was possibly used as a place of burial (B. J. v.
7, §3).
(2.) The alternative view that the Temple
was situated near the centre of the Haram, on
the ground now covered by the platform of the
" Dome of the Rock," is maintained by many
authorities, but opinion differs widely as to the
exact position that it occupied. Robinson,
Thomson, Williams, Tobler, Furrer, Perrot, and
Guerin place the Altar on the Sakhrah; Sepp
and Conder identify the Sakhrah with the "stone
of foundation " ; and whilst De Vogii<S places
the Altar to the north of the Sakhrah, Warren
places it to the south. It has been urged that,
as the Temple courts descended in terraces round
the Holy House, the Temple and Altar must
have been on the top of the hill, and that the
levels of the various courts, ascertained by the
number of steps leading to them, can be brought
into accordance with the actual levels of the
rock in this part of the Haram, and nowhere
else ; that, from the description of the sacrifice
of the red heifer (Mid. ii. 4), the Temple must
have been opposite the summit of the Mount of
Olives ; that the Sakhrah is either the " stone
of foundation" upon which the Ark rested
( i'oma, v. 2), or the site of the Altar ; that the
cistern immediately north of the " Dome of the
Kock " is part of the passage running under the-
Chel, from the Gate-house Moked to the Gate
Tadi ; and that Muslim tradition has always
associated the Sakhrah with the sacred site of
the Jews.
The principal objections to these argument*
are that the Temple is nowhere stated to have
been on the top of a hill, except possibly in
Ezek. xliii. 12 ; that the rock being everywhere
near the surface of the platform, there is ample
space for the erection of a small building like-
the Temple without great foundations such as
those indicated by Josephus (Ant. xv. 11, §3;
B. J. v. 5, § 1) ; that there is no such complete
accordance between the levels of the several
Digitized by
Google
1642
JERUSALEM
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
JERUSALEM
1643
court* and the actual lerel of the rock as ha*
been suggested ; ' and that there is little trace
in this part of the Haram ef the substructures,
vaults, cisterns, &c, which are said (Parah,
iii. 3; Maimonides, Beth Hob. v. 1) to have
existed beneath the Temple and its courts. The
omission of any allusion by Josephus to such a
remarkable work as the viaduct which is sup-
posed to have connected Mount Moriah with
the Mount of Olives is calculated to raise a
doubt as to the accuracy of the description of
the sacrifice of the red heifer ; but, in any case,
a building on the platform would not be more
directly opposite the summit of the Mount of
Olives, than one at the S.W. angle. The " stone
of foundation " was not a portion of the rocky
ridge of Moriah, but was a movable stone
(}3X), and it was so regarded by Jewish tra-
dition ; k besides, the Holy of Holies, only 20
cubits square, could scarcely have included the
Sakhrah, which is 56 feet long and 40 feet wide.
There is no indication in Josephus or the
Mishna that the Altar was erected over a cave
such as that beneath the Sakhrah ; and there is
no evidence that the cistern, north of the " Dome
of the Rock," was ever part of a subterranean
passage. According to Professor Robertson
Smith (Encyc. Brit. s.v. Temple) the first person
to identify the Sakhrah with the "stone of
foundation," or to associate it with the Temple,
was the Muslim Jew Wahb ibn Monabbih, who
enriched Islam with so many Jewish fables, and
died a century after Jerusalem was taken by
the Arabs (Tabari, p. 571 ; Ibn al-Fakih, p. 97).
It may be added that if the Temple were on
the platform it would have been within easy
range of and completely commanded by the
Castle of Antonia, and its situation with refer-
ence to the approaches to the enclosure from the
sooth and west would have been awkward and
inartistic.
3. Antonia. — The Tower or Castle (tbpoiptov)
of Antonia, which replaced the citadel of the
Asmoneans, was on the north side of the Temple,
but did not cover the whole of it {Ant. xv.
11, § 4;— B. J. i. 5, § 4; 21, § 1 ; v. 7, §3). It
is more particularly defined as having been at
the north-west corner of the Temple; and it
was connected with the cloisters of the Temple
by two parallel cloisters, called "limbs" or
" legs," by which the Roman guards went down,
fully armed, to their posts during the Jewish
festivals. One of the two cloisters was a con-
tinuation of the western cloister of the Temple,
and the demolition of both of them made the
Temple a square (B. J. ii. 15, § 6 ; 16, § 5 ; v.
.5, § 8 ; vi. 2, § 9 ; 5, § 4). The Antonia was
near the Temple, but there was a certain space
between them which was the scene of some hard
fighting between the Jews and the Romans
* Isolated levels are .taken to Indicate the general
level of the rock over Urge spaces hidden from view ; and
in the outer court the rock rises, in places, from 9 feet to
16 feet above the assumed level.
» See the traditions as given by Dr. Chaplin In PBFQy.
Stat. 1886, pp. 60, 61. There is no instance In which
the term " Eben " Is applied to solid rock, and the Eben
Shlthlah, '■ stone of foundation," may be compared with
the " Ebcns " mentioned in the Bible ; though whether it
stood upright, or lay on its face, la uncertain. It was
possibly the lapit ptrtunu mentioned in the /tin.
WctokI.
during the siege. The distance between the two
buildings was greater than the effective range
of the darts and stones thrown by the Roman
engines of war ; and it was possibly a stadium '
(Ant. xv. 8, § 5 ; xvUi. 4, § 3 ;— B. J. v. 5, § 2 ;
vi. 2, §§ 5-7). The Castle was at a higher level
than the Temple, and, being built on " the top
of the hill," on a precipitous rock 50 cubits
high, was very conspicuous (Ant. xiii. 16, § 5 ;
xv. 11, § 4;— B. J. v. 5, § 8 ; vi. 1, § 5 ;— Acts
xxi. 30-40; Tacitus, v. 11). It occupied the
whole ridge so completely that the walls had to
be partially thrown down before Titus could
bring up his engines of war and attack the
Temple; and it was generally regarded as the
most important feature in the defences of the
city (Ant. xv. 7, § 8 ;— B. J. ii. 15, §§ 5, 6 ; v. 5,
§ 8 ; vi. 2, §§ 1-7). It adjoined Bezetha, and
the " New Town," from which it was separated
by a deep ditch ; was near the Pool Struthion,
and was the point at which the second wall
terminated (B. J. v. 4, § 2; 5, § 8; 11, § 4).
The Antonia must have covered a large area.
It is said to have resembled both " a city " and
" a royal palace," and to have contained rooms,
cloisters, places for bathing, and broad spaces
for camps; and the Roman garrison of Jeru-
salem, an entire legion, was quartered in it.
The Castle was rectangular in form, and at each
angle there was a tower. The walls were 40
cubits high, whilst three of the towers were 50
cubits, and that at the S.E. corner, which
appears to have been more particularly called
the "Tower of Antonia," was 70 cubits high.
The construction was similar to that of the still
existing Tower of Phasaelus (Tower of David), —
a sloping scarp of smooth stone surmounted by a
breastwork, and behind the breastwork a chemin
das rondes, and the solid masonry of the walls
and towers. A secret subterranean passage led
from the Castle to a tower over the eastern gate
of the inner Temple (.4nt. xv. 1 1, §§ 4, 7 ; — B. J.
i. 21, § 1 ; v. 5, § 8).
The citadel (luep6ito\ts) which Herod enlarged
and named Antonia, in honour of Antony, was
called by the Asmoneans the Baris. It was
originally built by Hyrcanus, possibly on or near
the site of the earlier "castle (Birah) that
appertaineth to the house " (Neh. ii. 8, R. V.) ;
and was used as a royal residence, and sometimes
as a prison. The Baris was well fortified, and
of extraordinary strength; and it was approached
from the Temple side by the dark passage or
gateway know as Strato's Tower, k in which
Antigonue was killed. The vestments of the
high-priest were kept in it; and this custom
was continued in the later Antonia. Herod's
object in enlarging and strengthening the old
citadel was to " secure and guard the Temple " ;
and the greatest importance was afterwards
attached, by friend and foe alike, to the posses-
sion of the new fortress (Ant. xiii. 11, § 2 ; xiv.
> The meaning of Josephus (£. /. v. 6, $ 2} appears to
be that the cloisters which enclosed the square of the
Temple were four stadia, and that with the addition of
the two cloister* Joining the Temple to Antonia they
were six stadia. The two connecting cloisters would
therefore be a stadium each.
k It haa been suggested (Imp. Bib. Diet., s. v. Jeru-
salem) that there was here an old tower called Athtoreth,
or flock tower ; and that ** Asbtoretb " was confounded
with " Strata. "
Digitized by
Google
1644
JERUSALEM
16, § 2 i it. 11, § 4 ; xriii. 4, § 3 ;— B. J. i. 3,
§a:5,§4).
The Antonia was certainly situated in the
N.W. corner of the Haram area ; but no trace
of its foundations has yet been found, and the
space that it occupied is unknown. Its western
limit is defined by the line of the western wall,
and its northern by the rock-hewn ditch that
separated it from Bezetha ; its southern and
eastern limits must for the present remain con-
jectural.
4. The Acra (A. V. "stronghold," "fortress,"
"tower") was built or restored by Antiochus
Epiphanes, c. B.C. 168-7, and was situated in
the " Lower City," i.e. on the eastern hill, upon
a rocky height that was afterwards cut down
and levelled (1 Hacc. i. 33; Joseph. Ant. zii. 5, §4;
xiii. 6, § 7). It was in close proximity to and
overlooked the Temple (1 Mace. ir. 41, xiii. 52 ;
Ant. xii. 5, § 4; 9, § 3; 10, § 5); and was
within the limits of the "City of David"
(1 Mace. i. 33 ; xiv. 36 ; vii. 32 : cp. Ant. xii.
10, § 4). Its walls and towers were originally
great and strong (1 Mace. i. 33 ; Ant. xii. 5,
§ 4) ; and they were afterwards specially
strengthened by Bacchides (1 Mace. ix. 52 ;
Ant. xiii. 1, § 3). The Acra, until it was de-
stroyed by Simon Maccabaeus, was regarded as
the Citadel or Acropolis of Jerusalem ' (1 Mace,
vi. 26, ix. 53, x. 32, xi. 41 ; Ant. xii. 6, § 2 ;
xiii. 2, § 1); and it is frequently mentioned, often
in connexion with the Temple, in the history of
the wars of the Maccabees (1 Mace. iii. 45 ; iv.
2 ; vi. 18, 24-27, 32 ; ix. 52, 53 ; x. 6, 7, 9, 32 ;
xi. 20, 21, 23, 41 ; xii. 36 ; xiii. 49, 50, 52 ; xiv.
7, 36; 2 Mace. xv. 31-35). The gymnasium
built by Antiochus Epiphanes was "under the
Acra" (2 Mace. iv. 12 ; cp. 1 Mace i. 14; Ant.
xii. 5, § 1) ; and it was apparently in the same
locality that Jonathan Maccabaeus afterwards
built a wall or mound to shut off the Macedonian
garrison in the Acra from the market-place
(A-yooA) in the city (1 Mace. xii. 36 ; Ant. xiii.
5, §11).
With very few exceptions" writers on the
topography of Jerusalem place the Acra in the
N.W. corner of the Haram, where there is
abundant evidence of the levelling operations
of Simon Maccabaeus (Ant. xiii. 6, § 7). This
position, strong by nature and improved by art,
was, prior to the construction of the Acra,
occupied by a fortress which is described by
Aristeas as standing on a commanding eminence
to the N. of the Temple, fortified with towers to
the summit of the hill, and constructed with
enormous stones (Williams, Holy City, i. 73, 74);
and this fortress again was probably built on the
foundations of the citadel of Pre-Exilic Jeru-
salem, and of the Acropolis of the Jebusites.*
After the destruction of the Acra, Simon Macca-
baeus fortified the "hill of the Temple" near it,
and there "dwelt with his company " (1 Mace
> Josepbus calls it indifferently '• the Acra " and " the
Acropolis."
™ Warren, Underground Jerusalem, p. 64, and Conder,
Bbk. to Bible, p. 346, place tbe Acra on a presumed
knoll between the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the
Tyropoeon Valley.
■ Josepbus (.ant. vii. 3, $$ 1, 2) uses the word 'Aupa
for thectUdel which David took ; and the LXX. in every
case excepts Ch. xxxll. a tender " MIUo " by i, itpa.
JERUSALEM
xiii. 52). At a later date, Hyrcanus built the
Baris, near the Temple, and made it his place of
residence (Ant. xviii. 4, § 3). The Baris is
called by Josephus the fortress (to Qpo6pur)
that was above the Temple (Ant. xiii. 16, § 5),
and the Acropolis (xiv. 1, § 2; xv. 11, $ 4);
and after its reconstruction by Herod, it received
the name of Antonia.
The view suggested is that the Acropolis of
the Jebusites was situated at tbe N.W. corner
of the Haram, and that it was enlarged and
strengthened by David and his successors. After
the return from the Captivity the citadel wu
rebuilt in the form in which it was seen fry
Aristeas, and it was afterwards more strongly
fortified by Antiochus Epiphanes. When the
Macedonians were finally expelled from Jeru-
salem, Simon Maccabaeus demolished the citadel
and cut away the higher part of the ridge on
which it stood. At the same time he built a
new, or restored an existing, wall (Ant. xiii 6,
§ 4) that ran along the northern end of the
platform of the " Dome of the Rock " {Ant xiv.
4, §§ 1, 2 ; B. J. i. 7, §§ 1, 3, 4), and protected
it by towers, in one of which he lived (1 Mace
xiii. 52). During the prosperous reign of Hyr-
canus a portion of the site of the Acra was
re-occupied and the Baris built, and in this
condition the defences on the N. side of the
Temple remained until they were remodelled bj
Herod. That king threw down the wall erected
by Simon, filled up the ditch to the north of the
platform, built the west wall of the Haram, and
included the north-west corner of the Harsn
within the walls of the Castle of Antonia, which
thus formed part of the Temple precincts. It
may be observed that nntil the reign of Herod
only one citadel, that on the eastern hill, is
mentioned in connexion with Jerusalem; hut
after the erection of the three towers and the
palace, near the Jaffa Gate, a distinction is nude
between the citadel belonging to the city and
that belonging to the Temple {Ant. xv. 7, § 8 ;
B. J. ii. 3, § 1). The latter — the Antonia—
was always occupied by the garrison of Jeru-
salem ; the only soldiers in Herod's palace and
the towers were those forming the guard of the
Procurator or Roman governor.
5. Hippicus. — The position of the Tower Hip-
picus — the point at which Josephus commence!
his description of the fortifications of Jerusalem
(#. J. v. 4, §§ 1, 2)— is a question of great
importance, and one fortunately to which there
can be but one answer. It was close to the
Jaffa Gate, and its site is now occupied by one
of the towers of the citadel. Hippicus* was
one of the three royal towers (B. J. ii. 17, § 8)
— the others being Phasaelus and Mariamne—
which Herod built in connexion with his palace,
and together they formed the citadel (to 4>/>oi-
ptor) of the western hill (B. /. ii. 3, § 2 ; v. 5,
§ 8). The towers stood in the line of the old
wall that ran along the northern face of that
portion of the western hill which is called by
• The Cbaldee Farapbrsst gives Mtfidt-Pihu as
another name for the tower of H&n&neel in Jer. xxxt 3t
and Zech. xiv. 10 (Lightfoot, Cent. Ckaroor.); sod
according to Schwars (£T. L. p. 306) the targumW
Jonathan ben Usiel renders Bananeel by Mtgdal-Pilsiu,
which "Is certainly Hippicus.'' Hananeel, however,
was on the eastern hill.
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
Josephus the " Upp«r Market Place ; " and sd-
joinining them, on the south, was the Royal
Palace (B. J. v. 4, § 4). They were built with
great magnificence, and were " for largeness,
beauty, and strength, beyond all that were in
the habitable earth " (v. 4, § 3). Hippicus was
25 cubits square and 80 cubits high ; Phasaelus
was 40 cubits square and 90 cubits high, and
resembled in appearance the Pharos at Alexan-
dria (Ant. xvi. 5, § 2); and Mariamne was
20 cubits square and 50 cubits high. The stones
used in their construction were of great size,
and so perfect was the masonry that the joints
between the stones were scarcely visible, and
each tower looked like a mass of rock fashioned
by the hand of a sculptor (S. J. v. 4, § 4 ; vi.
■9, § 1). After the capture of the city, the
towers were left standing by Titus, "as a monu-
ment of his good fortune " (vi. 9, § 1 ; viii. 1,
§ 1) ; but only one, the well-known " Tower of
David," now remains. This tower corresponds, in
size and construction, very closely to Phasaelus,
and the beautiful masonry at its base is dis-
tinctly Herodian in character. During the siege
one of the legions camped two stadia from
Hippicus (v. 3, § 5); and it was through a
liostern close to that tower that the Jews made
a desperate sally at the commencement of the
siege, and attempted to destroy the siege works
thrown up by the Romans against the third or
outer wall (v. 6, § 5). The cisterns of Hippicus,
which were supplied by an aqueduct that en-
tered the city at a neighbouring gate (vi. 7,
§ 3), are still used. Thev lie beneath the tower
at the Jaffa Gate, and traces of the conduit,
which conveyed water to them, have been found
(0.5. Notes, p. 47). The position of Mariamne
is uncertain ; if Josephos be taken literally, it
must have been east of the " Tower of David,"
but it is possibly represented by the existing
tower to the south.
6. The Walls, #c. — Josephus states (B. /. v.
4, § 1) that where Jerusalem was girt by impas-
sable ravines it was defended by only one wall,
and that on those sides which had no natural
defences it was protected by three walls. The fir tt
or old wall (Plate II.), which Josephus (§ 2) as-
cribes to David and his successors, began at the
Tower Hippicus, and, extending to the Xystus,
joined the council house, and ended at the west
cloister of the Temple. That is, starting from
the Jaffa Gate, it ran eastward along the northern
face of modern Sion, where traces of it have been
found (Lewin, SiegeofJ., pp. 215-17), crossed the
Tyropoeon Valley, possibly on the causeway, and
ended at the Haram wall, at or near " Wilson's
Arch." Its southern course from Hippicus is
described as passing through Bethso to the Gate
of the Essenes ; then, facing the south, it made
a bend above the Fountain of Siloam, where it
again turned, facing the east, at Solomon's Pool,
and, extending as far as a certain place called
Ophlas, it united itself to the cloister of the
Temple which faces the east. The line of this
wall, south of the Jaffa Gate, is marked by the
scarped rock in the Protestant cemetery, at the
S.W. corner of modern Sion, where there appears
to have been a descent to the Valley of Hinnom,
by flights of rock-hewn steps. This spot may
possibly be Bethso, " the dung place " ; which
we may perhaps identify with Bethson, "the
place of the scarp." The next point, the "Gate
JERUSALEM
1645
of the Essenes," was probably at the southern
end of the long street which, commencing at
the Damascus Gate, runs southward, almost in
a straight line, through and beyond the city
to the brink of the Valley of Hinnom. This
street, a continuation of the great road from
the north, must always have been one of the
principal thoroughfares of Jerusalem, and it is
possible that the name of the sect of the Essenes
has been confounded with the Hebrew word
Yeshanah, " Old," which the LXX., in Neh. iii. 6,
give as a proper name, 'latraval. The " Gate
of the Essenes " would thus be " the old gate "
or "the gate of the old wall." Above the
Fountain of Siloam, which was outside the
fortifications (B. J. v. 9, § 4), the wall curved
inwards so as to cross the Tyropoeon Valley at a
more convenient altitude.* This loop or bend
is perhaps referred to by Tacitus in the ex-
pression, " muri per artem obliqui aut introrsus
sinuati " (Hist, v. 11); and between its walls
ran " the way of the king's garden " (Jer.
xxxix. 4, Hi. 7 ; 2 K. xxv. 4). The place called
Ophlas (B. /. ii. 17, § 9 ; v. 6, § 1), which may
have given the name of Ophel (2 Ch. xxvii. 3,
xxxiii. 14 ; Neh. iii. 26, 27, xi. 21) to that part
of the eastern hill immediately south of the
Haram, was a public building, close to but
distinct from the Temple, that was burnt by
the Romans during the siege (B. /. vi. 6, § 3).
It appears to have been at the S.E. corner of
the Haram, and the city wall, 4 on reaching
this point, was connected with the east cloister
of the Temple by the south wall of the Haram.
The second wall commenced at the Gate Gen-
nath, which was in the first wall, and, encircling
the quarter that lay to the north, went up to
Antonia. No certain trace of this wall has yet
been found, and it is matter of dispute whether
the ground now occupied by the Church of the
Holy Sepulchre was included or excluded. The
wall must have run along the S. side of the
ditch that separated Antonia from Bezetha,
and the point at which it ended is therefore
known within narrow limits. Another point of
the wall is perhaps indicated by the ruined
gateway seen by Felix Fabri (A.D. 1483) between
the Damascus Gate and the Church of the Holy
Sepulchre, and called the Porta Judiciaria
(p. 1366; Eng. Trans., p. 440). The position
of the Gate Gennath' is uncertain, but it was
p Tbe wall probably ran along the edge of tbe cUff
above tbe Pool of Siloam ; and, instead of crossing tbe
valley in a straight line, kept northwards, on the same
level, until It met the bed of tbe Tyropoeon, where It
turned southwards and pawed along the eastern face of
modern 8lon. Tbe Fools of Siloam were first Included
within tbe limits of tbe city by the Empress Eodocia,
between a.d. 438-450 (Ant. Mart. xxv.).
i Tbe city wall, or •' wall of Ophel," which has been
partially traced by Sir C. Warren (PKF. Mem. Jerusalem,
216 sq.) and Prof. II. Qutbe (ZDPV. vol. v.), Is at a
much lower level than that of the Haram, and there Is
a straight joint between the two walls, indicating that
they belong to two distinct building periods. This may
perhaps account for tbe obscurity in the description of
Josephus.
' It bos been suggested that Gennath is equivalent to
Ge-hcnnatb, and that the gate led to the valley of
Hinnom ; but tbe usual explanation that it derived its
name from the rose garden mentioned In tbe Miahna
( Maatetvih, II. y 5), or bom tbe fact of Its leading to gardens
Digitized by
Google
1646
JEBUSALEM
evidently to the east of Herod's three towers,
and not far from them. It may also, perhaps,
be inferred from B. J. v. 11, § 4, compared with
6, § 2, and 7, § 3, that the Pool Amygdalon
and John's monument were situated between
the second wall and the third, which commenced
at Hippicos. In this case the Gate Gennath
must hare been near the south end of "Chris-
tian street," and Plate II. shows the wall running
along that street and including the Church of
the Holy Sepulchre. The alternative view is
that the wall excluded the church, and that
traces of its ditch exist in the great cistern of
Constantino and other excavations near it. In
the quarter of the town between the second and
first walls — the "other city " of Josephus (Ant.
xv. 11, § 5)— were the bazaars (B. J. v. 8, § IX
occupying the same position, near the middle of
the second wall (7, § 4), that they do now.
The third wall was not commenced till twelve
years after the Crucifixion, when it was under-
taken by king Herod Agrippa. It was in-
tended to enclose the suburbs that had grown
out on the northern sides of the city, which
before this had been left exposed (B. J. r. 4,
§ 2). It began at the Tower Hippicus and ran
towards the north quarter of the city as far as
the Tower Psephinus; it then passed opposite
the monuments of Helena, queen of Adiabene,
and, running across the Royal Caverns, turned
at the corner tower, near the spot known as the
Monument of the Fuller, and joined the old
wall at the valley called Kedron. The wall was
constructed of large stones, so fitted to each
other that they could scarcely have been under-
mined by iron tools or shaken by engines ; and
had it been completed, the city would have been
impregnable. Agrippa, however, left off build-
ing through fear of Claudius Caesar, and the
wall was hurriedly finished before the siege.
Various opinions have been expressed with re-
gard to the direction of this wall. Robinson,
Schultx, Ferguson, Thrupp, and Tobler, carry it
so far north as to pass close to the " Tombs of
the Kings." Warren and Conder place Psephinus
near the Russian Cathedral beyond the N.W.
angle of the city, and carry the wall thence,
eastward and southward, to join the existing
wall at the Quarries, near the Damascus Gate.
Krafft, Lewin, Sepp, De Vogue, De Saulcy, Henke,
Caspari, Furrer, and Wilson, identify the third
wall with the present north wall of the city.
The principal, and almost conclusive, argument
against the first two theories is that, although
the ground supposed to have been included has
been largely bnilt over during the last twenty-
' five years, no trace of a city wall or of a rock-
hewn ditch has been found to the north of the
existing fortifications.
The Tower Psephinus was at the N.W. corner
of the wall, and opposite to Hippicus. It was
octagonal, and was 70 cubits high, and from it
could be seen Arabia, and the utmost limits of
the land of the Hebrews as far as the sea (B. J.
v. 3, § 5 ; 4, § 3). The view is exaggerated,
but the description is otherwise applicable to a
tower at or near KaPat Jalud, in the N.W. angle
of the city. The name is perhaps derived from
between the second and third walls, is probably more
accurate.
JERUSALEM
}tay, "north," or flDX, "to watch," thus
meaning the " watch tower," rather than from
tf>9«)os, "a pebble," because it was built of rubble
masonry. The monuments of Helena were three
stadia from Jerusalem (Ant. xx. 4, § 3), and
opposite to a gate protected by the " women's
towers " (B. J. v. 2, § 2). They were well known
to Eusebius (H. E. ii. 12) ; were on the left-hand
side of a traveller approaching the city from
the north (Jerome, Ep. Paul, vi.) ; and the
tomb was closed by a stone door that could only
be opened by a concealed mechanical contrivance
(Paus. viii. 16, § 5). The o-rijAm that sur-
mounted the sepulchre have disappeared, bat the
"Tombs of the Kings," although four and not
three stadia from the wall, is no doubt the place
intended. The gate (B. J. v. 2, § 2) would be
that by which the great road from the north
entered the city, — the Damascus Gate, — and the
Women's Towers (ywautttoi xipyo'i either an
altered form or an attempted translation of a
Hebrew word) were the flanking towers on
either side. The Royal Caverns were the great
quarries, near the Damascus Gate ; and they
were probably so called from their vast extent,
as the Royal Cloister south of the Temple was
so named from its superior size and magnifi-
cence.* The corner tower was that at the N.E.
angle of the city, and the existence near it of a
fuller's monument may be explained by the
proximity of the large pool near the Church of
St. Anne, and possibly of the aqueduct that
supplied it. The valley called Kedron was evi-
dently within the walls (B. J. v. 6, § 1% and
must have been the ravine running across the
N.E. corner of the Hararo. The point at which
the third joined the old wall is, however, oncer-
tain. It would appear from Sir C. Warren's
excavations to have been south of the St. Ste-
phen's Gate, bat may have been on the other
side of the ravine near the Golden Gate. 1 Jo-
sephus, it may be observed, does not mention
the east wall of the Haram, which he appears to
have regarded as the outer wall of the Temple
precincts, and not as a portion of the city wall
proper.
After describing the three walls, Josephus
adds that the third had 90 towers, 200 cubits
apart, the second 14, and the first 60 towers ;
and that the city was 33 stadia in circumfer-
ence. Taking the distance of the towers at
150 feet, or 100 cubits, from centre to centre,
which is probably near the truth on the
average, the extent of the first wall would be
9,150 feet, and this is roughly the length of the
wall from " Wilson's Arch " to the Jaffa Gate,
and thence round by Siloam to the S.E. corner
of the Haram, aa shown on Plate II. In the
same way the extent of the second wall would
be 2,250 feet, which corresponds with the
length shown on Plate II. The third wall
with its 90 towers would be 13,650 feet, and
■ The stone from this quarry Is known as mtiektK
"royal" stone.
' Possibly the great wall, 186 feet Ugh. which clows
the gorge of the "valley called Kedron," at the Hi.
angle of tbe Haram (PSP. Mem. Jerusalem, pp. 134
eq.), was tbat which was built by Agrippa, and attracted
the notice of Claudius Caesar. In this case the Junc-
tion of the third with tbe old wall must have ben
about 60 feet north of tbe Golden Gate.
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM.
Scale — Twelve inches to a mile.
I'LATK II.
Topognpby of Josephi!*.
Digitized by
To face p. 1M6.
Google
' Digitized by VjOOQ IC
JERUSALEM
this distance is so nearly equal to the combined
lengths of the third wall from the N.E. corner
of the Haram to the Jaffa Gate and of the first
wall thence to the S.E. corner of the Haram,
that it is reasonable to suppose that Josephus
has here given the total number of towers in the
whole circnit of the outer wall. If the state-
ment of Josephus (B. J. v. 12, § 1) be correct,
that the wall of circumvallation, which ran
along the further sides of the valleys of Kedron
and Hinnom, was only 39 stadia, the cir-
cumference of the city, which lay within
those valleys, could not have been as much as
33 stadia, and was probably not more than
25 stadia.
Several places of interest are mentioned by
Josephus as being within or near the city.
The palace bnilt by Herod (Ant. xv. 9, §3;
B. J. i. 21, § 1), sometimes called the " royal
palace" (B. J. ii. 19, §4; vi. 8, §1), was
situated immediately to the south of the three
great towers Hippicus, Phasaelus, and Hariamoe
(v. 4, § 4), and formed with them the citadel of
the npper city (v. 5, § 8 ; vi. 8, § 4). It was
constructed with great magnificence (v. 4, § 4),
and two of its spacious chambers were named
Caesarium and Agrippium (i. 21, § 1). After
the death of Herod, it became the residence of
the Roman governor (ii. 3, §2; 14, §8). The
palace of Agrippa, originally built by the
Asmomean princes (Ant. xx. 8, §11; B.J. ii.
16, § 3), and sometimes distinguished as the
"King's palace" (Ant. xv. 11, §5; xvii. 10,
§2), was situated on the western hill (Ant.
xvii. 10, § 2 ; B. J. ii. 3, § 2), on an eminence
whence there was a fine view of the city, and
whence the Temple courts and the Altar were
visible (Ant. xx. 8, § 11). The palace, which
was burnt by the insurgents under Eleazar
(B. J. ii. 17, §6), was near and above the
Xystus, at the street leading to the upper city
where the bridge joined the Xystus to the
Temple (Ant. xx. 8, §11; B. J. ii. 16, §3),
and one of the west gates of the Temple led to
it by a causeway (Ant. xv. 11, §5). From
these indications it is clear that the palace
stood on the brow of the cliff above the Tyro-
poeon Valley a little S. of "David's Street."
The palace of Helena was S. of the Temple, in
the middle of Acra (B. J. r. 6, § 1 ; vi. 6, § 3).
In the lower part of the same quarter, not far
from Siloam, was the palace of Mondbazus
(v. 6, § 1) ; and in the upper part, apparently
close to the Temple, was the palace of QrapU
(iv. 9, § 1). In the vicinity of Agrippa's palace
were the house of Ananias," the high-priest,
the Record Office (ii. 17, § 6), the Council House
(v. 4, §2; vi. 6, §3), and the Xsytus, which
appears to have stretched southwards from the
causeway that leads to Wilson's Arch (ii. 16,
§3; iv. 9, §12; v. 4, §2; vi. 3,§2; 6, § 2).
Closely connected with the Temple were the
Treasury (John viii. 20 ; Ant. xix. 6, § 1 ; B.J.
r. 5, § 2) and the Pastophoria (iv. 9, § 12).
The Hippodrome, perhaps the same place as the
Theatre (Ant. xv. 8, § IX was south of the
Temple (Ant. xvii. 10, § 2 ; B. J. ii. 3, § 1),
JEBUSALEM
1647
■ • Possibly this was the official residence of the high-
priest, and the same place as the bouse of CaUphas
(Matt. xxvl. 68; Hark xlv. M; Luke xxil. 64 s John
xvUi. 6).
apparently below the mosque el-Aksa ; and the
Camp of the Assyrians, where Titus pitched his
camp, was within the third wall (v. 7, § 3),
between the N.W. angle of the city and the
Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The tomb of
King Alexander, near the Antonia and the north
cloister of the Temple (v. 7, § 3), was possibly
in the valley called Kedron ; that of John the
High Priest was 30 cubits from the Pool
Amygdalon, between the second and third
walls, and close to the first wall and Hippicus
(v. 6, §2; 7, §3; 9, §2; 11, §4); and that
of Ananus the High Priest was on the west side
of the Kedron ravine (v. 12, § 2). The tomb of
Herod, possibly that prepared for Aristobulus
(Ant. xv. 3, §4), and that in which Pherorae
was afterwards buried (Ant. xvii. 3, § 3), was
near the Serpent's Pool (B. J. v. 3, § 2), and
inclndcd in the wall of circumvallation thrown
up by Titus (12, §2). It is clear from the
context that the tomb must have been close
to the Birket Mamilla, but no trace of it has
yet been found.
7. Population There is no point in which
the exaggeration in which Josephus occasion-
ally indulges is more apparent than in speaking
of the population of the city. The inhabitants
were dead ; no record remained ; and to mag-
nify the greatness of the city was a compliment
to the prowess of the conquerors. Still the
assertions that the numbers assembled at the
Passover were sometimes 2,700,000 (B. J. vi.
9, §3), and sometimes 3,000,000 (ii. 14, §3);
that 600,000 dead bodies were cast out of the
gates (v. 13, §7); that 1,100,000 perished
during the siege; that 97,000 were taken
captive (vi. 9, § 3), besides 40,000 set at
liberty (8, § 2), are so childish that it is sur-
prising that anyone could ever have repeated
them. Even the more moderate calculation of
Tacitus (v. 13) of 600,000 inhabitants is far
beyond the limits of probability.*
No town in the East can be pointed out
where each inhabitant has not at least 50
square yards on an average allowed to him.
In some of the crowded cities of the West, such
as parts of London, Liverpool, Hamburg, &c,
the space is reduced to about 30 yards, and in
very limited areas to 9} yards, to each in-
habitant; but this only applies to the poorest
and more crowded places, with houses many
stories high, not to cities containing palaces
and public buildings. The area of the plateau
upon which Jerusalem stands, does not exceed
5,000,000 square yards; and this, allowing
30 square yards for each inhabitant, only
gives a population of 166,666. At the time
of the Roman siege, however, when the city
covered a greater extent of ground than it
did before or afterwards, its area did not
exceed 1,379,980 square yards; this gives a
population of 46,000, and if a deduction be
made for the space occupied by the Temple, the
palaces and the gardens, the total may be reduced
to 40,000. The population of Jerusalem, in
its days of greatest prosperity, may thus have
' It is Instructive to compare these with the moderate
figures of Jeremiah (111. 28-30), where he enumerates the
number of persons carried into captivity by Nebuchad-
nezzar in three deportations from both city and province
a only 4,600.
Digitized by
Google
1648
JERUSALEM
•mounted to at most 46,000 souls ; and as-
suming that in times of Festival there was
an addition of one-half to these numbers, which
is an extreme estimate, there may hare been
about 70,000 in the city when Titus came
up against it. As no one would stay in a be-
leaguered city who had a home to flea to, it
is hardly probable that the man who came
up to fight for the defence of the city would
equal the number of women and children who
would seek refuge elsewhere ; so that the
probability is that about the usual population
of the city were in it at that time.
It may also be mentioned that the army
which Titus brought up against Jerusalem did
not exceed from 25,000 to 30,000 effective men
of all arms, which, taking the probabilities of
the case, is about the number that would be
required to attack a fortified town defended by
from 8,000 to 10,000 men capable of bearing
arms. Had the garrison been more numerous,
the siege would have been improbable. Josephus
indeed states (B. J. v. 6, § 1) that the number
of fighting men was 23,400, but, taking the
whole incidents of his narrative, there is nothing
to lead ns to suppose that the Jews could ever
have mustered 10,000 combatants at any period
of the siege ; 7,000 or 8,000 is probably nearer
the troth. Had the besieged been more numerous,
Titus would never have broken up his army
into three divisions, and posted them at such
widely spaced intervals as he did (v. 3, § 5) ; nor
would the Jews have been unable to break
through the long wall of circumvallation.
8. Pre-exilic Jerusalem, according to Jose-
phus (B. J. v. 4, §§ 1, 2X covered the eastern
and western hills, and this is the generally
accepted view. It has, however, been contested
by Prof. Robertson Smith (Encyc. Brit. s. v.
Jerusalem) and by Prof. Sayce (PEFQy. Stat.
1883, p. 215 sq.), who maintain that, prior to the
Captivity, the city had not spread beyond the
limits of the eastern hill. This theory is open
to the objections that the area of the eastern
hill' is insufficient for the population that must
have been present in Jerusalem during the
prosperous reigns of Solomon and some of his
successors; and that there is no indication in
the books of Maccabees, or in Josephus, that
any important additions were made to the city
between the rebuilding of the walls by Nehe-
miah and the reign of Herod.
Jerusalem, when it first comes into view,
bears the name Jebus (Josh. xv. 8, xviii. 28;
Judg. xix. 10). It was then a royal city of
the Canaanites (Josh. x. 1, 23) ; but, excepting
that its king, who was nearest to the point of
danger, took the lead in the league against the
Gibeonites, there is no indication that it was of
more importance, or of greater size, than the
other towns whose chiefs, or kinglets, opposed
the advance of the Israelites. In fact the
Jebusites are always mentioned last, as if of
least importance, in the formula by which the
Promised Land is designated; and they appear
to have occupied a very limited tract of
country.
» The eastern bill has an area of 256,939 square yards,
which at 60 square yards for each inhabitant, a low esti-
mate when the nature of the ground is considered,
would give a population of 5,100.
JERUSALEM
There is no reason to suppose that the
growth of Jerusalem differed, in any material
respect, from that of other ancient cities. The
first colony wonld naturally settle en the
eastern hill, in close proximity to the spring
at its foot, and the western hill wonld be
gradually occupied as wealth and population
increased. The view adopted in the present
article is that when the Israelites entered
Palestine Jebus was confined to the eastern
hill, and that it then consisted of an acropolis,
and of a walled town covering the rocky
slopes of the hill above Siloam. Perhaps too,
as some ancient rock-hewn chambers seem to
suggest, there was a small suburb on the S.E.
slope of the western hill; but it is impro-
bable that the whole of that hill was covered
with buildings at such an early period. Jebus
was attacked by Judah, and by Benjamin, and,
upon one occasion, the lower or walled town
was captured and burned (Judg. i. 8). The
Acropolis, however, — the stronghold or mountain
fortress (iTiyp) of Zion, — held out and resisted
all attempts at capture, until David carried it
by storm (2 Sam. if. 7 j 1 Ch. xi. 5). David
strengthened the Acropolis with new walla, and
made it his place of residence. Hence it was
called the " city of David " (2 Sam. v. 9 ; 1 Ch.
xi. 7), a name originally confined to the Acro-
polis, but afterwards, as in the similar case of
the Macedonian Acra, applied to all that portion
of the city that lay on the eastern hill.*
After its capture Jerusalem became the re-
ligious and political centre of the Jews; and
during the reign of Solomon it was enlarged
and fortified (1 K. iii. 1, ix. 15 ; Joseph. Ant
viii. 2, § 1 ; 6, § 1), and adorned with a Temple
and palace (1 K. vii. ; Ant. viii. 5, §§ J, 2).
It was probably during this period, one of
great commercial activity, when there was a
large and rapid increase of wealth and pros-
perity, that the western hill was enclosed by
walls' and joined to the " City of David." This
new quarter was no doubt, at first, largely
composed of the houses and gardens of the
wealthy ; and here, apparently, was the house
built by Solomon for the daughter of Pharaoh
(1 K. ix. 24; 2 Ch. viii 11). The fortifications
were afterwards repaired and strengthened by
Uzziah, Jotham, Hezekiah, and Manasseh ; and
the two last kings added new walls to the city
(2 Ch. xxvi. 9, xxvii. 3, xxxii. 5, xxxiii. 14;
Joseph. Ant. ix. 10, §3; 11, §2; x. 3, §2>
Hezekiah greatly improved the water supply
(2 K. xx. 20; 2 Ch. xxxii. 30); and it was
possibly during his reign that the "second
wall " (p. 1603) was built (2 Ch. xxxii. 5).
Pre-exilic Jerusalem, according to the above
view, occupied the same area that the city did
in the time of Christ, — that is, before Agrippa
added the third wall ; and the division into two
quarters, corresponding apparently to the upper
and lower cities, was already recognised (2 K.
• The passages in which the City of David > men-
tioned are : 2 Sam. vi. 12, 16; 1 K. il. 10, Iii. 1, vUi. I,
lx. 24, xi. 2T, 43, Xlv. 31, XV. 8, 24, XXlL 60 ; 2 K. VilL 24,
Ix. 28, xil. 21, Xlv. 20, XV. 1 , 38, xvl. 20 ; 1 Ch. xUL 13,
XV. 1, 29 J 2 Ch. V. 2, viii. 11, ix. 31, xil. 16, xlv. 1.
XVI. 14, XXL 1, 20, XXlv. 16, 25, xxvU. 9, xxxii. 6, 30, 33,
xxxiii. 14 ; Neb. iii. 15, xll. 37 ; 1 Mace. I. 33, vii. 33,
xlv. 36 ; Joseph. Ant. vii. 3, $ 2.
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
xxii. 14; Zeph. i. 10: cp. 2 K. xx. 4; Neh. iii.
9). There is no indication in the Bible of the
character of the fortifications or of the archi-
tectural features of the houses; but the walls
were provided with towers, especially at the
gates and corners, and with battlements (2 Ch.
xxvi. 9, 15, xxxii. 5 ; Ps. xlviii. 12, 13 ; Ant.
x. 3, § 2). One tower only, Manaiieel (R. V.
Hananel), is specially mentioned (Jer. xxxi. 38 ;
Zech. xiv. 10) ; and this, from the later descrip-
tion in Nehemiah (iii. 1, xii. 39), appears to
hare been to the north of and close to the Temple
(see Plate III.)' Closely connected with the forti-
fications was MlLLO (2 Sam. v. 9 ; IK. ix. 15,
24, xi. 27 ; 2 K. xii. 20 ; 1 Ch. xi. 8 ; 2 Ch.
xxxii. 5), an archaic word, perhaps of Canaanite
origin, which, except in one case (2 Ch. xxxii. 5),
is translated by the LXX. jj itpa, — a word that
they employ nowhere else in the 0. T., and that
is used throughout the books of Maccabees for
the fortress on Mount Zion (p. 1644). Some
authorities suppose Millo to hare been a place
of assembly, others an embankment, a tower on
a mound, or a valley (Lightfoot, Cent. Chor.
xxiv.). The view taken here is that it was
either the Acropolis or one of its towers, and
that it stood on or near the site of the later
Acra. In close proximity to the south wall of
the Temple was the place or quarter called
" the Ophel," which derived its name from, or
u'.ive it to, an important tower in the line of
fortifications above the Kedron (2 Ch. xxvii. 3,
xxxiii. 14; Is. xxxii. 14 [Heb.]; Mic. iv. 8
[Heb.]; cp. Tal. Jer. Taanith, iii. 11). Ophel
was the residence of the Nethinim (Neh. iii.
26, 27) ; and it is mentioned by Josephus in his
account of the last days of Jerusalem as " the
Ophla" (B. /. ii. 17, §9; v. 4, §2 ; 6, § 1 ; vi.
6, § 3).
The gates, those important features of
an Oriental city, are referred to generally in
Ps. ix. 14, lxxxvii. 2 ; Jer. xvii. 19. They
would naturally be at the ends of the principal
streets, and the names of several of them are
specially mentioned. (1) The Gate of Ephraim
was 400 cubits from the Corner Gate (2 K. xiv.
13 ; 2 Ch. xxv. 23), and, according to Nehemiah
(viii. 16, xii. 39), was between the Old Gate
and the broad wall, and at the end of a street
of the same name. Jerome (Quaest. Heb.)
identifies it with the Valley Gate ; but there can
be little doubt that it was the gate, on the
north side of the city, through which the road
to the north ran, and it may be placed with
some degree of certainty near the junction of
the " Via Dolorosa," with the street from the
Damascus Gate, where the porta judiciaria was
shown in the Middle Ages. (2) The Gate of
Benjamin, by which Jeremiah left the city
(Jer. xxxvii. 13), must also have been in the
north wall. It is mentioned again (Zech. xiv.
10), and was perhaps the same as the Gate of
Ephraim.* There was a Temple gate of the
same name (Jer. xx. 2, xxxviii. 7 ; cp. v. 14),
apparently the Miphkad of Nehemiah (iii. 31);
and there was to be a Gate of Benjamin on the
east side of the restored, holy Jerusalem (Ezek.
xlviii. 32). (3) The First Gate is mentioned,
JERUSALEM
1649
• Some of the earlier pilgrims, probably from Ezek.
xlviii. 32, place the Gate of Benjamin on the east side
of Jerusalem. (Theodoslus, 1. ; Arculfus, 1. 1.)
BIBLE OICT. — VOL. I.
apparently in order, between the Gate of
Benjamin and the Corner Gate (Zech. xiv. 10),
and is perhaps the same as (4) the Middle Gate,
in which the princes of Babylon sat after the
capture of Jerusalem (Jer. xxxix. 3), and as
the Old Gate (Neh. iii. 6). In this case the
First Gate would be at the north end of the
street running up the Tyropoeon Valley.
(5) The Fish Gate (2 Ch. xxxiii. 14), which
occupied a prominent position (Zeph. i. 10),
was between the Tower of Hananeel and the
Old Gate (Neh. iii. 1-6, xii. 39); and if the
position assigned to the Tower of Hananeel, at
the N.W. corner of the Haram, be correct, it
must have been the gate through which the
direct road from the eastern hill to the north,
now Tarii bob cz-Zahire, passed. It was per-
haps so called from its vicinity to the fish market
where the Tyrian merchants sold their fish
(Neh. xiii. 16); Jerome (Quaest. Heb.) identi-
fies it with the Jaffa Gate, but this is inad-
missible if he refers to the modern gate of that
name. (6) The Corner Gate (2 K. xiv. 3;
2 Ch. xxv. 23, xxvi. 9; Zech. xiv. 10) is
mentioned in connexion with the Tower of
Hananeel (Jer. xxxi. 38), and was possibly the
same as the Fish Gate. (7) The Horse Gate, by
which horses entered " the king's house," was
near the Temple (2 E. xi. 16; 2 Ch. xxiii. 15),
close to a corner of the east wall (Jer. xxxi. 40)
and to the wall of Ophel (Neh. iii. 27, 28), and
according to Josephus (Ant. ix. 7, § 3) it opened
on to the Kedron Valley. It must have been
near the S.E. corner of the Haram area.
(8) The gate between the two walls was close
to the king's gardens (2 K. xxv. 4 ; Jer. xxxix.
4), and is apparently identical with the Fountain
Gate (Neh. iii. 15), which was near the same
place. (9) The Gate Harsith, which led to the
Valley of Uinnom (Jer. xix. 2), was perhaps
the later Dung Gate (Neh. iii. 14), and Gate of
the Essenes (Joseph. B. J. v. 4, § 2), at the end
of the main street running southward, over
the western hill, from the Gate of Ephraim.
(10) The Valley Gate, or Gate of the Ravine,
gSi (2 Ch. xxvi. 9), which, from its name, must
have led to the Valley of Hinoom, was between
the Tower of the Furnaces and the Dung Gate,
and apparently opposite to or near the " dragon's
well" (Neh. ii. 13-15, iii. 11-13). It was
possibly a gate in the west wall to the south of
the present citadel. (11) The Gate of Joshua,
the governor of the city, is mentioned (2 K.
xxiii. 8), without any indication of position.
Other gates are referred to in connexion with
the king's house and the Temple (2 K. xi. 6,
19, xv. 35; 1 Ch. ix. 18, xivi. 16; 2 Ch.
xxiii. 5, 20; Jer. xxvi. 10, xxxvi. 10; Ezek.
ix. 2), but no traces of them now exist. There
were open spaces and bazirs in the city (2 Ch.
xxxii. 6 ; Jer. xxxvii. 21); reservoirs, or tanks
supplied by conduits (p. 1591) ; and, in the
valley below Siloam, gardens kept green and
fresh by irrigation.
The pre-exilic Temple and its courts covered
a much smaller area than the Temple of Herod,
but the altars of both temples were erected on
the same spot, near the S.W. corner of the
Haram (p. 1641). The position of the royal
palaces is uncertain. David, who at first
resided in the Acropolis, moved afterwards to
I a " house of cedar " built for bim by Tyrian
5 N
Digitized by VjOOQIC
1G50
JEBUSALEM
workmen (2 Sam. v. 9-11; 1 Ch. xiv. 1),
which appears to have been in sight of, and
at a lower level than, the threahing- floor of
Araunah (2 Sam. ixiv. 16, 18; IK. viii. 1, 6).
In the time of Nehemiah the traditional house
of David stood on the eastern hill, not far from
the Temple (Neh. xii. 37) ; and in the same
quarter was the Armoury (iii. 19), which was
no doubt the " tower of David builded for an
armoury, whereon there hang a thousand
bucklers, all the shields of the mighty men "
(Cant. iv. 4). It is possible that the more
magnificent house of Solomon (1 K. vii. 1-12)
was an enlargement or reconstruction of David's
" house of cedar," and that it afterwards became
the "king's house," or royal palace. This
" king's house " was in close proximity to the
Temple (2 K. xi. 5, 16, 19, 20; 2 Ch. xxiii. 15,
20; Ezek. xliii. 7, 8), and apparently within
its precincts (2 K. xxiii. 11). It was connected
by a covered way with the outer court (2 K.
xvi. 8), and lay partly under the treasury
. (Jer. xxxriii. 11), which, as at a later period
(John viii. 10 ; Joseph. Ant. xix. 6, § 1 ; B. J.
v. 5, § 2), appears to have been an adjunct of the
Temple. The same palace is probably alluded to
as the " king's high house " (Neh. iii. 25), which
was near the wall of'Ophel. There was also
a " winter house " (Jer. xxxvi. 22), and a
" house " for the daughter of Pharaoh (p. 1598).
According to the Mishna (Parah, iii. 2) it was
the custom to bury inside the walls at the time
of the first Temple, i.e. during the pre-exilic
period ; and this accords with the statements in
the Bible with regard to the burial of David
and most of his successors (1 K. ii. 10, xi.
43, xv. 24, xxii. 50, &c). At a later date all
the tombs, i.e. the bones in them, excepting
those of the family of David, and that of
Huldah, appear to have been removed outside
the city (Tosefta Baba Bathra, i.). The position
of the tomb of David, which became the burial-
place of the kings of Judah, is uncertain. It is
distinctly stated to have been in the "City of
David " (/. c), that is, on the eastern hill ; and
this is not only confirmed by Nehemiah, who
mentions it (iii. 15, 16) after Siloam in a
description proceeding from west to east, but
by a curious Jewish tradition that the tombs of
the kings were connected by a hollow way or
tunnel with the Eedron Valley (quoted by
Dr. Chaplin, PEFQy. Stat. 1885, p. 192, note).
The locality seems to have been well known up
to the time of the destruction of Jerusalem by
Titus (Acts ii. 29; Joseph. Ant. xvi. 7, §1);
nod it was apparently within the walls when
the city was besieged by Antiochus (Joseph.
Ant. vii. 15, §3; xiii. 8, §4; B. J. i. 2, §5).
Many suggestions have been made with regard
to the position of the tomb, and of these the
most plausible is perhaps that of M. Clermont-
(lanneau. He supposes that the sepulchre of
David was a pit-tomb of the Phoenician type, —
a sepulchral chamber or chambers, reached from
the surface by a shaft, — and that it was at the
southern extremity of the eastern hill, in the
bend made by the rock-hewn conduit between
the Fountain of the Virgin and the Pool of
Siloam. The statement of Josephus (Ant. xvi.
7, § 1) that Herod built a monument on the
mouth, M t$ ffro/iltf, of David's tomb seems to
favour the view that it was a pit-tomb; and
JERUSALEM
Epiphanius, Theodoret, Nicolas of Damascus, and
the Paschal Chronicle connect the Siloam con-
duit with the tomb (Revue Critique, 1887).
Eusebius and Jerome, on what authority is not
stated, place the tomb of David at Bethlehem
(OS* p. 246, 22 ; p. 135, 5). It is now shown,
outside the Sion Gate, on the western hill of
Jerusalem.
9. Zion. — One of the most difficult points
connected with the topography of ancient Jeru-
salem is the correct fixation of the locality of
the sacred Mount of Zion. Unfortunately the
name Zion is not found in the works of Josephus,
so that we have not his assistance, which would
be invaluable in this case, and there is do
passage in the Bible which directly asserts
the identity of the hills Moriah and Zion,
though many that cannot well be understood
without this assumption. The cumulative
proof, however, is such as almost to supply
this want.
From the passages in 2 Sam. v. 7, 9, 1 K.
viii. 1, 1 Ch. xi. 5, 7, and 2 Ch. v. 2, it is quite
clear that Zion and the City of David were
identical, for it is there said, " David took the
strong hold of Zion; the same is the City of
David" (R. V.); "and David dwelt in the
strong hold, and called it the City of David "
(R. V.). When David moved from the strong-
hold to the palace of cedar which the Tyrian
craftsmen built for him, the names Zion and
City of David were no doubt, as in the parallel
case of the Macedonian Acra, applied both to
the Acropolis and to the town beneath its walls.
Mount Zion originally, and in a narrow sense,
was the hill upon which Zion, the City of David,
was built ; and, as the Temple apparently stood
above the City of David (2 Sam. xxiv. 18;
1 K. viii. 1, 4; 2 Ch. v. 2), it follows that
Mount Zion must have been the lower or
eastern, and not the higher or western hill of
Jerusalem. The name Zion is, it is true, often
applied to the whole of the city (Ps. liii. 6,
cxxvi. 1, cxlvi. 10 ; Is. i. 27, xiv. 32 ; Lam. i.
4), and is sometimes a mere reduplication of
Jerusalem ; but, as a rule, a distinction is made
between the two places. In the following pas-
sages, for instance, Zion is apparently spoken of
as a different city, or quarter, from Jerusalem :
" For out of Jerusalem shall go forth a rem-
nant, and they that escape out of Mount Zion **
(2 K. xix. 31). " Do good in thy good pleasure
unto Zion ; build thou the walls of Jerusalem "
(Ps. Ii. 18). " For the people shall dwell in Zion
at Jerusalem " (Is. xxx. 19). "Thy holy cities
are a wilderness, Zion is a wilderness, Jerusalem
a desolation" (Is. Ixiv. 10). "Zion shall be
plowed like a field, and Jerusalem shall become
heaps" (Jer. xxvi. 18; Mic. iii. 12). "The
Lord shall roar out of Zion, and utter His voice
from Jerusalem " (Joel iii. 10 ; Amos i. 2). * The
Lord shall get comfort in Zion, and shall yet
choose Jerusalem " (Zech. I. 17)." This qnality
of designation indicates precisely the twofold
character of the city, — the Acropolis (Zion) with
the houses and palaces (Ps. xlviii. 3) clustering
round it, — the " lower city " of Josephus,— on
* See also 1 K. vUi. 1 ; 2 K. xix. 21 ; Ps. csxvtiL *,
cxlvli. 12; Is. ii. 3, xxiv. 23, xxxl. 4, S, xxxvll. 32,
111. 1 ; Mlc. tv. % xxiv. 10, 11 ; sad after the Captivity.
Ecclus. xxxvi. 13, 14.
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
the eastern hill ; and the town itself (Jeru-
salem) — the " upper city " of the same author —
on the western hill. There are also numerous
passages in which Zion is spoken of as a Holy
place in such terms as are never applied to
Jerusalem, and which can only be understood on
the supposition that they apply to the Holy
Temple Mount. As, for instance, " I set my king
on my holy hill of Zion" (Ps. ii. 6). "The Lord
loreth the gates of Zion more than all the dwell-
ings of Jacob" (Ps. lxxxvii. 2). "The Lord has
chosen Zion " (Ps. cxxxii. 13). " The city of the
Lord, the Zion of the Holy One of Israel " (Is.
lx. 14). " Arise ye, and let us go up to Zion to
the Lord " (Jer. xxxi. 6). « Thus saith the Lord,
I am returned to Zion " (Zech. viii. 3). " I am
the Lord thy God, dwelling in Zion, my holy
mountain " (Joel iii. 17). " For the Lord
dwelleth in Zion" (Joel iii. 21); and other
passages* which will occur to every one at all
familiar with the Scriptures. Though these
cannot be taken as absolute proof, they certainly
amount to strong presumptive evidence that
Zion and the Temple hill were one and the same
place. There is one curious passage, however,
which is scarcely intelligible on any other hypo-
thesis than this. It is known that the sepul-
chres of David and his successors were on
Mount Zion, or in the City of David, but the
wicked king Ahaz for his crimes was buried in
Jerusalem, "in the city," and "not in the
sepulchres of the kings" (2 Ch. xxviii. 27).
Jehoram (2 Ch. xxi. 20) narrowly escaped the
same punishment, and the distinction is so
marked that it cannot be overlooked. It also
follows from Neh. iii. 15, 16, that the name
Zion was applied to the eastern hill.
When from the Old Testament we turn to
the books of the Maccabees, we find passages,
written by persons who certainly were ac-
quainted with the localities, which seem to fix
the site of Zion with a considerable amount of
certainty; as, for instance, "(They) went up
into Mount Zion. And when they saw the
sanctuary desolate, and the altar profaned, and
the gates burned up, and shrubs growing in the
courts as in a forest" (1 Mace. iv. 37, 38;
cp. r. 60). "After this went Nicanor up to
Mount Zion, and there came out of the sanc-
tuary certain of the priests " (1 Mace. vii. 33 ;
cp. 2 Mace xiv. 31). "They went up to Mount
Zion with joy and gladness, where they offered
burnt offerings" (1 Mace. v. 54). See also
1 Mace vi. 48, 51, xiv. 27 ; cp. v. 48, &c. These
passages leave no doubt that at that time
Zion and the Temple Hill were considered one
and the same place. In agreement with this
are also the references in Eccltis. xxiv. 10;
1 Esd. viii. 81; 2 Esd. v. 25; Judith ix. 13.
Joscphus, it is true, places the "City of David"
and the citadel stormed by Joab on the western
hill, and clearly identifies them with the " Upper
City " {Ant. vii. 3, §§ 1, 2 ; cp. B. J. v. 4, § 1) ;
but the statements of the Jewish historian cannot
be regarded as equal in authority to those of
JERUSALEM
1651
• Ps. ix. 11, 1. 2, lxxlv. 2, 3, lxxvi. 2, lxxviii. 68,
«9, lxxxiv. 7, xclx. 2, cxxxlv. 3; Is. viii. 18, xviii. 7 ;
Jer. viii. 19, 1. 28; Obad. v. 17. It should be re-
membered, with reference to the expressions in some of
Die Psalms, that the Ark was In the City of David, on
Mount Zion, for many years during David's reign.
the writers of the books of Maccabees, Esdras,
and Ecclesiasticus.
The question whether the stronghold of Zion
was to the north or to the south of the Temple
cannot be solved with our present knowledge.
Lightfoot (Op. i. 553; ii. 187) is in favour of
the former, and refers to the words, " Beautiful
for situation, the joy of the whole earth, is Mount
Zion, on the sides of the north, the city of the
great king " (Ps. xl viii. 2), and also to Is. xiv. 13
and Ezek. xl. 2. Reland (Pa/, p. 846 sq.) con-
troverts this view, and argues in favour of the
identification of Zion with the " Upper City " of
Joseph us. The more probable view seems to be
that the author of the First Book of Maccabees
was right in identifying Zion with the Temple
Mount and its stronghold with the Acra (i. 31-
33, 36 ; iii. 45 ; vii. 32).
During the first four centuries after Christ
the name Zion was applied sometimes to the
eastern and sometimes to the western hill.
From the 5th century inclusive the latter only
has been known as Zion. The Rabbis with one
accord place the Temple on Mount Zion; and
though their authority in matters of doctrine
may be valueless, still their traditions ought to
have been sufficiently distinct to justify their
being considered as authorities on a merely
topographical point of this sort. Lightfoot
(Fall of Jerusalem, § 1) quotes from the Talmud:
"The wicked Turnus Rufus ploughed up the
place of the Temple, and the places about it, to
accomplish what is said, Zion shall become a
ploughed field." Origen (in Joan. iv. 19, 20)
clearly identifies Zion with the Temple Mount,
and so do Eusebius (in It. xxii. 1) and apparently
Jerome (in Is. xxii. 1, 2). On the other hand,
Eusebius and Jerome in the Onomasticon (OS. 7
p. 257, 21 ; p. 162, 25 ; p. 134, 20) and in other
places refer to the western hill as Zion, and so
does the Bordeaux Pilgrim (/tin. Ilieros.).
It has been suggested that the name Zion was
originally applied to the western hill, that after
the return from Captivity it was transferred to
the eastern hill, and that in the 4th century
a.d. it was retransferred to the western hill ;
but this theory is quite untenable. A more
probable view is that the eastern hill was
regarded as Zion until Christianity became the
religion of the State, and that, when Constan-
tine built " New Jerusalem " (i.e. the Church of
the Anastasis, and the Basilica) over against the
one celebrated of old ((.«. the Jewish Temple), the
name Zion was transferred to the western hill.
It may be added that, the Antonia having been
completely demolished, the great towers attached
to Herod's palace, which were left standing
by Titus, would naturally become in the eyes
of an uncritical age the ancient Acropolis of
Jerusalem, — the stronghold of Zion.
10. Topography of the Book of Nehemiah. —
The only description of the ancient city of Jeru-
salem which exists in the Bible, so extensive in
form as to enable us to follow it as a topo-
graphical description, is that found in the Book of
Nehemiah ; and although it is hardly sufficiently
distinct to enable us to settle all the moot
points, it contains such valuable indications
that it is well worthy of the most attentive
examination.
The easiest way to arrive at any correct
conclusion regarding it, is to take first the
5 N 2
Digitized by VjOOQlC
1652
JERUSALEM
description of the Dedication of the Wills in
ch. xii. (31-40), and, drawing such a diagram as
this, we easily get at the main features of the
old wall at least.
Diagram of placea mentioned in dedication of walla.
The order of procession was that the princes
of Jndah went up upon the wall at some point
as nearly as possible opposite to the Temple,
and one half of them, turning to the right,
went towards the Dung Gate, " and at the
fountain gate, which was over against them"
("by the fountain gate, and straight before
them," R. V.), or, in other words, on the opposite
or Temple side of the city, " went up by the
stairs of the city of David at the going up of
the wall, above the house of David, even unto
the water-gate eastward." The Water Gate,
therefore, was one of the southern gates of the
Temple (iii. 26 ; viii. 1, 3, 16), and the stairs
that led up towards it are here identified with
those of the city of David, and consequently
with Zion.
The other party turned to the left, or north-
wards, and passed from beyond (" above," R. V.)
the Tower of the Furnaces even " unto the broad
wall," and passing the Gate of Ephraim, the Old
Gate, the Fish Gate, the towers of Hananeel and
Meah, to the Sheep Gate, " stood still in the
prison-gate " ('• gate of the guard," R. V.), as
the other party had in the Water Gate. "So
stood the two companies of them that gave
thanks in the house of God."
If from this we turn to the 3rd chapter,
which gives a description of the repairs of the
wall, we have no difficulty in identifying all
the places mentioned in the first sixteen verses
with those enumerated in the 12th chapter.
The repairs began at the Sheep Gate on the
north side, and in immediate proximity to the
Temple, and all the places named in the dedica-
tion, excepting the Gate of Ephraim, are again
named, but in the reverse order, till we come to
the Tower of the Furnaces, which must have
stood on or near the site afterwards occupied
by the Tower Hippicus (p. 1644). Mention is
then made, but now in the direct order of the
dedication, of " the valley-gate," the " dung-
gate," " the fountain-gate ; " and lastly, the
" stairs that go down from the city of David."
Between these last two places we find mention
made of the Pool of Siloah and the king's garden,
JERUSALEM
so that we have long passed the so-called
sepulchre of David on the modern Zion, and
have crossed the valley that separates it from
the hill upon which the Temple stood. What
follows is most important (v. 16), "After him
repaired Nehemiah, the son of Azbuk, the ruler
of the half part of Bethzur, unto the place over
against the sepulchres of David, and to the
pool that was made, and unto the house of the
mighty." This passage, when taken with the
context, seems in itself quite sufficient to set at
rest the question of the position of the city of
David, of the sepulchres of the kings, and con-
sequently of Zion, all which could not be men-
tioned after Siloah if placed where modern
tradition has located them.
In the enumeration of the places repaired, in
the last part of the chapter, we have two
which we know, from the description of the
dedication, really belonged to the Temple. The
prison-court (" court of the guard," R. V., iii.
25), which must have been connected with the
prison-gate (" gate of the guard," R. V.), and
which, as shown by the order of the dedication,
must have been on the north side of the Temple,
is here also connected with the king's high or
upper house ; all this apparently referring to the
Castle of David, which originally occupied the
site of the Turris Antonia. We have on the
opposite side the " water-gate," mentioned in
the next verse to Ophel, and consequently a>
clearly identified with the southern gate of thv
Tempie. We have also the Horse Gate, that by
which Athaliah was taken out of the Temple
(2 K. xi. 16 ; 2 Ch. xxiii. 15), which Josephns
states led to the Kedron (Ant. ix. 7, § 3), and
which is here mentioned as connected with the
priests' houses, and probably, therefore, in close
proximity to the Temple. Mention is also made
of the house of Eliashib, the high-priest, and of
the eastern gate, probably that of the Temple.
In fact, no place is mentioned in these last
verses which cannot be more or less directly
identified with the localities on the Temple
hill, and not one which can be located in Jeru-
salem, on the western hill. The whole of the
City of David, however, was so completely
rebuilt and remodelled by Herod, that there are
no local indications to assist us in ascertaining
the line which the order of description of the
places mentioned after e. 16 follows. It U
enough to know that the description in the
last seventeen verses applies to Zion, or the City
of David ; as this is sufficient to explain almost
all the difficult passages in the Old Testament
which refer to the ancient topography of the city.
11. Site of the Holy Sepulchre. — Three im-
portant questions have to be considered in con-
nexion with the site of the Holy Sepulchre.
First, did Constantino, and those who acted
with him, possess sufficient information to enable
them to ascertain exactly the precise localities
of the Crucifixion and Burial of Christ ? Second,
does the present Church of the Holy Sepulchre
stand upon the ground once occupied bv the
Churches of Constantine ? Third, where should
the site of Christ's tomb be sought ?
Eusebius, who was present at the consecration
of Constantine's churches, A.D. 335, states that,
in order to hide the " Divine cave " from the
eyes of men, and so conceal the truth, certain
j ungodly and impious persons had covered up the
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
whole place with earth, paved it with stone,
and erected above it a temple dedicated to
Aphrodite. Conatantine, "inspired by the
Divine Spirit," ordered the temple to be de-
stroyed, and the soil to be dug np to a consider-
able depth. When this was done, the cave, " con-
trary to all expectation," became visible. This
discovery the emperor regarded as a miracle
which it was beyond the capacity of man to
understand (Vit. Const, iii. 25-28). Elsewhere
Eusebius writes (Theophania, Lee's Translation,
p. 199): "It is astonishing to see even the rock
standing out erect and alone on a level land,
and having only one cave in it ; lest, had there
been many, the miracle of Him who overcame
death might have been obscured." No other
writer in the 4th century alludes to the cir-
cumstances attending the recovery of the Holy
Sepulchre, but all the historians of the following
century describe the discovery of the Tomb and
the Cross as having been miraculous, and the
act of the Empress Helena. The erection of
the temple of Aphrodite is at the same time
generally ascribed to the enemies of Christianity
(Soc. H. E. i. 17 ; Theod. H. E. i. 18 ; Soz.
//. E. ii. 1).
With regard to the " Invention of the
Cross " which is so intimately connected with
the discovery of the Tomb by historians of the
5th and succeeding centuries, Eusebius, who
mentions (Orat. de Laud. Const, ix.) that the
Basilica was dedicated to the Cross, and the
Bordeaux Pilgrim, who visited Jerusalem in
A.D. 333, are silent. Yet twenty years later
Cyril speaks of its existence as a well-known
fact, and before the close of the century it
played an important part in the ritual of the
Church at Jerusalem 1 ' (S. Silciae Aq. Per. ad
I. S., pp. 66, 67).
It has been urged (Chateaubriand, /tin. 2*
Mem., i. p. 122 sq.) that the members of the
first Christian Church must have been well
acquainted with the site of the Holy Sepulchre,
and that, as there was a regular succession of
bishops from the Apostle James to Hadrian's
reign, the tradition could not have been lost.
Also that the erection of a temple by Hadrian
on the site is a proof that it was well known
in his time. That the early Christians knew
the position of the tomb is true, but there is no
evidence in the N. T., or in the history of the
primitive Church, that they attached the slight-
est importance to it. The regular succession of
bishops from James to Hadrian's time rests on
the authority of Eusebius, who states (//. E.
iv. 5) that he wrote from report, and not from
documentary evidence.* Jerome, it is true,
hints (Ep. 49, ad Paul.) that the temple
was one of the many buildings with which
Hadrian adorned Aelia; but there is no cer-
tainty that he built it, that he did so at the
place known as Colgotha in his day, or that
he intentionally erected a temple above the
tomb of Christ. As Dean Stanley well says
(S.andP. p. 458), "It is hardly conceivable that
JERUSALEM
1653
* It appears that special precautions had to be taken
to prevent pilgrims biting pieces out of the cross when
kissing It on Good Friday (S. SI 1. 1, c).
• The arguments for and against the existence of any
tradition respecting the site of the Tomb are given by
Boblnson (It. 70 sq.).
Hadrian could have had any motive in such a
purpose, when his whole object in establishing
his new city of Aelia was to insult, not the
Christians, but the Jews, from whom, in Pales-
tine at that time, the Christians were em-
phatically divided."
It has been suggested (Finlay, On the Site of
the Holy Sepulchre) that, as the Romans made
accurate maps and plans of the principal locali-
ties in their conquered provinces, Constantino
could have had no difficulty in ascertaining the
exact position of Golgotha. To this it may be
objected that, unless Golgotha were the public
place of execution, the spot at which three men
were crucified would not have been of sufficient
importance to be shown on a map ; and that
if the finders of the Tomb had been guided by
a map, they would not have spoken of its dis-
covery as miraculous. Possibly a tradition may
have lingered as to the general direction, but
that the exact spot was unknown seems to
follow from the silence of Eusebius with regard
to the place of Christ's burial in his earlier
writings/
The view (Conder, PEFQy. Stat, 1883,
p. 69 sq.) that the cave beneath the temple
of Aphrodite was a natural cavern,' connected
with the mysteries of Venus, which was adopted
by Macarius as the Sepulchre of Christ, and re-
consecrated as a Christian Holy Place, derives
some support from the statement of Jerome
that from the time of Hadrian onwards Adonis
had been worshipped in the Grotto at Bethlehem
(Ep. xlix. ad Paulin.), and from the manner in
which the " three holy caves " are alluded to by
Eusebius (de Lmtd. Const, ix.). On the other
hand, if there had been any doubt as to the
authenticity of the site, Julian would probably
have brought it forward as an instance of
Christian duplicity. It is only natural to sup-
pose that those who discovered the Tomb of
Christ made every effort to ascertain the true
site ; yet it is difficult to resist the conclusion
that they were guided by no definite tradition
and by no trustworthy historical evidence.
The identity of the traditional Holy Sepulchre
with the cave discovered by Constantine may be
regarded as certain. Eusebius aud Jerome (OS.*
p. 257, 22; p. 162, 25) place Golgotha to the north
of Mount Zion, evidently the western hill ; the
Bordeaux Pilgrim passing from Zion, along the
main street of the ancient city, to the '• Gate of
Neapolis," at or near the Damascus Gate, had
Golgotha on his left hand and the Praetorium
on his right (/fin. Hieros.) : and S. Paula, after
leaving the Sepulchre, ascends Zion (Ep. Paul.
* Eusebius, writing ten or more years before the Jour-
ney of Helena, refers to pilgrimages to the cave on the
Mount of Olives in which Christ taught His disciples,
and mentions the cave of the Nativity at Bethlehem
(Demon*. JSe. vl. 18, p. 288 ; vtl. 2, p. 343) ; and it Is
difficult to believe that he would not have alluded to the
Tomb If its site had been known.
« It is to be observed that Eusebius always speaks of
the sepulchre as to arrpop, which usually implies a
natural cavern, rather than an excavated tomb (fit.
Const, ill. 2&-33) ; and that be uses the same word when
writing of the grotto of the Nativity at Bethlehem, and
the cave of the Apostles on the Mount of Olives (ill. 43 ;
Orat. dt Laud. Cunrt. ix.). The word used in the N. T.
Is generally lurtiiuiov. Matt, xxvil. 61, sxvliL 1, has
alsora^ot.
Digitized by
Google
1654
JERUSALEM
vii.). Eucherius, c. A.D. 530 (§§ 1-5), distinctly
places Golgotha to the north of modern Zion,
and no other position is assigned to it by subse-
quent writers.
The Tomb was richly decorated by Constan-
tine, who, in a.d. 326-335, erected over and
near it two great churches : one, the Anastasis
or Church of the Resurrection, contained the
Sepulchre ; the other, the Basilica or Martyrium,
was dedicated to the Cross. There was also a
smaller church of Golgotha or Calvary, which,
though not mentioned by Eusebius, must hare
been built at the same time or soon afterwards.
The Basilica stood in an open court with cloUters
on three sides, and to the east of it were an
atrium, with exedrae, and a porch. These
buildings remained intact until 614, when they
are said to have been destroyed or greatly
injured by the Persians. They are described by
Eusebius ( Vit. Const, iii. 25-42), who was pre-
sent at their dedication, and they were seen,
whilst in a perfect state, by several pilgrims
who have left records, more or less full, of what
they saw (Itin. Hieros. ; S. Silviae Aq. Per. ;
Jerome, Per. S. Paulae ; Eucherius, De Loc. Sanct.
i.-viii. ; Brev. de Hieros. ; Theodosius, De Sit.
T. S. §§ t-14 ; Antoninus, De Loc. Sanct. xvi.-
xxvii.). After the Persian invasion and before
the capture of the city by the Arabs, A.D. 637,
the churches were repaired or rebuilt by Wo-
destus, and in this state they were seen by Ar-
culfus, c. 670-80, who, besides giving a detailed
description of the buildings, is the first pilgrim
to furnish a plan (De Loc. Sanct. i. 2—13); by
Willibald (Hodoep.) ; and by Bernard (/tin.).
It is clear from a careful comparison of these
ancient records, and especially of the plan of
Arculfus, with the present Church of the Holy
Sepulchre and its adjuncts, that many traces of
the original churches remain. The relative
position of the churches is the same ; the cir-
cular Church of the Anastasis has preserved its
form; the south wall of the Basilica can be
traced from "Calvary" eastward; portions of
the paved conrt have been brought to light ; and
one of the large cisterns constructed by Con-
stantine has been discovered. The original
surface of the ground inclined to the S.E., and a
level platform was obtained by cutting away the
rock at the western end to a depth of about
30 ft. below the level of Christian Street. At
the same time the rock masses of the Tomb
and " Calvary " were isolated so as to stand out
prominently above the general level. This ex-
plains the remark of Dositheus (ii. 1, § 7), that
on account of the hill there was only the wall
of the enclosure on the west side of the Sepulchre ;
and it is probable that the isolation of the rock
at " Calvary " gave rise to the term " Mount "
(Monticulus) Calvary. The existence of two
rock-hewn tombs, one to the west, the other
to the north-east of the Holy Sepulchre, shows
that this locality was used by the Jews as a
place of burial, and that the Sepulchre may
well have formed part of an ancient tomb.
Cyril expressly states (Cat. xir. 9) that the
outer cave was cut away to facilitate the decora-
tion of the Tomb itself, and there would have
been no difficulty in doing this (Willis, Holy
Sepulchre; Wilson, PEFQy. Stat., 1877, p. 130
sq.), though it is somewhat surprising that
Eusebius does not mention an excavation of such
JERUSALEM
magnitude. Many attempts have been made
to restore the plan upon which Constantine's
MARKET PLACE
Plan of CoxuUnUnc'a ClioichfiB.
churches were originally built, and very different
views have been advanced on the subject ; k but
no successful restoration can be made until the
ground round the existing church has been
examined by excavation.
The view" that the Church of the Holy Sepul-
chre stands upon the site once occupied by Con-
stantine's churches was contested by the late
Mr. James Fergusson, who maintained, chiefly
upon architectural grounds, that the original
churches were situated within the Haram area,
that the " Dome of the Kock " was the Church of
the Resurrection, and that there was a transfer-
ence of site during the first half of the 1 1th
century (Essay, p. 154; D. of B. 1st ed. s. v.
Jerusalem, Sect. x. ; Temples of the Jews, p. 258
sq.) This theory, which from its novelty and
from the heat imparted to the controversy by
its originator and his opponents attracted much
attention at the time, was not very favourably
received, and the fuller information of the
present day shows it to be quite untenable.
The history of the churches since their re-
storation by Modestus may be briefly told. About
a.d. 1010 the Church of the Sepulchre was
razed to its foundations (usque ad solum dirvta,
W. of Tyre, Hist. i. 4), and an attempt made to
■> The plan in the text is an attempt to reconcile tbr
various descriptions with the existing remains. A good
summary of the subject will be round In Barter Lewis'
Churches «/ Contlantine at Jerusalem, P. P. Text
Society Scries ; and Ilayter Lewis' Uoly Places at Jeru-
salem.
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM.
Scale — Twelve Inches to a mile.
Pr.»TE III.
Topography of the Bible.
To /ace p. 1«M.
Digitized by VjOOQIC
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
JERUSALEM
165o
destroy the Tomb itself by order of the Fatimite
Khnlif el-Hakim. The restoration of the churches
was completed in a.d. 1048, and a few years
after the capture of Jerusalem by the Crusaders
the buildings were seen and described by Saewnlf
(P. P. Teit Soc. Series) and Abbot Daniel (the
same series). During the Latin occupation of
the city the church was reconstructed so as to
bring all the Holy Places under one roof; and
this building, of which there are many detailed
descriptions, existed until it was partially de-
stroyed by fire in 1808.' The restoration of
the church in its present form was completed
in 1810.
The determination of the true sites of Golgotha
and the Tomb of Christ must rest chiefly on
topographical considerations, and unfortunately
the information to be obtained from the Bible on
this head is most meagre. We are told that Jesus
was led away from Gethsemane to the house of
the High Priest, possibly his official residence,
and the same as that mentioned by Josephus(2?.
J. ii. 17, § 6) ; and that at daybreak next morn-
ing He was questioned by the Sanhedrin (Luke
xxii. 66), which probably sat in the "Council
House," between the Xystus and the western
cloister of the Temple (B. J. v. 4, § 2), close to
" Wilson's Arch." From the council chamber
Jesus was taken to the Praetorium, and brought
before Pilate (John xviii. 28, 29), who, after
judgment, delivered Him to the Roman soldiers
to be crucified. He was then led away to
Golgotha and crucified with two malefactors.
The Praetorium could only have been one of
two places, — the palace of Herod, on the western
hill, or the Castle of Antonia, north of the
Temple. The first was certainly occupied by
Gessius Floras, who, Josephus says, in words
that are almost an echo of the Gospels, "had
his tribunal set before it, and sat upon it, when
the High Priests, and the principal people, and
all those of the greatest eminence in the city,
came before his tribunal" (5. J. ii. 14, § 8).
How long previously the palace had been the
residence of the Roman Procurators is uncertain,
but it is scarcely probable that Pilate, whose
wife was with him, would have lived with the
soldiers of the garrison in the Antonia, when
Herod's palace, with its gardens and banqueting
halls, was at his disposal. On the other hand, a
tradition at least as old as the 4th cent. (/tin.
fficros.') places the Praetorium to the east of
the Sepulchre ; Theodosius and Antoninus in the
6th century mention that the Church of St.
Sophia occupied the site of the Praetorium,
apparently that on which the "Dome of the
Rock " now stands ; and later tradition identifies
it with the Antonia, which stood at the N.W.
angle of the Harain. A possible explanation is
that Jesus was in the first place taken to Herod's
palace, — the Praetorium, in which Pilate resided ;
that after judgment He was taken by the Roman
soldiers to the Antonia, which was at once the
head-quarters of the garrison and the state
prison ; and that from thence He was led out
with the two thieves to be crucified.
The place of the Crucifixion was in a garden
(John xix. 41), without the gate (Heb. xiii. 12:
cp. Matt, xxvii. 32 ; Hark xv. 20 ; John xix.
1 In the British Museum there is an interesting model
of the church made prior to the fire of 1808.
17), and nigh to the city (John xix. 20), yet not
necessarily close to it, for the Mount of Olives
is said (Acts i. 12) to have been " nigh " to the
city, and the transference of the cross, and the
visits of the disciples and the women, give the
idea of distance. It was near a frequented
thoroughfare leading from one of the city gates
to the country (Matt, xxvii. 39; Mark xv. 21.
29 ; Luke xxiii. 26), and was visible from afar
oft' (Mark xv. 40 ; Luke xxiii. 49), and presum-
ably from the Temple, or some point of vantage
whence the high priests could look on without
the risk of ceremonial defilement (Matt, xxvii.
41 ; Mark xv. 31 ; cp. John xviii. 28). Possibly
also, as the sin offering was to be burned some
distance from the camp, and to the north of the
Altar (Lev. i. 10, 11 ; iv. 21 : cp. Heb. xiii. 11,
12), Christ the Antitype suffered in the same
position. In the garden in which He was cruci-
fied was the rock-hewn tomb in which "never
man had yet lain " (Matt, xxvii. 60 ; Mark xv.
46 ; Luke xxiii. 53 ; John xix. 41).
In discussing the site of Golgotha, it is
necessary to bear in mind that, at the time of
the Crucifixion, the third wall, or that of Agrippa
(as shown on Plate II.), had not been built ;
and that of the main roads entering the city,
the one from the north, after passing thn
"Tombs of the Kings," probably led by three
separate ways to the Antonia, to the principal
gate of the second wall, and to the Gate Gennath
and Herod's palace. The sites that have been
suggested are : —
(i.) The traditional spot is now well within
the city, and has not yet been proved to have
been without the walls at the time of the Cruci-
fixion. Nothing is yet certainly known of the
course of the second wall ; and the question
whether it ran so as just to exclude or just to
include the present site, can only be solved by
excavation. The discoverers of the Sepulchre
apparently believed that it was outside the
walls, and that it was brought within thew-
limits by Hadrian when he rebuilt the city.
Amongst the arguments in favour of the site are
the early tradition, the existence of rock-hewn
tombs in the immediate vicinity, and the easy
access, through the Gate Gennath, from Herod's
palace, supposing that building to have been the
Praetorium and the starting-point of the way to
Golgotha. On the other hand, the tradition is
not wholly reliable, the presence of tombs docs
not necessarily imply that the spot was outside
the wall, and the position is west rather than
north of the fiaram esh-Sherif, in which the
Temple stood.
(ii.) The site in the Haram advocated by
Mr. Fergusson is too close to the position he
assigned to the Temple, and it was apparently
within the wall of Herod. The historical
evidence is decisive against it, and there is no
evidence that the cave beneath the Sakhrah was
ever used as a place of burial.
(iii.) M. Kenan ( Vie de Je~sw>, p. 269) considers
that the site of the Crucifixion must have been
to the north or north-west of the city, on the
plateau between the Kedron and the Hinnom
valleys ; and he is inclined to place it near the
N.W. angle of the present wall, or on the hill
side above the Birket Mamilla. This position,
suitable in many respects, is too far to the west
to meet the requirements of Lev. i. 10, 11.
Digitized by
Google
1656
JERUSALEM
JERUSALEM
(iv.) The proximity of the knoll above " Jere- j
miah'a Grotto " to the great roa<l from the i
north, its prominence, and its northerly position ,
with regard to the Temple led Otto Thenius, as I
early as 1849, to identify it with Golgotha ; and
this view has since been strongly advocated by '.
Felix Howe (1871), the late General Gordon,
Major Conder, and other English and American
writers. The principal argument in its favour,
in addition to those just mentioned, is that
according to modern Jewish tradition it is the
place of execution by stoning, called in the
Talmud the Beth has-Sckilah, or " House of
Stoning." The existence of a cliff, the legends
connected with the valley to the east, and the
very early belief that St. Stephen suffered
martyrdom outside the Damascus Gate, support
the view that this spot was the " House of
Stoning ; " and if Christ had been condemned
by the Sanhedrin for an offence against the reli-
gious law, He would probably have suffered death
here. It must, however, be remembered that
He was condemned by Pilate and crucified by
Roman soldiers ; and there is not the least evi-
dence that the Roman place of crucifixion and the
Jewish " House of Stoning " were identical. The
contrary seems the more reasonable supposition.
The Roman custom was to cany out executions
beside a public highway, and the soldiers would
scarcely have selected a place of execution so
peculiarly Jewish. It is hardly probable either
that the garden of Joseph of Arimathea in-
cluded the "House of Stoning," or that Joseph
would have made a new tomb in such close
proximity to the common Jewish place of exe-
cution.
(v.) There are now no means of ascertaining
the true site of the Crucifixion, but it may well
be that Christ, having been brought from
Herod's palace to the Antonia, was led out, with
the two thieves, along that branch of the north
road which kept to the eastern hill without de-
scending into the Tyropoeon valley. The line
of this road is clearly marked, within and with-
out the city, and somewhere close to it the
third wall. Perhaps the view which best meets
all the requirements of the case is that which
was held by the late Bishop Gobat of Jerusalem.
who maintained that Christ suffered directly
to the north of the Temple, on the hill or spur
to the east of Jeremiah's Grotto.
12. Buildings: Constantine to Godfrey. — The
attempt of Julian, " the Apostate," to rebuild
the Temple of the Jews was commenced about
six months before his death ; and according to
Interior of Golden Gateway. (From * photograph.)
three crosses were possibly erected. The hill of
liezetha, forming as it does a prolongation of ,
the ridge of Mount Moriah, would appear to be a i
suitable spot, but it must at that time have
been covered with the " new town," which soon
afterwards necessitated the construction of the
FronUapleoe of JuUaii in south wall of Hiram.
Mr. Fergusson, traces of his work may still be
seen in the south wall of the Haram. "The
great tunnel-like vault under the Mosque el-
Aksa, with its four-domed vestibule, is almost
certainly part of the temple of Herod [see
Temple], and coeval with his period; but
externally to this, certain architectural deco-
rations have been added (see above), at"!
that so slightly, that daylight can be perceived
between the old walls and the subsequent deco-
ratious, except at the points of attachment.'
From their classical forms these adjuncts cannot
be so late as the time of Justinian; and they
may with very tolerable certainty be ascribed to
the age of Julian. Above them an inscription
bearing the name of Hadrian has been inserted in
the wall, but turned upside down ; and the
whole of the masonry being of an intermediate
character between that which we know to be
ancient, and that which we easily recognise
as the work of the Muhammadans, there can
be little doubt but that it belongs to this
period.
The principal bearing of Julian's attempt on
the topography of Jerusalem consists in the w*
of its proving not only that the site of the
Jewish temple was perfectly well known at this
period— A.D. 362— but that the spot was then,
Digitized by
Google
JEBUSALEM
as always, held accursed by the Christians, and
as doomed by the denunciation of Christ Himself
never to be re-established.
During the reign of Constantino two churches
were erected on the Mount of Olives, and there
was a church on Mount Zion, which was called
the mater omnium ecclesiarum, and was said to
date from the time of Hadrian k (Epiphanius, De
M. et P. 15; Theodosius, § 6). The tract of
Kucherius (c. a.d. 440) mentions no other
churches, but the visit of the Empress Eudocia to
Jerusalem, A.D. 439, appears to have initiated
a period of great building activity. To this
jicriod belonged the Church of St. Stephen,
outside the Damascus Gate, and many of the
churches mentioned by writers in the 6th cen-
tury. The most important of these were
St. Peter's, once the house of Caiaphas ; St.
Mary's, at the Pool of Bethesda ; and the
churches of the Tomb of the Virgin, Siloam,
and the pinnacle of the Temple. The Church
of St. Sophia or of the Praetorium, which, from
the description given of it, must have stood on
the site now occupied by " the Dome of the
Rock," was apparently built towards the close
of the 5th or commencement of the 6th century.
It is only mentioned in documents of the 6th
century (Brev. de Hiero$. ; Theodosius ; and
Antoninus), and was probably, with the Mary
Church of Justinian close to it, destroyed during
the Persian invasion.
Nearly two centuries after the attempt of
Julian to rebuild the Temple, Justinian, accord-
ing to Mr. Fergusson, "erected a church at
Jerusalem ; of which, fortunately, we have so
full and detailed an account in the works of
Procopius (de Aedificiis Const.) that we can have
little difficulty in fixing its site, though no
remains (at least above ground) exist to verify
our conjectures. The description given by
Procopius is so clear, and the details he gives
with regard to the necessity of building up the
substructure point so unmistakably to the spot
near to which it must have stood, that almost
all topographers have jumped to the conclusion
that the Mosque el-Aksa is the identical church
referred to. The architecture of that building
is, however, alone sufficient to refute any such
idea. No seven-aisled basilica was built in that
n;e, and least of all by Justinian, whose
favourite plan was a dome on pendentives,
which in fact, in his age, had become the type of
an Oriental Church. Besides, the Aksa has do
apse, and, from its situation, never could have
had cither that or any of the essential features
of a Christian basilica. Its whole architecture
is that of the end of the 7th century, and its
ordinance is essentially that of a mosque. It is
hardly necessary to argue this point, however, as
the Aksa stands on a point which was perfectly
known at the time to be the very centre of the
site of Solomon's Temple. Not only is this
k Possibly there was also a church near the site of the
Temple, the Itpbv to which Jullan'B workmen fled when
diiven from their works by the globes of fire that issued
from the foundations of the Temple (Gregory Naxlanzen,
ad Jud. ct Gtnt. 7, 1, and confirmed by Sozomen). It
in a question, however, whether the building referred to
was not that mentioned by the Bordeaux Pilgrim as
standing on the site of too Temple, possibly the temple
erected by Hadrian.
JEBUSALEM
1657
shown from Julian's attempt, but all the his-
torians, Christian and Muhammadan, who refer
to Omar's visit to Jerusalem, relate that the
Sakhrah was covered with filth and abhorred by
the Christians ; and more than this, we have the
direct testimony of Eutychius, writing in the
9th century, from Alexandria ( Annates, ii. 289),
'That the Christians had built no church within
the area of the Temple on account of the
denunciations of the Lord, and had left it in
ruins.'
" Notwithstanding this, there is no difficulty in
fixing on the site of this church, inasmuch as the
vaults that fill up the south-eastern angle of the
Haram area are almost certainly of the age ot
Justinian (woodcuts, pp. 1635, 1630), and are just
such as Procopius describes ; so that if it were
situated at the northern extremity of the vaults,
all the arguments that apply to the Aksa
equally apply to this situation." After a care-
ful re-examination of the whole question, Prof.
Hayter Lewis has come to the same conclusion
with regard to the position of the church {Holy
Places, p. 88).
The "Hostel" and Church of St. Mary
founded by Charlemagne in the first years of
the 9th century complete the list of Christian
buildings of interest.
The Muslims are said to have built two
important mosques at Jerusalem — the Kubbet
es-Sakhrah, "Dome of the Rock," and the
Mosque el-Aksa. The erection of the first is
ascribed by Arab historians to the Khalif Abd
ul-Melik, and a Curie inscription in the mosque
states that it was built A.H. 72, or a.d. 691.
The building is so perfect iu form, and so
classical in detail, that doubts have, from time
to time, arisen with regard to its Arab origin.
Mr. Fergusson believed that it was the original
church of the Anastasis erected by Constantine
(Temples of the Jews, p. 192 sq.) ; whilst Prof.
Sepp considers it to be the work of Justinian
(Die Fclsenfmppell eine Just. Sophien Kirche).
The supporters of the Arab origiu of the mosque
maintain that it was designed for the Arabs by
a Byzantine or Persian architect, and built by-
Persian or Byzantine workmen, before the Arabs
had developed any definite style of art of their
own (Hayter Lewis, Holy Places, p. 72). The fact
that the Arabs never erected a building so purely
classical in feeling elsewhere gives rise to the
suspicion that Abd ul-Melik did nothing more
than restore a Christian church. There is pro-
bably no more foundation for the assertion that
he was the builder of the " Dome of the Rock "
than there is for the statement that el-Walid
built the mosque at Damascus when he only
restored and enlarged a church. It may be
suggested that the " Dome of the Rock " was
originally the Church of St. Sophia, built on
the supposed site of the Praetorium ; that it
was destroyed by the Persians; that it was
rebuilt with the old material by Abd ul-Melik,
who covered it with a dome ; and that it was
again repaired and redecorated by el-Mamun.
The Mosque el-Aksa was built, c. 690, on the
site of the Mosque of Omar, by Abd ul-Melik,
on a scale of great grandeur out of the ruins of
Justinian's Church of St. Mary. In 746 or 755
it was partly thrown down by an earthquake,
and it was afterwards rebuilt by el-Mahdi
(775-785) with fifteen aisles, of which seven
Digitized by
Google
1658
JERUSALEM
JERUSHA
only now remain (Hayter Lewis, H. P. p. 82
sq. ; Le Strange, Pal. under the Moslems,
p. 91 sq.).
13. Mediaeval Jerusalem. — There are so many
descriptions of Jerusalem during the Latin
occupation that it is possible to construct a
plan of the city at that time with considerable
accuracy. The walls, afterwards partly re-
modelled by Suleiman the Magnificent, did not
differ greatly from those of the present day. j
The Gate of Iiavid is now the Jaffa Gate ; the
Postern of St. Lazarus was in the north wall to
the west of the Damascus (then called St. Ste-
phen's) Gate ; the Madeleine Postern is now
" Herod's Gate," and the Gateof Jehoshaphat that
of St. Stephen. The Golden Gate was open, and
processions passed through it to the Holy Places
on the slopes of Olivet; the Postern of the Tan-
nery is the present Dung Gate, and the Zion
Gate was to the east of the modern gate of the
same name. From Darid's Gate a street in part
called David Street and in part Temple Stre«t
ran eastward to the Haram, which it entered
by the " Beautiful Gate," now Bab cs-83s3eh.
From St. Stephen's Gate a street of the same
name ran southward to the " Syrian Exchange "*
at the north end of the bazaars, which, then as
now, were three covered streets ; at the south
end of the bazaars was the " Latin Exchange,"
whence Mount Zion Street led directly to the
Zion Gate. Parallel to and east of Mount Zion
Street was the Street of the Arch of Judas, in
which Judas was said to have hanged himself;
and further cast was the Street of the Germans.
An unnamed street ran from St. Stephen's Gate
down the vailey and under " Wilson s Arch " to
the Postern of the Tannery, and this was joined
near the Austrian Consulate by the Street of
Jehoshaphat. From David Street, the Street of
the Patriarch (now Christian Street) led north-
ward past the gate of the Hospital, the west
end of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, and
the house of the Patriarch to the Street of the
Sepulchre. To the south of the great church,
with its cloisters and dormitories, were the
Hospital of the Knights of St. John, and the
churches of St. Mary the Latin and St. Mary
the Great, occupying, with their adjuncts, the
Muristdn. Within the Haram enclosure were
the "Templum Domini," Kubbet es-Sakhrah, the
"Templum Salomonis," Mosque el-Aksa, the
Chapel of St. James (now the "Dome of the
Chain "), and, at the S.E. angle, the Chapel of
"the Cradle." Outside the walls ou the north
were the Church of St. Stephen, the Lepers'
Hospital, and the Anerie, in which the asses and
horses of the Hospitallers and pilgrims were
stabled; on the south were the Coenaculum.
the Church of St. Saviour, and the Church of
St. Peter m Gallicante; and on the east Geth-
semane and the Church of St. Mary of Jeho-
shaphat. Within the city were also the
churches of St. Anne, St. Mary Magdalene, St.
James of Galicia, St. Caristo, St. Peter ad Fi'n-
cula, and St. Martin.
Descriptions of Modern Jerusalem will be found
in Murray's and Baedeker's Handbooks to Syria
and Palestine. [W.]
JERU'SHA (KB>1T = taken in possession ;
'Upoviri, B. "Epour, A. 'lipois ; Jen/so), daughter
of Zadok, queen of Uzziah, and mother of Jo-
tham king of Judah (2 Rings xv. 33). in
Digitized by
Google
JEBUSHAH
Chronicles the name is given under the altered
form of
JERU'SHAH (HOTT ; 'Upovtra, B. 'Upova-
cri ; Jerusa), 2 Ch. xxvii. 1. See the preceding
article.
JESAI'AH, R. V. JESHAI'AH (fTO*;
B. 'Itrafii, A. 'Utrn4; Jeseias). 1. Son of
Hananiah, brother of Pelatiah, and grandson
of Zerubbabel (1 Ch. iii. 21). But according to
the LXX. and the Vulgate, he was the son of
Pelatiah. For an explanation of this genealogy,
and the difficulties connected with it, see Lord
A. Hervev's Genealogies of our Lord, ch. iv. § v.
2. (rPi?E», i.e. Jeshaiah, as in K. V. ; 'Uaia,
A. 'Uaatla, N. 'Uacii ; Isaia.) A Benjamite,
whose descendants were among those chosen by
lot to reside in Jerusalem after the return from
Babylon (Neh. xi. 7).
JESHAI'AH. 1. (WlXh= salvation of Je-
hovah : B. 2oii km Sejieel in 1 Ch. xxr. 3, and
'Iworla, B. 'lairrtiA, in c. 15 ; in the former A. has
'Utla koI 2e/t«(, and in the latter 'Idas : the
Vulg. has Jeseias and Jesaias.) One of the six
sons of Jeduthun, set apart for the musical
service of the Temple, under the leadership of
their father, the inspired minstrel : he was the
chief of the eighth division of the singers.
The Hebrew name is identical with that of
the prophet Isaiah.
2. (BA. 'naalas ; IsaSas.) A Levite in the
reign of David, eldest son of Rehabiah, a descend-
ant of Amram through Moses (1 Ch. xxvi. 25).
He is called Isshiah (DJB") in 1 Ch. xxiv.21, in
A. V. and R. V., though the Hebrew is merely
another form of the name. Shebuel, one of his
ancestors, appears among the Hemanites in
1 Cb. xxv. 4, and is said in Targ. on 1 Ch.
xxvi. 24 to be the same as Jonathan the son of
Gershom, the priest of the idols of the Danites,
who afterwards returned to the fear of Jehovah.
8. (n»rB7; B. 'Io<r«<*, A. 'Herak; IsaHas.)
The son of Athaliah and chief of the house of
the Bene Elam who returned with Ezra (Ezra
viii. 7). In 1 Esd. viii. 33 he is called Josias.
4. (B. 'Claaias; Isaias.) A Merarite, who
returned with Ezra (Ezra viii. 19). He is called
Osaias in 1 Esd. viii. 48.
JESHA'NAH(n3B«=ancwnt; B. Kant, A.
'Avd, Joseph. ^ '\aari, Euseb. 'Icurcwd; Je-
Sana), a town which, with its dependent villages
(Heb. and LXX. A. " daughters "), was one of
the three taken from Jeroboam by Abijah (2 Ch.
xiii. 19; cp. Joseph. Ant. viii. 11, § 3). The
other two were Bethel and Ephrain (R. V.
Ephron), and Jeshanah is named between them.
A place of the same name (Jt 'ltrdyas) was the
scene of an encounter between Herod and Pappus,
the general of Antigonus' army, related by
Josephus with curious details {Ant. xiv. 15,
§ 12), which however convey no indication of
its position. It is not mentioned in the Ono-
masticon, unless we accept the conjecture of
Reland (Pal. p. 861) that Jerome's " Jethaba, urbs
antiqua Judaeae" (OS. 7 p. 166, 30), is at once a
corruption and a translation of the name Jeshana,
which signifies "old." It has been identified
by M. Clerinont-Ganneau with the village of
JESHIMON
165»
'Am Sinia, which stands on an ancient site
about 3J miles N. of Bethel (PEFQy. Stat. 1877,
p. 206). There are here abundant springs, and
many rock-hewn tombs, on the door of one of
which there is an inscription in ancient Hebrew
character (PEF. Man. ii. 291, 302). [G.] [W.]
JESHABE'LAH (ftaoc*; B. 'latpchK
A. '\apen\i ; Isreela), head of the seventh of the
twenty-four wards into which the musicians of the
Levites were divided (1 Ch. xxv. 14). [Heman j
Jeduthon.] He belonged to the house of
Asaph, and had twelve of his house under him.
In v. 2 his name is written Asarelah, with an
initial M instead of ' ; in the LXX. B. "Epa^jA,
A. 'WffWjX. [A. C. H.]
JESHEB-E-AB (2X2&?=th* Father bring-
eth back ; B. TtX&d, A. 'I<r/3adA ; Isbaab), head of
the fourteenth course of priests (1 Ch. xxir. 13).
[Jehoiarib.] [A. C. H.]
JE'SHER ("ie*= uprightness; BA. 'ladaap;
Jaser), one of the sons of Caleb the son of
Hezron by his wife Azubah (1 Ch. ii. 18). In
two of Kennicott's MSS. it is written "11V,
Jethcr, from the preceding verse, and in one
MS. the two names are combined. The Peshitto
Syriac has Oshir, the same form in which Jaslter
is represented in 2 Sam. i. 18.
JESHI'MON (Jto^n = theuaste: in Num.
il ipiiiios ; in Sam. 6 'U<T<reu/iit and 'U<r<re pis ',
A. EUaaaifiis : desertion, tolitudo, Jesimon), a
name which occurs in Num. xxi. 20 and xxiii.
28, in designating the position of Pisgah and
Peor : both described as " facing ('3B"7ff) the
Jeshimon " ; R. V. " that looketh down upon the
desert." Not knowing more than the general
locality of either Peor or Pisgah, this gives us
no clue to the situation of Jeshimon. But it is
elsewhere used in a similar manner with refer-
ence to the position of two places very distant
from both the above — the hill of Hachilah, " on
the south of" or " facing the Jeshimon " (I Sam.
xxiii. 19, xxvi. 1, 3), and the wilderness of Maon,
also south of it (xxiii. 24). Ziph (xxiii. 15) and
Maon are known at the present day. They lie
a few miles south of Hebron, so that the district
strictly north of them is the hill-country of
Judah. But a line drawn between Maon and
the probable position of Peor— on the high
country opposite Jericho — passes over the
dreary, barren waste of the hills lying im-
mediately on the west of the Dead Sea. To this
district the name, if interpreted as a Hebrew
word, would be not inapplicable. It would also
suit as to position, as it would be full in view
from an elevated point on the highlands of Moab,
and not far from north of Maon and Ziph. On
the other hand, the use of the word ha-'Arabah,
in 1 Sam. xxiii. 24, must not be overlooked,
meaning, as that elsewhere does, the sunk dis-
trict of the Jordan and Dead Sea, the modern
Ghor. Beth-Jeshimoth too, which by its name
ought to hare some connexion with Jeshimon.
would appear to have been on the lower level,
somewhere near the mouth of the Jordan.
[Beth-Jeshimoth.] In R. V. the word is al-
ways translated " the desert;" and it is doubtful
whether it should be taken to be a proper name.
Digitized by
Google
1660
JESHISHAI
In that case the particular desert mentioned in
N umb. would not be the same as that referred
to in 1 Samuel xxiii. The passages in which it
is first mentioned are indisputably of very early
date, and it is quite possible that it is an archaic
name found and adopted by the Israelites (PEF.
Mem. iii. 299 ; Tristram, Zand of Israel,
p. 535). [G.] [W.]
JESHI'SHAI (Wjfc, (?) = old (gray) ; B.
'Io-af, A. 'Uooal ; Jesisl), one of the ancestors
of the Gadites who dwelt in Gilead, and whose
genealogies were made out in the days of
Jotham king of Judah (1 Ch. v. 14). In the
Peshitto Syriac the latter part of the verse is
omitted.
JESHOHA'IAH (nTn&,(?)=bou:ing before
Jehotah; BA. 'laaovtd; Isuhala), a chief of one
of the families of that branch of the Simeonites
which was descended from Shimei, and was
more numerous than the rest of the tribe
(1 Ch. iv. 36). He was concerned in the raid
upon the Hamites in the reign of Hezekiah.
JESHU'A (OTE»; "bio-oCr; Jeshue and Jo-
shue), a later Hebrew pronunciation of Joshua,
implied by Jehosbua. [Jeiioshua.]
1. Joshua, the son of Nun, is called Jeshua
in one passage (Neh. viii. 17). [Joshua.]
2. K. V. A priest in the reign of David, to
whom the ninth course fell by lot (1 Ch. xxiv.
11). He is called Jeshuah in the A. V. One
branch of the house, viz. the children of
Jedaiah, returned from Babylon (Ezra ii. 36 ;
but see Jedaiah).
3. One of the Levites in the reign of Hezekiah,
after the reformation of worship, placed in trust
in the cities of the priests in their classes, to
distribute to their brethren of the offerings of
the people (2 Ch. xxxi. 15).
4. Son of Jehozadak, first high-priest of the
third series, viz. of those after the Babylonish
Captivity, and ancestor of the fourteen high-
priests his successors down to Joshua or Jason,
and Onias or Menelaus, inclusive. [High-
priest.] Jeshua, like his contemporary Ze rub-
babel, was probably born in Babylon, whither
his father Jehozadak had been taken captive
while young (1 Ch. vi. 15, A. V.). He came up
from Babylon in the first year of Cyrus with
Zerubbabel, and took a leading part with him
in the rebuilding of the Temple, and in the
restoration of the Jewish Commonwealth.
Everything we read of him indicates a man of
earnest piety, patriotism, and courage. One of
less faith aud resolution would never have sur-
mounted all the difficulties and opposition he
had to contend with. His first care on arriving
at Jerusalem was to rebuild the Altar, and
restore the daily sacrifice, which had been
suspended for some fifty years. He then, in
conjunction with Zerubbabel, hastened to col-
lect materials for rebuilding the Temple, and
was able to lay the foundation of it as early as
the second month of the second year of their
return to Jerusalem (B.C. 536). The services
on this occasion were conducted by the priests
in their proper apparel, with their trumpets,
and by the sons of Asaph, the Levites, with
their cymbals, according to the ordinance of
king David (Ezra iii.). However, the progress
JESHTJA
of the work was hindered by the enmity of the
Samaritans, who bribed the counsellors of tht
kings of Persia so effectually to obstruct it that
the Jews were unable to proceed with it till tht
second year of Darius Hystapes — an interval of
about fourteen yean. In that year, B.C. 520,
at the prophesying of Haggai and Zechariah
(Ezra v. 1, vi. 14; Hagg. i. 1, 12, 14, ii. 1-9 ;
Zech. i.-viii.), the work was resumed by Jeshua
and Zerubbabel with redoubled rigour, and wis
happily completed on the third day of tht
month Adar (= March), in the sixth of Darius
(D.c. 516). The dedication of the Temple, and
the celebration of the Passover, in the next
month, were kept with great solemnity and re-
joicing (Ezra vi. 15-22), and especially " twelve
he-goats, according to the number of the tribes
of Israel," were offered as a sin-offering for all
Israel. Jeshua's zeal in' the work is commended
by the Son of Sirach (Ecclus. xlix. 12). Besides
the great importance of Jeshua as a historical
character, from the critical times in which he
lived, and the great work which he accom-
plished, his name (= Jesus), his restoration of
the Temple, his office as high-priest, and
especially the two prophecies concerning him
in Zech. iii. and vi. 9-15, point him out as an
eminent type of Christ. [High - PRIEST.]
Nothing is known of Jeshua later than the
seventh year of Darius, with which the narra-
tive of Ezra i.— vi. closes. Josephus, who san
that the Temple was seven years in building, and
places the dedication of it in the ninth year of
Darius, contributes no information whatever
concerning him : his history here, with tht
exception of the 9th sect, of b. xi. ch. 4, being
merely a paraphrase of Ezra and 1 Esdras,
especially the latter. [ZERUBBABEL.] Jeshni
had probably conversed often with Daniel and
Ezekiel, and may or may not have known
Jehoiachin at Babylon in his youth. Ht
probably died at Jerusalem (see Hunter,
After tlie Exile, ch. iii. sq.). His name is
written Jeshoshua in Zech. iii. 1, 3, &c. ; Hagg.
i. 1, 12, &c.
6. Head of a Levitical house, one of those
which returned from the Babylonish Captivity,
and took an active part under Zerubbabel, Ezra,
and Nehemiah. The name is used to designate
either the whole family or the successive chiefs
of it (Ezra ii. 40, iii. 9; Neh. iii. 19,' viii. ',
i.\. 4, 5, xii. 8, &c). Jeshua, and Kadmiel, with
whom he is frequently associated, were both
" sons of Hodaviah " (called Judah, Ezra iii. 9),
but Jeshua's more immediate ancestor was
Azaniah (Neh. x. 9). In Neh. xii. 24 "Jeshua
the son of Kadmiel" should probably be
" Jeshua (and) Kadmiel." The LXX. read «ol
viol Katfiifa- It is more likely that |3 is •"
accidental error for 1.
6. A branch of the family of Pahath-Moab,
one of the chief families, probably, of the tribe
of Judah (Neh. vii. 11, x. 14, &c. ; Ezra i. 30).
His descendants were the most nomerousof*"
the families which returned with Zerubbabel.
Neh. vii. 11, "The children of Pahath-Moab,
* Tbe connexion with Banl, Hashabiah (or H" 1 " 1 "
nlau), Henadad, and the Levites («. 1J-I»). &>***
that Jeshua, the father of Eaer, is tbe same pen* "
in the other passages cited.
Digitized by
Google
JESHUA
of the children of Jeshua and Joab," represents
Pahath-Moab (i.e. governor of Moab) as the
head of the family. [A. C. H.]
JESHU'A(WB*; 'Iij<roS; Jesue), one of the
towns re-inhabited by the people of Judah after
the return from Captivity (Neh. xi. 26). Being
mentioned with Moladah, Beersheba, &c, it was
apparently in the extreme south. It does not,
however, occur in the original lists of Judah
and Simeon (Josh, xv., xix.), nor is there any
name in those lists of which this would be pro-
bably a corruption. It is not mentioned else-
where. Conder (PEF. Mem. iii. pp. 404, 409)
has suggested Kh. S'aweh, an important site on
the edge of the Beersheba desert. [G.] [W.]
JESHU'AH (WE?, contr. form of ffCnn^:
'Iijo-oSt ; Jesua), a priest in the reign of David
(1 Cl>. xxiv. 11), the same as Jeshua, No. 2.
JESHU'BDN, and once by mistake in A. V.
JESU'EUN, Is. xliv. 2 (inp» ; i frywrWo*,
once with the addition of 'i<rpai)\, which the
Arabic of the Lond. Polyglot adopts to the
exclusion of the former ; dileetus, rectissimiu), a
symbolical name for Israel in Deut. xxxii. 15,
xxxiii. 5, 26 ; Is. xliv. 2. The Targum and
Peshitto Syriac uniformly render Jeshurun by
" Israel."* The termination p" is intensive, as
the Vulgate takes it, and not an affectionate
diminutive (see Dillmann* on Deut. xxxii. 15,
and Delitzsch' on Is. /. c). [F.]
JESI'AH, R. V. ISSHIAH Ofl"^, i.e. Yish-
shiyahu = whom Jehovah lends ; B. 'li)<r<nn>tl,
A. 'lurid; Jesid). 1. A Korhite, one of the
mighty men, " helpers of the battle," who
joined David's standard at Ziklag during his
flight from Saul (1 Ch. xii. 6).
2. (D'B* ; B. 'Itrttd, A. 'Uo-trii.) The second
son of TJzziel, the son of Kohath (1 Ch. xxiii.
20). He is the same as Isshiah, whose repre-
sentative was Zechariah (1 Ch. xxiv. 25); but
in A. V. the translators in the present instance
followed the Vulg., as they have too often done
in the case of proper names.
JESI-MTEL ('?8jMp , b':; V. 'IvfintiK, B. omits;
hmiel), a Simeonite, descended from the prolific
family of Shimei, and a prince of his own branch
of the tribe, whom he led against the peaceful
Hamites in the reign of Hezekiah (1 Ch. iv. 36).
JES'SE ('{?*, i.e. Yishai; b ,'I«oW, Joseph.
'Itaorcuos ; Isai : in the margin of 1 Ch. x. 14, the
A.V. translators have given the Vulgate form),
the father of David, and thus the immediate
progenitor of the whole line of the kings of
Jndah, and ultimately of Christ. He is the
only one of his name who appears in the sacred
records. Jesse was the son of Oued, who again
was the fruit of the union of Boaz and the
Moabitess Ruth. Nor was Ruth's the only
JESSE
1661
• The name Is formed from Tp»="l£* (Ps. xxv. 21),
like p^j, pnT from VjlT «> d TIT-
* Jerome (Liber de tfominibui) gives the strange
interpretation of iniuUtt libamtn.
foreign blood that ran in his veins ; for his great-
grandmother was no less a person than Rahab
the Canaanite, of Jericho (Matt. i. 5). Jesse's
genealogy * is twine given in full in the Old
Testament, — viz. Ruth iv. 18-22, and 1 Ch. ii.
5-12. We there see that long before David had
rendered his family illustrious, it belonged to
the greatest house of Judah, that of Pharez,
through Hezron his eldest son. One of the links
in the descent was Nahshon (N. T., R. V.),
chief man of the tribe at the critical time of the
Exodus. In the N. T. the genealogy is also twice
given (Matt. i. 3-5 ; Luke iii. 32-34).
He is commonly designated as " Jesse the
Bethlehemite " (1 Sam. xvi. 1, 18). So he is
called by his son David, then fresh from home
(xvii. 58) ; but his full title is " the Ephrathite
of Bethlehem-Judah " (xvii. 12). The double
expression and the use of the antique word
Ephrathite perhaps imply that he was one of the
oldest families in the place. He is an " old man "
when we first meet with him (1 Sam. xvii. 12),
with eight sons (xvi. 10, xvii. 12), residing at
Bethlehem (xvi. 4, 5). It would appear, how-
ever, from the terms of xvi. 4, 5, and of Josephus
(Ant. vi. 8, § 1), that Jesse was not one of the
" elders " of the town.
The few slight glimpses we can catch of him
are soon recalled. According to an ancient
Jewish tradition, recorded in the Targum on
2 Sam. xxi. 19, Jesse was a weaver of the vails
of the sanctuary ; but as there is no contra-
diction, so there is no corroboration, of this
in the Bible, and it is possible that it was sug-
gested by the occurrence of the word oregim,
" weavers," in connexion with a member of his
family. [Jaare-Orequi.] Jesse's wealth seems
to have consisted of a flock of sheep and goats
({KV, A. V. " sheep "), which were under the
care of David (xvi. 11 ; xvii. 34, 35). Of the
produce of this flock we find him on two occa-
sions sending the simple presents which in those
days the highest persons were wont to accept —
milk cheeses to the captain of the division of
the army in which his sons were serving (xrii.
18), and a kid to Saul (xvi. 20); with the
accompaniment in each case of parched corn from
the fields of Boaz, loaves of the bread from which
Bethlehem took its very name, and wine from
the vineyards which still enrich the terraces of
the hill below the village.
When David's rupture with Saul had finally
driven him from the court, and he was in the
cave of Adullam, " his brethren and all his
father's house " joined him (xxii. 1). His.
" brother " (probably Eliab) is mentioned on a
former occasion (xx. 29) as taking the lead in
the family. This is no more than we should
expect from Jesse's great age. David's anxiety
at the same period to find a safe refuge for his
parents from the probable vengeance of Saul, is
also quite in accordance with their helpless con-
dition. He took his father and his mother into
the country of Moab, and deposited them with
• This genealogy Is embodied In the "Jesse tree,"
not (infrequently to be found In the rercdos and east
windows of English churches. One of the finest is at
Dorchester, Oxon. The tree springs from Jesse, who Is
recumbent at the bottom of the window, and contains
twenty-live members of the line, culminating in our
Lord.
Digitized by
Google
1662
JESSUE
' the king, and there they disappear from our
view in the records of Scripture. But another
old Jewish tradition (Rabboth Seder, NtJ>J, 256,
col. 2) states that after David had quitted the
hold, his parents and brothers were put to death
liy the king of Moub, so that there remained,
besides David, but one brother, who took refuge
with Nahash, king of the Bene-Ainmon. In the
4th century Jesse's tomb was shown near Beth-
lehem (/tin. Hierosol.); it is now pointed out,
with that of liuth, in the Deir el-Arb'mn close
to Hebron. In the 12th century the " house of
Jesse " was shown at Bethel, a bow-shot east of
Bethlehem (Abbot Daniel, Pilg. xlix.).
Who the wife of Jesse was we are not told.
His eight sons will be found displayed under
David, p. 721. The family contained in addition
two female members, Zeruiah and Abigail,
but it is uncertain whether these were Jesse's
daughters; for though they are called the
sisters of his sons (1 Ch. ii. 16), yet Abigail is
said to have been the daughter of Nahash
(2 Sam. xvii. 25). Of this two explanations
have been proposed. (1.) The Jewish — that
Nahash was another name for Jesse (Jerome,
Q. Hebr. on 2 Sam. xvii. 25*). (2.) Dean
Stanley's — that Jesse's wife had been formerly
wife or concubine to Nahash, possibly the king of
the Ammonites [David, p. 722].
An English reader can hardly fail to remark
how often Jesse is mentioned long after the
name of David had become famous enough to
supersede that of his obscure and humble parent.
While David was a struggling outlaw, it was
natural that to friend and foe — to Saul, Doeg,
and Nabal, no less than to the captains of Judah
and Benjamin — he should be merely the " son of
Jesse " (1 Sam. xxii. 9, 13: cp. xxiv. 16, xxv.
10; 1 Ch. xii. 18); but that Jesse's name
should be brought forward in records of so late a
date as 1 Ch. xxix. 26 and Ps. lxxii. 20, long
after the establishment of David's own house, is
certainly worthy of notice. Especially is it to
be observed that it is in his name — the " shoot
out of the stem of Jesse .... the root of Jesse
which should stand as an ensign to the people "
(Is. xi. 1, 10), that Isaiah announces the most
splendid of his promises, intended to rouse and
cheer the heart of the nation at the time of its
deepest despondency. [G.] [W.]
JESSU'E ('lijffoCs, B. 'VijtrovtU, A. 'Inaovi ;
Jem), a Levite, the same as Joshua (1 Esd.
v. 26 ; cp. Ezra ii. 40).
JE'SD ("IijffoOj, A. 'Iijo-oS ; Jesu), the same
as Jeshua the Levite, the father of Jozabad
(1 Esd. viii. 63; see Ezra viii. 33), also called
Jessne and Jesus.
4 Tbls Is given also In the Targum to Ruth iv. 23.
" And Obed begat lahai (Jesse), whose name is Nacbasb,
because there were not found in him Iniquity and
corruption, that be should be delivered Into the band
of the Angel of Death that he should take away his
soul from him; and he lived many days until was
brought to mind before Jehovah the counsel which the
Serpent gave to Chavvafa the wife of Adam, to eat of the
tree, of the fruit of which when they did eat they were
able to discern between good and evil ; and by reason of
this counsel all the Inbablters of the earth became guilty
of death, and in that iniquity only died lahai the
righteous."
JESUS THE SON OF 8IBACH
JESU1, R. V. ISHVI («1C«; 1t<roi, A.
'Utrovt ; Jessui), the son of Asher, whose de-
scendants THE Jescites were numbered in the
plains of Moab at the Jordan of Jericho (Nam.
xxvi. 44). He is elsewhere called Isui, R. V.
Ishvi (Gen. xlvi. 17), and Ishuai, R. V. Ishvi
(1 Ch. vii. 30).
JESU'ITES, THE C1C»n ; t 'Uaovl; Jet.
suitae). A family of the tribe of Asher (Num.
xxvi. 44).
JESU'RUN. [Jesucrujj.]
JE'SUS ('Iijcrolt, B. 'Iijffow; Jesu, Jesus,
Josue), the Greek form of the name Joshua or
Jeshua, a contraction of Jehoshua (DtJ^rV), that
is, "Jehovah is help " or "Saviour " (Nam. xiii.
16). [JEH08HCA.]
1. Joshua the priest, the son of Jehozadak
(1 Esd. v. 5, 8, 24, 48, 56, 68, 70, vi. 2, ix. 19 ;
Ecclus. xlix. 12). Also called Jeshua. CJeshua,
No. 4.]
2. (Jesus.) Jeshua the Levite (1 Esd. v. 58,
ix. 48).
8. Joshua the son of Nun (2 Esd. vii. 37 ;
Ecclus. xlvi. 1 ; 1 Mace. ii. 55 ; Acts vii. 45 ;
Heb. iv. 8). [Joshua.]
JESUS THE FATHER OF SIBACH.
[J K8CS THE SOS OT SlEACll.]
JESUS THE SON OF SIRACH On*™
viis itipdx ; Jesus filius Slrach) is described in
the text of Ecclesiasticus (1. 27) as the author
of that book, which in the LXX., and generally
except in the Western Church, is called by his
name, the Wisdom of Jesus the son of Sirach, or
simply the lv7*/o«i of Sirach. The same passage
speaks of him as a native of Jerusalem (Ecclus.
/. c.) ; and the internal character of the book
confirms its Palestinian origin. The name Jesus
was of frequent occurrence, and was often repre-
sented by the Greek Jason. In the apocryphal
list of the 72 commissioners sent by Eleaxar
to Ptolemy it occurs twice (Arist. Hist. ap.
Hody, De text. p. vii.) ; but there is not the
slightest ground for connecting the author of
Ecclesiasticus with either of the persons there
mentioned. The various conjectures which have
been made as to the position of the son of Sirach
from the contents of his book — as, for instance,
that he was a priest (from vii. 29 sq., xlv.
xlix., 1.), or a physician (from xxxviii. 1 sq.) —
are equally unfounded.
Among the later Jews the " Son of Sirach "
was celebrated under the name of Ben Sirs as a
writer of proverbs, and some of those which
have been preserved offer a close resemblance to
passages in Ecclesiasticus ; but in the course of
time a later compilation was substituted for the
original work of Ben Sira (Zunz, Gottesd. Vortr.
d. Juden, p. 100 sq.), and tradition has pre-
served no authentic details of his person or
his life.
The chronological difficulties which have been
raised as to the date of the Son of Sirach are
noticed elsewhere [Ecclesiasticus].
According to the first prologue to the book
of Ecclesiasticus, taken from the Synopsis of the
l'seudo-Athanasius (iv. p. 377, ed. Migne), the
translator of the book' bore the same name a*
Digitized by
Google
JESUS
the author of it. It is, however, most likely
that the last chapter, " The prayer of Jesus the
son of Sirach" gave occasion to this conjecture.
The prayer was attributed to the translator,
and then the table of succession followed neces-
sarily from the title attached to it [see Eocle-
JESUS CHEIST
1663
SIASTICtTS].
F. W.]
JE'SUS, called JUSTUS, a Christian who
was with St. Paul at Rome, and joined him in
sending salutations to the Colossians. He was
one of the fellow-workers who were a comfort
to the Apostle (Col. iv. 11). In the Acta Sanct.
Jan. iv. 67, he is commemorated as bishop of
Eleutheropolis. [W. T. B.]
JESUS CHRIST.* The name Jesus ClifiroSj)
signifies Saviour. Its origin is explained above,
and it seems to hare been not an uncommon
name among the Jews. It is assigned in the
N. T. (1) to our Lord Jesus Christ, Who "saves
His people from their sins " (Matt. i. 21) ; also
(2) to Joshua the successor of Moses, who
brought the Israelites into the land of promise
(Num. xxvii. 18; Acts vii. 45; Heb. iv. 8); and
(3) to Jesus surnamed Justus, a converted Jew,
associated with St. Paul (Col. iv. 11).
The name of Christ (Xptoro's, from xpica, I
anoint) signifies Anointed. Priests were anointed
amongst the Jews, as their inauguration to their
office (1 Ch. xvi. 22 ; Ps. cv. 15), and kings also
(2 Mace. i. 24 ; Ecclus. xlvi. 19). In the N. T.
the name Christ is used as equivalent to Messiah
(Greek M«ro-(oj; Hebrew ITK'O, John i. 41),
the name given to the long-promised Prophet
and King Whom the Jews had been taught by
their Prophets to expect ; and therefore = i
ipxiptvot (Acts xix. 4 ; Matt. xi. 3). The use
of this name as applied to the Lord has always
a reference to the promises of the Prophets. In
Matt. ii. 4, xi. 2, it is assumed that the Christ
when He should come would live and act in a
certain way, described by the Prophets. So
Matt. xxii. 42, xxiii. 10, xxiv. 5, 23 ; Mark xii.
35, xiii. 21 ; Luke iii. 15, xx. 41 ; John vii. 27,
31, 41, 42, xii. 34, in all which places there is a
reference to the Messiah as delineated by the
Prophets. That they had foretold that Christ
should suffer appears from Luke xxiv. 26, 46. The
name of Jesus is the proper Name of our Lord,
and that of Christ is added to identify Him with
the promised Messiah. Other names are some-
times added to the Names Jesus Christ, or Christ
Jesus : thus " Lord " (frequently), " a King "
{added as a kind of explanation of the word
Christ, Luke xxiii. 2), " King of Israel " (Mark
xv. 32), Son of David (Mark xii. 35 ; Luke xx.
41), chosen of God (Luke xxiii. 35).
Remarkable are such expressions as "the
Christ of God " (Luke ii. 26, ix. 20 ; Rev. xi. 15,
xii. 10); and the phrase "in Christ," which
occurs about 78 times in the Epistles of St.
Paul, and is almost peculiar to them. But the
germ of it is to be found in the words of our
Lord Himself, " Abide in Me, and I in you. As
the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it
abide in the vine ; no more can ye, except ye
abide in Me " (John xv. 4, also 5, 6, 7, 9, 10).
• This article, by the late Archbishop of York, Is
reprinted without change. A literary supplement is
placed at the end of It.— Emtoes.
The idea that all Christian life is not merely an
imitation and following of the Lord, but a living
and constant union with Him, causes the Apostle
to use such expressions as "fallen asleep in
Christ" (1 Cor. xv. 18), "I knew a man in
Christ" (2 Cor. xii. 2), "I speak the truth in
Christ" (1 Tim. ii. 7), and many others (see
Schleusner's Lexicon; Wahl's Claris; Fritzsche
on St. Mttthew ; De Wette's Commentary;
Schmidt's Greek Concordance, &c).
The Life, the Person, and the Work of our
Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ occupy the whole
of the New Testament. Of this threefold subject
the present article includes the first part, namely,
the Life and Teaching ; the Person of our Lord
will be treated under the article Sox op God ;
and His Work will naturally fall under the
word Saviour.
Towards the close of the reign of Herod the
Great, arrived that "fulness of time" which
God in His inscrutable wisdom had appointed
for the sending of His Son ; and Jesus was born
at Bethlehem, to redeem a sinful and ruined
world. According to the received chronology,
which is in fact that of Dionysius Exiguus in
the 6th century, this event occurred in the year
of Rome 754. But modern writers, with hardly
an exception, believe that this calculation places
the Nativity some years too late ; although they
differ as to the amount of error. Herod the
Great died, according to Josephus, in the thirty-
seventh vear after he was appointed king {Ant.
xvii. 8, § 1 ; B. J. i. 33, § 8). His elevation
coincides with the consulship of Cn. Domitius
Calvinus and C. Asinius Pollio, and this de-
termines the date A.u.c. 714 (Joseph. Ant. xiv.
14, § 5). There is reason to think that in such
calculations Josephus reckons the years from
the month Nisan to the same month ; and also
that the death of Herod took place in the be-
ginning of the thirty-seventh year, or just before
the Passover (Joseph. Ant. xvii. 9, § 3) ; if then
thirty-six complete years are added, they give
the year of Herod's death A.U.C. 750 (see Note
on Chronology at the end of this article). As
Jesus was born during the life of Herod, it
follows from these data that the Nativity took
place some time before the month of April 750 ;
and if it took place only a few months before
Herod's death, then its date would be four
years earlier than the Dionysian reckoning
(Wieseler).
Three other chronological data occur in the
Gospels, but the arguments founded on them are
not conclusive. 1. The Baptism of Jesus was
followed by a Passover (John ii. 13), at which
certain Jews mention that the restoration of
their Temple had been in progress for forty-six
years (ii. 20), Jesus Himself being at this time
" about thirty years of age " (Luke iii. 23). As
the date of the Temple-restoration can be ascer-
tained, it has been argued from these facts also
that the Nativity took place at the beginning of
a.u.c. 750. But it is sometimes argued that
the words that determine our Lord's age are not
exact enough to serve as the basis for such a
calculation. 2. The appearance of the star to
the wise men has been thought likely, by the
aid of astronomy, to determine the date. But
the opinion that the star in the East was a re-
markable conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in
the sign Pisces, is now rejected. Besides the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
1664
JESUS CHBIST
JESUS CHRIST
difficulty of reconciling it with the (acred
narrative (Matt. ii. 9), it would throw back the
birth of our Lord to A.u.C. 747, which is too
early. 3. Zacharias was " a priest of the course
of Abia " (Luke i. 5), and he was engaged in the
duties of his course when the birth of John the
Baptist was foretold to him ; and it has been
thought possible to calculate, from the place
which the course of Abia held in the cycle, the
precise time of the Saviour's birth. All these
data are discussed below (p. 1700).
In treating of the Life of Jesus, a perfect
record of the events would be no more than a
reproduction of the four Gospels, and a discussion
of those events would swell to the compass of a
voluminous commentary. Neither of these
would be appropriate here, and in the present
article a brief sketch only of the Life can be
attempted, drawn up with a view to the two
remaining articles, on the Son OP God and
Saviour.
The Man Who was to redeem all men and do
for the human race what no one could do for
his brother, was not born into the world as
others are. The salutation addressed by the
Angel to Mary His mother, " Hail t thou that
art highly favoured," was the prelude to a new
act of Divine creation ; the first Adam that
sinned was not born but created ; the second
Adam, that restored, was born indeed, but in
supernatural fashion. "The Holy Ghost shall
come upon thee, and the power of the Highest
shall overshadow thee ; therefore also that holy
thing which shall be born of thee shall be called
the Son of God " (Luke i. 35). Mary received
the announcement of a miracle, the full import
of which she could not have understood, with
the submission of one who knew that the message
came from God ; and the Angel departed from
her. At first, her betrothed husband, when he
heard from her what had taken place, doubted
her, but a supernatural communication convinced
him of her purity, and he took her to be his
wife. Not only was the approaching birth of
Jesus made the subject of supernatural com-
munications, but that of John the Baptist the
forerunner also. Thus before the birth of either
had actually taken place, a small knot of persons
had been prepared to expect the fulfilment of
the Divine promises in the Holy Oue that should
be born of Mary (Luke i.).
The prophet Micah had foretold (r. 2) that
the future king should be born in Bethlehem of
Judaea, the place where the house of David had
its origin ; but Mary dwelt in Nazareth. Au-
gustus, however, had ordered a general census
of the Roman Empire ; and although Judaea, not
being a province of the Empire, would not
necessarily come under such an order, it was
included, probably because the intention was
already conceived of reducing it after a time to
the condition of a province (see note on Chron-
ology). That such a census was made we know
from Cassiodorus ( Far. iii. 52). That in its
application to Palestine it should be made with
reference to Jewish feelings and prejudices, being
carried out no doubt by Herod the Jewish king,
was quite natural ; and so Joseph and Mary
went to Bethlehem, the city of David, to be
taxed. From the well-known and much-can-
vassed passage in St. Luke (ii. 2) it appears that
the taxing was not completed till the time of
Quirinus [CrREKlus], some years later ; and
how far it was carried now, cannot be deter-
mined; all that we learn is that it brought
Joseph, who was of the honse of David, from
his home to Bethlehem, where the Lord was
born. As there was no room in the inn, a
manger was the cradle in which Christ the
Lord was laid. But signs were not wanting ot
the greatness of the event that seemed so unim-
portant. Lowly shepherds were the witnesses,
of the wonder that accompanied the lowly
Saviour's birth ; an Angel proclaimed to them
" good tidings of great joy ; " and then the ex-
ceeding joy that was in heaven amongst the
Angels about this mystery of love broke through
the silence of night with the words — " Glory to
God in the highest, and on earth peace, good
will towards men" (Luke ii. 8-20). We need
not suppose that these simple men were cherish-
ing in their hearts the expectation of the
Messiah which others had relinquished ; they
were chosen from the humble, as were our
Lord's companions afterwards, in order to show
that God " hath chosen the weak things of tic
world to confound the things which are mighty "
(1 Cor. i. 26-31), and that the poor and meek
could apprehend the message of salvation to
which kings and priests could turn a deaf ear.
The subject of the Genealogy of our Lord, s»
given by St. Matthew and St. Luke, is discussed
fully in another article. [See Gexeaxogt of
our Lord Jesus Christ.]
The child Jesus is circumcised in due time, is
brought to the Temple, and the mother makes
the offering for her purification. That offering
wanted its peculiar meaning in this case, which
was an act of new creation, and not a birth after
the common order of our fallen nature. But
the seed of the new kingdom was to grow un-
discernibly as yet ; no exemption was claimed
by the " highly favoured " mother, and no
portent intervened. She made her humble
offering like any other Judaean mother, and
would have gone her way unnoticed ; bet here
too God suffered not His beloved Son to be
without a witness, and Simeon and Anna, taught
from God that the object of their earnest long-
ings was before them, prophesied of His Divine
work : the rejoicing that his eyes had seen the
salvation of God, and the other speaking of
Him "to all that looked for redemption in
Jerusalem " (Luke ii. 28-38).
Thus recognised amongst His own people, the
Saviour was not without witness amongst the
heathen. " Wise menr from the East " — that is,
Persian magi of the Zend religion, in which the
idea of a Zoziosh or Redeemer was clearly known
— guided miraculously by a star or meteor
created for the purpose, came and sought out
the Saviour to pay Him homage. We have said
that in the year 747 occurred a remarkable
combination of the planets Jupiter and Saturn,
and this is supposed to be the sign by which the
wise men knew that the birth of some great
one had taken place. But, as has been said, the
date does not agree with this view, and the
account of the Evangelist describes a single star
moving before them and guiding their steps.
We must suppose that God saw good to speak
to the Magi in their own way : they were
seeking light from the study of the stars,
whence only physical light could be found, and
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
He guided them to the Source of spiritual light,
to the cradle of His Son, by a star miraculously
made to appear to them, and to speak intelligibly
to them through their preconceptions. The
offerings which they brought hare been regarded
as symbolical : the gold was tribute to a king,
the frankincense was for the use of a priest, and
the myrrh for a body preparing for the tomb.
" Anna nascent! roderunt manna regi.
Than dedere Deo, myrrbam tribuere sepolto,"
says Sedulius : but in a more general view
these were at any rate the offerings made by
worshippers, and in that light must the Magi be
regarded. The events connected with the Birth
of our Lord are all significant, and here soma of
the wisest of the heathen kneel before the Re-
deemer as the first-fruits of the Gentiles, and as
a sign that His dominion was to be not merely
Jewish, but as wide as the whole world (see
Matt. ii. 1-12 ; Miinter, Star of the Wi$t Men,
Copenhagen, 1827; the Commentaries of Alford,
Williams, Olshausen, and Heubner, where the
opinions as to the nature of the star are dis-
cussed).
A little child made the great Herod quake
upon his throne. When he knew that the Magi
were come to hail their King and Lord, and
did not stop at his palace, but passed on to a
humbler roof, and when he found that they
would not return to betray this child to him,
he put to death all the children in Bethlehem
that were under two years old. The crime was
great ; but the number of the victims, in a little
place like Bethlehem, was small enough to
escape special record amongst the wicked acts
of Herod from Josephus and other historians, as
it had no political interest. A confused indi-
cation of it, however, is found in Macrobius
{Saturn, ii. 4).
Joseph, warned by a dream, flees to Egypt
with the young child, beyond the reach of
Herod's arm. This flight of cur Lord from His
own land to the land of darkness and idolatry —
a land associated even to a proverb with all
that was hostile to God and His people — im-
presses on us the reality of His humiliation.
Herod's cup was well-nigh full; and the doom
that soon overtook him could have arrested him
then in his bloody attempt : but Jesus, in
accepting humanity, accepted all its incidents.
He was saved, not by the intervention of God,
but by the obedience of Joseph ; and from the
storms of persecution He had to use the common
means of escape (Matt. ii. 13-23 ; Thomas i
Kempis, iii. 15, and Commentaries). After the
death of Herod, in less than a year, Jesus re-
turned with His parents to their own land, and
went to Nazareth, where they abode.
Except as to one event the Evangelists are
silent upon the succeeding years of our Lord's
life down to the commencement of His ministry.
When He was twelve years old He was found in
the Temple, " hearing "the doctors " and asking
them questions " (Luke ii. 40-52). We are shown
this one fact that we may know that at the
time when the Jews considered childhood to be
passing into youth, Jesus was already aware of
His mission, and consciously preparing for it,
although years elapsed before its actual com-
mencement. This fact at once confirms and
illustrates such a general expression as "Jesus
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
JESUS CHRIST
1665
increased in wisdom and stature, and in favonr
with God and man " (Luke ii. 52). His public
ministry did not begin with a sudden impulse,
but was prepared for by His whole life. The
consciousness of His Divine nature and power
grew, and ripened and strengthened until the
time of His showing unto Israel.
Thirty years had elapsed from the Birth of
our Lord to the opening of His ministry. In
that time great changes had come over the
chosen people. Herod the Great had united
under him almost all the original kingdom of
David ; after the death of that prince it was
dismembered for ever. Archelaus succeeded to
the kingdom of Judaea, under the title of
Ethnarch ; Herod Antipas became tetrarch of
Galilee and Peraea, and Philip tetrarch of
Trachonitis, Gaulonitis, Batanaea, and Paneas.
The Emperor Augustus promised Archelaus the
title of king, if he should prove worthy ; but in
the tenth year of his reign (a.u.C. 759) he was
deposed in deference to the hostile feelings of
the Jews, was banished to Vienne in Gaul, and
from that time his dominions passed under the
direct power of Rome, being annexed to Syria,
and governed by a procurator. Neither king nor
ethnarch held Judaea afterwards, if we except
the three years when it was under Agrippa I.
Marks are not wanting of the irritation kept up
in the minds of the Jews by the sight of a
foreigner exercising acts of power over the
people whom David once ruled. The publicans
(portitora) who collected tribute for the Roman
Empire were everywhere detested; and as a
marked class is likely to be a degraded one, the
Jews saw everywhere the most despised among
the people exacting from them all, and more
than all (Luke iii. 13), that the foreign tyrant
required. Constant changes were made by the
same power in the office of high-priest, perhaps
from a necessary policy. Josephus says that
there were twenty-eight high-priests from the
time of Herod to the burning of the Temple
(Ant. xx. 10). The sect of Judas the Ganlonite,
which protested against paying tribute to Caesar,
and against bowing the neck to an alien yoke,
expressed a conviction which all Jews shared.
The sense of oppression and wrong would tend
to shape all the hopes of a Messiah, so far as
they still existed, to the conception of a warrior
who should deliver them from a hateful political
bondage.
It was in the fifteenth year of Tiberius the
Emperor, reckoning from his joint role with
Augustus (Jan. A.U.C. 765), and not from his sole
rule (Aug. A.U.O. 767), that John the Baptist
began to teach. In this year (A.U.C. 779) Pontius
Pilate was procurator of Judaea, the worldly
and time-serving representative of a cruel and
imperious master ; Herod Antipas and Philip
still held the tetrarchies left them by their
father. Annas arid Caiaphas are both described
as holding the office of high-priest ; Annas was
deposed by Valerius Gratus in this very year,
and his son-in-law Joseph, called also Caiaphas,
was appointed, after some changes, in his room ;
but Annas seems to have retained after this
time (John xviii. 13) much of the authority of
the office, which the two administered together.
John the Baptist, of whom a full account is
given below under his own name, came to preach
in the wilderness. He was the last representa-
5
Digitized by
Google
1666
JESUS CHRIST
tire of the prophets of the Old Covenant ; and
his work was twofold — to enforce repentance
and the terrors of the old Law, and to revive the
almost forgotten expectation of the Messiah
(Matt. Hi. 1-10 ; Mark i. 1-8 ; Luke iii. 1-18).
Both these objects, which are very apparent in
his preaching, were connected equally with the
coming of Jesus, since the need of a Saviour
from sin is not felt but when sin itself is felt to
be a bondage and a terror. The career of John
seems to have been very short ; and it has been
asked how such great influence could have been
attained in a short time (Matt. iii. 5). But his
was a powerful nature which soon took posses-
sion of those who came within its reach ; and
his success becomes less surprising if we assume
with Wieseler that the preaching took place in
a sabbatical year (Baumgarten, GeschichU Jesu,
p. 40). It is an old controversy whether the
baptism of John was a new institution, or an
imitation of the baptism of proselytes as practised
by the Jews. But at all events there is no
record of such a rite, conducted in the name of
and witfl reference to a particular person (Acts
xix. 4), before the ministry of John. Jesus
came to Jordan with the rest to receive this
rite at John's hands: first, in order that the
Sacrament by which all were hereafter to be
admitted into His kingdom might not want His
example to justify its use (Matt. iii. 15); next,
that John might have an assurance that his
course as the herald of Christ was now completed
by His appearance (John i. 33) ; and last, that
some public token might be given that He was
indeed the Anointed of God (Heb. v. 5). A
supposed discrepancy between Matt. iii. 14 and
John i. 31, 33, disappears when we remember
that from the relationship between the families
of John and our Lord (Luke i-X John must
have known already something of the power,
goodness, and wisdom of Jesus ; what he did not
know was, that this same Jesus was the very
Messiah for Whom he had come to prepare the
world. Our Lord received the rite of baptism
at His servant's hands, and the Father attested
Him by the Voice of the Spirit, Which also was
seen descending on Him in a visible shape :
" This is My Beloved Son, in Whom I am well
pleased" (Matt, iii 13-17; Mark i. 9-11;
Luke iii. 21, 22).
Immediately after this inauguration of His
ministry Jesus was led up of the Spirit into the
wilderness to be tempted of the devil (Matt,
iv. 1-11 ; Mark i. 12, 13; Luke iv. 1-13). As
the baptism of our Lord cannot have been for
Him the token of repentance and intended re-
formation which it was for sinful men, so does
our Lord's sinlessness affect the nature of His
temptation ; for it was the trial of One Who
could not possibly have fallen. This makes
a complete conception of the temptation im-
possible for minds wherein temptation is always
associated with the possibility of sin. But
whilst we must be content with an incom-
plete conception, we must avoid the wrong
conceptions that are often substituted for it.
Some suppose the account before us to describe
what takes place in a vision or ecstasy of our
Lord ; so that both the temptation and its
answer arise from within. Others think that
the temptation was suggested from within,
but in a state, not of sleep or ecstasy, but of
JESUS OHEIST
complete consciousness. Others consider this
narrative to have been a parable of our Lord, of
which He has made Himself the subject. All
these suppositions set aside the historical testi-
mony of the Gospels : the temptation as there
described arose not from the sinless mind of the
Son of God, where indeed thoughts of evil could
not have harboured, but from Satan, the enemy
of the human race. Nor can it be supposed
that this account is a mere parable, unless we
assume that St. Matthew and St. Luke have
wholly misunderstood their Master's meaning.
The story is that of a fact, hard indeed to be
understood, but not to be made easier by ex-
planations such as would invalidate the only
testimony on which it rests (Heubner's Practical
Commentary on Matthew).
The three temptations are addressed to the
three forms in which the disease of sin makes
its appearance on the soul — to the solace of
sense, and the love of praise, and the desire of
gain (1 John ii. 16). But there is one element
common to them all — they are attempts to call
up a wilful and wayward spirit in contrast to a
patient self-denying one.
In the first temptation the Redeemer is an
hungered and when the Devil bids Him, if He
be the Son of God, command that the stones
may be made bread, there would seem to be
no great sin in this use of Divine power to over-
come the pressing human want. Our Lord's
answer is required to show us where the essence
of the temptation lay. He takes the words of
Moses to the children of Israel (Deut. Tiii. 3),
which mean, not that men must dispense with
bread and feed only on the study of the Divine
word, but that our meat and drink, our food
and raiment, are all the work of the creating
hand of God ; and that a sense of dependence on
God is the duty of man. He tells the Tempter
that as the sons of Israel standing in the wilder-
ness were forced to humble themselves and to
wait upon the hand of God for the bread from
heaven which He gave them, so the Sou of Mao,
fainting in the wilderness from hunger, will be
humble and will wait upon His Father in heaven
for the word that shall bring Him food, and
will not be hasty to deliver Himself from that
dependent state, but will wait patiently for the
gifts of His goodness. In the second temptation,
it is not probable that they left the wilderness,
but that Satan was allowed to suggest to our
Lord's mind the place, and the marvel that
could be wrought there. They stood, as has
been suggested, on the lofty porch that over-
hung the valley of Kedron, where the steep side
of the valley was added to the height of the
Temple (Joseph. Ant. xv. 11, § 5), and made a
depth that the eye could scarcely have borne to
look down upon. " Cast Thyself down " — per-
form in the Holy City, in a public place, a wonder
that will at once make all men confess that none
but the Son of God could perform it. A passage
from Psalm xci. is quoted to give a colour
to the argument. Our Lord replies by an
allusion to another text that carries us back
again to the Israelites wandering in the wilder-
ness : " Te shall not tempt the Lord your God,
as ye tempted Him in Massah" (Deut. vi 16).
Their conduct is more fully described by the
Psalmist as a tempting of God : " They tempted
God in their heart by asking meat for their
Digitized by VjOOQlC
JESUS OHKIST
lust; yea, they spake against God: they said,
Can God furnish a table in the wilderness ? Be-
hold He smote the rock that the waters gushed
out, and the streams overflowed. Can He give
bread also? Can He provide flesh for His
people ? " (Pa. lxxviii.) Just parallel was the
temptation here : — " God has protected Thee so
far, brought Thee up, pot His seal upon Thee
by manifest proofs of His favour. Can He do
this also? Can He send the angels to buoy
Thee up in Thy descent ? Can He make the
air thick to sustain, and the earth soft to receive
Thee?" The appropriate answer is, "Thou shalt
not tempt the Lord thy God." In the third
temptation it is not asserted that there is any
mountain from which the eyes of common men
can see the world and its kingdoms at once
displayed ; it was with the mental vision of One
Who knew all things that these kingdoms and
their glory were seen. And Satan has now
begun to discover, if he knew not from the
beginning, that One is here Who can become the
King over them all. He says, " All these things
will I give Thee if Thon wilt fall down and
worship me." In St. Lake the words are fuller :
" All this power will I give Thee, and the glory
of them, for that is delivered unto me, and to
whomsoever I will I give it ; " but these words
are the lie of the Tempter, which he uses to
mislead. "Thou art come to be great — to be
a King on the earth ; bnt I am strong, and will
resist Thee. Thy followers shall be imprisoned
and slain ; some of them shall fall away through
fear; others shall forsake Thy cause, loving
this present world. Cast in Thy lot with me ;
let Thy kingdom be an earthly kingdom, only
the greatest of all — a kingdom such aa the Jews
seek to see established on the throne of David.
Worship me by living as the children of this
world live, and so honouring me in Thy life :
then all shall be Thine." The Lord knows that
the Tempter is right in foretelling such trials to
Him ; bnt though clouds and darkness hang
over the path of His ministry, He must work
the work of Him that sent Him, and not another
work: He must worship God and none other.
" Get thee hence, Satan ; for it is written, Thou
shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only
shalt thou serve." As regards the order of the
temptations, there are internal marks that the
account of St. Matthew assigns them their
historical order: St. Luke transposes the two
last, for which various reasons are suggested by
commentators (Matt. iv. 1-11; Mark i. 12, 13;
Luke iv. 1-13).
Deserting for a time the historical order, we
shall find that the records of this first portion
of His ministry, from the Temptation to the
Transfiguration, consist mainly — (1) of miracles,
which prove His Divine commission; (2) of
discourses and parables on the doctrine of " the
kingdom of heaven " ; (3) of incidents showing
the behaviour of various persons when brought
into contact with our Lord. The two former
may require some general remarks, the last will
unfold themselves with the narrative.
1. The Miracles. — The power of working
miracles was granted to many under the Old
Covenant : Moses (Ex. iii. 20, vii.-xi.) delivered
the people of Israel from Egypt by means of
them ; and Joshua, following in his steps, en-
joyed the same power for the completion of his
JESUS CHRIST
1667
work (Josh. iii. 13-16). Samson (Judg. xv. 19),
Elijah (1 K. xvii. 10, &c), and Elisha (2 K.
ii.-vi.) possessed the same gift. The Prophets
foretold that the Messiah, of Whom Moses was
the type, would show signs and wonders as he
had done. Isaiah, in describing His kingdom,
says — " Then the eyes of the blind shall be
opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be on-
stopped. Then shall the lame man leap as an
hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing " (xxxv.
5, 6). According to the same Prophet, the
Christ was called " to open the blind eyes, to
bring out the prisoners from the prison, and
them that sit in darkness out of the prison-
house " (xlii. 7). And all who looked for the
coming of the Messiah expected that the power
of miracles would be one of the tokens of His
commission. When John the Baptist, in his
prison, heard of the works of Jesus, he sent his
disciples to inquire, " Art Thou He that should
come (i ipx^eyos = the Messiah), or do we look
for another ? " Our Lord, in answer to this,
only points to His miracles, leaving to John the
inference from them, that no one could do such
works except the promised One. When our
Lord cured a blind and dnmb demoniac, the
people, struck with the miracle, said, "Is not
this the Son of David?" (Matt. xii. 23). On
another like occasion it was asked, " When
Christ cometh, will He do more miracles than
these which this man hath done? " (John vii. 81).
So that the expectation that Messiah would
work miracles existed amongst the people, and
was founded on the language of prophecy. Our
Lord's miracles are described in the New Testa-
ment by several names : they are signs (0-17/Mm),
wonders (riparra), works (Ipya, most frequently
in St. John), and mighty works (SwA/tus),
according to the point of view from which they
are regarded. They are indeed astonishing
works, wrought as signs of the Might and
Presence of God ; and they are powers or mighty
works because they are such as no power short
of the Divine could have effected. But if the
object had been merely to work wonders, with-
out any other aim than to astonish the minds
of the witnesses, the miracles of our Lord would
not have been the best means of producing the
effect, since many of them were wrought for
the good of obscure people, before witnesses
chiefly of the humble and uneducated class, and
in the course of the ordinary life of our Lord,
which lay not amongst those who made it their
special business to inquire into the claims of a
prophet. When requests were made for a more
striking sign than those which He had wrought,
for "a sign from heaven" (Luke xi. 16), it was
refused. When the Tempter suggested that He
should cast Himself down from the pinnacle of
the Temple before all men, the temptation was
rejected. The miracles of our Lord were to be,
not wonders merely, bnt signs ; and not merely
signs of preternatural power, but of the scope
and character of His ministry, and of the Divine
Mature of His Person. This will be evident
from an examination of those which are more
particularly described in the Gospels. Nearly
forty cases of this kind appear ; but that they
are only examples taken out of a very great
number, the Evangelists frequently remind us
(John ii. 23 ; Matt. viii. 16 and parall., iv. 23,
xii. 15 and parall. ; Luke vi. 19 ; Matt. xi. 5,
5 2
Digitized by VjOOQIC
1668
JESUS CHBIST
xiii. 58, ix. 35, xiv. 14, 36, xv. 30, xix. 2,
xxi. 14). These cases might be classified. There
are three instances of restoration to life, each
nnder peculiar conditions: the daughter of
Jairus was lately dead ; the widow's son at
Nain was being carried out to the grave; and
Lazarus had been four days dead, and was re-
turning to corruption (Matt. ix. 18 ; Luke vii.
11, 12; John xi. 1, &c.). There are about six
cases of demoniac possession, each with its own
circumstances : one in the synsgogue at Caper-
naum, where the unclean spirit bore witness to
Jesus as " the Holy One of God " (Mark i. 24) ;
a second, that of the man who dwelt among the
tombs in the country of the Gadarenes, whose
state is so forcibly described by St. Mark (v. 2),
and who also bore witness to Him as " the Son
of the Most High God " ; a third, the case of a
dumb man (Matt. ix. 32) ; a fourth, that of a
youth who was brought to Him as He came
down from the Mount of Transfiguration (Matt,
xvii. 15), and whom the disciples had vainly
tried to heal ; a fifth, that of another dumb
man, whom the Jews thought he had healed
" through Beelzebub the prince of the devils "
(Luke xi. 15); and a sixth, that of the Syro-
Phoenician girl whose mother's faith was so
tenacious (Matt. xv. 22). There are about
seventeen recorded cases of the cure of bodily
sickness, including fever, leprosy, palsy, in-
veterate weakness, the maimed limb, the issue
of blood of twelve years' standing, dropsy,
blindness, deafness, and dumbness (John ir. 47 ;
Matt. viii. 2, 14, ix. 2; John v. 5; Matt. xii. 10,
viii. 5, ix. 20, 27 ; Mark viii. 22 ; John ix. 1 ;
Luke xiii. 10, xvii. 11, xviii. 35, xxii. 51). These
three groups of miracles all pertain to one class ;
they all brought help to the suffering or
sorrowing, and proclaimed what love the Man
that did them bore towards the children of men.
There is another class, showing a complete
control over the powers of nature : first by acts
of creative power, as when in the beginning of
His ministry He made the water wine; and
when He fed at one time five thousand, and at
another four, with bread miraculously provided
(John ii. 7, vi. 10 ; Matt. xv. 32); secondly, by
setting aside natural laws and conditions — now
in passing unseen through a hostile crowd
(Luke iv. 30); now in procuring miraculous
draughts of fishes, when the fisher's skill had
failed (Luke v. 4 ; John xxi. 6) ; now in stilling
a tempest (Matt. viii. 26); now in walking to
His disciples on the sea (Matt. xiv. 25) ; now in
the transformation of His countenance by a
heavenly light and glory (Matt. xvii. 1); and
again in seeking and finding the shekel for the
customary tribute to the Temple in the fish's
mouth (Matt xvii. 27). 'In a third class of
these miracles we find our Lord overawing the
wills of men ; as when He twice cleared the
Temple of the traders (John ii. 13; Matt. xxi.
12) ; and when His look staggered the officers
that came to take Him (John xviii. 6). And in
a fourth subdivision will stand one miracle only,
where His power was used for destruction — the
case of the barren fig-tree (Matt. xxi. 18). The
destruction of the herd of swine does not pro-
perly rank here ; it was a permitted act of the
devils which He cast out, and is no more to be
laid to the account of the Redeemer than are all
the sicknesses and sufferings in the land of the
JESUS CHBIST
Jews which He permitted to waste and destroy,
having, as He showed by His miracles, abundant
power to prevent them. All the miracles of
this latter class show our Lord to be One Whs
wields the power of God. No one can suspend
the laws of nature save Him Who made them :
when bread is wonderfully multiplied and the
fickle sea becomes a firm floor to walk on, the
God of the Universe is working the change,
directly or through His deputy. Very remark-
able, as a claim to Divine power, is the mode is
which Jesus justified acta of healing on the
Sabbath— "My Father worketh hitherto, and I
work " (John v. 17) : which means, " As God
the Father, even on the Sabbath-day, keeps all
the laws of the universe at work, making the
planets roll, and the grass grow, and the animal
pulses beat, so do I My work ; I stand above the
law of the Sabbath, as He does." *
On reviewing all the recorded miracles, we
see at once that they are signs of the nature of
Christ's Person and mission. None of them are
done merely to astonish; and hardly any of
them, even of those which prove His power
more than His love, but tend directly towards
the good of men in some way or other. They
show how active and unwearied waa His lore;
they also show the diversity of ita operation.
Every degree of human need — from Laxanu
now returning to dust — through the palsy that
has seized on brain and nerves, and is almost
death — through the leprosy which, appearinc
on the skin, was really a subtle poison that had
tainted every drop of blood in the veins — up to
the injury to the particular limb — received
succour from the powerful word of Christ ; and
to wrest His buried friend from corruption and
the worm was neither more nor leas difficult
than to heal a withered hand or restore to its
place an ear that had been cut off. And this
intimate connexion of the miracles with the
work of Christ will explain the fact that faiti
was in many cases required as a condition for
their performance. According to the common
definition of a miracle, any one would seem to
be a capable witness of its performance : yet
Jesus sometimes refrained from working wonders
before the unbelieving (Mark vi 5, 6), and
sometimes did the work that was asked of Him
because of the faith of them that asked it (Hark
vii. 29). The miracles were intended to attract
the witnesses of them to become followers of
Jesus and members of the kingdom of heaven.
Where faith was already so far fixed on Him a*
to believe that He could do miracles, there was
the fit preparation for a faith in higher and
heavenly things. If they knew that He could
heal the body, they only required teaching to
enlarge their view of Him into that of a healer
of the diseased spirit, and a giver of true life to
* The Saviour's miracles are—
{In raising the dead.
In curing mental c
In healing the bodr.
{In creating.
In destroying,
in setting aside the ordinary Uwa of being.
In overawing the opposing wills of mea.
In the account in the text, the miracles that took place
after the Transfiguration have been included, for the
sake of completeness.
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
JESUS OHEIST
1669
those that are dead in trespass** and aina. On
the other hand, where men's minds were in a
state of bitterness and antagonism against Him,
to display miracles before them wonld bnt
increase their condemnation. " If I had not
done among them the works which none other
man did, they had not had Bin ; but now have
they both seen and hated both Me and Hy
Father" (John it. 24). This result was in-
evitable: in order to offer salvation to those
who are to be saved, the offer must be heard by
some of those who will reject it. Miracles then
have two purposes — the proximate and sub-
ordinate purpose of doing a work of love to
them that need it, and the higher purpose of
revealing Christ in His own Person and nature
as the Son of God and Saviour of men. Hence
the rejection of the demand for a sign from
heaven — for some great celestial phenomenon
which all should see and none could dispute.
He refused to give such a sign to the " genera-
tion " that asked it : and once He offered them
instead the fact that Jonah was a type of Him
as to His Burial and Resurrection, thus refusing
them the kind of sign which they required. So
again, in answer to a similar demand, He said,
" Destroy this Temple and in three days I will
raise it up " — alluding to His Death and Resur-
rection. It is as though He had said, " All the
miracles that I have been working are only in-
tended to call attention to the one great miracle
of My Presence on earth in the form of a servant.
No other kind of miracle will I work. If you
wish for a greater sign, I refer you to the great
miracle about to be wrought in Me— that of My
Resurrection." The Lord's words do not mean
that there shall be no sign ; He is working
wonders daily : but that He will not travel out
of the ' plan He has proposed for Himself. A
sign in the sun and moon and stars would prove
that the power of God was there ; but it would
not teach men to understand the mission of God
Incarnate, of the loving and suffering Friend
and Brother of men. The miracles which He
wrought are those best suited to this purpose ;
and those who had faith, though but in small
measure, were the fittest to behold them. They
knew Him bnt a little; but even to think of
Him as a Prophet Who was able to heal their
infirmity was a germ of faith sufficient to make
them fit hearers of His doctrine and spectators
of His deeds. But they gained nothing from
the Divine work who, unable to deny the evi-
dence of their eyes and ears, took refuge in the
last argument of malice, "He casteth out devils
through Beelzebub the prince of the devils."
What is a miracle? A miracle must be either
something done in contravention of all law, or it
is a transgression of all the laws known to us,
but not of some law which further research may
discover for us; or it is a transgression of all
natural laws, whether known now or to be
known hereafter, on account of some higher law
whose operation interferes with them. Only
the last of these definitions could apply to the
Christian miracles. God having chosen to govern
the world by laws, having impressed on the face
of nature in characters not to be mistaken the
great truth that He rules the Universe by law
and order, would not adopt in the kingdom of
grace a different plan from that which in the
kingdom of nature He has pursued. If the seen
universe requires a scheme of order, and the
spiritual world is governed without a scheme
(so to speak) by caprice, then the God of Nature
appears to contradict the God of Grace. Spinoza
has not failed to make the most of this argu-
ment ; but he assails not the true Christian idea
of a miracle, but one which he substitutes for it
{Tract. Theol. Pdit. 6). Nor can the Christian
miracles be regarded as cases in which the
wonder depends on the anticipation only of some
law that is not now understood, but shall be so
hereafter. In the first place many of them go
beyond, in the amount of their operation, all
the wildest hopes of the scientific discoverer.
In the second place, the very conception of a
miracle is vitiated by such an explanation. All
distinction in kind between the man who is
somewhat in advance of his age in physical
knowledge, and the worker of miracles, wonld
be taken away ; and the miracles of one age, as
the steam-engine, the telegraph-wire, become
the tools and toys of the next. It remains then
that a miracle is to be regarded as the over-
ruling of some physical law by some higher law
that is brought in. We are invited in tho
Gospels to regard the miracles not as wonders,
but as the wonderful acts of Jesus of Nazareth.
They are identified with the work of redemption.
There are even cautions against teaching them
separately — against severing them from their
connexion with His work. Eye-witnesses of His
miracles were strictly charged to make no report
of them to others (Matt. ix. 30 ; Mark. v. 43,
vii. 36). And yet when John the Baptist sent
his disciples to ascertain whether the Messiah
were indeed come or not, the answer they took
back was the very thing which was forbidden to
others — a report of miracles. The explanation
of this seeming contradiction is that wherever a
report of the signs and wonders was likely to be
conveyed without a right conception of the
Person of Christ and the kind of doctrine which
He taught, there He suffered not the report to
be carried. Now, had the purpose been to reveal
His Divine Nature only, this caution would not
have been needed, nor would faith have been a
needful preliminary for the apprehension of
miracles, nor would the temptations of Satan in
the wilderness have been the cunning snares
they were intended to be, nor would it have
been necessary to refuse the convincing sign
from heaven to the Jews that asked it. But
the part of His work to which attention was to
be directed in connexion with the miracles, was
the mystery of our redemption by One " Who
being in the form of God, thought it not robbery
to be equal with God, but made Himself of no
reputation, and took upon Him the form of a
servant, and was made in the likeness of men :
and being found in fashion as a man, He humbled
Himself, and became obedient unto death, even
the death of the Cross" (Phil. ii. 5-8). Very
few are the miracles in which Divine power is
exercised without a manifest reference to the
purpose of assisting men. He works for the
most part as the Power of God in a state of
humiliation for the good of men. Not insignifi-
cant here are the cases in which He condescends
to use means, wholly inadequate indeed in any
other hands than His ; but still they are a token
that He has descended into the region where
means are employed, from that in which even
Digitized by
Google
1670
JESUS CHRIST
the spoken word can control the subservient
agents of nature. He laid His hand upon the
patient (Matt. viii. 3, 15, iz. 29, zx. 34; Luke
vii. 14, zzii. 51). He anointed the eves of
the blind with clay (John iz. 6). He put His
finger into the ear and touched the tongue of
the deaf and dumb sufferer in Decapolis (Mark
vii. 33, 34). He treated the blind man at
Bethsaida in like fashion (Mark viii. 23). Even
when He fed the four and five thousand, He did
not create bread o'ut of nothing, which would
have tbeen as easy for Him, but much bread out
of little; and He looked up to heaven and
blessed the meat as a thankful man would do
(Matt. zir. 19 ; John vi. 11 ; Matt. zv. 36). At
the grave of Lazarus He lifted up His eyes and
gave thanks that the Father had heard Him
(John zi. 41, 42), and this great miracle is
accompanied by tears and groanings, that show
how One so mighty to save has truly become a
man with human soul and sympathies. The
worker of the miracles is God become Man ;
and as signs of His Person and work are they to
be measured. Hence, when the question of the
credibility of miracles is discussed, it ought to
be preceded by the question, Is redemption from
the sin of Adam a probable thing? Is it
probable that there are spiritual laws as well as
natural, regulating the relations between us and
the Father of our spirits ? Is it probable that,
such laws existing, the needs of men and the
goodness of God would lead to an expression of
them, complete or partial, by means of revela-
tion? If these questions are all decided in
the affirmative, then Hume's argument against
miracles is already half overthrown. " No
testimony," says Hume, " is sufficient to establish
a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a
kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous
than the fact which it endeavours to establish ;
and even in that case there is a mutual destruc-
tion of arguments, and the superior only gives
us an assurance suitable to that degree of
force which remains after deducting the inferior "
(Essays, vol. ii. p. 130). If the Christian
miracles are parts of a scheme which bears
other marks of a Divine origin, they point to the
existence of a set of spiritual laws with which
Christianity is connected, and of which it is the
expression ; and then the difficulty of believing
them disappears. They are not "against nature,"
but above it ; they are not the few caprices of
Providence breaking in upon ages of order, but
they are glimpses of the Divine spiritual cosmos
permitted to be seen amidst the laws of the
natural world, of which they take precedence,
just as in the physical world one law can
supersede another. And as to the testimony for
them let PaJey speak : — " If twelve men, whose
probity and good sense I had long known, should
seriously and circumstantially relate to me an
account of a miracle wrought before their eyes,
and in which it was impossible they should be
deceived ; if the governor of the country, hearing
a rumour of this account, should call those men
into his presence, and offer them a short proposal,
either to confess the imposture or submit to be
tied up to a gibbet ; if they should refuse with
one voice to acknowledge that there existed any
falsehood or imposture in the case ; if this threat
were communicated to them separately, yet
with no different effect ; if it was at last
JESUS CHBIST
executed, if I myself saw them one after another
consenting to be racked, burnt or strangled,
rather than give up the truth of their account ;
. . . there exists not a sceptic in the world who
would not believe them, or who would defend
such incredulity " (Evidences, Introduction, p. 6).
In the theory of a "mutual destruction" of
arguments so that the belief in miracles would
represent exactly the balance between the evi-
dence for and against them, Hume contradicts
the commonest religious, and indeed worldly,
experience ; he confounds the state of delibera-
tion and examination with that of conrietioa.
When Thomas the Apostle, who had doubted thr
great central miracle of the Resurrection, was
allowed to touch the Saviour's wounded side.
and in an access of undoubting faith exclaimed,
" My Lord and my God ! " who does not see
that at that moment all the former doubts were
wiped out, and were as though they had never
been ? How could he carry about those doubts
or any recollection of them, to be a set-off
against the complete conviction that had suc-
ceeded them ? It is so with the Christian life
in every case ; faith, which is " the substance of
things hoped for, the evidence of things not
seen," could not continue to weigh and balance
evidence for and against the truth ; the convic-
tion either rises to a perfect moral certainty, or
it continues tainted and worthless as a principle
of action.
The lapse of time may somewhat alter the
aspect of the evidence for miracles, but it does
not weaken it. It is more difficult (so to speak)
to cross-examine witnesses who delivered their
testimony ages ago ; but another kind of evi-
dence has been gathering strength in successive
ages. The miracles are all consequences and
incidents of one great miracle, the Incarnation ;
and if the Incarnation is found true, the rest
become highly probable. But this very doctrine
has been thoroughly proved through all these
ages. Nations hare adopted it, and they are the
greatest nations of the world. Men have lived
and died in it, have given up their lives to
preach it ; have found that it did not disappoint
them, but held true under them to the last.
The existence of Christianity itself has become
an evidence. It is a phenomenon easy to under-
stand if we grant the miracle of the Incarnation,
but is an effect without an adequate cause if
that be denied.
Miracles then are offered us in the Gospels,
not as startling violations of the order of nature,
but as consequences of the revelation of Himself
made by Jesus Christ for men's salvation, and as
such they are not violations of order at all, but
interferences of the spiritual order with the
natural. They are abundantly witnessed by
earnest and competent men, who did not aim at
any earthly reward for their teaching; and
they are proofs, together with His pure life and
holy doctrine, that Jesus was the Son of God
(see Dean Trench on the Miracles, an important
work ; Baumgarten, Leben Jesu ; Paley's Evi-
dences; Butler's Analogy; Hase, Leben Jesu;
with the various Commentaries on the New
Testament).
2. The Parables. — In considering the Lord's
teaching we turn first to the parables. In all
ages the aid of the imagination has been sought
to assist in the teaching of abstract truth, and
Digitized by
Google
JESUS OHBIST
that in various ways: in the parable, where
some story of ordinary doings is made to convey
a spiritual meaning, beyond what the narrative
itself contains, and without any assertion that
the narrative does or does not present an actual
occurrence : in the fable, where a story, for the
most part an impossible one, of talking beast
and reasoning bird, is made the vehicle of some
shrewd and. prudent lesson of worldly wisdom :
in the allegory, which is a story with a moral
or spiritual meaning, in which the lesson taught
is so prominent as almost wholly to supersede
the story that clothes it, and the names and
actions are so chosen that no interpreter shall
be required for the application: and lastly, in
the proverb, which is often only a parable or a
fable condensed into a few pithy words [Pab-
able] (Ernesti, Lex. Tech. Qraecum, under
irapaffoXii, \6yos, hWrryopia; Trench, On the
Parables; Alford on Matt. xiii. 1, and other
Commentators; Hase, Leben Jew, § 67, 4th edit. ;
Meander, Leben Jem, p. 568 sq.). Nearly fifty
parables are preserved in the Gospels, and they
are only selected from a larger number (Mark
iv. 33). Each Evangelist, even St. Mark, has
preserved some that are peculiar to himself.
St. John never uses the word parable, but that
of proverb (rapoifda), which the other Evan-
gelists nowhere employ. In reference to this
mode of teaching, our Lord tells the disciples,
" Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of
the kingdom of God ; but to others in parables,
that seeing they might not see, and hearing
they might not understand" (Luke viii. 10):
and some have nastily concluded from this that
the parable — the clearest of all modes of teaching
— was employed to conceal knowledge from
those who were not susceptible of it, and that
this was its chief purpose. But it was chosen
not for this negative object, but for its positive
advantages in the instruction of the disciples.
The nature of the kingdom of heaven was not
understood even by disciples; hard even to
them were the sayings that described it, and the
hearing of them caused many to go back and
walk no more with Him (John vi. 66). If there
was any mode of teaching better suited than
another to the purpose of preserving truths for
the memory that were not yet accepted by the
heart — for keeping the seed safe till the time
should arrive for the quickening Spirit to come
down and give it growth — that mode would be
the best suited to the peculiar position of the
disciples. And any means of translating an
abstract thought into sensuous language has
ever been the object of poet and teacher in all
countries. He who can best employ the symbols
of the visible world for the deeper acts of
thought has been the clearest and most suc-
cessful expositor. The parable affords just such
an instrument as was required. Who could
banish from his mind, when once understood,
the image of the house built on the sand, as the
symbol of the faithless soul unable to stand by
the truth in the day of temptation ? To whom
does not the parable of the prodigal son bring
back the thought of God's merciful kindness
towards the erring ? But without such striking
images it wonld have been impossible (to use
mere human language) to make known to the
disciples in their half-enlightened state the
mysteries of faith in the Son of God as a
JESUS OHBIST
1671
principle of life, of repentance from sin, and of
an assurance of peace and welcome from the God
of mercy. Eastern teachers have made this
mode of instruction familiar ; the originality of
the parables lay not in the method of teaching
by stories, but in the profound and new truths
which the stories taught so aptly. And Jesus
had another purpose in selecting this form of
instruction : He foresaw that many would re-
ject Him, and on them He would not lay a
heavier burden than they needs must bear. He
did not offer them daily and hourly, in their
plainest form, the grand truths of sin and atone-
ment, of judgment and heaven and hell, and in
so doing multiply occasions of blaspheming.
"Those that were without " heard the parable ;
but it was an aimless story to them if they
sought no moral purpose under it, and a dark
saying, passing comprehension, if they did so
seek. When the Lord gathered round Him those
that were willing to be His, and explained to
them at length the parable and its application
(Matt. xiii. 10-18), then the light thus thrown
on it was not easy to extinguish in their memory.
And amongst those without there was no doubt
a difference ; some listened with indifferent, and
some with unbelieving and resisting minds; and
of both minds some remained in their aversion,
more or less active, from the Son of God unto
the end, and some were converted after He was
risen. To these we may suppose that the
parables which had rested in their memories as
vivid pictures, yet still a dead letter, so far as
moral import is concerned, became by the Holy
Spirit, Whose business it was to teach men all
things and to bring all things to their remem-
brance (John xiv. 26), a quick and powerful
light of truth, lighting up the dark places with
a brightness never again to fade from their eyes.
The parable unapplied is a dark saying ; the
parable explained is the clearest of all teaching.
When language is used in Holy Scripture which
would seem to treat the parables as means of
concealment rather than of instruction, it must
be taken to refer to the unexplained parable — to
the cypher without the key — the symbol with-
out the interpretation.
Besides the parables, the more direct teaching
of our Lord is conveyed in many discourses,
dispersed through the Gospels; of which three
may be here selected as examples, — the Sermon
on the Mount (Matt, v.-vii.), the discourse after
the feeding of the five thousand (John vi. 22-
65), and the final discourse and prayer which
preceded the Passion (John xiv.-xvii.). These
are selected principally because they mark three
distinct periods in the ministry of Jesus,— the
opening of it, the principal change in the tone
of its teaching, and the solemn close.
Notwithstanding the endeavour to establish
that the Sermon on the Mount of St. Matthew
is different from the Sermon on the Plain of
St. Lake, the evidence for their being one and
the same discourse greatly preponderates. If
so, then its historical position must be fixed
from St. Luke ; and its earlier place in St. Mat-
thew's Gospel must be owing to the Evangelist's
wish to commence the account of the ministry
of Jesus with a summary of His teaching; an
intention further illustrated by the /mode in
which the Evangelist has wrought in with his
report of the discourse several sayings which
Digitized by
Google
1672
JESUS CHBIST
St. Luke connect! with the various facta which
on different occasion* drew them forth (cp.
Lake ziv. 34, zi. 33, ivi. 17, xii. 58, 59, xvi. 18,
with placet in Matt. t. ; also Lake xi. 1-4,
xii. 33, 34, xi. 84-36, xvt 13, xii. 22-31, with
placet in Matt. vi. ; also Lake xi. 9-13, xiii. 24,
25-27, with placet in Hatt. vii.). Yet this is
done without violence to the connexion and
structure of the whole discourse. St. Matthew,
to whom Jesus is ever present as the Messiah,
the Anointed Prophet of the chosen people, the
•accessor of Motet, sets at the head of Hit
ministry the giving of the Christian law with
its bearing on the Jewish. From St. Luke we
learn that Jesus had gone up into a mountain to
pray, that on the morning following He made
up the number of His twelve Apostles, and
solemnly appointed them, and then descending
He stood upon a level place (icarrafi&s lurf ovrAv
tart) M roVeu rtSwov, Luke vi. 17), not neces-
sarily at the bottom of the mountain, but where
the multitude could stand round and hear ; and
there He taught them in a solemn address the
laws and constitution of Hit new kingdom, the
kingdom of Heaven. He tells them who are
meet to be citizens of that heavenly polity, and
in so doing rebukes almost every quality on
which the world sets a value.i The poor in
spirit, that U the lowly-minded, the mourners
and the meek, those who hunger and thirst for
righteousness, the merciful, the pure, the peace-
makers, are all "blessed," are all possessed of
the temper which will assort well with that
heavenly kingdom, in contrast to the proud, the
confident, the great and successful, whom the
world honours. (St. Luke adds denunciations
of woe to the tempers which are opposed to the
Gospel, which St. Matthew omits.) This novel
exordium startles all the hearers, for it seems
to proclaim a new world, new hopes, and new
virtues; and our Lord then proceeds to meet
the question that rises up in their minds — " If
these dispositions and not a literal obedience to
minute precepts constitute a Christian, what
then becomes of the Law?" Answering this
tacit objection, the Lord bids them " think not
that I am come to destroy («rraAvo*<u, abolish)
the Law and the Prophets, I am not come to
destroy but to fulfil " (wKjipAvat, complete, Matt.
v. 17). He goes on to tell them that not one
point or letter of the Law was written in vain ;
that what was temporary in it does not fall
away till its purpose is answered, what was of
permanent obligation shall never be lost. He
then shows how far more deep and searching a
moral lawgiver He is than was Moses His proto-
type, who like Him spoke the Mind of God. The
eternal principles which Moses wrote in broad
lines, such as a dull and anspiritual people must
read, He applies to deeper-seated sins and to all
the finer shades of evil. Murder was denounced
by the Law ; bat anger and provoking speech
are of the same stock. It is not only murder,
but hate, that is the root of that poisonous fruit
which God abhors. Hate defiles the very offer-
ing that a man makes to God ; let him leave
his gift unoffered and get the hate cast out, and
not waste his time in an unacceptable sacrifice.
Hate will affect the soul for ever, if it goes out
of the world to meet its Judge in that defiling
garment: "Agree with thine adversary quickly,
whiles thou art in the way with him " (r. 25).
JESUS CHBIST
The act of adultery is deadly, and Moses forbid
it. But to permit the thought of lust to rest
in the heart, to suffer the desire to linger then
without combating it (flKtwta tsoi re en-
Av/140-ai) is of the same nature, and shares the
condemnation. The breach of an oath (Lot.
xix. 12) was forbidden by the Law; and the
rabbinical writers had woven a distinction be-
tween oaths that were and oaths that were net
binding (Maimonides in Lightfoot, Hot. Heb. ii.
p. 127). Jesus shows that all oaths, whether
they name the Creator or not, are an appeal to
Him, and all an on that account equally bind-
ing. But the need of an oath "cometh of evil;"
the bare asseveration of a Christian should be
as solemn and sacred to him as the most bindu;
oath. That this in its simple literal application
would go to abolish all swearing is beyond >
question; but the Lord is sketching out t
perfect Law for a perfect kingdom ; and this ii
not the only part of the Sermon on the Mount
which in the present state of the world cannot
be carried out completely. Men there an 01
whom a word is less binding than an oath ; and
in judicial proceedings the highest test most be
applied to them to elicit the truth; therefore
an oath must still form part of a legal process
and a good man may take what is really kept
up to control the wicked. Jesus Himself dk
not refuse the oath administered to Him in the
Sanhedrin (Matt. xxvi. 63). And yet the need
of an oath "cometh of evil," for among men
who respect the truth it would add nothing to
the weight of their evidence. Almost the sum
would apply to the precepts with which our
Lord replaces the much-abused law of retain-
tion, " An eye for an eye, and a tooth for 1
tooth " (Ex. xxi. 24). To conquer an enemy by
submission where be expected resistance ii of
the very essence of the Gospel ; it is an exact
imitation of our Lord's own example, Who,
when He might have summoned more tku
twelve legions of Angels to Hit aid, allowed the
Jews to revile and slay Him. And yet it is not
possible at once to wipe out from- our social
arrangements the principle of retribution. The
robber who takes a coat must not be encouraged
to seise the cloak also; to give to every one
that asks all that he asks would be an en-
couragement to sloth and shameless impor-
tunity. But yet the awakened conscience will
find out a hundred ways in which the spirit ot
this precept may be carried oat, even in ear
imperfect social state ; and the power of thu
loving policy will be felt by those who attempt
it. Finally, oar Lord sums up this portion of
His Divine law by words full of sublime wis-
dom. To the cramped and confined love of the
Rabbis, "Thou shalt love thy neighbour and
hate thine enemy," He opposes this nobler role
— "Love your enemies, bless them that cone
you, do good to them that hate you, and pray
for them which despitefully use you snd per-
secute you, that ye may be the children of your
Father Which is in heaven ; for He maketh His
son to rise on the evil and on the good, snd
sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust ■ • ■
Be ve therefore perfect, even as your Fsther
Which is in heaven is perfect " (Matt. v. 44,
45, 48). To this part of the sermon, which
St. Luke has not preserved, but which St.
Matthew, writing as it were with his fc**
Digitized by
Google
JESUS 0HK1ST
turned towards his Jewish countrymen, could
not pretermit, succeed precepts on almsgiving,
on prayer, on forgiveness, on fasting, on trust
in God's providence, and on tolerance ; all of
them tuned to one or two notes : that a man's
whole nature must be offered to God, and that
it is man's duty to do to others as he would
have them do to him. An earnest appeal on
the difficulty of a godly life, and the worthless-
ness of mere profession, cast in the form of a
parable, concludes this wonderful discourse.
The differences between the reports of the two
Evangelists are many. In the former Gospel
the sermon occupies one hundred and seven
verses ; in the latter, thirty. The longer report
includes the exposition of the relation of the
Gospel to the Law : it also draws together, as
we have seen, some passages which St. Luke
reports elsewhere and in another connexion;
and where the two contain the same matter,
that of St. Luke is somewhat more compressed.
But in taking account of this, the purpose of
St. Matthew is to be borne in mind : the
morality of the Gospel is to be fully set forth
at the beginning of our Lord's ministry, and
especially in its bearing on the Law as usually
received by the Jews, for whose use especially
this Gospel was designed. And when this dis-
course is compared with the later examples to
which we shall presently refer, the fact comes
oat more distinctly, that we have here the Code
of the Christian Lawgiver, rather than the
whole Gospel ; that the standard of Christian
duty is here fixed, but the means for raising
men to the level where the observance of snch a
law is at all possible are not yet pointed out.
The hearers learned how Christians wonld act
and think, and to what degree of moral purity
they would aspire, in the state of salvation ; but
how that state was to be purchased for them, and
conveyed over to them, is not yet pointed out.
The next example of the teaching of Jesus
must be taken from a later epoch in His
ministry. It is probable that the great dis-
course in John vi. took place about the time of
the Transfiguration, just before which He began
to reveal to the disciples the story of His suffer-
ings (Matt. xvi. and parallels), which was the
special and frequent theme of His teaching until
the end. The effect of His personal work on
the disciples now becomes the prominent sub-
ject. He had taught them that He was the
Christ, and had given them His law, wider and
deeper far than that of Moses. But the objection
to every law applies more strongly the purer and
higher the law is ; and " how to perform that
which I will " is a qnestion that grows more
difficult to answer as the standard of obedience
is raised. It is that question which our Lord
proceeds to answer here. The feeding of the
five thousand had lately taken place ; and from
this miracle He preaches yet a greater, namely,
that all spiritual life is imparted to the disciples
from Him, and that they must feed on Him that
their souls may live. He can feed them with
something more than manna, even with Him-
self; "for the Bread of God is He Which
cometh down from heaven and giveth life unto
the world" (John vi. 26-40). The Jews mur-
mur at this hard doctrine, and He warns them
that it is a kind of test of those who have been
with Him : " No man can come to Me except the
JESUS CHBIST
1673
Father Which hath sent Me draw him." He
repeats that He is the Bread of Life ; and they
murmur yet more (ot. 41-52). He presses it
on them still more strongly : " Verily, verily I
say unto yon, Except ye eat the Flesh of the
Son of man and drink His Blood, ye have no life
in you. Whoso eateth My Flesh and drinketh
My Blood hath eternal Life ; and I will raise
him up at the last day. For My Flesh is meat
indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed. He that
eateth My Flesh, and drinketh My Blood, dwell-
eth in Me and I in him. As the living Father
hath sent Me, and I live by the Father, so he
that eateth Me, even he shall live by Me"
(en. 53-57). After this discourse many of the
disciples went back and walked no more with
Him. They could not conceive how salvation
could depend on a condition so strange; nay,
even so revolting. However we may blame
them for their want of confidence in their
Teacher, it is not to be imputed to them as a
fault that they found a doctrine, which in itself
is difficult, and here was clothed in dark and
obscure expressions, beyond the grasp of then-
understanding at that time. For that doctrine
was, that Christ had taken our fleshly nature,
to suffer in it, and to shed His Blood in it ; and
that those to whom the benefits of His atoning
death are imparted find it to be their spiritual
food and life, and the condition of their resur-
rection to life everlasting.
Whether this passage refers, and in what
degree, to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper,
is a question on which commentators have been
much divided, but two observations should in
some degree guide our interpretation : the one,
that if the primary reference of the discourse
had been to the Lord's Supper, it would have
been uttered at the institution of that rite,
and not before, at a time when the disciples
could not possibly make application of it to a
Sacrament of which they had never even heard ;
the other, that the form of speech in this dis-
course comes so near that which is used in in-
stituting the Lord's Supper, that it is impossible
to exclude all reference to that Sacrament. The
Redeemer alludes here to His Death, to the Body
which shall suffer on the Cross, and to the Blood
which shall be poured out. This great sacrifice
is not only to be looked on, but to be believed ;
and not only believed, but appropriated to the
believer, to become part of his very heart and
life. Faith, here as elsewhere, is the means of
apprehending it : but when it is once laid hold
of, it will be as much a part of the believer
as the food that nourishes the body becomes in-
corporated with the body. In three passages in
the other Evangelists, in which our Lord about
this very time prepares them for His sufferings,
He connects with the announcement a warning
to the disciples that all who would come after
Him must show the fruit of His death in their
Uvea (Matt, xvi., Mark viii., Luke ix.). And
this new principle, infused into them by the life
and death of the Redeemer, by His taking onr
flesh and then suffering in it (for neither of
these is excluded), is to believers the seed of
eternal life. The believer " hath eternal life;
and I will raise him np at the last day " (John
vi. 54). Now the words of Jesus in instituting
the Lord's Supper come very near to the ex-
pressions in this discourse : " This is My Body
Digitized by
Google
1674
JESUS CHBiST
which is given for you (brip ifuiv) . . . This
cup is the new testament in My Blood, which
is shed for you " (Luke xxii. 19, 20). That the
Lord's Supper is a means of applying to us
through faith the fruits of the Incarnation and
the Atonement of Christ, is generally admitted ;
and if so, the discourse before us will apply
to that Sacrament, not certainly to the ex-
clusion of other means of appropriating the
saving Death of Christ, but still with great
force, inasmuch as the Lord's Supper is the most
striking symbol of the application to us of the
Lord's Body. Here in a bold figure the disciples
are told that they must eat the Flesh of Christ
and drink His Blood ; whilst in the Sacrament
the same figure becomes an act. Here the
language is meant to be general ; and there it
finds its most striking special application, but not
its only one. And the uttering of these words at
an epoch that preceded by some months the
first celebration of the Lord's Supper was pro-
bably intended to preclude that special and
limited application of it which would narrow
it down to the Sacrament only, and out of which
much false and even idolatrous teaching has
grown (cp. Commentaries of Alford, Lucke,
Meyer, Stier, Heubner, Williams, Tholuck, and
others, on this passage). It will still be asked
how we are to account for the startling form in
which this most profound Gospel-truth was put
before persons to whom it was likely to prove
an offence. The answer is not difficult. Many
had companied with the Lord during the early
part of His ministry, to see His miracles, perhaps
to derive some fruit from them, to talk about
Him, and to repeat His sayings, who were quite
unfit to go on as His followers to the end. There
was a wide difference between the two doctrines,
that Jesus was the Christ, and that the Christ
must hang upon the tree, as to their effects on
unregenerate and worldly minds. For the
latter they were not prepared : though many of
them could possibly accept the former. Now
this discourse belongs to the time of transition
from the easier to the harder doctrine. And we
may suppose that it was meant to sift the
disciples, that the good grain might remain
in the garner and the chaff be scattered to the
wind. Hence the hard and startling form in
which it was cast ; not indeed that this figure
of eating and drinking in reference to spiritual
things was wholly unknown to Jewish teachers,
for Lightfoot, Schitttgen, and Wetstein have
shown the contrary. But hard it doubtless was ;
and if the condition of discipleship had been
that they should then and there understand
what they heard, their turning back at this time
would have been inevitable. But even on the
twelve Jesus imposes no such condition. He
only asks them, " Will ye also go away ? " If a
beloved teacher says something which overturns
the previous notions of the taught, and shocks
their prejudices, then whether they will continue
by his side to hear him explain further what
they find difficult, or desert him at once, will
depend on the amount of their confidence in
him. Many of the disciples went back and
walked no more with Jesus, because their con-
viction that He was the Messiah had no real
foundation. The rest remained with Him for
the reason so beautifully expressed by Peter:
"Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the
JESUS CHBIST
words of eternal life. And we believe and in
sure that Thou art that Christ, the Son of the
living God " (John vi. 68, 69> The sin of tie
faint-hearted followers who now deserted Hb
was not that they found this difficult ; but that
finding it difficult they had not confidence enough
to wait for light.
The third example of our Lord's discount!
which may be selected is that which clots Hit
ministry — "Now is the Son of Man glorinei,
and God is glorified in Him. If God be glorified
in Him, God shall also glorify Him in Himself,
and shall straightway glorify Him " (John nil
31, 32). This great discourse, recorded only bt
St. John, extends from the xiiith to the end of Ik
xviith chapter. It hardly admits of analysis. It
announces the Saviour's departure in the fulfil-
ment of His mission ; it imposes the " new com-
mandment " on the disciples of a special lore to-
wards each other which should be the outward
token to the world of their Christian profession;
it consoles them with the promise of the Com-
forter Who should be to them instead of the
Saviour ; it tells them all that He would do for
them, teaching them, reminding them, reproraj
the world and guiding the disciples into ail
truth. It offers them, instead of the Bodilr
Presence of their beloved Master, free access ts
the throne of His Father, and spiritual blessing
such a* they had not known before. Finally.
it culminates in that sublime prayer (ch. rrul
by which the High-Priest, as it were, consecrate
Himself the Victim ; and, so doing, prays for
those who shall hold fast and keep the benefits
of that Sacrifice, offered for the whole worU,
whether His disciples already, or to be brought
to Him thereafter by the ministry of Apostl*.
He wills that they shall be with Him and bebolJ
His glory. He recognises the righteousness c;
the Father in the plan of salvation, and in the
result produced to the disciples ; in whom that
highest and purest love wherewith the Father
loved the Son shall be present, and with ami u
that love the Son Himself shall be present with
them. " With this elevated thought," sars
Olshausen, " the Redeemer concludes His pray"
for the disciples, and in them for the Church
through all ages. He has compressed into the
last moments given Him for intercourse wits
His own the most sublime and glorious seo"-
ments ever uttered by human lips. Hardly has
the sound of the last word died away when
Jesus passes with His disciples over the hrooh
Kedron to Gethsemane ; and the bitter conflict
draws on. The seed of the new world roust k
sown in death that thence life may spring up.
These three discourses are examples of the
Saviour's teaching — of its progressive character
from the opening of His ministry to the do*
The first exhibits His practical precepts as law-
giver of His people ; the second, an exposition ol
the need of His Sacrifice, but addressed to the
world without, and intended to try them rather
than to attract ; and the third, where Const,
the Lawgiver and the High-Priest, stands before
God as the Son of God, and speaks to Him ol
His inmost counsels, as One Who had know"
them from the beginning. They will serre ai
illustrations of the course of Hii doctnw;
whilst others will be mentioned in the nam* 1 "
as it proceeds.
The scene of the LorxT) mtnutn/.—±>to w
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
scene of the ministry of Christ, no less than as
to its duration, the three Evangelists seem at
first sight to be at variance with the fourth.
St. Matthew, St. Mark, and St. Luke record only
our Lord's doings in Galilee ; if we put aside a
few days before the Passion, we find that they
never mention His visiting Jerusalem. St. John,
on the other hand, whilst he records some acts
in Galilee, devotes the chief part of his Gospel
to the transactions in Judaea. But when the
supplemental character of St. John's Gospel is
borne in mind, there is little difficulty in ex-
plaining this. The three Evangelists do not
profess to give a chronology of the ministry, but
rather a picture of it : notes of time are not
frequent in their narrative. And as they chiefly
confined themselves to Galilee, where the Re-
deemer's chief acts were done, they might natu-
rally omit to mention the Feasts, which being
passed by our Lord at Jerusalem, added nothing
to the materials for His Galilean ministry. St.
John, on the other hand, writing later, and
giving an account of the Redeemer's life which
is still less complete as a history (for more than
one-half of the fourth Gospel is occupied with
the last three months of the ministry, and
seven chapters out of twenty-one are filled with
the account of the few days of the Passion),
vindicates his historical claim by supplying
several precise notes of time : in the occurrences
after the Baptism of Jesus, days and even hours
are specified (i. 29, 35, 39, 43, ii. 1) ; the first
miracle is mentioned, and the time at which it
was wrought (ii. 1-11). He mentions not only
the Passovers (ii. 13, 23 ; vi. 4 ; xiii. 1, and
perhaps v. 1), but also the Feast of Tabernacles
(vii. 2) and of Dedication (x. 22); and thus it
is ordered that the Evangelist who goes over the
least part of the ground of our Lord's ministry
is yet the same who fixes for us its duration, and
enables us to arrange the facts of the rest more
exactly in their historical places. It is true
that the three Gospels record chiefly the occur-
rences in Galilee ; but there is evidence in them
that labours were wrought in Judaea. Fre-
quent teaching in Jerusalem is implied in the
Lord's lamentation over the lost city (Matt, xxiii.
37). The appearance in Galilee of Scribes and
Pharisees and others from Jerusalem (Matt. iv.
25, xv. 1) would be best explained on the sup-
position that their enmity had been excited
against Him during visits to Jerusalem. The in-
timacy with the family of Lazarus (Luke x. 38,
&c), and the attachment of Joseph of Arimathea
to the Lord (Matt, xxvii. 57), would imply,
most probably, frequent visits to Jerusalem.
But why was Galilee chosen as the principal
scene of the ministry ? The question is not easy
to answer. The Prophet would resort to the
Temple of God ; the King of the Jews wonld go
to His own royal city ; the Teacher of the chosen
people would preach in the midst of them. But
their hostility prevented it. The Saviour, Who,
accepting all the infirmities of " the form of a
servant " which He had taken, fled in His child-
hood to Egypt, betakes Himself to Galilee to avoid
Jewish hatred and machinations, and lays the
foundations of His Church amid a people of im-
pure and despised race. To Jerusalem He comes
occasionally, to teach and suffer persecution, and
finally to die : " for it cannot be that a prophet
perish out of Jerusalem " (Luke xiii. 33). It
JESUS CHRIST
1675
was upon the first outbreak of persecution against
Him that He left Judaea : " When Jesus had
heard that John was cast into prison, He departed
into Galilee" (Matt. iv. 12). And that this
persecution aimed at Him also we gather from
St. John : " When therefore the Lord knew how
that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made
and baptized more disciples than John ... He
left Judaea and departed into Galilee " (iv. 1, 3).
If the light of the Sun of Rightedusness shone
on the Jews henceforward from the far-off
shores of the Galilean lake, it was because they
had refused and abhorred that light.
Duration of the Ministry. — It is impossible to
determine exactly from the Gospels the number
of years daring which the Redeemer exercised
His ministry before the Passion ; but the doubt
lies between two and three ; for the opinion,
adopted from an interpretation of Isaiah lxi. 2
by more than one of the ancients, that it lasted
only one year, cannot be borne out (Euseb. iii.
24 ; Clem. Alex. Strom. 1 ; Origen, Princ. 4, 5).
The data are to be drawn from St. John. This
Evangelist mentions six Feasts, at five of which
Jesus was present: the Passover that followed
His Baptism (ii. 13); "a Feast of the Jews"
{iopr^i without the article, v. 1); a Passover
during which Jesus remained in Galilee (vi. 4) ;
the Feast of Tabernacles to which the Lord went
up privately (vii. 2) ; the Feast of Dedication
(x. 22); and lastly the Feast of Passover, at
which He suffered (xii. xiii.). There are cer-
tainly three Passovers, and it is possible that
" a Feast " (v. 1) may be a fourth. Upon this
possibility the question turns. Liicke in his
Commentary (vol. ii. p. 1), in collecting with
great research the various opinions on this place,
is unable to arrive at any definite conclusion
upon it, and leaves it unsolved. But if this
Feast is not a Passover, then no Passover is
mentioned by St. John between the first (ii. 13)
and that which is spoken of in the sixth chapter ;
and the time between those two must be assumed
to be a single year only. Now, although the
record of John of this period contains but few
facts, yet when all the Evangelists aro com-
pared, the amount of labour compressed into
this single year would be too much for its
compass. The time daring which Jesus was
baptizing (by His disciples) near the Jordan
was probably considerable, and lasted till John's
imprisonment (John iii. 22-36, and see below).
The circuit round Galilee, mentioned in Matt,
iv. 23-25, was a missionary journey through a
country of considerable population, and con-
taining two hundred towns; and this would
occupy some time. But another such journey,
of the most comprehensive kind, is undertaken
in the same year (Luke viii. 1), in which He
" went throughout every city and village."
And a third circuit of the same kind, and
equally general (Matt. ix. 35-38), would close
the same year. Is it at all probable that Jesus,
after spending a considerable time in Judaea,
would be able to make three circuits of Galilee
in the remainder of the year, preaching and
doing wonders in the various places to which He
came ? This would be more likely if the journeys
were hurried and partial ; but all three are
spoken of as though they were the very opposite.
It is, to say the least, easier to suppose that the
" Feast " (John v. 1) was a Passover, dividing
Digitized by
Google
1676
JESD8 CHBI8T
the time into two, and throwing two of these
circuital into the second year of the ministry;
provided there be nothing to make this inter-
pretation improbable in itself. The words are,
" After this there was a Feast of the Jews ; and
Jesos went up to Jerusalem." These two facts
are meant as cause and effect ; the Feast caused
the -visit. If so, it was probably one of the
three Feasts at which the Jews were expected to
appear before God at Jerusalem. Was it the
Passover, the Pentecost, or the Feast of Taber-
nacles ? In the preceding chapter the Passover
has been spoken of as " the Feast " (v. 45) ; and
if another Feast were meant here, the name of
it would have been added, as in vii. 2, x. 22.
The omission of the article is not decisive, for it
occurs in other cases where the Passover is cer-
tainly intended (Matt, xxvii. 15 ; Mark xv. 6) ;
nor is it clear that the Passover was called the
Feast, as the most eminent, although the Feast
of Tabernacles was sometimes so described. All
that the omission could prove would be that the
Evangelist did not think it needful to describe
the Feast more precisely. The words in John iv.
35, " There are yet four months and then cometh
harvest," would agree with this, for the barley
harvest began on the 16th Nisan, and reckoning
back four months would bring this conversation
to the beginning of December, i.e. the middle of
Kislen. If it be granted that our Lord is here
merely quoting a common form of speech
(Alford), still it is more likely that He would
use on* appropriate to the time at which He
was speaking. And if these words were uttered
in December, the next of the three great Feasts
occurring would be the Passover. The shortness
of the interval between v. 1 and vi. 4 would
afford an objection, if it were not for the scanti-
ness of historical details in the early part of
the ministry in St. John : from the other
Evangelists it appears that two great journeys
might have to be included between these verses.
Upon the whole, though there is nothing that
amounts to proof, it is probable that there were
four Passovers, and consequently that our Lord's
ministry lasted somewhat more than three
years, the "beginning of miracles" (John ii.)
having been wrought before the first Passover.
On data of calculation that have already been
mentioned, the year of the first of these Pass-
overs was U.C. 780, and the Baptism of our Lord
took place either in the beginning of that year
or the end of the year preceding. The ministry
of John the Baptist began in U.C. 779 (see Com-
mentaries on John v. 1, especially Kuinoel and
Lucke. Also Winer, BealicSrterbuch, art. Jesus
Christ; Greswell, Dissertations, i., Diss. 4, ii.
Diss. 22).
After this sketch of the means, the scene, and
the duration of the Saviour's ministry, the his-
torical order of the events may be followed
without interruption.
Our Lord has now passed through the ordeal
of temptation, and His ministry has begun. At
Bethabara, to which He returns, disciples begin
to be drawn towards Him ; Andrew and another,
probably John, the sole narrator of the fact,
see Jesns, and hear the Baptist's testimony con-
cerning Him. Andrew brings Simon Peter to
see Him also; and he receives from the Lord
the name of Cephas. Then Philip and Nathanael
are brought into contact with our Lord. All
JESUS CHBI8T
these reappear as Apostles, if Nathanael hi, u
has often been supposed, the same u Bartholo-
mew; but the time of their calling to tint
office was not yet. But that their minds, era
at this early time, were wrought upon by tit
expectation of the Messiah appears by the con-
fession of Nathanael : "Thou art the Son of God ;
Thou art the King of Israel " (John i. 35-51).
The two disciples last named aaw Him u fit
was about to set out for Galilee, on the third
day of His sojourn at Bethabara. The third
day after his interview Jesus is at Cans in
Galilee, and works His first miracle, by mitring
the water wine (John i. 29, 35, 43 ; ii. 1). All
these particulars are supplied from the fourth
Gospel, and come in between the 11th and 12th
verses of the fourth chapter of St. Matthew.
They show that our Lord left Galilee expressly
to be baptized and to suffer temptation, aid
returned to His own country when these ver<
accomplished. He now betakes Himself t»
Capernaum, and, after a sojourn there of "not
many days," sets out for Jerusalem to the Pass-
over, which was to be the beginning of His
ministry in Judaea (John ii. 12, 13).
The cleansing of the Temple is associated by
St. John with this first Passover (ii. 18-22),
and a similar cleansing is assigned to the list
Passover by the other Evangelists. These two
cannot be confounded without throwing discredit
on the historical character of one narrative «
the other; the notes of time are too precise.
But a host of interpreters have pointed oot tie
probability that an action symbolical of the
power and authority of Messiah should be twice
performed, at the opening of the ministry sad it
its close. The expulsion of the traders was not
likely to produce a permanent effect, and it the
end of three years Jesus found the tumult sad
the traffic defiling the court of the Temple »
they had done when He visited it before. Be-
sides the difference of time, the narrative of St
John is by no means identical with those of the
others ; he mentions that Jesus made a scourge
of small cords (<ppay4\Atov 4k <rxpirltn>, ii. 15)
as a symbol — we need not prove that it could be
no more— of His power to punish ; that here He
censured them for making the Temple "a boose
of merchandise," whilst at the last cleansing it
was pronounced " a den of thieves," with s dis-
tinct reference to the two passages of Isaiah tad
Jeremiah (Is. lvi. 7 ; Jer. vii. 11). Writers like
Strauss would persuade us that "tact and good
sense" would prevent the Redeemer from
attempting such a violent measure at the begin-
ning of His ministry, before His authority vis
admitted. The aptness and the greatness of the
occasion have no weight with such critics. The
usual sacrifices of the Law of Jehovah, and the
usual half-shekel paid for tribute to the Temple,
the very means that were appointed by God to
remind them that they were a consecrated people,
were made an excuse for secularising even the
Temple ; and in its holy precincts all the busi-
ness of the world went on. It was a time when
" the zeal of God's house " might well supersede
the " tact " on which the German philosopher
lays stress ; and Jesus failed not in the zeal, ""
did the accusing consciences of the traders fiil
to justify it, for at the rebuke of one man they
retreated from the scene of their gains. Then-
hearts told them, even though they had »**»
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
long immersed in hardening traffic, that the
House of God could belong to none other but
God ; and when a Prophet claimed it for Him,
conscience deprived them of the power to resist.
Immediately after this, the Jews asked of Him
a sign or proof of His right to exercise this
authority. He answered them by a promise of
a sign by which He would hereafter confirm
His mission, " Destroy this Temple and in three
days I will raise it up " (John ii. 19), alluding,
as the Evangelist explains, to His Resurrection.
But why is the name of the building before
them applied by our Lord so darkly to Himself?
There is doubtless a hidden reference to the
Temple as a type of the Church, which Christ
by His Death and Resurrection would found and
raise up. He Who has cleared of buyers and
sellers the courts of a perishable Temple made
with hands, will prove hereafter that He is the
Founder of an eternal Temple made without
hands, and their destroying act shall be the
cause. The reply was indeed obscure; but it
was meant as a refusal of their demand ; and to
the disciples afterwards it became abundantly
clear. At the time of the Passion this saying
was brought against Him, in a perverted form —
" At the last came two false witnesses, and said,
This fellow said, I am able to destroy the Temple
of God, and to build it in three days " (Matt,
xxri. 61). tThey hardly knew perhaps how
utterly false a small alteration in the tale had
made it. They wanted to hold Him up as one
who dared to think of the destruction of the
Temple ; and to change "destroy " into "I can
destroy," might seem to do no great violence to
the truth. But those words contained not a
mere circumstance but the very essence of the
saying, " You are the destroyers of the Temple ;
you that were polluting it now by turning it
into a market-place shall destroy it, and also
Jour city, by staining its stones with My Blood."
esus came not to destroy the Temple but to
widen its foundations ; not to destroy the Law
but to complete it (Matt. v. 17). Two syllables
changed their testimony into a lie.
The visit of Kicodemus to Jesus took place
about this first Passover. It implies that our
Lord had done more at Jerusalem than is re-
corded of Him even by St. John ; since we have
here a Master of Israel (John iii. 10), a member
of the Sanhedrin (John vii. 50), expressing his
belief in Him, although too timid at this time
to make an open profession. The object of the
visit, though not directly stated, is still clear :
he was one of the better Pharisees, who were
expecting the kingdom of Messiah, and, having
seen the miracles that Jesus did, he came to
enquire more fully about these signs of its
approach. This indicates the connexion between
the remark of Nicodemus and the Lord's reply :
" Tou recognise these miracles as signs of the
kingdom of God ; verily I say unto you, no one
can truly see and know the kingdom of God,
unless he be born again " (iyuStr, from above ;
see Lightfoot, Hor. J/ebr. in he., vol. iv.). The
visitor boasted the blood of Abraham, and ex-
pected to stand high in the new kingdom in
virtue of that birthright. He did not wish to
surrender it and set his hopes upon some other
birth (cp. Matt. iii. 9) ; and there is something
of wilfulness in the question — " How can a man
be born when he is old ? " (v. 4). Our Lord
JESUS OHBIST
1677
again insists on the necessity of the renewed
heart, in him who would be admitted to the
kingdom of heaven. The new birth is real
though it is unseen, like the wind which blows
hither and thither though the eye cannot watch
it save in its effects. Even so the Spirit sways
the heart towards good, carries it away towards
heaven, brings over the soul at one time the
cloud, at another the sunny weather. The
sound of Him is heard in the soul, now as the
eager east wind bringing pain and remorse ; now
breathing over it the soft breath of consola-
tion. In all this He is as powerful as the wind ;
and as unseen is the mode of His operations.
For the new birth, of water and of the Holy
Ghost, without which none can come to God,
faith in the Son of God is needed (v. 18) ; and
as implied in that, the renouncing of those evil
deeds that blind the eyes to the truth (m. 19,
20). It has been well said that this discourse
contains the whole Gospel in epitome ; there is
the kingdom of grace into which God will receive
those who have offended Him, the new truth
which God the Holy Spirit will write in all
those who seek the kingdom ; and God the Son
crucified and slain that all who would be saved
may look on Him when He is lifted up, and find
health thereby. The three Persons of the Trinity
are all before us carrying out the scheme of man's
salvation. If it be asked how Nicodemus, so
timid and half-hearted as yet, was allowed to
hear thus early in the ministry what our Lord
kept back even from His disciples till near the
end of it, the answer must be, that, wise as it
was to keep back from the general body of the
hearers the doctrine of the Crucifixion, the
Physician of souls would treat each case with
the medicine that it most required. Nicodemus
was an enquiring spirit, ready to believe all the
Gospel, but for his Jewish prejudices and his
social position. He was one Whom even the
shadow of the Cross would not estrange; and
the Lord knew it, and laid open to him all the
scheme of salvation. Not in vain. The tra-
dition, indeed, may not be thoroughly certain,
which reports his open conversion and his
baptism by Peter and John (Phot. Bibiioth. Cod.
171). But three years after this conversation,
when all the disciples have been scattered by
the death of Jesus, he comes forward with Joseph
of Arimathaea, at no little risk, although with a
kind of secrecy still, to perform the last offices
for the Master to Whom his soul cleaves (John
xix. 39).
After a sojourn at Jerusalem of uncertain
duration, Jesus went to the Jordan with His
disciples ; and they there baptized in His name.
The Baptist was now at Aenon near Salim ; and
the jealousy of his disciples against Jesus drew
from John an avowal of his position, which is
remarkable for its humility (John iii. 27-30),
" A man can receive nothing except it be given
him from heaven. Te yourselves bear me
witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but
that I have been sent before Him. He that
hath the bride is the bridegroom; but the
friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and
heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the
bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is
fulfilled. He must increase, but I must de-
crease." The speaker is one who has hitherto
enjoyed the highest honour and popularity, a
Digitized by VjOOQlC
1678
JESUS CHBIST
prophet extolled by all the people. Before the
Sun of Righteousness his reflected light is turn-
ing pale ; it shall soon be extinguished. Yet no
word of reluctance, or of attempt to cling to a
temporary and departing greatness, escapes him.
" He most increase, bat I mnst decrease." It
had been the same before ; when the Sanhedrin
sent to enquire about him, he claimed to be no
more than "the roice of one crying in the
wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord,
as said the Prophet Esaias " (John i. 23) ; there
was One " Who coming after me is preferred
before me, Whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy
to unloose " (i. 27). Strauss thinks this height
of self-renunciation beautiful, but impossible
(Leben Jesu, ii. 1, § 46); but what Divine
influence had worked in the Baptist's spirit,
adorning that once rugged nature with the
grace of humility, we do not admit that
Dr. Strauss is in a position to measure.
How long this sojourn in Judaea lasted is
uncertain. But in order to reconcile John iv. 1
with Matt. iv. 12, we must suppose that it was
much longer than the " twenty-six or twenty-
seven " days to which the learned Mr. Greswell
upon mere conjecture would limit it. From
the two passages together it would seem that
John was after a short time cast into prison
(Matt.), and that Jesus, seeing that the enmity
directed against the Baptist would now assail
Him, because of the increasing success of His
ministry (John), resolved to withdraw from its
reach.
In the way to Galilee Jesus passed by the
shortest route, through Samaria, This country,
peopled by men from five districts, whom the
king of Assyria had planted there in the time of
Hoahea (2 K. xvii. 24, &c), and by the residue
of the ten tribes that was left behind from the
Captivity, had once abounded in idolatry, though
latterly faith in the true God had gained ground.
The Samaritans even claimed to share with the
people of Judaea the restoration of the Temple
at Jerusalem, and were repulsed (Ezra iv. 1-3).
In the time of our Lord they were hated by the
Jews even more than if they had been Gentiles.
Their corrupt worship was a shadow of the
true; their temple on Gerizim was a rival to
that which adorned the hill of Zion. " He that
eats bread from the hand of a Samaritan," says
a Jewish writer, "is as one that eats swine's
flesh." Tet even in Samaria were souls to be
saved ; and Jesus would not shake off even that
dust from His feet. He came in His journey
to Sichem, which the Jews in mockery had
changed to Sychar, to indicate that its people
were drunkards (Lightfoot), or that they followed
idols Offi, Reland ; see Hab. ii. 18). Wearied
and athirst, He sat on the side of Jacob's well.
A woman from the neighbouring town came to
draw from the well, and was astonished that a
Jew should address her as a neighbour, with a
request for water. The conversation that
ensued might be taken for an example of the
mode in which Christ leads to Himself the souls
of men. The awakening of her attention to the
privilege she is enjoying in communing with
Him (John iv. 10-15); the self-knowledge and
self-conviction which He arouses (vv. 15-19),
and which whilst it pains does not repel ; the
complete revelation of Himself, which she
cannot but believe (or. 19-29), are effects that i
JESUS CHBIST
He has wrought in many another caw. He
woman's lightness and security, until she finds
herself in the presence of a Prophet, Who
knows all her past sins; her readiness after-
wards to enter on a religious question, which
perhaps had often been revolved in her mind in
a worldly and careless way, are so natural that
they are almost enough of themselves to establish
the historical character of the account.
In this remarkable dialogue are many thing*
to ponder over. The living water which Christ
would give ; the announcement of a change ia
the worship of Jew and Samaritan ; lastly, the
confession that He Who speaks is truly the
Messiah, are all noteworthy. The open avowal
that He is the Messiah, made to the daughter
of an abhorred people, is accounted for if we
remember that this was the first and last time
when He taught personally in Samaria, and that
the woman showed a special fitness to receive it,
for she expected in the Christ a spiritual teacher
not a temporal prince : " When He is come, He
will tell us all things " (r. 25). The very absence
of national pride, which so beset the Jews,
preserved in her a right conception of the
Christ. Had she thought — had she said, " When
He is come, He will restore the kingdom to
Israel, and set His followers in high places, on
His right and on His left," then He could not
have answered, as now, " I that speak unto thee
am He." The words would have conveyed a
falsehood to her. The Samaritans came ost to
Him on the report of the woman ; they heard
Him and believed : " We have heard Him our-
selves, and know that this is indeed the Christ,
the Saviour of the world " (o. 42). Was this
great grace thrown away upon them? Did it
abide by them, or was it lost? In the penecn-
tion that arose about Stephen, Philip "went
down to a city of Samaria (not " the city," si in
A. V. [and R. V.]), and preached Christ unto
them " (Acts viii. 5). We dare not pronounce
as certain that this city was Sychar; bat the
readiness of the Samaritans to believe (viii. 6)
recalls the candour and readiness of the men of
Sychar, and it is difficult not to connect the two
events together.
Jesus now returned to Galilee, and came to
Nazareth, His own city. In the Synagogue He
expounded to the people a passage from Isaiah
(lxi. 1), telling them that its fulfilment was now
at hand in His Person. The same truth that bad
filled the Samaritans with gratitude, wrought
up to fury the men of Nazareth, who would
have destroyed Him if He had not escaped ont
of their hands (Luke iv. 16-30). He came now
to Capernaum. On His way thither, when He
had reached Cana, He healed the ton of one of
the courtiers of Herod Antipas (John iv. 46-54),
who " himself believed, and his whole house."
This was the second Galilean miracle. At Caper-
naum He wrought many miracles for them that
needed. Here two disciples who had known
Him before, namely, Simon Peter and Andrew,
were called from their fishing to become " fishers
of men " (Matt. iv. 19X and the two sons of
Zebedee received the same summons. After
healing on the Sabbath a demoniac in the
Synagogue, a miracle which was witnessed by
many, and was made known everywhere, He
returned the same day to Simon's house, and
healed the mother-in-law of Simon, who was
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
JESUS CHRIST
1679
sick of a fever. At sunset, the multitude, now
fully aroused by what they had heard, brought
their sick to Simon's door to get them healed.
He did not refuse His succour, and healed them
all (Hark i. 29-34). He now, after showering
down on Capernaum so many cures, tnrned His
thoughts to the rest of Galilee, where other
" lost sheep " were scattered : — •' Let us go into
the next towns (Ko>itov6\ta) that I may preach
there also, for therefore came I forth (Mark
i. 38). The journey through Galilee, on which
He now entered, must have been a general
circuit of that country. His object was to call
on the Galileans to repent and believe the
Gospel. This could only be done completely by
taking such a journey that His teaching might
be accessible to all in turn at some point or
other. Josephus mentions that there were two
hundred and four towns and villages in Galilee
( Vita, 45) : therefore such a circuit as should
in any real sense embrace the whole of Galilee
would require some months for its performance.
"The course of the present circuit," says
Mr. Gresswell (Dissertations, ii. 293), " we may
conjecture, was, upon the whole, as follows : —
First, along the western side of the Jordan,
northward, which would disseminate the fame
of Jesus in Decapolis ; secondly, along the
confines of the tetrarchy of Philip, westward,
which would make Him known throughout
Syria ; thirdly, by the coasts of Tyre and Sidon,
southward; and lastly, along the verge of
Samaria, and the western region of the lake
of Galilee— the nearest points to Judaea proper
and to Peraea — until it returned to Caper-
naum." In the course of this circuit, besides
the works of mercy spoken of by the Evangelists
(Matt. iv. 23-25; Mark i. 32-34; Luke iv.
40-44) He had probably called to Him more
of His Apostles. Four at least were His com-
panions from the beginning of it. The rest
(except perhaps Judas Iscariot) were Galileans,
and it is not improbable that they were found
by their Master during this circuit. Philip of
Bethsaida and Nathanael or Bartholomew were
already prepared to become His disciples by an
earlier interview. On this circuit occurred the
first case of the healing of a leper ; it is selected
for record by the Evangelists, because of the
incurableness of the ailment. So great was
the dread of this disorder — so strict the precau-
tions against its infection— that even the
raising of Jairus' daughter from the dead,
which probably occurred at Capernaum about
the end of this circuit, would hardly impress the
beholders more profoundly.
Second year of the Ministry. — Jesus went up
to Jerusalem to " a feast of the Jews," which
we have shown (p. 1675) to have been probably
the Passover. At the pool Bethesda (=Ao?<*> of
mercy), which was near the sheep-gate (Neh.
iii. 1) on the north-east side of the Temple,
Jesus saw many infirm persons waiting their
turn for the healing virtues of the water
(John v. 1-18. On the genuineness of the
fourth verse, see Scholz, W. T. ; Tischendorf,
if. T.; and Liicke, in loc. It is wanting in
three out of the four chief MSS. ; it is singu-
larly disturbed with variations in the MSS.
that insert it, and it abounds in words which
do not occur again in this Gospel). Among
them was a man who had had an infirmity
thirty-eight years : Jesus made him whole by a
word, bidding him take up his bed and walk.
The miracle was done on the Sabbath ; and the
Jews, by which name in St. John's Gospel we
are to understand the Jewish authorities who
acted against Jesus, rebuked the man for carry-
ing his bed. It was a labour; and, as such,
forbidden (Jer. xvii. 21). The answer of the
man was too logical to be refuted : " He that
made me whole, the same said unto me, Take up
thy bed and walk" (v. 11). If He had not
authority for the latter, whence came His
power to do the former? Their anger was now
directed against Jesus for healing on the
Sabbath, even for well-doing. Tbey sought to
put Him to death. In our Lord's justification
of Himself, " My Father worketh hitherto, and
I work " (v. 17), there is an unequivocal claim
to the Divine Nature. God the Father never
rests: if sleep could visit His Eyelids for an
instant ; if His Hand could droop for a moment's
rest, the Universe would collapse in ruin. He
rested on the seventh day from the creation of
new beings ; but from the maintenance of those
that exist He never rests. His love streams
forth on every day alike ; at do the Impartial
beams from the sun that He has placed in the
heavens. The Jews rightly understood the
saying: none but God could utter it; none
could quote God's example, as setting Him over
and above God's law, save One Who was God
Himself. They sought the more to kill Him.
He expounded to them more fully His relation
to the Father. He works with the strength of
the Father and according to His will. He can
do all that the Father does. He can raise men
out of bodily and out of spiritual death; and
He can judge all men. John bore witness to
Him ; the works that He does bear even stronger
witness. The reason that the Jews do not
believe is their want of discernment of the
meaning of the Scriptures; and that comes
from their worldliness, their desire of honour
from one another. Unbelief shall bring con-
demnation ; even out of their Law they can be
condemned, since they believe not even Moses,
who foretold that Christ should come (John
v. 19-47).
Another discussion about the Sabbath arose
from the disciples plucking the ears of corn as
they went through the fields (Matt. xii. 1-8).
The time of this is somewhat uncertain : some
would place it a year later, just after the third
Passover (Clausen) ; but its place is much more
probably here (Newcome, Robinson, 4c). The
needy were permitted by the Law (Deut.
xxxiii. 25) to pluck the ears of corn with their
hand, even without waiting for the owner's per-
mission. The disciples must have been living a
hard and poor life to resort to such means of
sustenance. But the Pharisees would not allow
that it was lawful on the Sabbath-day. Jesus
reminds them that David, whose example they
are not likely to challenge, ate the sacred shew-
bread in the Tabernacle, which it was not lawful
to eat. The priests might partake of it, but not
a stranger (Ex. xxix. 33 ; Lev. xxiv. 5, 9). David,
on the principle that mercy was better than
sacrifice (Hos. vi. 6), took it and gave it to the
young men that were with him that they might
not perish for hunger. In order further to
show that a literal mechanical observance of the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
1680
JESUS CHBIST
law of the Sabbath would lead to absurdities,
Jesus reminds them that this law i* perpetually
set aride on account of another : " The priests
profane the Sabbath and are blamelesa " (Matt.
lii. 5). The work of sacrifice, the placing of the
ehewbread, go on on the Sabbath, and labour
even on that day may be done by priests, and
may please God. It was the root of the Phari-
sees' fault that they thought sacrifice better
than mercy, ritual exactness more than love :
" If ye had known what this meaneth, I will
have mercy and not sacrifice, ye would not have
condemned the guiltless. For the Son of Man is
Lord even of the Sabbath-day " (Matt. xii. 7, 8).
These last words are inseparable from the mean-
ing of onr Lord's answer. In pleading the ex-
ample of David, the king and prophet, and of
the priest* in the Temple, the Lord tacitly im-
plies the greatness of His own position. He is
indeed Prophet, Priest, and King ; and had He
been none of these, the argument would have
been not merely incomplete, but misleading. It
is undeniable that the law of the Sabbath was
very strict. Against labours as small as that of
winnowing the corn a severe penalty was set.
Our Lord quotes cases where the Law is super-
seded or set aside, because He is One Who has
power to do the same. And the rise of a new
law is implied in those words which St. Mark
alone has recorded : " The Sabbath was made
for man, and not man for the Sabbath." The
law upon the Sabbath was made in love to men,
to preserve for them a due measure of rest, to
keep room for the worship of God. The Son of
Man has power to readjust this law, if its work
is done, or if men are fit to receive a higher.
This may have taken place on the way from
Jerusalem after the Passover. On another Sab-
bath, probably at Capernaum, to which Jesus
had returned, the Pharisees gave a far more
striking proof of the way in which their hard
and narrow and unloving interpretation would
turn the beneficence of the Law into a blighting
oppression. Our Lord entered into the syna-
gogue, and found there a man with a withered
band — some poor artisan perhaps whose handi-
work was his means of life. Jesus was about to
heal him — which would give back life to the
sufferer — which would give joy to every beholder
who had one touch of pity in his heart. The
Pharisees interfere : " Is it lawful to heal on the
Sabbath-day ? " Their doctors would have al-
lowed them to pull a sheep out of a pit ; but
they will not have a man rescued from the depth
of misery. Rarely is that loving Teacher wroth,
but here His anger, mixed with grief, showed
itself: He looked round about upon them " with
anger, being grieved at the hardness of their
hearts," and answered their cavils by healing the
man (Matt. xii. 9-14 ; Mark iii. 1-6 ; Luke vi.
6-11).
In placing the ordination or calling of the
Twelve Apostles just before the Sermon on the
Mount, we are under the guidance of St. Luke
(vi. 13, 17). But this more solemn separation
for their work by no means marks the time of
their first approach to Jesus. Scattered notices
prove that some of tbem at least were drawn
gradually to the Lord, so that it would be diffi-
cult to identify the moment when they earned
the name of disciples. In the case of St. Peter,
five degrees or stages might be traced (John i.
JE8U8 CHBIST
41-43; Matt. iv. 19, xvi. 17-19; Luke uii.
31, 32 ; John xxi. 15-19), at each of which he
came somewhat nearer to his Master. Tbtt
which takes place here is the appointment of
twelve disciples to be a distinct body, under tie
name of Apostles. They are not sent forth to
preach until later in the same year. The num-
ber twelve must have reference to the number
of the Jewish tribes : it is a number selected on
account of its symbolical meaning, for the work
confided to them might have been wrought by
more or fewer. Twelve is used with the lamt
symbolical reference in many passages of the
0. T. Twelve pillars to the Altar which Moses
erected (Ex. xxiv. 4) ; twelve stones to comme-
morate the passing of the Ark over Jordan (Josh.
iv. 3) ; twelve precious stones in the breastplate
of the priest (Ex. xxriii. 21); twelve oxea
bearing up the molten sea in the Temple of
Solomon (1 K. vii. 25); twelve officers orer
Solomon's household (1 K. iv. 7): all these in
examples of the perpetual repetition of the
Jewish number. Bahr (Symbolik, vol. L) hu
accumulated passages from various authors t«
show that twelve, the multiple of four and
three, is the type or symbol of the Universe,
but it is enough here to say that the use of tie
number in the foundation of the Chrisuu
Church has a reference to the tribes of the
Jewish nation. Hence the number continue] to
be used after the addition of St. Paul and St
Barnabas had made it inapplicable. The Lord
Himself tells them that they "shall sit «
thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel"
(Matt. xix. 27, 28). When He began Bis miiuV
try in Galilee, He left HU own home at Naxareth,
and separated Himself from His kinsmen after
the flesh, in order to devote Himself more com-
pletely to His prophetical office; and these
Twelve were « to be with Him " (Mark), and to
be instead of family and friends. But the en-
mity of the Jews separated Him also from His
countrymen. Every day the prospect of the
Jews receiving Him as their Messiah, te their
own salvation, became more faint; and the
privileges of the favoured people passed grids-
ally over to the new Israel, the new Church, the
new Jerusalem, of which the Apostles were the
foundation. The precise day in which this de-
fection was completed could not be specified.
The Sun of Righteousness rose on the worM,and
set for the Jews, through all the shades of twi-
light. In the education of the Twelve for their
appointed work, we see the supersedore of the
Jews ; in the preservation of the symbolial
number we see preserved a recognition of their
original right.
In the four lists of the names of the Apostles
preserved to us (Matt, x., Mark iii., Luke ri,
Acts i.), there is a certain order preferred,
amidst variations. The two pairs of brothers,
Simon and Andrew, and the sons of Zebedee, are
always named the first; and of these Siaoo
Peter ever holds the first place. Philip awl
Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew, are always
in the next rank ; and of them Philip ii alw»j»
the first. In the third rank James the ton of
Alphaeiisis the first, as Judas Iscariot is always
the last, with Simon the Zealot and Thaddaeas
between. The principle that governs this ar-
rangement cannot be determined very potHiTely ;
but as no doubt Simon Peter stands first becsust
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
JESUS CHRIST
1681
of his zeal in his Master's service, and Judas
ranks last because of his treason, it is natural
to suppose that they are all arranged with some
reference at least to their zeal and fitness for
the apostolic office. Some of the Apostles were
certainly poor and unlearned men ; it is probable
that the rest were of the same kind. Four of
them were fishermen, not indeed the poorest of
their class ; and a fifth was a " publican," one
of the portitores, or tax-gatherers, who collected
the taxes fanned by Romans of higher rank.
Andrew, who is mentioned with Peter, is less
conspicuous in the history than he, but he en-
joyed free access to his Master, and seems to
hare been more intimate with him than the rest
(John vi. 8, xii. 22, with Mark xiii. 3). But
James and John, who are sometimes placed above
him in the list, were especially distinguished by
Jesus. They were unmarried ; and their mother,
of whose ambition we have a well-known in-
stance, seems to have had much influence over
them. The zeal and fire of their disposition is
indicated in the name of Boanerges bestowed
upon them. One seems hardly to recognise in
the fierce enthusiasts who would have called
down fire from heaven to consume the inhospit-
able Samaritans (Luke ix. 52-66) the Apostle of
Love and his brother. It is probable that the
Bartholomew of the Twelve is the same as
Nathanael (John i.) ; and the Lebbaeus or Thad-
daeus the same as Judas the brother of James.
Simon the Zealot was so called probably from
his belonging to the sect of Zealots, who, from
Num. xxv. 7, 8, took it on themselves to punish
crimes against the Law. If the name Iscariot
(=man of Cariot=Kerioth) refers the birth of
the traitor to Kerioth in Judah (Josh. xv. 25),
then it would appear that the traitor alone was
of Judaean origin, and the eleven faithful ones
were despised Galileans.
From henceforth the education of the twelre
Apostles will be one of the principal features of
the Lord's ministry. First He instructs them ;
then He takes them with Him as companions of
His wayfaring; then He sends them forth to
teach and heal for Him. The Sermon on the
Mount, although it is meant for all the disciples,
seems to have a special reference to the chosen
Twelve (Matt. v. 1 1, &c). Its principal features
have been sketched already ; but they will miss
their full meaning if it is forgotten that they
are the first teaching which the Apostles were
called on to listen to after their appointment.
About this time it was that John the Baptist,
long a prisoner with little hope of release, sent
his disciples to Jesus with the question, " Art
thou He that should come, or do we look for
another ? " In all the Gospels there is no more
touching incident. Those who maintain that it
was done solely for the sake of the disciples,
and that John himself needed no answer to sup-
port his faith, show as little knowledge of the
human mind as exactness in explaining the
words of the account. The great privilege of
John's life was that he was appointed to recog-
nise and bear witness to the Messiah (John i. 31).
After languishing a year in a dungeon, after
learning that even yet Jesus had made no steps
towards the establishment of His kingdom of
the Jews, and that His following consisted of
only twelve poor Galileans, doubts began to
cloud over his spirit. Was the kingdom of
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
Messiah as near as he had thought ? Was Jesus
not the Messiah but some forerunner of that
Deliverer, as he himself had been ? There is no
unbelief; he does not suppose that Jesus has
deceived ; when the doubts arise, it is to Jesus
that he submits them. But it was not without
great depression and perplexity that he put the
question, "Art thou He that should come?"
The scope of the answer given lies in its recalling
John to the grounds of his former confidence.
The very miracles are being wrought that were
to be the signs of the kingdom of heaven ; and
therefore that kingdom is come (Is. xxxv. 5 ;
xlii. 6, 7). There is more of grave encourage-
ment than of rebuke in the words, " Blessed is
he who shall not be offended in me " (Matt. xi. 6).
They bid the Forerunner to have a good heart,
and to hope and believe to the end. He has
allowed sorrow, and the apparent triumph of
wickedness, which is a harder trial, to trouble
his view of the Divine plan ; let him remember
that it is blessed to attain that state of confi-
dence which these things cannot disturb; and
let the signs which Jesus now exhibits suffice
him to the end (Matt. xi. 1-6 ; Luke vii. 18-23).
The testimony to John which our Lord gra-
ciously adds is intended to reinstate him in that
place in the minds of His own disciples which
he had occupied before this mission of doubt.
John is not a weak waverer; not a luxurious
courtier, attaching himself to the new dispensa-
tion from worldly motives ; but a prophet, and
more than a prophet, for the prophets spoke of
Jesus afar off, bnt John stood before the Messiah,
and with his hand pointed Him out. He came
in the spirit and power of Elijah (Mai. iii. 1,
iv. 5), to prepare for the kingdom of heaven.
And yet great as he was, the least of those in
the kingdom of heaven when it is completely
planted should enjoy a higher degree of religion*
illumination than he (Matt. xi. 7-11 ; Luke vii.
24-28).
Now commences the second circuit of Galilee
(Luke viii. 1-3), to which belong the parables in
Matt. xiii. ; the visit of onr Lord's mother and
brethren (Luke viii, 19-21), and the account of
his reception at Nazareth (Mark vi. 1-6).
During this time the twelve have journeyed
with Him. But now a third circuit in Galilee
is recorded, which probably occurred during the
last three months of this year (Matt. ix. 35-38) ;
and during this circuit, after reminding them
how great is the harvest and how pressing the
need of labourers, He carries the training of the
disciples one step further by sending them forth
by themselves to teach (Matt x., xi.). Such a
mission is not to be considered as identical in
character with the mission of the Apostles after
the Resurrection. It was limited to the Jews ;
the Samaritans and heathen were excluded ; but
this arose, not from any narrowness in the limits
of the kingdom of heaven (Matt, xxviii. 19 ;
Mark xvi. 15), but from the limited knowledge
and abilities of the Apostles. They were sent
to proclaim to the Jews that " the kingdom of
heaven," which their Prophets taught them to
look for, was at hand (Matt. x. 7) ; but they
were unfit as yet for the task of explaining to
Jews the true nature of that kingdom, and still
more to Gentiles who had received no prepara-
tion for any such doctrine. The preaching of
the Apostles whilst Jesus was yet on earth was
5 P
Digitized by
Google
1682
JESDS CHBIST
only ancillary to His and a preparation of the
way for Him. It was probably of the simplest
character. " As ye go, preach, saying, The king-
dom of heaven is at band.*' Power was given
them to confirm it by signs and wonders ; and
the purpose of it was to throw the minds of
those who heard it into an inquiring state, so
that they might seek and find the Lord Him-
self. But whilst their instructions as to the
matter of their preaching were thus brief and
simple, the cautions, warnings, and encourage-
ments as to their own condition were far more
full. They were to do their work without
anxiety for their welfare. Mo provision was to
be made for their journey; in the house that
first received them in any city they were to
abide, not seeking to find the best. Dangers
would befall them, for they were sent forth " as
sheep in the midst of wolves" (Matt. x. 16);
bnt they were not to allow this to disturb their
thoughts. The same God Who wrought their
miracles for them would protect them ; and
those who confessed the name of Christ before
men would be confessed by Christ before the
Father as His disciples. These precepts for the
Apostles even went somewhat beyond what their
present mission required ; it does not appear
that they were at this time delivered up to
councils, or scourged in synagogues. But in
training their feeble wings for their first flight
the same rules and cautions were given which
would be needed even when they soared the
highest in their zeal and devotion to their cru-
cified Master. There is no difficulty here, if we
remember that this sending forth was rather a
training of the Apostles than a means of con-
verting the Galilean people.
They went forth two and two ; and our Lord
continued His own circuit (Matt. xi. 1), with
what companions does not appear. By this time
the leaven of the Lord's teaching had begun
powerfully to work among the people. Herod,
we read, "was perplexed, because that it was
said of some, that John was risen from the dead,
and of some that Elijah had appeared ; and of
others, that one of the old Prophets was risen
again" (Luke ix. 7, 8). The false apprehensions
about the Messiah that He should be a temporal
ruler, were so deep-rooted, that whilst all the
rumours concurred in assigning a high place to
Jesus as a Prophet, none went beyond to recog-
nise Him as the King of Israel — the Saviour
of His people and the world.
After a journey of perhaps two months'
duration the Twelve return to Jesus, and give
an account of their ministry. The third
Passover was now drawing near ; but the Lord
did not go up to it, because His time was
not come for submitting to the malice of the
Jews against Him ; because His ministry in
Galilee was not completed ; and especially,
because He wished to continue the training of
the Apostles for their work, now one of the
chief objects of His ministry. He wished to
commune with them privately upon their work,
and, we may suppose, to add to the instruction
they had already received from Him (Mark vL
30, 31). He therefore went with them from
the neighbourhood of Capernaum to a mountain
on the eastern shore of the Sea of Tiberias, near
Bethsaida Julias, not far from the head of the
sea. Great multitudes pursued them ; and here
JESUS OHBIST
the Lord, moved to compassion by the hunger
and weariness of the people, wrought for then
one of His most remarkable miracles. Oat <f
five barley loaves and two small fishes, He
produced food for fire thousand men beside!
women and children. The act was one of
creation, and therefore was both an assertion
and a proof of Divine power ; and the discourse
which followed it, recorded by St. John wit.
was an important step in the training of the
Apostles, for it hinted to them for the first tint
the unexpected truth that the Body and Wool
of Christ, that is, His Passion, must become the
means of man's salvation. This view of t»
doctrine of the kingdom of heaven which tan
had been preaching, could not have been under-
stood; but it would prepare those who still
clave to Jesus to expect the hard facti that
were to follow these hard words. The discourse
itself has already been examined (p. 16731
After the miracle, but before the comment ci
it was delivered, the disciples crossed the sea
from Bethsaida Julias to Bethsaida of Galilee.
and Jesus retired alone to a mountain to cat-
mune with the Father. They were toiling at
the oar, for the wind was contrary, when, as tk
night drew towards morning, they saw Jest
walking to them on the sea, having passed the
whole night on the mountain. They wen
amazed and terrified. He came into the shit
and the wind ceased. They worshipped Him it
this new proof of Divine power— " Of s tr»t»
Thou art the Sob of God " (Matt. xiv. 33) IV
storm had been another trial of their faiti
(cp. Matt. viii. 23-26), not in a present Muter
as on a former occasion, but in an absent ok
But the words of St. Mark intimate that em
the feeding of the five thousand had not built
up their faith in Him, — "for they consider*!
not the miracle of the loaves : for their hem
was hardened " (vi. 52). St Peter, howeter.
as St. Matthew relates, with his usual let
wishing to show that he really possessed thai
faith in Jesus which perhaps in the height rf
the storm had been somewhat forgotten, request'
Jesus to bid him come to Him upon the water.
When he made the effort, his faith began to nil
and he cried out for succour. Christ's rebate,
"0 thou of little faith, wherefore didst th«
doubt ? " does not imply that he had no faith, «r
that it wholly deserted him then. All the
failings of Peter were of the same kind; there
was a faith full of zeal and eagerness, but it TO
not constant. He believed that he could wall:
on the waters if Jesus bade him ; but the war
of the waves appalled him, and he sank rrou
the same cause that made him deny hit Uri
afterwards.
When they reached the shore of Gennesartt
the whole people showed their faith in Him a< a
Healer of disease (Mark vi. 53-56); and He per-
formed very many miracles on them. Notbin;
could surpass the eagerness with which they
sought Him. Yet on the next day the great
discourse just alluded to was uttered, ami
" from that time many of His disciples went
back and walked no more with Him " (John
vi. 66).
Third year of the Ministry.— Hearing pwhapi
that Jesus was not coming to the feast. Scribe'
and Pharisees from Jerusalem went down to see
Him at Capernaum (Matt. xv. 1> The; found
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHBIST
fault with His disciples for breaking the tradi-
tion about purifying, and eating with unwashen
hands. It is not necessary to suppose that they
came to lie in wait for Jesns. The objection
was one which they would naturally take. Our
Lord in His answer tries to show them how far
external rule, claiming to be religious, may lead
men away from the true spirit of toe Gospel.
" Ye say, Whosoever shnll say to his father or
his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou
rnightest be profited by me ; and honour not his
father or his mother, he shall be free" (Matt. xv.
5, 6). They admitted the obligation of the
6fth commandment, but had introduced a means
of evading it, by enabling a son to say to his
father and mother who sought his help that
he had made his property " a gift " to the
Temple, which took precedence of his obligation.
Well might He apply to a people where such a
miserable evasion could find place, the words
of Isaiah (xxix. 13) : " This people draweth nigh
unto Me with their mouth, and honoureth Me
with their lips, but their heart is far from Me.
But in vain they do worship Me, teaching for
doctrines the commandments of men."
Leaving the neighbourhood of Capernaum, our
Lord now travels to the north-west of Galilee,
to the region of Tyre and Sidon. The time is
not strictly determined, but it was probably the
early summer of this year. It does not appear
that He retired into this heathen country for
the purpose of ministering; more probably it
was a retreat from the machinations of the
Jews. A woman of the country, of Greek edu-
cation ('EXAijWs Ivpo^oiylxuraa, Mark), came to
entreat Him to heal her daughter who was
tormented with an evil spirit. The Lord at
first repelled her by saying that He was not sent
but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel ; but
not so was her maternal love to be baffled. She
sought Him again and was again repelled ; the
bread of the children was not to be given to
dogs. Still persisting, she besought His help
even as one of the dogs so despised : " the dogs
eat of the crumbs that fall from the master's
table." Faith so sincere was not to be resisted.
Her daughter was made whole (Matt. xv. 21-28 ;
Mark vii. 24-30).
Returning thence, He passed round by the
north of the sea of Galilee to the region of
Decapolis on its eastern side (Mark vii. 31-37).
In this district He performed many miracles,
and especially the restoration of n deaf man who
had an impediment in his speech, remarkable
for the seeming effort with which He wrought
it. To these succeeded the feeding of the four
thousand with the seven loaves (Matt. xv. 32).
He now crossed the Lake of Magdala, where the
Pharisees and Sadducees asked and were refused
a " sign ; " some great wonder wrought expressly
for them to prove that He was the Christ. He
answers them as He had answered a similar
request before : "the sign of the Prophet Jonas"
was all that tbey should have. His own Resur-
rection after a death of three days should be the
great sign, and yet in another sense no sign
should be given them, for they should neither
see it nor believe it. The unnatural alliance
between Pharisee and Sadducee is worthy of
remark. The zealots of tradition and the
political partisans of Herod (for " leaven of the
Sadducees," in Matt. xvi. 6= "leaven of Herod,
JESUS CHRIST
1683
Mark viii. 15) joined together for once with a
common object of hatred. After they had de-
parted, Jesus crossed the lake with His disciples,
and, combining perhaps for the use of the dis-
ciples the remembrance of the feeding of the
four thousand with that of the conversation
they had just heard, warned them to " beware
of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the leaven
of Herod " (Mark viii. 15). So little however
were the disciples prepared for this, that they
mistook it for a reproof for having brought only
one loaf with them 1 They had forgotten the
five thousand and the four thousand, or they
would have known that where He was, natural
bread could not fail them. It was needful to
explain to tbem that the leaven of the Pharisees
was the doctrine of those who had made the
Word of God of none effect by traditions which
appearing to promote religion really overlaid
and destroyed it, and the leaven of the Sadducees
was the doctrine of those who, under the show
of superior enlightenment, denied the founda-
tions of the fear of God by denying a future
state. At Bethsaida Julias, Jesus restored sight
to a blind man ; and here, as in a former case,
the form and preparation which He adopted are
to be remarked. As though the human Saviour
has to wrestle with and painfully overcome the
sufferings of His people, He takes him by the
hand, and leads him out of the town, and spits
on his eyes and asks him if he sees aught. At
first the sense is restored imperfectly ; and
Jesus lays His hand again upon him and the
cure is complete (Mark viii. 22—26).
The ministry in Galilee is now drawing to its
close. Through the length and breadth of that
country Jesus had proclaimed the kingdom of
Christ, and has shown by mighty works that He
is the Christ that was to come. He begins to
ask the disciples what are the results of all
His labour. " Whom say the people that I
am? " (Luke ix. 18). It is true that the answer
shows that they took Him for a Prophet. But
we are obliged to admit that the rejection of
Jesus by the Galileans had been as complete as
His preaching to them had been universal.
Here and there a few mar have received the
seeds that shall afterwards be quickened to
their conversion. But the great mass had heard
without earnestness the preached word, and for-
gotten it without regret. " Whereunto shall I
liken this generation ? " says Christ. "It is like
children sitting in the market, and calling unto
their fellows, and saying, We have piped unto yon,
and ye have not danced ; we have mourned unto
you, and ye have not lamented " (Matt. xL 16,
17). This is a picture of a wayward people
without earnest thought. As children, from
want of any real purpose, cannot agree in their
play, so the Galileans quarrel with every form
of religions teaching. The message of John and
that of Jesus they did not attend to ; but they
could discuss the question whether one was
right in fasting and the other in eating and
drinking. He denounces woe to the cities where
He had wrought the most — to Chorazin, Beth-
saida, and Capernaum — for their strange insensi-
bility, using the strongest expressions. "Thou,
Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt
be brought down to hell ; for if the mighty
works, which have been done in thee, had been
done in Sodom, it would have remained until
5 P 2
Digitized by
Google
1684
JESUS CHRIST
this day. But I aay onto you, that it shall be
more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day
of judgment than for thee " (Matt. xi. 23, 24).
Such awful language could only be used to
describe a complete rejection of the Lord. And
in truth nothing was wanting to aggravate that
rejection. The lengthened journeys through
the land, the miracles, far more than are
recorded in detail, had brought the Gospel
home to all the people. Capernaum was the
focus of His ministry. Through Chorazin and
Bethsaida He had no doubt passed with crowds
behind Him, drawn together by wonders that
they had seen, and by the hope of others to
follow them. Many thousands had actually
been benefited by the miracles; and yet of all
these there were only twelve that really clave
to Him, and one of them was Judas the traitor.
With this rejection an epoch of the history is
connected. He begins to unfold now the doc-
trine of His Passion more fully. First inquiring
whom the people said that He was, He then put
the same question to the Apostles themselves.
Simon Peter, the ready spokesman of the rest,
answers, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the
living God." It might almost seem that such
a manifest inference from the wonders they had
witnessed was too obvious to deserve praise, did
not the sight of a whole country which had
witnessed the same wonders, and despised them,
prove how thoroughly callous the Jewish heart
was. " Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona : for
flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee,
but My Father Which is in heaven. And I also
say nnto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this
rock I will build My Church ; and the gates of
hell shall not prevail against it. And I will
give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of
heaven : and whatsoever thou shalt bind on
earth shall be bound in heaven : and whatsoever
thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in
heaven " (Matt. xvi. 16-20). We compare the
language applied to Capernaum for its want of
faith with that addressed to St. Peter and the
Apostles, and we see how wide is the gulf
between those who believe and those who do
not. Jesus now in the plainest language tells
them what is to be the mode of His departure
from the world : " how that He must go unto
Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders
and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and
be raised again the third day " (Matt. xvi. 21).
St. Peter, who had spoken as the representative
of all the Apostles before, in confessing Jesus as
the Christ, now speaks for the rest in offering to
our Lord the commonplace consolations of the
children of this world to a friend beset by danger.
The danger they think will be averted : such
an end cannot befall one so great. The Lord,
" when He had turned about and looked on His
disciples " (Mark), to show that fie connected
Peter's words with them all, addresses Peter as
the tempter — " Get thee behind Me, Satan ; thou
art an offence nnto Me." These words open up
to us the fact that this period of the ministry
was a time of special trial and temptation to the
sinless Son of God : — " Escape from sufferings
and death 1 Do not drink the cup prepared of
Thy Father ; it is too bitter ; it is not deserved."
Such was the whisper of the prince of this world
at that time to our Lord; and St. Peter has
been unwittingly taking it into his mouth. The
JESUS CHBI8T
doctrine of a suffering Messiah, so plainly ex-
hibited in the Prophets, had receded from sight
in the current religion of that time. The
announcement of it to the disciples was at one*
new and shocking. By repelling it, even when
offered by the Lord Himself, they fell into a
deeper sin than they could have conceived. The
chief of them was called " Satan," because he
was unconsciously pleading on Satan's side
(Matt. xvi. 21-23).
Turning now to the whole body of those who
followed Him (Mark, Luke), He published the
Christian doctrine of self-denial. The Apostles
had just shown that they took the natural view
of suffering, that it was an evil to be shunned.
They shrank from conflict, and pain, and death,
as it is natural men should. But Jesus teaches
that, in comparison with the higher life, the
life of the soul, the life of the body is valueless.
And as the renewed life of the Christian implies
his dying to his old wishes and desires, suffering,
which causes the death of earthly hopes and
wishes, may be a good. " If any man will come
after Me, let him deny himself, and take np his
Cross and follow Me. For whosoever will save
his life shall lose it, and whosoever will lose his
life for My sake shall find it. For what is a mas
profited, if he should gain the whole world, and
lose his own soul ? or what shall a man give ia
exchange for his soul ? " (Matt. xvi.). From
this part of the history to the end we shall not
lose sight of the sufferings of the Lord. The
Cross is darkly seen at the end of onr path ;
and we shall ever draw nearer that mysterious
implement of human salvation (Matt. xvi. 21-
28 ; Mark viii. 31-38 ; Luke ix. 22-27).
The Transfiguration, which took place just a
week after this conversation, is to be understood
in connexion with it. The minds of the Twelve
were greatly disturbed at what they had heard.
The Messiah was to perish by the wrath of men.
The Master Whom they served was to be takes
away from them. Now, if ever, they needed
support for their perplexed spirits, and this
their loving Master failed not to give them.
He takes with Him three chosen disciples —
St. Peter, St. John, and St. James — who formed
as it were a smaller circle nearer to Jesus than
that of the rest, into a high mountain apart by
themselves. There are no means of determining
the position of the mountain ; although Caesaren
Philippi was the scene of the former conver-
sations, it does not follow that this occurred on
the eastern side of the lake, for the intervening
week would have given time enough for a long
journey thence. There is no authority for the
tradition which identifies this mountain with
Mount Tabor, although .it may be true. The
three disciples were taken up with Him, who
should afterwards be the three witnesses of His
Agony in the garden of Gethsemane : those who
saw His glorv in the holy mount would be
sustained by the remembrance of it when they
beheld His lowest humiliation. The calmness
and exactness of the narrative preclude all
doubt as to its historical character. It is no
myth, nor vision ; but a sober account of a
miracle. When Jesus had come up into the
mountain, He was praying ; and as He prayed,
a great change came over Him. "His face did
shine as the sun (Matt.) ; and His raiment
became shining, exceeding white as snow ; s»
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHBIST
as no fuller on earth can white them " (Mark).
Beside Him appeared Moses the great Lawgiver,
and Elijah, great amongst the Prophets ; and
they spake of His departure, as though it was
something recognised both by Law and Prophets.
The three disciples were at first asleep with
weariness ; and when they woke, they saw the
glorious scene. As Hoses and Elijah were
departing (Luke), St. Peter, wishing to arrest
them, uttered those strange words, " Lord, it is
good for us to be here, and let us make three
tabernacles, one for Thee, and one for Moses,
and one for Elijah." They were the words of
one astonished and somewhat afraid, yet of one
who felt a strange peace in this explicit testi-
mony from the Father that Jesus was His. It
was good for them to be thore, he felt, where
no Pharisees could set traps for them, where
iieither Pilate nor Herod could take Jesus by
force. Just as he spoke a cloud came over
them, and the voice of the Heavenly Father
attested once more His Son — "This is My
beloved Son ; hear Him." There has been
much discussion on the purport of this great
wonder. But thus much seems highly probable.
First, as it was connected with the prayer of
Jesus, to which it was no doubt an answer, it
is to be regarded as a kind of inauguration of
Him in His new office as the High-Priest Who
should make atonement for the sins of the
people with His own Blood. The mystery of
His trials and temptations lies too deep for
speculation: but He received strength against
human infirmity — against the .prospect of suf-
ferings so terrible — in this His glorification.
Secondly, as the witnesses of this scene were
the same three disciples who were with the
Master in the garden of Gethsemane, it may be
assumed that the one was intended to prepare
them for the other, and that they were to be
borne up under the spectacle of His Humiliation
by the remembrance that they had been eye-
witnesses of His Majesty (2 Pet. i. 16-18).
As they came down from the mountain He
charged them to keep secret what they had
seen till after the Resurrection ; which shows
that this miracle took place for His use and for
theirs, rather than for the rest of the disciples.
This led to questions about the meaning of His
rising again from the dead, and in the course of
it, and arising out of it, occurred the question,
" Why then (olr, which refers to some pre-
ceding conversation) say the Scribes that Elias
must first come ? " They had been assured by
what they had just seen that the time of the
kiugdom of God was now come; and the ob-
jection brought by the Scribes, that before the
Messiah Elijah must reappear, seemed hard to
reconcile with their new conviction. Our Lord
answers them that the Scribes have rightly
understood the prophecies that Elijah would
first come (Mai. iv. 5, 6), but have wanted the
discernment to see that this prophecy was
-already fulfilled. " Elias is come already, and
they knew him not, bnt have done unto him
whatever they listed." In John the Baptist,
who came in the spirit and power of Elijah,
were the Scriptures fulfilled (Matt. xvii. 1-13 ;
Mark ii. 2-13 ; Luke ix. 28-36).
Meantime amongst the multitude below a
scene was taking place which formed the
strongest contrast to the glory and the peace
JESUS CHBIST
1685
which they had witnessed, and which seemed to
justify Peter's remark, " It is good for us to be
here. A poor youth, lunatic and possessed by
a devil — for here as elsewhere the possession is
superadded to some known form of that bodily
and mental evil which came in at first with sin
and Satan — was brought to the disciples who
were not with Jesus, to be cured. They could
not prevail ; and when Jesus appeared amongst
them, the agonized and disappointed father ap-
pealed to Him, with a kind of complaint of the
impotence of the disciples. "0 faithless and
perverse generation ! " said onr Lord ; " how
long shall I be with you? how long shall
I suffer you ? " The rebuke is not to the
disciples, but to all, the father included ; for
the weakness of faith that hindered the miracle
was in them all. St. Mark's account, the most
complete, describes the paroxysm that took
place in the lad on our Lord's ordering him to
be brought ; and also records the remarkable
saying, which well described the father's state,
"Lord, I believe; help Thou my unbelief I"
What the disciples had failed to do, Jesus did
at a word. He then explained to them that
their want of faith in their own power to heal,
and in His promises to bestow the power upon
them, was the cause of their inability (Matt,
xvii. 14-21 ; Mark ix. 14-29 ; Luke ix. 37-43).
Once more did Jesus foretell His sufferings
on their way back to Capernaum; but "they
understood not that saying, and were afraid to
ask Him " (Mark ix. 30-32).
But a vague impression seems to have been
produced on them that His kingdom was now
very near. It broke forth in the shape of a
dispute amongst them as to which should rank
the highest in the kingdom when it should
come. Taking a little child, He told them
that, in His kingdom, not ambition, but a
childlike humility, would entitle to the highest
place (Matt, xviii. 1-5 ; Mark ix. 33-37 ; Luke
ix. 46-48). The humility of the Christian is
so closely connected with consideration for the
souls of others, that the transition to a warning
against causing offence (Matt., Mark), which
might appear abrupt at first, is most natural.
From this Jesus passes naturally to the subject
of a tender consideration for " the lost sheep ; "
thence to the duty of forgiveness of a brother.
Both of these last points are illustrated by
parables. These, and some other discourses
belonging to the same time, are to be regarded
as designed to carry on the education of the
Apostles, whose views were still crude and
unformed, even after all that bad been done for
them (Matt, xviii.).
From the Feast of Tabernacles, Third Year. —
The Feast of Tabernacles was now approaching.
For eighteen months the ministry of Jesus had
been confined to Galilee ; and His brothers, not
hostile to Him, yet only half-convinced about
His doctrine, urged Him to go into Judaea that
His claims might be known and confessed on a
more conspicuous field. This kind of request,
founded in human motives, was one which our
Lord would not assent to : witness Hi* answer
to Mary at Cana in Galilee when the first
miracle was wrought. He told them that,
whilst all times were alike to them, whilst
they could always walk among the Jews
without danger, His appointed time was not
Digitized by
Google
1686
JESUS CHRIST
come. They set out for the feast without Him,
and He abode in Galilee for a few days longer
(John vii. 2-10). Afterwards He set out, taking
the more direct but less frequented route by
Samaria, that His journey might be " in secret.
It was in this journey that James and John
conceived the wish — so closely parallel to facts
in the Old Covenant, so completely at variance
with the spirit of the New — that fire should be
commanded to come down from heaven to con-
sume the inhospitable Samaritans (Lake ix.
51-62).
St. Luke alone records, in connexion with
this journey, the sending forth of the seventy
disciples. This event is to be regarded in a
different light from that of the twelve. The
seventy had received no special education from
our Lord, and their commission was of a tem-
porary kind. The number has reference to the
Gentiles, as twelve had to the Jews ; and the
scene of the work, Samaria, reminds us that
this is a movement directed towards the
stranger. It takes place six months after the
sending forth of the twelve ; for the Gospel was
to be delivered to the 'Jew first and afterwards
to the Gentile. In both cases probably the
preaching was of the simplest kind — "The
kingdom of God is come nigh unto you." The
instructions given were the same in spirit ; but,
on comparing them, we see that now the danger
was becoming grenter and the time for labour
shorter (Luke x. 1-16).
After healing the ten lepers in Samaria, He
came " about the midst of the feast " to Jeru-
salem. Here the minds of the people were
strongly excited and drawn in different ways
concerning Him. The Pharisees and rulers
sought to take Him ; some of the people,
however, believed in Him, but concealed their
opinion for fear of the rulers. To this division
of opinion we may attribute the failure of the
repeated attempts on the part of the San-
hedrin to take One Who was openly teaching
in the Temple (John vii. 11-53; see esp. re.
30, 32, 44, 45, 46). The officers were partly
afraid to seize in the presence of the people the
favourite Teacher; and they themselves were
awed and attracted by Him. They came to
seiie Him, but could not lift their hands against
Him. Notwithstanding the ferment of opinion,
and the fixed hatred of those in power, He
seems to have taught daily to the end of the
Feast in the Temple before the people.
The history of the woman taken in adultery
belongs to this time. But it must be premised
that several AISS. of highest authority omit
this passage, and that in those which insert it
the text is singularly disturbed (see Lticke in
loc., and Tischendorf, Gr. Test., ed. vii.). The
remark of Augustine is perhaps not far from
the truth, that this story formed a genuine
portion of the apostolic teaching, but that mis-
taken people excluded it from their copies of
the written Gospel, thinking it might be per-
verted into a license to women to sin (Ad
Pollent. ii. ch. 7). That it was thus kept apart,
without the safeguards which Christian vigi-
lance exercised over the rest of the text, and
was only admitted later, would at once account
for its absence from the MSS. and for the
various forms assumed by the text where it is
given. But the history gives no ground for
JESUS CHRIST
such apprehensions. The Law of Moses gave
the power to stone women taken in adultery.
But Jewish morals were sunk very low, like
Jewish faith ; and the punishment could not be
inflicted on a sinner by those who bad sinned in
the same kind : " Eteniin non est ferendns aocn-
sator is qui quod in altero vitium reprebendit,
in eo ipso deprehenditur " (Cicero, c. Verrem,
iii.). Thus the punishment had passed oat of
use. But they thought, by proposing this case
to our Lord, to induce Him either to set the
Law formally aside, in which case they might
accuse Him of profaneness; or to sentence the
guilty wretch to die, and so become obnoxious
to the charge of cruelty. From such tempta-
tions Jesus was always able to escape. He
threw back the decision upon them ; He told
them that the man who was free from that sin
might cast the first stone at her. Conscience
told them that this was unanswerable, and one
by one they stole away, leaving the guilty
woman alone before One Who was indeed her
Judge. It has been supposed that the word*
" Neither do I condemn thee " convey an abso-
lute pardon for the sin of which she had just
been guilty. But they refer, as has long since
been pointed out, to the doom of stoning only.
" As they have not punished thee, neither do i ;
go, and let this danger warn thee to sin n*
more " (John viii. 1-11).
The conversations (John viii. 12-59) show ia
a strong light the perversity of the Jews ia
misunderstanding our Lord's words. They re-
fuse to see any spiritual meaning in them, and
drag them as it were by force down to a lo*
and carnal interpretation. Our Lord's remark
explains the cause of this, " Why do ye not
understand My speech [way of speaking] ? Eve*
because ye cannot hear My word " (t>. 43). His
mode of expression was strange to them, because
they were neither able nor willing to understand
the real purport of His teaching. To this place
belongs the account, given by John alone, of
the healing of one who was born blind, and the
consequences of it (John ix. 1-41, x. l-21>
The poor patient was excommunicated for re-
fusing to undervalue the agency of Jesns ia
restoring him. He believed on Jesus ; whilst
the Pharisees were only made the worse for
what they had witnessed. Well might Jesus
exclaim, "For judgment I am come into this
world, that they which see not might see ; and
that they which see might be made blind "
(ix. 39). The well-known parable of the Good
Shepherd is an answer to the calumny of the
Pharisees, that He was an impostor and breaker
of the law, "This man is not of God, because He
keepeth not the Sabbath day " (ix. 16).
We now approach a difficult portion of the
sacred history. The note of time given us by
St. John immediately afterwards is the Feast of
the Dedication, which was celebrated on the
25th of Kisleu, answering nearly to December.
According to this Evangelist, our Lord does not
appear to have returned to Galilee between the
Feast of Tabernacles and that of Dedication, but
to have passed the time in and near Jerusalem.
St. Matthew and St. Mark do not allude to the
Feast of Tabernacles. St. Luke appears to do
so in ix. 51 ; but the words there used would
imply that this was the last journey to Jeru-
salem. Now in St. Luke's Gospel a large section.
Digitized by
Google
JESDS CHBIST
f rom ix. 51 to iviii. 14, seems to belong to the
time preceding the departure from Galilee ; and
the question is, How is this to be arranged, so
that it shall harmonize with the narrative of
St. John ? In most Harmonies a retnrn of our
Lord to Galilee has been assumed, in order to
find a place for this part of Luke's Gospel.
" But the manner," says the English editor of
Robinson's Harmony, " in which it has been
arranged, after all, is exceedingly various.
Some, as Le Clerc (Harm. Evang. p. 264), insert
nearly the whole during this supposed journey.
Others, as Lightfoot, assign to this journey only
what precedes Luke xiii. 23 ; and refer the
remainder to our Lord's sojourn beyond Jordan,
John x. 40 (Chron. Temp. JV. T., Opp. ii. pp. 37,
39). Greswell (ii. XHnert. xvi.) maintains that
the transactions in Luke ix. 51-xviii. 14 all
belong to the journey from Ephraim (through
Samaria, Galilee, and Peraea) to Jerusalem,
which he dates in the interval of four months,
between the Feast of Dedication and our Lord's
last Passover. Wieseler ( Chron. Synop$. p. 328)
makes a somewhat different arrangement; ac-
cording to which, Luke ix. Sl-xiii. 21 relates
to the period from Christ's journey from Galilee
to the Feast of the Tabernacles till after the
Feast of Dedication (parallel to John vii. 10-
x. 42). Luke xiii. 22-xvii. 10 relates to the
interval between that time and our Lord's stay
at Ephraim (parallel to John xi. 1-54); and
Luke xvii. 11-xviii. 14 relates to the journey
from Ephraim to Jerusalem, through Samaria,
Galilee, and Peraea" (Robinson's Harmony,
English ed. p. 92). If the table of the Harmony
of the Gospels given above is referred to
[Gospels], it will be found that this great
division of St. Luke (x. 17-xviii. 14) is inserted
entire between John x. 21 and 22 ; not that this
appeared certainly correct, but that there are
no points of contact with the other Gospels to
assist us in breaking it up. That this division
contains partly or chiefly reminiscences of occur-
rences in Galilee prior to the Feast of Taber-
nacles, is untenable. A journey of some kind is
implied in the course of it (see xiii. 22), and
beyond this we shall hardly venture to go. It
is quite possible, as Wieseler supposes, that part
of it should be placed before, and part after the
Feast of Dedication. Notwithstanding the un-
certainty, it is as the history of this period of
the Redeemer's career that the Gospel of St.
Luke possesses its chief distinctive value for us.
Some of the most striking parables, preserved
only by this Evangelist, belong to this period.
The parables of the good Samaritan, the pro-
digal son, the unjust steward, the rich man and
Lazarus, and the Pharisee and publican, all
peculiar to this Gospel, belong to the present
section. The instructive account of Mary and
Martha, on which so many have taken a wrong
view of Martha's conduct, reminds us that there
are two ways of serving the truth, that of active
exertion and that of contemplation. The pre-
ference is given to Mary's meditation, because
Martha's labour belonged to household cares,
and was only indirectly religious. The miracle
of the ten lepers belongs to this portion of the
narrative. Besides these, scattered sayings that
occur in St. Matthew are here repeated in a
new connexion. Here too belongs the return of
the seventy disciples, but we know not precisely
JESUS CHRIST
1G87
where they rejoined the Lord (Luke x. 17-20).
They were full of triumph, because they fonnd
even the devils subject to them through the
weight of Christ's word. In anticipation of the
victory, which was now begun, over the powers
of darkness, Jesus replies, " I beheld Satan as
lightning fall from heaven." He sought how-
ever to humble their triumphant spirit, so near
akin to spiritual pride: "Notwithstanding, in
this rejoice not, that the spirits are subject unto
you ; but rather rejoice, because your names are
written in heaven."
The account of the bringing of young chil-
dren to Jesus unites again the three Evangelists.
Here, as often, St. Mark gives the most minute
account of what occurred. After the announce-
ment that the disposition of little children was
the most meet for the kingdom of God, "He
took them up in His arms, put His hands upon
them and blessed them." The childlike spirit,
which in nothing depends upon its own know-
ledge but seeks to be taught, is in contrast with
the haughty pharisaism with its boast of learn-
ing and wisdom ; and Jesus tells them that the
former is the passport to His kingdom (Matt.
xix. 13-15; Mark x. 13-16; Luke xviii. 15-17).
The question of the ruler, " What shall I do
to inherit eternal life?" was one conceived
wholly in the spirit of Judaism. The man asked
not how he should be delivered from sin, but
how his will, already free to righteousness,
might select the best and most meritorious line
of conduct. The words, " Why callest thou Me
good ? there is none good but One, that is God,"
were meant first to draw him down to a humbler
view of his own state ; the title good is easy to
give, but hard to justify, except when applied
to the One Who is all good. Jesus by no means
repudiates the title as applied to Himself, but
only as applied on any other ground than that
of a reference to His true Divine Nature. Then
the Lord opened out to him all the moral law,
which in its full and complete sense no man
has observed ; but the ruler answered, perhaps
sincerely, that he had observed it all from hi*
youth up. Duties however there might be
which bad not come within the range of bis
thoughts ; and as the demand had reference to
his own special case, our Lord gives the special
advice to sell all his possessions and to give to
the poor. Then for the first time did the man
discover that his devotion to God and his yearn-
ing after the eternal life were not so perfect as
he had thought; and he went away sorrowful,
unable to bear this sacrifice. And Jesus told
the disciples how hard it was for those who had
riches to enter the kingdom. St. Peter, ever
the most ready, now contrasts, with somewhat
too much emphasis, the mode in which the
disciples had left all for Him, with the conduct
of this rich ruler. Our Lord, sparing him the
rebuke which he might have expected, tells
them that those who have made any sacrifice
shall have it richly repaid even in this life in
the shape of a consolation and comfort, which
even persecutions cannot take away (Mark);
and shall hare eternal life (Matt. xix. 16-30;
Mark x. 17-31 ; Luke xviii. 18-30). Words
of warning close the narrative, " Many that are
first shall be last, and the last shall be first."
lest the disciples should be thinking too much
of the sacrifices, not so very great, that they
Digitized by
Google
1688
JESUS OHBIST
had made. And in St. Matthew only, the well-
known parable of the labourer of the vineyard
is added to illustrate the same lesson. What-
ever else the parable may contain of reference
to the calling of the Jews and Gentiles, the first
lesson Christ was to give was one of caution to
the Apostles against thinking too much of their
early calling and arduous labours. They would
see many, who, in comparison with themselves,
were as the labourers called at the eleventh
hour, who should be accepted of God as well as
they. But not merit, not self-sacrifice, but the
pure love of God and His mere bounty, con-
ferred salvation on either of them : " Is it not
lawful for me to do what I will with my own ? "
(Matt. xz. 1-16).
On the way to Jerusalem through Peraea, to
the Feast of Dedication, Jesus again puts before
the minds of the twelve what they are never
now to forget, the sufferings that await Him.
They " understood none of these things " (Luke),
tor they could not reconcile this foreboding of
suffering with the signs and announcements of
the coming of His kingdom (Matt. zz. 17-19 ;
Mark z. 32-34 ; Lnke zriii. 31-34). In conse-
quence of this new, though dark, intimation of
the coming of the kingdom, Salome, with ber
two sons, James and John, came to bespeak the
two places of highest honour in the kingdom.
Jesus tells tbem that they know not what they
ask ; that the places of honour in the kingdom
shall be bestowed, not by Jesus in answer to a
chance request, but upon those for whom they
are prepared by the Father. As sin ever pro-
vokes sin, the ambition of the ten was now
aroused, and they began to be much displeased
with James and John. Jesns once more recalls
the principle that the childlike disposition is
that which He approves. " Ye know that the
princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over
them, and they that are great exercise authority
upon them. But it shall not be so among you :
but whosoever will be great among yon, let him
be your minister; and whosoever will be chief
among you, let him be your servant: even as
the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto
but to minister, and to give His life a ransom
for many " (Matt. xx. 20-28 ; Mark z. 35-45).
The healing of the two blind men at Jericho
is chiefly remarkable among the miracles from
the difficulty which has arisen in harmonizing
the accounts. Matthew speaks of too blind
men, and of the occasion as the departure from
Jericho; Mark of one, whom he names, and of
their arrival at Jericho; and Luke agrees with
him. This point has received much discussion ;
but the view of Lightfoot finds favour with
many eminent expositors, that there were two
blind men, and both were healed under similar
circumstances, except that Bartimaeus was on
one side of the city, and was healed by Jeaus as
He entered, and the other was healed on the
other side as they departed (see Greswell, Diss.
xx. ii. ; Wieseler, Chron. Syn. p. 332 ; Matt. xz.
29-34 ; Mark x. 46-52 ; Luke zviii. 35-43).
The calling of Zacchaeus has more than a
mere personal interest. He was a publican, one
of a class hated and despised by the Jews. But
he was one who sought to serve God ; he gave
largely to the poor, and restored fourfold where
he hod injured any man. Justice and love were
he law of his life. From such did Jesus wish
JESUS CHBIST
to call His disciples, whether they were publicans
or not. "This day is salvation come to this
house, for that he also is a son of Abraham.
For the Son of Man is come to seek and to save
that which was lost " (Luke xix. 1-10).
We have reached now the Feast of Dedication
but, at has been said, the exact place of th
events in St. Luke about this part of the ministry
has not been conclusively determined. Ana
being present at the Feast, Jesus returned to
Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John had
formerly baptized, and abode there. The place
which the beginning of His ministry had con-
secrated, was now to be adorned with His
Presence as it drew towards its close, and the
scene of John's activity was now to witness toe
presence of the Saviour Whom he had so rarth-
fully proclaimed (John x. 22-42). The Lord
intended by this choice to recall to the minds of
many the good which John had done them, and
also, it may be, to prevent an undue exaltation
of John in the minds of some who hod heard
him only. " Many," we read, " resorted to
Him, and said John did no miracle: but all
things that John spake of this man were trie.
And many believed on Him there " (m. 41, 42).
How long He remained here does not appear.
It was probably for some weeks. The sore need
of a family in Bethany, who were whst men
call the intimate friends of our Lord, called
Him thence. Lazarus was sick, and his sisters
sent word of it to Jesus, whose power they sell
knew. Jesus answered that the sickness n-
not unto death, but for the glory of God and of
the Son of God. This had reference to tot
miracle about to be wrought ; even though h*
died, not his death but his restoration to lilt
was the purpose of the sickness. But it was a
trial to the faith of the sisters to find tie
words of their friend apparently falsified. Jens
abode for two days where He was, and then
proposed to the disciples to return. The rap
of the Jews against Him filled the disciple
with alarm; and Thomas, whose mind leant
always to the desponding side, and saw nothing
in the expedition but certain death to all °i
them, said, " Let us also go that we may die
with Him." It was not till Lazarus hsd been
four days in the grave that the Saviour appeared
on the scene. The practical energy of Martha.
and the retiring character of Mary, show them-
selves here, as once before. It was Martha wbo
met Him, and addressed to Him words of sorrow-
ful reproach. Jesus probed her faith deeply.
and found that even in this extremity of sorro*
it would not fail her. Mary now joined then'.
summoned by her sister ; and she too reproached
the Lord for the delay. Jesus does not resist
the contagion of their sorrow, and as a Man He
weeps true human tears by the side of the gran
of a friend. But with the Power of God He
breaks the fetters of brass in which Lazarus
was held by deatb, and at His word the nun on
whom corruption had already begun to do it*
work, came forth alive and whole (John "•
1-45). It might seem difficult to account for
the omission of this, perhaps the most signs! of
the miracles of Jesus, by the three synoptical
Evangelists. No doubt it was intentional, sad
the wish not to direct attention, and perhaps
persecution, to Lazarus in his lifetime may p>
far to account for it. But it stands well is the
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
pages of St. John, whoso privilege it has been
to announce the highest truths connected with
the Divine Mature of Jesus, and who is now also
permitted to show Him touched with sympathy
for a sorrowing family with whom He lived in
intimacy.
A miracle so public — for Bethany was close to
Jerusalem, and the family of Lazarus well
known to many people in the mother-city — could
not escape the notice of the Sanhedrin. A
meeting of this Council was called without loss
■of time, and the matter discussed, not without
symptoms of alarm, for the members believed
that a popular outbreak, with Jesus at its head,
was impending, and that it would excite the
jealousy of the Romans and lead to the taking
away of their " place and nation." Caiaphas
the high-priest gave it as his opinion that it
was expedient for them tbat one man should die
tor the people, and that the whole nation should
not perish. The Evangelist adds that these
words bore a prophetic meaning, of which the
speaker was unconscious: "This spake he not
of himself, but being high-priest that year he
prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation."
That a bad and worldly man may prophesy, the
-case of Balaam proves (Num. xxii.); and the
Jews, as Schottgen shows, believed that prophecy
might also be unconscious. But the connexion
of the gift of prophecy with the office of the
high-priest offers a difficulty. It has been said
that, though this gift is never in Scripture
assigned to the high-priest as such, yet the
popular belief at this time was that he did
«njoy it. There is no proof, however, except
this passage, of any such belief ; and the Evan-
gelist would not appeal to it except it were true,
and, if it were true, then the 0. T. would contain
some allusion to it. The endeavours to escape
from the difficulty by changes of punctuation
are not to be thought of. The meaning of the
passage seems to be this : — The Jews were about
to commit a crime, the real results of which
they did not know, and God overruled the
words of one of them to make him declare the
reality of the transaction, but unconsciously;
and as Caiaphas was the high-priest, the highest
minister of God, and therefore the most con-
spicuous in the sin, it was natural to expect
that he and not another would be the channel
of the prophecy. The connexion between his
office and the prophecy was not a necessary
one; but if a prophecy was to be uttered by
unwilling lips, it was natural that the high-
priest, who offered for the people, should be the
person compelled to utter it. The death of
Jesus was now resolved on, and He fled to
Ephraim for a few days, because His hour was
not yet come (John xi. 45-57).
We now approach the final stage of the
history, and every word and act tend towards
the great act of suffering. The hatred of the
Pharisees, now converted into a settled purpose
of murder, the vile wickedness of Judas, and
the utter fickleness of the people, are all dis-
played before us. Each day is marked by its
own events or instructions. Our Lord entered
into Bethany on Friday the 8th of Nisan, the
eve of the Sabbath, and remained over the
Sabbath.
Saturday the 9th of A'isan {April 1st). — As
He was at supper in the house of one Simon,
JESUS CHBIST
1689
surnamed "the leper," a relation of Lazarus,
who was at table with Him, Mary, full of
gratitude for the wonderful raising of her
brother from the dead, took a vessel containing
a quantity of pure ointment of spikenard and
anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped His feet
with her hair, and anointed His head likewise.
She thought not of the cost of the precious
ointment, in an emotion of love which was
willing to part with anything she possessed to
do honour to so great a Guest, so mighty a
Benefactor. Judas the traitor, and some of the
disciples (Matt., Mark), who took their tone
from him, began to murmur at the waste : " If
might have been sold for more than three
hundred pence, and have been given to the
poor." But Judas cared not for the poor;
already he was meditating the sale of his Master's
life, and all that he thought of was how he
might lay hands on something more, beyond the
price of blood. Jesus, however, who knew how
true was the love which had dictated this
sacrifice, silenced their censure. He opened out
a meaning in the action which they had not
sought there : " She is come aforehand to anoint
My Body to the burying."
Passion Week. Sunday the 10th day of
Nisan {April 2nd). — The question of John the
Baptist had no doubt often been repeated in the
hearts of the expectant disciples : — " Art Thou
He that should come, or do we look for an-
other?" All His conversations with them of
late had been filled, not with visions of glory,
but with forebodings of approaching death.
The world thinks them deceived, and its mockery
begins to exercise some influence even over them.
They need some encouraging sign under in-
fluences so depressing, and this Jesus affords
them in the triumphal entry into Jerusalem.
If the narrative is carefully examined, it will be
seen how remarkably the assertion of a kingly
right is combined with the most scrupulous care
not to excite the political jealousy of the Jewish
powers. When He arrives at the Mount of
Olives, He commands two of His disciples to go
into the village near at hand, where they would
find an ass and a colt tied with her. They
were neither to buy nor hire them, and " if any
man shall say aught unto you, ye shall say,
The Lord hath need of them ; and straightway
he will send them." With these beasts, im-
pressed as for the service of a king, He was to
enter into Jerusalem. The disciples spread-
upon the ass their ragged cloaks for Him to
sit on. And the multitudes cried aloud before
Him, in the words of the cxviii. Psalm,
"Hosanna (Save now)! blessed is He that
cometh in the Name of the Lord." This
Messianic Psalm they applied to Him, from a
belief, sincere for the moment, that He was the
Messiah. It was a striking and to the Pharisees
an alarming sight ; but it only serves in the
end to show the feeble hearts of the Jewish
people. The same lips that cried Hosanna will
before long be crying, "Crucify Him, crucify
Him I " Meantime, however, all thoughts were
carried back to the promises of a Messiah. The
very act of riding in upon an ass revived an
old prophecy of Zechariah (ix. 9). Words of
prophecy out of a Psalm sprang unconsciously
to their lips. All the city was moved. Blind
and lame came to the Temple when He arrived
Digitized by
Google
1690
JESUS CHRIST
there and were healed. The august conspirators
of the Sanhedrin were sore displeased. But all
these demonstrations did not deceive the Divine
insight of Christ. He wept over the city that
was hailing Him as its King, and said, "If
thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this
thy day, the things which belong unto thy
peace ! but now they are hid from thine eyes "
(Luke). He goes on to prophesy the destruction
of the city, just as it afterwards came to pass.
After working miracles in the Temple, He re-
turned to Bethany. The 10th of Nisan was the
day for the separation of the paschal lamb
(Ex. xii. 3). Jesus, the Lamb of God, entered
Jerusalem and the Temple on this day ; and
although none but He knew that He was the
Paschal Lamb, the coincidence is not undesigned
(Matt. xxi. 1-11, 14-17; Mark xi. 1-11;
Luke xix. 29-44 ; John iii. 12-19>
Monday the llth of Nisan {April Srd).— The
next day Jesus returned to Jerusalem, again to
take advantage of the mood of the people to in-
struct them. On the way He approached one of
the many fig-trees which grew in that quarter
(Bethphage = house of figs), and found that it
was full of foliage, but without fruit. He said,
" No man eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever 1 "
and the fig-tree withered away. This was no
doubt a work of destruction, and as such was
unlike the usual tenor of His acts. But it is
hard to understand the mind of those who
stnmble at the destruction of a tree which
seems to have ceased to bear by the word of Ood
the Son, yet are not offended at the famine or
the pestilence wrought by God the Father.
The right of the Son must rest on the same
ground as that of the Father. And this was
not a wanton destruction ; it was a type and a
warning. The barren fig-tree had already been
made the subject of a parable (Luke xiii. 6), and
here it is made a visible type of the destruction
of the Jewish people. He had come to them
seeking fruit, and now it was time to pronounce
their doom as a nation — there should be no fruit
on them for ever (Matt. xxi. 18, 19 ; Mark
xi. 12-14). Proceeding now to the Temple, He
cleared its court of the crowd of traders that
gathered there. He had performed the same
net at the beginning of His ministry, and now
at the close He repeats it, for the honse of
prayer was as much a den of thieves as ever.
With zeal for God's house His ministry began,
with the same it ended (see p. 1676 ; Matt. xxi.
12, 13; Mark xi. 15-19; Luke xix. 45-48).
In the evening He returned again to Bethany.
Tuesday the 12th of Nisan (April 4th).— On
this the third day of Passion week Jesus went
into Jerusalem as before, and visited the Temple.
The Sanhedrin came to Him to call Him to
account for the clearing of the Temple. "By
what authority doest Thou these things?"
The Lord answered their question by another,
which, when pnt to them in their capacity of
judges of spiritual things, and of the pretensions
of prophets and teachers, was very hard either
to answer or to pass in silence — what was their
opinion of the baptism of John ? If they replied
that it was from heaven, their own conduct
towards John would accuse them ; if of men,
then the people would not listen to them even
when they denounced Jesus, because none doubted
that John was a prophet. They refused to
JESUS CHBIST
answer, and Jesus refused in like manner to
answer them. In the parable of the Two Sons,
given by Matthew, the Lord pronounces a strong
condemnation on them for saying to God,
"I go, Sir." but not going (Matt. xxi. 23-32;
Mark xi. 27-33 ; Luke xx. 1-8). In the parable
of the wicked husbandmen the history of the
Jews is represented, who had stoned and killed
the prophets, and were about to crown their
wickedness by the death of the Son. In the
parable of the wedding garment the destruction
of the Jews, and the invitation to the Gentiles
to the feast in their stead, are vividly repre-
sented (Matt. xxi. 33-46, xxii. 1-14; Mark xii.
1-12; Luke xx. 9-19).
Not content with their plans for His death,
the different parties try to entangle Him in
argument and to bring Him into contempt.
First come the Pharisees and Herodians, as if to
ask Him to settle a dispute between them. " Is
it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?"
The spirit of the answer of Christ lie* here:
that, since they had accepted Caesar's money,
they had confessed his rule, and were bound to
render to the civil power what they had con-
fessed to be due to it, as they were to render to
God and to His Holy Temple the offerings due to
it. Next appeared the Sadducees, who denied a
future state, and put before Him a contradiction
which seemed to them to arise out of that
doctrine. Seven brethren in succession married
a wife (Dent. xxv. 5) : whose wife should she be
in a future state ? The answer was easy to find.
The law in question referred obviously to the
present time : it would pass away in another
state, and so would all such earthly relations,
and all jealousies or disputes founded on them.
Jesus now retorts the argument on the Sadducees.
Appealing to the Pentateuch, because His hearers
did not acknowledge the authority of the later
Books of the Bible, He recites the words, " I am
the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac and
the God of Jacob," as used to Moses, and draws
from them the argument that these men must
then hare been alive. Although the words would
not at first sight suggest this inference, they
really contain it ; for the form of expression im-
plies that He still exists and they still exist
(Matt. xxii. 15-33; Mark xii. 13-27; Lake xx.
20-40). Fresh questions awaited Him, bnt His
wisdom never failed to give the appropriate
answer. And then He uttered to all the people
that terrible denunciation of woe to the Pharisees
with which we are familiar (Matt, xxiii. 1-39).
If we compare it with our Lord's account of His
own position in reference to the Law, in the
Sermon on the Mount, we see thst the principles
there laid down are everywhere violated by
the Pharisees. Their almsgiving was ostenta-
tion ; their distinctions about oaths led to false-
hood and profaneness; they were exact about
the small observances and neglected the weightier
ones of the Law ; they adorned the tombs of the
Prophets, saying that if they had lived in the
time of their fathers they would not have slain
them ; and yet they were about to fill up the-
measure of their fathers' wickedness by slaying
the greatest of the Prophets, and persecuting;
and slaying His followers. After an indignant
denunciation of the hypocrites who, with a show
of religion, had thus contrived to stifle the true
spirit of religion and were in reality its chief
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHBIST
persecutors, He apostrophizes Jerusalem in words
full of compassion, yet carrying with them a
sentence of death : " O Jerusalem, Jerusalem,
thou that killest the Prophets and stonest them
which are sent unto thee, how often would I
hare gathered thy children together, even as a
hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and
ye would not I Behold, your house is left unto
you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not
see Me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed
is He that cometh in the Name of the Lord "
(Matt, xxiii.).
Another great discourse belongs to this day,
which, more than any other, presents Jesus as
the great Prophet of His people. On leaving the
Temple His disciples drew attention to the beauty
of its structure, its " goodly stones and gifts,"
their remarks probably arising from the threats
of destruction which had so lately been uttered
by Jesus. Their Master answered that not one
stone of the noble pile should be left upon
another. When they reached the Mount of
Olives, the disciples, or rather the first four
(Mark), speaking for the rest, asked Him when
this destruction should be accomplished. To
understand the answer it must be borne in mind
that Jesus warned them that He was not giving
them an historical account such as would enable
them to anticipate the events. " Of that day
and hour knoweth no man, no, not the Angels
of heaven, but My Father only." Exact data
of time are to be purposely withheld from
them. Accordingly, two events, analogous in
character bnt widely sundered by time, are so
treated in the prophecy that it is almost impos-
sible to disentangle them. The destruction of
Jerusalem and the day of judgment — the national
and the universal days of account — are spoken
of together or alternately without hint of the
great interval of time that separates them.
Thus it may seem that a most important fact is
omitted; but the highest work ot prophecy is
not to fix times and seasons, but to disclose the
Divine significance of events. What was most
important to them to know was that the de-
struction of Jerusalem followed upon the pro-
bation and rejection of her people, and that the
Crucifixion and that destruction were connected
as cause and effect (Matt. xxiv. ; Mark xiii. ;
Luke xxi.). The conclusion which Jesus drew
from His own awful warning was, that they
were not to attempt to fix the date of His
return : " Therefore be ye also ready, for in such
an hour as ye think not the Son of Man cometh."
The lesson of the parable of the Ten Virgins is
the same ; the Christian soul is to be ever in a
state of vigilance and preparation (Matt. xxiv.
44, xxv. 13). And the parable of the Talents,
here repeated in a modified form, teaches tisw
precious to souls are the uses of time (xxv.
14-30). In concluding this momentous discourse,
our Lord puts aside the destruction of Jerusalem,
and displays to our eyes the picture of the final
judgment. There will He Himself be present,
and will separate all the vast family of mankind
into two classes, and shall appraise the works of
each class as works done to Himself, present in
the world though invisible ; and men shall see,
some with terror and some with joy, that their
life here was spent either for Him or against
Him, and that the good which lay before them
to do was provided for them by Him, and not
JESUS CHRIST
1691
by chance, and the reward and punishment shall
be apportioned to each (Matt. xxv. 31-46).
With these weighty words ends the third day ;
and whether we consider the importance of His
recorded teaching, or the amount of opposition
and of sorrow presented to His mind, it was one
of the greatest days of all His earthly ministra-
tions. The general reflections of John (xii. 37-
50), which contain a retrospect of His ministry
and of the strange reception of Him by His
people, may well be read as if they came in
here.
Wednesday the 13th of Nisan (April 5(A).—
This day was passed in retirement with the
Apostles. Satan had put it into the mind of one
of them to betray Him ; and Jndas Iscariot made
a covenant to betray Him to the chief priests for
thirty pieces of silver. The character of Judas,
and the degrees by which he reached the abyss
of guilt in which he was at last destroyed,
deserve much attention. There is no reason to
doubt that when he was chosen by Jesus he
possessed, like the rest, the capacity of being
saved, and was endued with gifts which might
have made him an able minister of the New
Testament. But the innate worldliness and
covetousness were not purged out from him.
His practical talents made him a kind of steward
of the slender resources of that society, and no
doubt he conceived the wish to use the same
gifts on a larger field, which the realization of
"the kingdom of Heaven" would open out
before him. These practical gifts were his ruin.
Between him and the rest there could be no real
harmony. His motives were worldly, and theirs
were not. They loved the Saviour more as they
knew Him better. Judas, living under the con-
stant tacit rebuke of a most holy example, grew
to hate the Lord ; for nothing, perhaps, more
strongly draws out evil instincts than the en-
forced contact with goodness. And when he
knew that his Master did not trust him, was
not deceived by him, his hatred grew more in-
tense. But this did not break out into overt
act until Jesus began to foretell his own Cruci-
fixion and Death. If these were to happen, all
his hopes that he had built on following the
Lord would be dashed down. If they should
crucify the Master, they would not spare the
servants ; and, in place of a heavenly kingdom,
be would find contempt, persecution, and pro-
bably death. It was high time, therefore, to
treat with the powers that seemed most likely
to prevail in the end ; and he opened a negotia-
tion with the high-priests in secret, in order
that, if his Master were to fall, he might be the
instrument, and so make friends among the
triumphant persecutors. And yet, strange con-
tradiction, he did not wholly cease to believe
in Jesus : possibly he thought that he would so
act that he might be safe either way. If Jesus
was the Prophet and Mighty One that he had
once thought, then the attempt to take Him
might force Him to put forth all His resource*
and to assume the kingdom to which He laid
claim, and then the agent in the treason, even if
discovered, might plead that he foresaw the result :
if He were unable to save Himself and His dis-
ciples, then it were well for Judas to betake
himself to those who were stronger. The bribe
of money, not very considerable, could not have-
been the chief motive ; but as two vicious appe-
Digitized by
Google
1692
JESUS CHRIST
tites could be gratified instead of one, the thirty
pieces of silver became a part of the temptation.
The treason was successful, and the money paid ;
but not one moment's pleasure did those silver
pieces purchase for their wretched possessor, not
for a moment did he reap any fruit from his detest-
able guilt. After the Crucifixion, the avenging
belief that Jesus was what He professed to be
rushed back in full force upon his mind. He
went to those who had hired him ; tbey derided
his remorse. He cast away the accursed silver
pieces, defiled with the " innocent blood " of the
Sou of God, and went and hanged himself (Matt,
mi. 14-16 ; Mark xiv. 10-11 ; Luke xxii. 1-6).
Thursday the Uth of A wan (April 6th).— On
" the first day of unleavened bread," when the
Jews were wont to put away all leaven out of
their houses (Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. on Mark xiv.
12), the disciples asked their Master where they
were to eat the Passover. He directed Peter
and John to go into Jerusalem, and to follow a
man whom they should see bearing a pitcher of
water, and to demand of him, in their Master's
name, the use of the gnestchamber in his house
for this purpose. All happened as Jesus had
told them, and in the evening they assembled to
celebrate, for the last time, the paschal meal.
The sequence of the events is not quite clear
from a comparison of the Evangelists ; but the
difficulty arises with St. Luke, and there is ex-
ternal evidence that he is not following the chro-
nological order (Wieseler, Chron. Syn. p. 399).
The order seems to be as follows. When they bad
taken their places at table and the supper had
begun, Jesus gave them the first cup to divide
amongst themselves (Luke). It was customary
to drink at the paschal supper four cups of wine
•nixed with water ; and this answered to the
first of them. There now arose a contention
nmong the disciples which of them should be
the greatest; perhaps in connexion with the
places they had taken at this feast (Luke).
After a solemn warning against pride and ambi-
tion, Jesus performed an act which, as one of
the last of His life, must ever have been re-
membered by the witnesses as a great lesson of
humility. He rose from the table, poured water
into a basin, girded Himself with a towel, and
proceeded to wash the disciples' feet (John). It
was an office for slaves to perform, and from Him,
knowing, as He did, " that the Father bad given
all things into His Hand, and that He was come
from God and went to God," it was an unspeak-
able condescension. But His love for them was
infinite ; and if there were any way to teach
them the humility which as yet they had not
learned, He would not fail to adopt it. Peter,
with his usual readiness, was the first to refuse
to accept such menial service — " Lord, dost Thou
wash my feet ? " When he was told that this act
was significant of the greater act of humiliation
by which Jesus saved His disciples and united
them to Himself, his scruples vanished. After
all had been washed, the Saviour explained to
-them the meaning of what He had done. " If I,
your Lord and Master, have washed your feet,
ye also ought to wash one another's feet. For I
have given you an example, that ye should do as
I have done to you." But this act was only
the outward symbol of far greater sacrifices for
them than they could as yet understand. It was
a small matter to wash their feet ; it was a great
JESUS CHBIST
one to come down from the glories of heavei to
save them. Later the Apostle Paul put this
same lesson of humility into another form, aid
rested it upon deeper grounds. " Let this mind
be in you which was also in Christ Jesus: Who,
being in the form of God, thought it not robber;
to be equal with God : but made Himself of k>
reputation, and took upon Him the form of i
servant, and was made in the likeness of men,
and being found in fashion as a man He humbled
Himself and became obedient unto death, eves
the death of the cross" (Phil. ii. 5-8; Matt.
xxvi. 17-20; Mark xiv. 12-17; Lake nil.
7-30; JohnxiiL 1-20).
From this act of love it does not seem that
even the traitor Judas was excluded. But bit
treason was thoroughly known ; and now itm
denounces it. One of them should betray Him.
They were all sorrowful at this, and each asksd
" Is it 1 1" and even Judas asked and received so
affirmative answer (Matt.), but probably in u
undertone, for when Jesus said, " That thoudoest
do quickly," none of the rest understood. The
traitor having gone straight to his wicked object,
the end of the Saviour's ministry seemed already
at hand. " Now is the Son of Man glorified, sul
God is glorified in Him." He gave them the
new commandment, to love one another, as though
it were a last bequest to them. To lore was sot
a new thing, it was enjoined in the old Law;
but to be distinguished for a special Christian
love and mutual devotion was what He wooH
have, and this was the new element in the com-
mandment. Founded by a great act of lore, the
Church was to be marked by love (Matt xxvi.
21-25; Mark xiv. 18-21; Luke xxii. 21-23;
John xiii. 21-35).
Towards the close of the meal Jesus instituted
the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. He tool
bread, and gave thanks and brake it, and pre
to His disciples, saying, " This is My Body whits
is given for you ; this do in remembrance of Me."
He then took the cup, which corresponded to
the third cup in the usual course of the paschal
supper, and, after giving thanks, He gave it to
them, saying, " This is My Blood of the new testa-
ment [covenant] which is shed for many.'' It *»
a memorial of His Passion and of this Isst sapper
that preceded it ; and in dwelling on His Passion
in this Sacrament, in true faith, all belieren
draw nearer to the Cross of His sufferings sad
taste more strongly the sweetness of His Ion
and the efficacy of His atoning Death (Matt,
xxvi. 26-29 ; Mark xiv. 22-25 ; Luke xxii. 1%
20 ; 1 Cor. xi. 23-25).
The denial of St. Peter is now foretold, and
to no one would such an announcement be more
incredible than to St. Peter himself. ■'Lord,
why cannot I follow Thee now ? 1 will laydowa
my life for Thy sake." The xeal was sincere,
and as such did the Lord regard it j but here,
as elsewhere, St. Peter did not count the coat
By and by, when the Holy Spirit has com*
down to give them a strength not their owa,
St. Peter and the rest of the disciples will »•
bold to resist persecution, even to the death.
It needs strong love and deep insight to vie*
such an act as this denial with sorrow sad not
with indignation (Matt xxvi. 31-35; Mark rir.
27-31 ; Luke xxii. 31-38 ; John xiii. 36-38)
That great final discourse, which St Jota
alone has recorded, is now delivered. Although
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
in the middle of it there is a mention of de-
parture (John xiv. 31), this perhaps only implies
that they prepared to go ; and then the whole
discourse was delivered in the house before they
proceeded to Gethsemane. Of the contents of
this discourse, which is the voice of the Priest
in the holy of holies, something has been said
already (p. 1674; John iiv.-ivii.).
Friday the 15th of Nisan (April 7), including
part of the eve of it. — " When they had snng a
hymn," which perhaps means, when they had
aung the second part of the Hallel, or song of
praise, which consisted of Psalms civ.-civiii.,
the former part (Psalms cxiii.-cxlv.) having bem
sung at an earlier part of the supper, they went
out into the Mount of Olives. They came to a
place called Gethsemane (oil-press), and it is
probable that the place now pointed out to
travellers is the real scene of that which follows,
and even that its huge olive-trees are the legiti-
mate successors of those which were there when
Jesus visited it. A moment of terrible agony is
approaching, of which all the Apostles need not
be spectators, for He thinks of them, and wishes
to spare them this addition to their sorrows.
So He takes only His three proved companions,
St. Peter, St. James, and St. John, and passes
with them farther into the garden, leaving the
rest seated, probably near the entrance. No
pen can attempt to describe what pasted that
night in that secluded spot. He tells them,
"My Soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto
death : tarry ye here and watch with Me," and
then leaving even the three He goes further, and
in solitude wrestles with an inconceivable trial.
The words of St. Mark are still more expressive
— " He began to be sore amazed, and to be very
heavy " (4>c9anlJt7<r9ai (col atn^ovtly, xiv. 33).
The former word means that He was struck with
a great dread ; not from the fear of physical
suffering, however excruciating, we may well
believe, but from the contact with the sina of
the world, of which, in some inconceivable way,
He here felt the bitterness and the weight. He
did not merely contemplate them, but bear and
feel them. It is impossible to explain this
scene in Gethsemane in any other way. If it
were merely the fear of the terrors of death
that overcame Him, then the martyr Stephen
and many another would surpaas Him In
oonstancy. But when He says, " Abba, Father,
all things are possible unto Thee; take away
this cup from Me : nevertheless not what I will
but what Thou wilt" (Mark), the cup was filled
with a far bitterer potion than death ; it was
flavoured with the poison of the sins of all man-
kind against its God. Whilst the sinless Son is
thus carried two ways by the present horror
and the strong determination to do the Father's
Will, the disciples have sunk to sleep. It was
in search of consolation that He came back to
them. The disciple who had been so ready to
ask, " Why cannot I follow Thee now ? " must
hear another question, that rebukes his former
confidence — "Couldest not thou watch one
hour ? " A second time He departs and wrestles
in prayer with the Father; bat although the
words He utters are almost the same (Mark
says " the same "), He no longer asks that the
cup may pass awny from Him — " If this cup
may not pass awav from Me except I drink it,
Thy will be done " (Matt.). A second time He
JESUS CHRIST
1693
returns and finds them sleeping. The same
scene is repeated yet a third time ; and then all
is concluded. Henceforth they may sleep and
take their rest ; never more shall they be asked
to watch one hour with Jesus, for His ministry
in the flesh is at an end. " The hour is at hand,
and the Son of Man is betrayed into the hands
of sinners" (Matt.). The prayer of Jesus in
this place has always been regarded, and with
reason, as of great weight against the Monothe-
lite heresy. It expresses the natural shrinking
of the human will from a horror which the
Divine nature has admitted into it, yet without
sin. Never does He say, " I will flee ; " He
says, " If it be possible ; and leaves that to
the decision of the Father. That horror and
dread arose from the spectacle of human sin ;
from bearing the weight and guilt of human
sin as about to make atonement for it; and
from a conflict with the powers of darkness.
Thus this scene is in complete contrast to the
Transfiguration. The same companions wit-
nessed both; but there there was peace, and
glory, and honour, for the sinless Son of God ;
here fear and conflict ; there God bore testimony
to Him ; here Satan for the last time tempted
Him. (On the account of the Agony see Krum-
macher, Der Leidende Christus, p. 206 ; Matt.
xxvi. 36-46; Mark xiv. 32-42; Luke xxii.
39-46 ; John xviii. 1.)
Judas now appeared to complete his work.
In the doubtful light of torches, a kiss from
him waa the sign to the officers whom they
should take. St. Peter, whose name is first
given in St. John's Gospel, drew a sword and
smote a servant of the high-priest, and cut off*
his ear ; but his Lord refused such succour, and
healed the wounded man. He treated the seizure
as a step in the fulfilment of the prophecies
about Him, and resisted it not. All the dis-
ciples forsook Him and fled (Matt. xxvi. 47-56 ;
Mark xiv. 43-52 ; Luke xxii. 47-53 ; John xviii.
2-12).
There is some difficulty in arranging the
events that immediately follow, so as to embrace
all the four accounts. — The data will be found
in the Commentary of Olshausen, in Wieseler
(Chron. Syn. p. 401 sqq.), and in Greswell's
Dissertations (iii. 200 sqq.). On the capture of
Jesus He was first taken to the house of Annas,
the father-in-law of Caiaphas (see p. 1665) the
high-priest. It has been argued that as Annas
is called, conjointly with Caiaphas, the high-
priest, he must have held some actual office in
connexion with the priesthood, and Lightfoot
and others suppose that he was the vicar or
deputy of the high-priest, and Selden that he
was president of the Council of the Sanhedrin ;
but this is uncertain.* It might appear from
the course of St. John's narrative that the ex-
amination of our Lord, and the first denial of
St. Peter, took place in the house of Annas
(John xviii. 13, 14). But the 24th verse is
retrospective — " Now Annas had sent Him bound
unto Caiaphas the high-priest" (artVrciAf,
aorist for pluperfect : see Winer's Qrammar) ;
and probably all that occurred after r. 14 took
place not at the house of Annas, but at that of
• Mr. Qreswell sees no uncertainty, and asserts as a
fact tbat be was the high-priest, vicar, and vice-president
of the 8anhedrln (p. 200).
Digitized by
Google
1694
JESUS CHBIST
Caiaphas. It is not likely that St. Peter gained
admittance to two houses in which two separate
judicial examinations took place with which he
had nothing ostensibly to do, and this would be
forced on us if we assumed that St. John
described what took place before Annas, and the
other Evangelists what took place before Caiaphas.
The house of the bigh-priest consisted probably,
like other Eastern houses, of an open central
court with chambers round it. Into this court
a gate admitted them, at which a woman stood
to open. St. Peter, who had fled like the rest
from the side of Jesus, followed afar off with
another disciple, probably St. John, and the
latter procured him admittance into the court
of the high-priest's house. As he passed in, the
lamp of the portress threw its light on his face,
and she took note of him ; and afterwards, at
the fire which had been lighted, she put the
question to him, "Art not thou also one of
this man's disciples ? " (John.) All the zeal
and boldness of St, Peter seem to hare deserted
him. This was indeed a time of great spiritual
weakness and ; depression, and the power of
darkness had gained an influence over the
Apostle's mind. He had come as in secret ; he
is determined so to remain, and he denies his
Master ! Feeling now the danger of bis situa-
tion, he went out into the porch, and there some
one, or, looking at all the accounts, probably
several persons, asked him the question a second
time, and he denied more strongly. About an
hour after, when he had returned into the
court, the same question was put to him a third
time, with the same result. Then the cock
crew ; and Jesus, Who was within sight, prob-
ably in some open room communicating with
the court, "turned and looked upon Peter.
And Peter remembered the word of the Lord,
how He had said unto him, Before the cock crow,
thou shalt deny He thrice. And Peter went
out and wept bitterly" (Luke). Let no man
who cannot fathom the utter perplexity and
distress of such a time presume to judge the
zealous disciple hardly. He trusted too much to
his own strength ; he did not enter into the full
meaning of the words, " Watch and pray lest ye
enter into temptation." Self-confidence betrayed
him into a great sin ; and the most merciful
Lord restored him after it. "Let him that
thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall"
(1 Cor x. 12 ; Matt. xxvi. 57, 58, 69-75 ; Mark
xiv. 53, 54, 66-72 ; Luke xxii. 54-62 ; John xviii.
13-18, 24-27).
The first interrogatory to which our Lord was
subject (John xviii. 19-24) was addressed to Him
by Caiaphas (Annas ?, Olshansen, Wieseler), pro-
bably before the Sanhedrin had time to assemble.
It was the questioning of an inquisitive person
who had an important criminal in his presence,
rather than a formal examination. The Lord's
refusal to answer is thus explained and justified.
When the more regular proceedings begin, He is
ready to answer. A servant of the high-priest,
knowing that he should thereby please his
master, smote the cheek of the Son of God with
the palm of his hand. But this was only the
beginning of horrors. At the dawn of day the
Sanhedrin, summoned by the high-priest in the
course of the night, assembled, and brought their
band of false witnesses, whom they must have
had ready before.^ These gave their testimony
JESUS CHRIST
(see Psalm xxvii. 12), but even before thii unjust
tribunal it could not stand ; it was so fall of
contradictions. At last two false wtaeaa
came, and their testimony was very like the
truth. They deposed that He had said, "I will
destroy this temple, that is made with hudt,
and within three days I will build another made
without hands " (Mark xiv. 58). The perrerrios
is slight but important ; for Jesus did not ay
that He would destroy (see John ii. 19), which
was jnst the point that would irritate the Jen.
Even these two fell into contradictions. The
high-priest now with a solemn adjuration aski
Him whether He is the Christ the Son of Goi.
He answers that He is, and foretells His retain
in glory and power at the last day. This ii
enough for their purpose. They pronounce Him
guilty of a crime for which death should be tie
punishment. It appears that the Council wis
now suspended or broken up ; for Jesus it de-
livered over to the brutal violence of the people,
which could not have occurred whilst the
supreme court of the Jews was sitting. TV
Prophets had foretold this violence (Is. L 6), ui
also the meekness with which it would be boru
(Is. liii. 7). And yet this "lamb led to tie
slaughter " knew that it was He that skull
judge the world, ^including every one of Hit
persecutors. The Sanhedrin had been Titbit
the range of its duties in taking cognisance of
all who claimed to be Prophets. If the quesuoc
put to Jesus had been merely, Art Thoa the
Messiah ? this body should have gone into the
question of His right to the title, and decided
upon the evidence. But the question was nail;
twofold, "Art Thou the Christ, and in tint
Name dost Thou also call Thyself the Son of
God ? " There was no blasphemy in clsimiig
the former name, but there was in assuming tie
latter. Henoe the proceedings were cut short
They had closed their eyes to the evidence,
accessible to all, of the miracles of Jesus, that
He was indeed the Son of God, and without
these they were not likely to believe that II?
could claim a title belonging to no other among
the children of men (John xviii. 19-24; Lufct
xxii. 63-71; Matt. xxvi. 59-68; Hark nt.
55-65).
Although they had pronounced Jesus to be
guilty of death, the Sanhedrin possessed so
power to carry out such a sentence (Joseph",
Ant. xx. 6). So as soon as it was day they took
Him to Pilate, the Roman procurator. The htU
of judgment, or praetorium, was probably •
part of the Tower of Antonia near the Tempi*!
where the Roman garrison was. Pilate, hearii;
that Jesus was an offender under their Law, ***
about to give them leave to treat him accord-
ingly ; and this would have made it quite safe
to execute Him. But the council, wishing to
shift the responsibility from themselves, from >
fear of some reaction amongst the people is
favour of the Lord, such as they had seen os
the first day of that week, said that it was not
lawful for them to put any man to death; and
having condemned Jesus for blasphemy, they
now strove to have Him condemned by Pilate
for a political crime, for calling Himself the
King of the Jews. But the Jewish punishroest
was stoning; whilst crucifixion was a Boma»
punishment, inflicted occasionally on those who
were not Roman . citizen* ; and thus it <*•"«
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHBIST
about that the Lord's saying as to the mode of
His Death was fulfilled (Hatt. xi. 19, with
John xii. 32, 33). From the first Jesus found
favour in the eyes of Pilate ; His answer that
His kingdom was not of this world, and there-
fore could not menace the Roman rule, was
accepted, and Pilate pronounced that he found
no fault in Him. Not so easily were the Jews
to be cheated of their prey. They heaped up
accusations against Him as a disturber of the
public peace (Luke xxiii. 5). Pilate was no
match for their vehemence. Finding that Jesus
was a Galilean, he sent Him to Herod to be
dealt with ; but Herod, after cruel mockery
and persecution, sent Him back to Pilate. Now
commenced the fearful struggle between the
Roman procurator, a weak as well as cruel man,
and the Jews. Pilate was detested by the Jews
as cruel, treacherous, and oppressive. Other
records of his life do not represent him merely
as the weakling that he appears here. He had
violated their national prejudices, and had used
the knives of assassins to avert the consequences.
But the Jews knew the weak point in his breast-
plate. He was the merely worldly and profes-
sional statesman, to whom the favour of the
Emperor was life itself, and the only evil of
life a downfall from that favour. It was their
policy therefore to threaten to denounce him to
Caesar for lack of zeal in suppressing a rebellion,
the leader of which was aiming at a crown.
In his way Pilate believed in Christ; this the
greatest crime of a stained life was that with
which his own will had the least to do. But he
did not believe so as to make him risk delation
to his Master and all its possible consequences.
He yielded to the stronger purpose of the Jews,
and suffered Jesus to be put to death. Not
many years after, the consequences which he
had stained his soul to avert came upon him.
He was accused and banished, and like Judas,
the other great accomplice in this crime of the
Jews, put an end to his own life. [See Pilate.]
The well-known incidents of the second inter-
view are soon recalled. After the examination
by Herod, and the return of Jesus, Pilate pro-
posed to release Him, as it was usual on the
Feast-day to release a prisoner to the Jews out
of grace. Pilate knew well that the priests and
rulers would object to this ; but it was a covert
appeal to the people, also present, with whom
Jesus had so lately been in favour. The multi-
tude, persuaded by the priests, preferred another
prisoner, called Barabbas. In the meantime
the wife of Pilate sent a warning to him to
have nothing to do with the death of "that
just man," as she had been troubled in a dream
on account of Him. Obliged, as he thought, to
yield to the clamours of the people, he took
water and washed his hands before them, and
adopting the phrase of his wife, which perhaps
represented the opinion of both of them formed
before this time, he said, " I am innocent of the
blood of this just person ; see ye to it." The
people imprecated on their own heads and those
of their children the blood of Him Whose doom
was thus sealed.
Pilate released unto them Barabbas, " that for
sedition and murder was cast into prison, whom
they had desired " (cp. Acts iii. 14). This was
no unimportant element in their crime. The
choice was offered them between one who had
JESUS CHRIST
1695
broken the laws of God and man, and One Who
had given His whole life up to the doing good
and speaking truth amongst them. They con-
demned the latter to death, and were eager for
the deliverance of the former. "And in fact
their demanding the acquittal of a murderer is
but the parallel to their requiring the death of
an innocent person, as St. Ambrose observes : —
for it is bnt the very law of iniquity, that they
which hate innocence should love crime. They
rejected therefore the Prince of Heaven, and
chose a robber and a murderer, and an insurrec-
tionist, and they received the object of their
choice ; so was it given them, for insurrections
and murders did not fail them till the last, when
their city was destroyed in the midst of murders
and insurrections, which they now demanded of
the Roman governor " (Williams on the Passion,
p. 215).
Now came the scourging, and the blows and
insults of the soldiers, who, uttering truth when
they thought they were only reviling, crowned
Him and addressed Him as King of the Jews.
According to St. John, Pilate now made one
more effort for His release. He thought that
the scourging might appease their rage, he saw
the frame of Jesus bowed and withered with all
that it had gone through ; and, hoping that
this moving sight might inspire them with the
same pity that he felt himself, he brought the
Saviour forth again to them, and said, " Behold
the Man ! " Not even so was their violence
assuaged. He had made Himself the Son of
God, and must die. Pilate still sought to
release Jesus : but the last argument, which had
been in the minds of both sides all along, was
now openly applied to him : " If thou let this
man go, thou art not Caesar's friend." This
saying, which had not been uttered till the
vehemence of rage overcame their decent respect
for Pilate's position, decided the question. He
delivered Jesus to be crucified (Matt, xxvii.
15-30; Mark xv. 6-19; Luke xxiii. 17-25;
John xviii. 39, 40, xix. 1-16). St. John men-
tions that this occurred about the sixth hour,
whereas the Crucifixion, according to St. Mark,
was accomplished at the third hour ; but there
is every reason to think, with Greswell and
Wieseler, that St. John reckons from midnight,
and that this took place at six in the morning,
whilst in St. Mark the Jewish reckoning from
six in the morning is followed, so that the
Crucifixion took place at nine o'clock, the inter-
vening time having been spent in preparations.
Difficult, but not insuperable, chronological
questions arise in connexion with (a) John xiii. 1,
" before the Feast of the Passover ; " (6) John
xviii. 28, "and they themselves went not into
the judgment-hall lest they should be defiled,
but that they might eat the Passover ; " and
(c) John xix. 14, " And it was the preparation
of the Passover, about the sixth hour," in all of
which the account of John seems dissonant with
that of the other Evangelists. These passages
are discussed in the various commentaries, but
nowhere more fully than in a paper by Dr.
Robinson (Bibliotheca Sacra, 1845, p. 405), re-
produced in his (English) Harmony in an
abridged form.
One Person alone has been calm amidst the
excitements of that night of horrors. On Him
is now laid the weight of His Cross, or at least
Digitized by
Google
1696
JESUS CHRIST
JESUS CHBIST
of the transverse beam of it; and, with this
pressing Him down, they proceed oat of the
city to Golgotha or Calvary, a place the site of
which is now uncertain. As He began to droop,
His persecutors, unwilling to defile themselves
with the accursed burden, lay hold of Simon of
Cyrene and compel him to carry the Cross after
Jesus. Amongst the great multitude that
followed, were several women, who bewailed
and lamented Him. He bade them not to weep
for Him, but for the widespread destruction of
their nation which should be the punishment
for His Death (Luke). After offering Him wine
and myrrh, they crucified Him between two
thieves. Nothing was wanting to His humilia-
tion; a thief had been preferred before Him,
and two thieves share His punishment. The
soldiers divided His garments and cast lots for
them (see Psalm xxii. 18). Pilate set over Him
in three languages the inscription "Jesus, the
King of the Jews." The chief priests took
exception to this that it did not denounce Him
as falsely calling Himself by that name, but
Pilate refused to alter it. The passers-by and
the Roman soldiers would not let even the
minutes of deadly agony pass in peace ; they
reviled and mocked Him. One of the two
thieves nnderwent a change of heart even on
the cross : he reviled at first (Matt.) ; and then,
at the sight of the constancy of Jesus, repented
(Luke) (Matt, xxvii. ; Mark xv. ; Luke xxiii. ;
John xix.).
In the depths of His bodily suffering, Jesus
calmly commended to St. John, who stood near,
the care of Mary His mother. "Behold thy
son 1 behold thy mother 1 " From the sixth hour
to the ninth there was darkness over the whole
land. At the ninth hour (3 p.m.) Jesus uttered
with a loud voice the opening words of the
xxii. Psalm, all the inspired words of which
referred to the suffering Messiah. One of those
present dipped a sponge in the common sour
wine of the soldiers, and pnt it on a reed to
moisten the Sufferer's lips. Again He cried
with a loud voice, " It is finished " (John),
" Father, into Thy Hands I commend My Spirit "
(Luke) ; and gave up the ghost. His words
upon the Cross had all of them shown how
truly He possessed His Soul in patience even
to the end of the sacrifice He was making :
" Father, forgive them 1 " was a prayer for His
enemies. " This day shalt thon be with Me in
"Paradise," was a merciful acceptance of the
offer of a penitent heart. " Woman, behold thy
son," was a sign of loving consideration, even at
the last, for those He had always loved. " Why
hast Thou forsaken Me?" expressed the fear
and the need of God. " I thirst," the only
word that related to Himself, was uttered
because it was prophesied that they were to
give Him vinegar to drink. "It is finished,"
expresses the completion of that work which,
when He was twelve years old, had been pre-
sent to His Mind, and never absent since ; and
" Into Thy Hands I commend My Spirit," was
the last utterance of His resignation of Himself
to what was laid upon Him (Matt, xxvii. 31-
56 ; Mark xv. 20-41 ; Luke xxiii. 33-49 ; John
xix. 17-30).
On the Death of Jesus the veil which covered
the most Holy Place of the Temple, the place
of the more especial Presence of Jehovah, was
rent in twain, a symbol that we may now have
" boldness to enter into the holiest by the Blood
of Jesus, by a new and living way, which He-
hath consecrated for us, through the reil, that
is to say, through His flesh " (Heb. x. 19, 20).
The priesthood of Christ superseded the priest-
hood of the Law. There was a great earth-
quake. Many who were dead roee from their
graves, although they returned to the dost
again after this great token of Christ's quick-
ening power had been given to many (Matt.):
they were "saints" that slept — probably they,
having most earnestly longed for the sal ra-
tion of Christ, were the first to taste the fruit*
of His conquest of death. The Centurion who
kept guard, witnessing what had taken place,
came to the same conclusion as Pilate and his
wife, "Certainly this was a righteous man;"
he went beyond them, "Truly this Man was
the Son of God " (Mark). Even the people who
had joined in the mocking and reviling were
overcome by the wonders of Hia Death, and
"smote their breasts and returned" (Lake
xxiii. 48). The Jews, very zealous for the
Sabbath in the midst of their murderous work,
begged Pilate that he would put an end to the
punishment by breaking the legs of the crimi-
nals (Lactant. ir. 26), that they might be takes
down and buried before the Sabbath, for which
they were preparing (Deut. xxi. 23 ; Joseph.
B. J. iv. 5, § 2). They who were to execute
this duty found that Jesus was dead and toe
thieves still living; so they performed this
work on the latter only, that a bone of Him
might not be broken (Ex. xii. 46 ; Pa, xxxrr.
20). The Death of the Lord before the others
was, no doubt, partly the consequence of the
previous mental suffering which He had under-
gone, and partly because His Will to die
lessened the natural resistance of the frame to
dissolution. Some seek for a "mysterious
cause" of it, something out of the course of
nature; but we must beware of sneh theories
as would do away with the reality of the
Death, as a punishment inflicted by the hands
of men. Joseph of Arimathaea, a member of
the Council but a secret disciple of Jesus, came
to Pilate to beg the Body of Jesus, that he
might bury it. Nicodemui assisted in this
work of love, and they anointed the Body and
laid it in Joseph's new tomb (Matt, xxvii. 50-
61; Mark xv. 37-47; Luke xxiii. 46-56;
John xix. 30-42).
Saturday the 16M of Nitan (April UK). — Love-
having done its part, hatred did its part also.
The chief priests and Pharisees, with Pilate's
permission, set a watch over the tomb, "lest
His disciples come by night and steal Him
away, and say unto the people, He is risen from
the dead" (Matt, xxvii. 62-66).
Sunday the 17M of Msan (April 9<A). — The
Sabbath ended at six on the evening of Nisan
16th. Early the next morning the Resurrectioa
of Jesus took place. Although He had lain in
the grave for about thirty-six or forty hours,
yet these formed part of three days ; and thus,
by a mode of speaking not unusual to the Jews
(Josephus frequently reckons years in this
manner, the two extreme portions of a year
reckoning as two years), the time of the do-
minion of death over Him is spoken of a> three
days. The order of the event* that fellow is
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
somewhat difficult to harmonise ; for each
Evangelist selects the facts which belong to his
purpose.' The exact hour of the Resurrection
is not mentioned by any of the Evangelists. But
from St. Mark xvi. 2 and 9 we infer that it was
not long before the coming of the women ; and
from the time at which the guards went into
the city to give the alarm the same inference
arises (Matt, xxviii. 11). Of the great mystery
itself, the resumption of life by Him who was
truly dead, we see but little. " There was a
great earthquake, for the Angel of the Lord
descended from heaven, and came and rolled
back the stone from the door and sat upon it.
His countenance was like lightning, and his
raiment white as snow ; and for fear of him the
keepers did shake, and became as dead men"
(Matt.). The women, who had stood by the
cross of Jesus, had prepared spices on the even-
ing before, perhaps to complete the embalming
of our Lord's Body, already performed in haste
by Joseph and Nicodemus. They came very
early on the first day of the week to the
sepulchre. The names of the women are difler-
ently put by the several Evangelists, but with
no real discrepancy. St. Matthew mentions the
two Marys; St. Mark adds Salome to these
two ; St. Luke has the two Marys, Joanna, and
others with them ; and St. John mentions Mary
Magdalene only. In thus citing such names as
seemed good to him, each Evangelist was no
doubt guided by some reason. St. John, from
the especial share which Mary Magdalene took
in the testimony to the fact of the Resurrection,
mentions her only. The women discuss with
one another who should roll away the stone,
that they might do their pious office on the
Body. Bat when they arrive, they find the
stone rolled away, and Jesus no longer in the
sepulchre. He had risen from the dead. Mary
Magdalene at this point goes back in haste ; and
at once, believing that the Body has been
removed by men, tells St. Peter and St. John
that the Lord had been taken away. The other
women, however, go into the Sepulchre, and
they see an Angel (Matt., Mark), or two Angels
(Luke), in bright apparel, who declare to them
that the Lord is risen, and will go before the
disciples into Galilee. The two Angels, men-
tioned by St. Luke, are probably two separate
appearances to different members of the group ;
for he alone mentions an indefinite number of
women. They now leave the sepulchre, and go
in haste to make known the news to the
Apostles. As they were going, "Jesus met
them, saying, All haiL And they came and
held Him by the Feet, and worshipped Him.
Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go
tell My brethren that they go into Galilee, and
there shall they see Me." The eleven do not
believe the account when they receive it. In
the meantime St. Peter and St. John came to
the sepulchre. They ran, in their eagerness,
and St. John arrived first and looked in ; St.
Peter afterwards came up, and it is character-
istic that the awe which had prevented the
other disciple from going in appears to have
been unfelt by St. Peter, who entered at once,
JESUS CHBIST
1697
d In what follows much use has been made of an
excellent paper by Dr. Robinson (BMioUwca Sacra,
IMS, p. 1«2).
BIBLE OICT. — VOL. L
and found the grave-clothes lying, but not Him
Who had worn them. This fact must have sug-
gested that the removal was not the work of
human hands. They then returned, wondering
at what they had seen. Mary Magdalene, how-
ever, remained weeping at the tomb, and she
too saw the two Angels in the tomb, though St.
Peter and St. John did not. They address her,
and she answers, still, however, without any
suspicion that the Lord is risen. As she turns
away she sees Jesus, but in the tumult of her
feeling does not even recognise Him at His first
address. But He calls her by name, and then
she joyfully recognises her Master. He says,
" Touch Me not, for I am not yet ascended to
My Father: but go to My brethren, and say
unto them, I ascend unto My Father and your
Father, and to My God and your God." The
meaning of the prohibition to touch Him must
be sought in the state of mind of Mary, since
St. Thomas, for whom it was desirable as an
evidence of the identity of Jesus, was permitted
to touch Him. Hitherto she had not realized
the mystery of the Resurrection. She saw the
Lord, and would have touched His hand or His
garment in her joy. Our Lord's answer means,
" Death has now set a gulf between us. Touch
not, as you once might have done, this Body,
which is now glorified by its conquest over
death, for with this Body I ascend to the
Father" (so Euthymius, Theophylact, and
others). Space has been wanting to discuss the
difficulties of arrangement that attach to this
part of the narrative. The remainder of the
appearances present less matter for dispute ; in
enumerating them the important passage in
1 Cor. xv. must be brought in. The third ap-
pearance of our Lord was to St. Peter (Luke,
Paul) ; the fourth to the two disciples going to
Emmnus in the evening (Mark, Luke) ; the fifth
in the same evening to the eleven as they sat at
meat (Mark, Luke, John). All of these occurred
on the first day of the week, the very day of
the Resurrection. Exactly a week after, He
appeared to the Apostles, and gave St. Thomas
a convincing proof of His Resurrection (John) ;
this was the sixth appearance. The seventh
was in Galilee, where seven of the Apostles
were assembled, some of them probably about
to return to their old trade of fishing (John).
The eighth was to the eleven (Matt.), and prob-
ably to five hundred brethren assembled with
them (Paul) on a mountain in Galilee. The
ninth was to St. James (Paul) ; and the last to
the Apostles at Jerusalem just before the
Ascension (Acts).
Whether this be the exact enumeration,
whether a single appearance may have been
quoted twice, or two distinct ones identified, it
is clear that for forty days the Lord appeared
to His disciples and to others at intervals.
These disciples, according to the common testi-
mony of all the Evangelists, were by no means
enthusiastic and prejudiced expectants of the
Resurrection. They were sober-minded men.
They were only too slow to apprehend the
nature of our Lord's Kingdom. Almost to the
last they shrank from the notion of His suffer-
ing death, and thought that such a calamity
would be the absolute termination of all their
hopes. But from the time of the Ascension
they went about preaching the truth that Jesus
5 Q
Digitized by
Google
1698
JESUS CHRIST
JESUS CHBI8T
was risen from the dead. Kings could not alter
their conviction on this point : the fear of death
could not hinder them from proclaiming it (see
Acts ii. 24, 32, iv. 8, 13, iii., x., xiii. ; 1 Cor. xv.
5 ; 1 Pet. i. 21). Against this erent no real
objection has ever been brought, except that it
is a miracle. So far as historical testimony
goes, nothing is better established.
In giving His disciples their final commission,
the Lord said, " All power is given unto Me in
heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore and teach
all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost :
teaching them to observe all things whatsoever
I have commanded you : and, lo, I am with you
alway, even unto the end of the world " (Matt,
xxviii. 18-20). The living energy of Christ is
ever present with His Church, even though He
has withdrawn from it His bodily Presence.
And the facts of the Life that has been before
us are the substance of the apostolic teaching
now as in all ages. That God and man were
reconciled by the mission of the Redeemer into
the world, and by His self-devotion to death'
(2 Cor. v. 18 ; Eph. i. 10 ; Col. i. 20) ; that this
sacrifice has procured for man the restoration of
the Divine love (Rom. r. 8, viii. 32 ; 1 John iv.
9); that we by His Incarnation become the
children of God, knit to Him in bonds of love,
instead of slaves under the bondage of the Law
(Rom. viii. 15, 29 ; Gal. iv. 1) ; these are the
common ideas of the apostolic teaching.
Brought into such a relation to Christ and His
Life, we see in all its acts and stages something
that belongs to and instructs us. His Birth,
His Baptism, Temptation, Lowliness of Life and
Mind, His Sufferings, Death, Burial, Resurrec-
tion, and Ascension, all enter into the apostolic
preaching, as furnishing motives, examples, and
analogies for our use. Hence every Christian
should study well this sinless Life, not in human
commentaries only, still less in a bare abstract
like the present, but in the living pages of inspira-
tion. Even if he began the study with a luke-
warm belief, he might hope, with God's grace,
that the conviction would break in upon him
that did upon the Centurion at the cross —
« Truly this is the Son of God."
Chronoi/xjy. — Year of the birth of Christ. —
It is certain that our Lord was born before the
death of Herod the Great. Herod died, accord-
ing to Josephus (Ant. xvii. 8, § 1), "having
reigned thirty-four years from the time that he
had procured Antigonus to be slain ; but thirty-
seven from the time that he had been declared
king by the Romans " (see also B. J. i. 33, § 8).
His appointment as king, according to the same
writer (Ant. xiv. 14, § 5), coincides with the
184th Olympiad, and the consulship of C.
Domitius Calvinus and C. Asinius Pollio. It
appears that he was made king by the joint
influence of Antony and Octavius; and the
reconciliation of these two men took place on
the death of Fulvia in the year 714. Again,
the death of Antigonus and the siege of Jeru-
salem, which form the basis of calculation for
the thirty-four years, coincide (Joseph. Ant. xiv.
16, § 4) with the consulship of M. Vipsanius
Agrippa and L. Caninius Gallus,— that is, with
the year of Rome T17 ; and occurred in the
month Sivan (=June or July). From these
facts we are justified in placing the death of
Herod in A.c.c. 750. Those who place it one
year later overlook the mode in which Josephus
reckons Jewish reigns. Wieseler shows by
several passages that he reckons the year from
the month Nisan to Nisan, and that he counts the
fragment of a year at either extreme as one
complete year. In this mode, thirty-four years,
from June or July 717, would apply to any date
between the first of Nisan 750 and the first of
Nisan 751. And thirty-seven years from 714
would apply likewise to any date within the
same termini. WieseleT finds facts confirmatory
of this in the dates of the reigns of Herod
Antipas and Archelaus (see his Chronologieche
Synapse, p. 55). Between these two dates
Josephus furnishes means for a more exact de-
termination. Just after Herod's death the Pass-
over occurred (Nisan 15th), and upon Herod's
death Archelaus caused a seven-days' mourning
to be kept for him (Ant. xvii. 9, § 3 ; xvii. 8,
§ 4) ; so that it would appear that Herod died
somewhat more than seven days before the
Passover in 750, and therefore in the first few
days of the month of Nisan A.U.C. 750. Now,
as Jesus was born before the death of Herod, it
follows that the Dionysian era, which corre-
sponds to A.u.c. 754, is at least four years too
late.
Many have thought that the star seen by the
wise men gives grounds for an exact calculation
of the time of our Lord's birth. It will be
found, however, that this is not the case. For
it has first been assumed that the star was not
properly a star, but an astronomical conjunction
of known stars. Kepler finds a conjunction
of Jupiter and Saturn in the sign Pisces in
A.C.C. 747, and again in the spring of the next
year, with the planet Mars added ; and from this
he would place the birth of Jesus in 748.
Ideler, on the same kind of calculation, places it
in A.U.C. 747. But this process only proves a
highly improbable date, on highly improbable
evidence. The words of St. Matthew are ex-
tremely hard to reconcile with the notion of a
conjunction of planets ; it was a star that ap-
peared, and it gave the Magi ocular proof of its
purpose by guiding them to where the young
child was. But a new light has been thrown on
the subject by the Rev. C. Pritchard, who has
made the calculations afresh. Ideler (Handbvch
d. Chronologie) asserts that there were three
conjunctions of Jupiter and Saturn in B.C. 7,
and that in the third they approached so near
that, "to a person with weak eyes, the one
planet would almost seem to come within the
range of the dispersed light of the other, so
that both might appear as one star." Dean
Alford puts it much more strongly, that on
November 12 in that year the planets were so
close " that an ordinary eye would regard them
as one star of surpassing brightness" (Greek
Test, m toe.). Mr. Pritchard finds, and his cal-
culations have been verified and confirmed at
Greenwich, that this conjunction occurred not
on November 12 but early on December 5 ; and
that even with Ideler s somewhat strange
postulate of an observer with weak eyes, the
planets could never have appeared as one star,
for they never approached each other within
double the apparent diameter of the moon
(Memoirs S. Astr. Soc. vol. xxv.). [Star in the
East.] Most of the chronologisls find an ele-
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
ment of calculation in the order of Herod to
destroy all the children " from two years old
and under " (4»o SictoGj koI Ktrriartpm, Matt. ii.
16). But the age within which he destroyed
would be measured rather by the extent of his
fears than by the accuracy of the calculation of
the Magi. Greswell has laboured to show that,
from the inclusive mode of computing years,
mentioned above in this article, the phrase of
the Evangelist would apply to all children just
turned one year old, which is true ; but he
assumes that it would not apply to any that
were older, say to those aged a year and eleven
months. Herod was a cruel man, angry and
afraid ; and it is vain to assume that he ad-
justed the limit of his cruelties with the nicest
accuracy. As a basis of calculation the visit of
the Magi, though very important to us in other
respects, must be dismissed (but see Greswell,
Z/issertations, &c, Diss, xviii. ; Wieseler, Chron.
Syn. p. 57 sqq., with all the references there).
The census taken by Augustus Caesar, which
led to the journey of Mary from Nazareth just
before the Birth of the Lord, has also been
looked on as an important note of time, in
reference to the chronology of the life of Jesus.
Several difficulties have to be disposed of in
considering it. (i.) It is [argued that there is
' no record in other histories of a census of the
whole Roman empire in the time of Augustus,
(ii.) Such a census, if held during the reign of
Herod the Great, would not have included
Judaea, for it was not yet a Roman province,
(iii.) The Roman mode of taking such a census
was with reference to actual residence, so that
it would not have been requisite for Joseph to
go to Bethlehem, (iv.) The state of Mary at
the time would render such a journey less
probable, (v.) St. Luke himself seems to say
that this census was not actually taken until
ten years later (ii. 2).
To these objections, of which it need not be
said Strauss has made the worst, answers may
be given in detail, though scarcely in this place
with the proper completeness, (i.) " As we know
of the Icijis actiones and their abrogation, which
were quite as important in respect to the early
period of Roman history, as the census of the
empire was in respect to a later period, not from
the historical works of Livy, Dionysius, or Poly-
bius, but from a legal work, the Institutes of
Gaius ; so we should think it strange if the works
of Paullus and Ulpian De Censibus had come down
to us perfect, and no mention were made in them
of the census of Augustus ; while it would not
surprise us that in the ordinary histories of the
time it should be passed over in silence"
(Huschke in Wieseler, p. 78). "If Suetonius
in his life [of Augustus] does not mention this
census, neither does Spartian in his life of
Hadrian devote a single syllable to the edictum
perpetuum, which, in later times, has chiefly
adorned the name of that emperor " (ib.). Thus
it seems that the argummtum de tatiturnitate is
very far from conclusive. The edict possibly
affected only the provinces, and in them was
not carried out at once ; and in that case it
would attract less attention at any one parti-
cular moment.
In the time of Augustus all the procurators
of the empire were brought under bis sole
control and supervision for the first time
JESUS CHBIST
1699
a.u.c. 731 (Dio Cass. liii. 32). This movement
towards centralisation renders it not improbable
that a general census of the empire should be
ordered, although it may not have been carried
into effect suddenly, nor intended to be so. But
proceedings in the way of an estimate of the
empire, if not an actual census, are distinctly
recorded to have taken place in the time of
Augustus. "Huic addendae sunt mensurae
limitum et terminomm ex libris Augusti et
Neronis Caesarum : sed et Balbi mensoris, qui
temporibus Augusti omnium provinciarum et
civitatum formas et mensuras compertas in
commentaries retulit et legem agrariam per
universitatem provinciarum distinxit et de-
claravit" (Frontinns, in the Rei Agrar. Auct.
of Goes, p. 109, quoted by Wieseler). This is
confirmed from other sources (Wieseler, pp. 81,
82). Augustus directed, as we learn, a brevi-
arium tottus imperii to be made, in which-
according to Tacitus, "Opes publicae contine,
bantur, quantum civium sociorumque in arm is,
quot classes, regna, provincial, tributa aut vec-
tigalia et necessitates ac largitiones" (Tacit.
Atmal. i. 11 ; Sueton. Aug. 28, 101 ; Dio Cass,
liii. 30, lvi. 33, given in Wieseler; see also
Ritschl, in Xhein. Mas. fur Philot. N. S., i.
481). All this makes a census by order of
Augustus in the highest degree probable, apart
from St. Luke's testimony. The time of our
Lord's Birth was most propitious. Except some
troubles in Dacia the Roman world was at peace,
and Augustus was in the full enjoyment of his
power. But there are persons who, though
they would at once believe this fact on the
testimony of some inferior historian, added to
these confirmatory facta, reject it just because
an Evangelist has said it.
Next comes the objection (ii. and iii.), that, as
Judaea was not yet a Roman province, such a
census would not have included that country, and
that it was not taken from the residence of each
person, but from the place of his origin. It is
very probable that the mode of taking the census
would afford a clue to the origin of it. Augustus
was willing to include in his census all the tribu-
tary kingdoms, for the regna are mentioned in
the passage in Tacitus ; but this could scarcely be
enforced. Perhaps Herod, desiring to gratify the
Emperor, and to emulate him in his love for this
kind of information, was ready to undertake the
census for Judaea ; but in order that- it might
appear to be his rather than the Emperor's, he
took it in the Jewish manner rather than in the
Roman, in the place whence the family sprang,
rather than in that of actual residence. There
might be some hardship in this, and we might
wonder that a woman about to become a mother
should be compelled to leave her home for such
a purpose, if we were sure that it was not
voluntary. A Jew of the house and lineage of
David would not willingly forego that position ;
and if it were necessary to assert it by going to
the city of David, he would probably make some
sacrifice to do so. Thus the objection (iv.), on
the ground of the state of Mary's health, is
entitled to little consideration. It is said indeed
that " all went to be taxed, every one into his
own city " (Luke ii. 3) ; but not that the decree
prescribed that they should. Nor could there
well be any means of enforcing such a regula-
tion. But the principle being adopted, that
5 Q 2
Digitized by
Google
1700
JESUS CHRIST
Jews were to be taxed in the placet to which
their families belongel, St. Lake tells as by
these words that as a matter of fact it was
generally followed, (v.) The objection that,
according to St. Luke's own admission, the
census was not taken now, but when Quiriuus
was governor of Syria, remains to be disposed
of. St. Lake makes two statements, that at
the time of our Lord's birth (" in those days ")
there was a decree for a census, and that this
taxing first came about, or took effect (rp&Ti)
iyivero), when Cyrenius, or Quirinus, was
governor of Syria (Luke ii. 1, 2) [see Cybehius].
And as the two statements are quite distinct,
and the very form of expression calls special
attention to some remarkable circumstance about
this census, no historical inaccuracy is proved,
unless the statements are shown to be contra-
dictory, or one or other of them to be untrue.
That Strauss makes such a charge without
establishing either of these grounds, is worthy
of a writer so dishonest (Leben Jesu, i. ch. iv. 32).
Now, without going into all the theories that
hare been proposed to explain this second verse,
there is no doubt that the words of St. Luke
can be explained in a natural manner, without
violence to the sense or contradiction. Herod
undertakes the census according to Jewish forms ;
but his death the same year puts an end to it, and
no more is heard of it: and but for its influence
as to the place of onr Lord's Birth it would not
have been recorded at all. But the Evangelist
knows that, as soon as a census (diroypad^) is
mentioned, persons conversant with Jewish his-
tory will think at once of the census taken after
the banishment of Archelaus, or about ten years
later, which was avowedly a Roman census, and
which caused at first some resistance in conse-
quence (Joseph. Ant. xviii. 1, § 1). The second
verse therefore means — " No census was actually
completed then, and I know that the first Roman
census was that which followed the banishment
of Archelaus ; but the decree went out much
earlier, in the time of Herod." That this is the
only possible explanation of so vexed a passage
cannot of course be affirmed.* But it will bear
this interpretation, and upon the whole evidence
there is no ground whatever for denying either
assertion of the Evangelist, or for considering
them irreconcilable. Many writers have con-
founded an obscurity with a proved inaccuracy.
The value of this census, as a fact in the chron-
ology of the life of Christ, depends on the con-
nexion which is sought to be established between
it and the insurrection which broke out under
Matthias and Judas, the son of Sariphaeus, in
the last illness of Herod (Joseph. Ant. xv. 6, § 1).
If the insurrection arose out of the census, a
* See a summary of the older theories in Kulnoel (In
Luc. U. a) ; alio in Meyer (In Luc. U. 2), who gives an
account of the view, espoused by many, that Quirinus
was now a t^ecial commissioner tor this census In Syria
(riy** • *& SvpiaO, wbich the Greek will not bear. But
if the theory of the younger Zumpt be correct, then
Quirinus was twice governor of Syria, and the Evangelist
would here refer to bis former rule. The difficulty is
that Josephus (Ant. wilt. 1, } 1) mentions that Quirinus
was sent, after the banishment of Archelaus, to take a
census. Either Zumpt would set this authority aside,
or would hold ih.it Quirinus, twice governor, twice made
a census ; which is scarcely an easier hypothesis than
some others.
JESUS CHRIST
point of connexion between the sacred history
and that of Josephus is made out. Such a
connexion, however, has not been clearly made
out (see Wieseler, Olshsnsen, and others, for the
grounds on which it is supposed to rest).
The age of Jesus at His Baptism (Lake iii. 33)
affords an element of calculation. " And Jesus
Himself began to be about (sVo-el) thirty years
of age." Born in the beginning of A.u.c 75*>
(or the end of 749), Jesus would be thirty ia
the beginning of A.u.c. 780 (a.d. 27). Greswell
is probably right in placing the Baptism of our
Lord in the beginning of this year, and the first
Passover during His ministry would be that of
the same year ; Wieseler places the Baptism
later, in the spring or summer of the same year.
(On the sense of if%i)t*ros, see the commenta-
tors.) To this first Passover after the Baptism
attaches a note of time which will confirm the
calculations already made. " Then said tbe
Jews, Forty and six years was this Temple i*
building (alxoSop^Oi)), and wilt Thou rear it up
in three days?" There can be no doubt that
this refers to the rebuilding of tbe Temple by
Herod : it cannot mean the second Temple, built
after the Captivity, for this was finished i>
twenty years (B.C. 535 to B.C. 515). Herod. i»
the eighteenth year of his reign (Joseph. Am.
xv. 1 1, § 1), began to reconstruct the Temple or
a larger and more splendid scale (A.u.c. 734)
The work was not finished till long after »i>
death, till A.u.c. 818. It is inferred frees
Josephus {Ant. xv. 11, §§ 5, 6) that it was
begun in the month Cisleu, A.u.c. 734. And r
the Passover at which this remark was mad'
was that of A.U.C. 780, then forty-five years awl
some months have elapsed, which, according t»
the Jewish mode of reckoning (p. 1663), wonW
be spoken of as " forty and six years."
Thus the death of Herod enables us to fix a
boundary on one side to the calculations of ear
Lord's Birth. The building of the Temple, for
forty-six years, confirms this, and also gives a
boundary on the other. From the atar of thr
Magi nothing conclusive can be gathered, nor
from the census of Augustus. One datum re-
mains : the commencement of the preaching si'
John the Baptist is connected with the fifteenth
year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar (Luke iii. 1)
The rule of Tiberius may be calculated either
from the beginning of his sole reign, after the
death of Augustus, A.U.C. 767, or from his joint
government with Augustus, i.e. from the be-
ginning of A.U.C. 765. In the latter case tbe
fifteenth year would correspond with A.u.c 779,
which goes to confirm the rest of the calculation*
relied on in this article.
An endeavour has been mode to deduce tbe
time of the year of the Birth of Jesus from the
fact that Zacharias was " a priest of the coarse
of Abia " (Luke i. 5). The twenty-four courses
of priest; served in the Temple according to a
regular weekly cycle, the order of which »
known. The date of the conception of John
would be about fifteen months before the birth
of our Lord ; and if the date of the latter be
A.u.c. 750, then the former would fall in A.u.c.
748. Can it be ascertained in what part of the
year 748 the course of Abia would be on doty in
the Temple ? , The Talmud preserves a tradition
that the Temple was destroyed by Titsut, a.d. 70.
on the ninth day of the month Ab. Josephs*
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
mentions the date as the 10th of Ab {Bel. Jud.
vi. 4, §§ 5, 8). Without attempting to follow
the steps by which these are reconciled, it seems
that the " coarse " of Jehoiarib had just entered
upon its weekly duty at the time the Temple
was destroyed. Wieseler, assuming that the
day in question would be the same as the 5th of
August, A.u.c. 823, reckons back the weekly
courses to A.u.c. 748, the course of Jehoiarib
being the first of all (1 Ch. xxiv. 7). "It
follows," he says, " that the ministration of the
course of Abia, 74 years 10 months and 2 days,
or (reckoning 19 intercalary years) 27,335 days,
earlier (=162 hieratic circles and 119 days
earlier), fell between the 3rd and 9th of October,
A.U.C. 748. Reckoning from the 10th of October,
on which Zacharias might reach his house, and
allowing nine months for the pregnancy of
Elizabeth, to which six months are to be added
(Luke i. 26), we have in the whole one year and
three months, which gives the 10th of January
as the date of Christ's birth." Greswell, how-
ever, from the same starting-point, arrives at
the date April 5th ; and when two writers so
laborious can thus differ in their conclusions, we
must rather suspect the soundness of their
method than their accuracy in the use of it.
Similar differences will be found amongst
eminent writers in every part of the chronology
of the Gospels. For example, the Birth of our
Lord is placed in B.C. 1 by Pearson and Hug;
B.C. 2 by Scaliger ; B.C. 3 by Baronius, Calvisius,
Siiskind, and Paulus ; B.C. 4 by Lamy, Beugel,
Anger, Wieseler, and Greswell ; B.C. 5 by Ussher
and Petavius; B.C. 7 by Meier and Sanclemente.
And whilst the calculations given above seem
sufficient to determine us, with Lamy, Ussher,
Petavius, Bengel, Wieseler, and Greswell, to the
close of B.C. 5, or early part of B.C. 4, let it
never be forgotten that there is a distinction
between these researches, which the Holy Spirit
has left obscure and doubtful, and " the weightier
matters " of the Gospel, the things which directly
pertain to man's salvation. The silence of the
inspired writers, and sometimes the obscurity of
their allusions to matters of time and place,
have given rise to disputation. But their words
admit of no doubt when they tell us that Christ
Jesus came into the world to save sinners, and
that wicked hands crucified and slew Him, and
that we and all men must own Him as the Lord
and Redeemer.
Sources. — The bibliography of the subject of
the Life of Jesus has been most fully set out in
Hase, Leben Jesu, Leipsic, 1854, 4th edition. It
would be vain to attempt to rival that enor-
mous catalogue. The principal works employed
in the present article are the Four Gospels, and
the best-known commentaries on them, including
those of Bengel, Wetstein, Lightfoot, De Wette,
Lticke, Olshausen, Stier, Alford, Williams, and
others ; Neander, Leben Jesu (Hamburg, 1837),
as against Strauss, Leben Jesu (Tubingen, 1837) ;
and, also consulted, Stackhouso's History of the
Bible; Ewald, Geschichte des Volkes Israel, vol.
v., Christus (Gettingen, 1857); Baumgarten,
Geschichte Jesu (Brunswick, 1859); Krum-
inacher, Der Leidende Christus (Bielefeld, 1854).
Upon the harmony of the Gospels, tee the list of
works given under Gospels : the principal works
used for the present article have been, Wieseler,
Chronologische Synapse, &c., Hamburg, 1843;
JESUS CHRIST
1701
Greswell's Harmony, Prolegomena, and Disserta-
tions, Oxford, v. y. ; two papers by Dr. Robinson
in the Bibliotheca Sacra for 1845 ; and Clausen,
Tabulae Synopticae, Havniae, 1829. Special
works, such as Dean Trench on the Parables and
on the Miracles, have also been consulted; and
detached monographs, sermons, and essays in
periodicals. For the text of the Gospels, the
7th edition of Tischendorf s Greek Text has been
employed. [W. T. ]
Bibliography. — The above article was pub-
lished in 1863, when the literature was already
enormous. It was written, therefore, before the
appearance of Renan's Vie de Jesus (1863), of
Strauss' new and more popular work, Das Leben
Jesu fur das deutsche Volk gearbeitet (1864), of
SchenkePs Characterbild Jesu (1864), of Keim's
Geschichte Jesu von Nazara (1867-72), of
Renan's Les £vangiles (1877), and of the count-
less writings which these five works have in-
spired or provoked. The best source of
information respecting this overwhelming
literature is the summary made by Hase in his
Leben Jesu (5th ed. 1865 ; Eng. tr. by Clarke,
Boston, 1881) and in his Geschichte Jesu (1875).
The list of authorities in Edersheim's Life and
Times of the Messiah (2nd ed. 1886) and in
Farrar's Life of Christ (24th ed. 1891), with the
literary sketch at the end of the articles on
Jesus Christ in Herzog's Real-Encykl. (2nd ed.
1880) and in the Encycl. Briton. (9th ed. 1881),
will be found useful. SchatTs History of the
Church; Apostolic Christianity, i. pp. 90-99
(2nd ed. 1883), contains a discriminating list of
leading works : see also Zoeckler's Handbuch der
theologischen Wissenschaften, I. ii. pp. 184-188
(3rd ed. 1889). Both these notice primitive
sources as well as modern literature ; and
Zoeckler adds information about medieval works
(for which see Rippold's Leben Jesu im Mittel-
qlter, Bern, 1884) and about the Reformation
period. For literature on the historical, chrono-
logical, and geographical questions which beset
the subject, Schurer's Geschichte des judischen
Volkes (1885 ; Eng. tr., The Jewish People in the
Time of Jesus Christ, Edinb. 1885-90) is indis-
pensable : the bibliographical information given
throughout the volumes is immense. See also
Edersheim, History of the Jewish Nation (1892).
Only a brief outline of the literature which
led up to the crisis provoked by Strauss, and
which that crisis in turn produced, will be
attempted here. It takes us back to the Deisti-
cal controversy; for which see A. S. Farrar's
Bampton Lectures, 1862, esp. Lect. vi. and vii.
with the notes. The sceptical and sometimes
scurrilous rationalism of Woolston (1733),
Chubb (1747), and Reimarus (1768) was followed
by the " natural " explanations of Babrdt
(1782, 1784), Venturini (1800), and Paulus
(1828); who were answered by Hess (1774,
8th ed. 1823X Reinhard (1781, 5th ed. 1830 ;
Eng. tr. 1831), Herder (1796), and Ullmann
(1828). Ullmann's Die Sundlosigkeit Jesu
(7th ed. 1864; Eng. tr. 1870) remains one of
the best treatises on the subject. Schleier-
macher's Vorlesungen ubcr das Leben Jesu were
delivered in and before 1832 at Berlin, where
Strauss attended them, and were published from
his pupils' notes long after the author's death
(1864). He maintained the sinlessness of Jesus,
but denied the miraculous birth. The first
Digitized by
Google
1702
JESUS CHB1ST
Leben Jesu of Strauss (1835) was answered on
the Protestant side by W. Hoffmann, Harless,
Sack, &c. in 1836 ; Tholnck, Hamb. 1837 ;
Neander, Hamb. 1837 (7th ed. Gotha, 1873;
Eng. tr. 1848) ; Ebrard, Frankf. 1842 (3rd ed.
1868; abridged Eng. tr. 1869); Lange, Heidelb.
1868 (still of great value ; Eng. tr. 1869) ; &c,
&c. Roman Catholic replies by F. Baader, 1836 ;
Kuhn, Tubing. 1838 ; Hug, Frankf. 1841 (2nd
ed. 1854); Sepp, Regensb. 1843 (mixed with
legend ; 2nd ed. 1865) ; Bucher, Stuttg. 1859 ;
&c. The title of most of these works is Das
Leben Jesu, with or without addition. Among
the chief disciples of Strauss are Weisse (1838,
1856), Gfrorer (1838), Salvator (Paris, 1838),
Hennell (Researches concerning the Origin of
Christianity, Lond. 1838), Liitzelberger (1840),
Volkmar (1857), Lang (1872). Volkmar in his
Jesus Nazarenus (1881) has gathered together
all the main results of radically destructive
criticism. Against Strauss, Renan, Schenkel,
and their disciples we have, among Protestants,
Ewald, Gotting. 1855 (3rd ed. 1867, vol. v. of
his Oesch. des Volkes Israel ; Eng. tr. vol. vi.);
Lichtenstein, Erlang. 1856 ; Riggenbach, Bas.
1858 (commended); .Banmgarten, Braunschw.
1859 ; Ellicott, Nulsean Lectures, 1859 (useful
notes; 6th ed. 1876); Bushnell, The Character
of Jesus, New York, 1859 ; Andrews, New York,
1863 (best American Life ; new ed. 1892) ; Oos-
terzee, Utrecht, 1863 ; Beyschlag, Haar, Luth-
ardt, Scbulze, with Scherer and Coquerel, all in
1864; Schaff, The Person of Christ, Boston,
1865 (12th ed. 1882 : often translated) ; Pres-
scnse, Paris, 1865; Plumptre, Boyle Lectures,
1866 ; Steinmeyer, Apoiogetische BeitrSge, 1866-
73 (of some importance) ; Schiekopp, 1867
(against Keim); Delitzsch, Jesus und HUM, 1867
(3rd ed. 1879), Handwer/terslebcn zw Zeit Jesu,
1875 (Eng. tr. 1877), Ein Tag in Kapernaum,
1871 ; 4c. Among Roman Catholics, Freppel,
Paris, 1863 ; Passaglia, Michelis, Deutinger, and
Haneberg, all in 1864 ; Dupanloup, Paris, 1870 ;
Bougaud, Le Christianisme et Us temps presents,
Paris, 1871 (3rd ed. 1877); Schegg, 1874;
Grimm, 1876 ; &c Strauss himself was one of
the keenest critics of Schenkel (as previously
of Paulas) in Die HaVben und die Ganzen, Berl.
1865. Uhlhorn gives a popular and clear
account of the main features of Strauss, Renan,
Schenkel, Keim, Deltf, and others in Das Leben
Jesu m seinen neueren Darstellungen, Stuttg.
1892. Lichtenberger supplies much informa-
tion about many of the writers mentioned
above in his Eistoire del idies religieuses en
Allemagne, Paris, 1873, 2nd ed. 1888 ; Eng. tr.
History of German Theology, Edinb. 1889 : see
also Hagenbach's Kirchengesch. des IBten und
IMen Jahrh. 1856 ; Eng. tr. New York, 1869.
In England Ecce Homo, Lond. 1864 [attributed
to J. R. SeeleyJ produced a considerable literature
of its own.
Since 1880 works on Jesus Christ have had
less reference to Strauss, Renan, and the Tubin-
gen School. Most of the following are positive
and in the main orthodox ; and where no title
is given it may be assumed that the book is a
Life of Jesus. Quite the most important is that
of B. Weiss, Berl. 1882 (3rd ed. 1888 ; Eng. tr.
Edinb. 1883 ; critical and boldly constructive) ;
Steinmeyer, Beitr&je zw Christologie, 1882;
Edersheim, Lond. 1883 (2nd ed. 1886; strong,
JETHEB
bat not infallible, in Jewish lore ; abridged by
Sanday, 1890); Seidel, Leipz. 1882 (popular,
but solid); Canus, Paris, 1883 (2nd ed. 1887;
Rom. Cath.); Ziindel, Jesus in BSdern an
seinem Leben, Zur. 1885; Usteri, Vie Setbst-
bezeichnung Jesu als des Menschen Sohsv, Zfix.
1886 (the title expresses His mission, not His
nature); Gesa, Christi Person und Werl,
Bas. 1887 (important ; strongly' emphasises
the Kenosis); Friedlieb, Miinst. 1887 (Rom.
Cath.); Schanz, Apologit d. Christenthvms,
Freib. 1888 (Rom. Cath.); Beyschlag, 2nd ed.
1888 ; Baldensperger, Das Setbstbewuasttem Jesu,
Strassb. 1888 (full as to the Messianic expecta-
tions of the time); Dalman, Der leidmde und
der sterbende Messios der Synagogue, BerL 1838 :
Latham, Pastor Pastorum or the Schooling of Ut
Apostles by our Lord, Camb. 1890 (exceilent) ;
Noesgen, Gesch. d. neutestamentlichen Ofen-
barung, Munch. 1891 (conservative) ; Didon,
Paris, 1891 (important ; eloquent, stately, and
firmly doctrinal, bat not very critical) ; Fonard,
Paris, 7th ed. 1891 (more critical than Djdun.
but inferior) ; Laible, Jesus Christus im Thalmtd.
Berl. 1891 (useful collection of notices of Jesus
in the Talmud). For articles in magazines anJ
reviews, see Poole's Index to Periodical Litera-
ture, Lond. 1883 and 1888: for literature is
which the Fourth Gospel is specially concerned.
see Watkins, Bampton Lectures, Lond. 1890, esp.
v. and vi., and Sanday 's papers in the Expositor,
1892. [A. P.]
JETHER 0^ 1- OoWp; Jethro.) Jelhro,
the father-in-law of Moses, is so called in Ex. if.
18 and the margin of A. V., though in the Heb.-
Sam. text and Sam. Version the reading is 1"uT.
as in. the Syriac and Targ. Jon., one of Eenai-
cott's MSS., and a MS. of Targ. Onk., No. lti i»
De Rossi's collection.
2. ('Ic0«p ; Jether.) The 6rstbom of Gideon*
seventy sons, who were all, with the exception
of Jotham, the youngest, slain at Ophrah by
Abimelech. At the time of his father's victories;
pursuit of the Midianites and capture of their
kings he was still a lad on his first battle-field,
and feared to draw his sword at Gideon's bidding,
and avenge, as the representative of the family,
the slaughter of his kinsmen at Tabor (J adj.
viii. 20).
8. (BA. 'IeflJp in 1 K. ii. 5, 32; B. 'totWs,
A. 'UBtp, in 1 Ch. ii. 17 ; Jether.) The father
of Amass, captain-general of Absalom's army.
Jether is merely another form of Ithra (2 Sam.
xvii. 25), the latter being probably a corrupt km
He is described in 1 Ch. ii. 17 as an Ishmaelite,
which again is more likely to be correct than
the " Israelite " of the Heb. in 2 Sam. xvii. (see
Driver, Notes on the Heb. Text of the BH. of
Samuel, in loco). Josephus calls him 'I(*i^n|i
(Ant. vii. 10, § 1). He married Abigail, David's
sister, probably during the sojourn of the family
of Jesse in the land of Moab, under the protection
of its king.
4. The son of Jada, a descendant of Hezron.
of the tribe ef Judah (1 Ch. ii. 32). He died
without children, and being the eldest son the
succession fell to his brother's family.
5. The son of Ezra, whose name occurs in a
dislocated passage in the genealogy of Jodah
(1 Ch. iv. 17). In the LXX. the name is re-
peated : " and Jether begat Meon," &c. By the
Digitized by
Google
JETHETH
author of the Qtiaest. Hebr. in Par. he is said to
hare been Aaron, Ezra being another name for
Am ram.
6. (B. 'ItHf, A. 'W»€>.) The chief of a
family of warriors of the line of Asher, and
father of Jephunneh (1 Ch. vii. 38). He is pro-
bably the same as Ithran in the preceding verse
(B. e«po). One of Kennicott's MSS. and the
LXX. A. had Jether in both cases. [W. A. W.]
JETHETH (fin*: in Gen. A. 'Ufiip, V*.
'Uiip; in Ch. B. 'WffeV, A. Irttt : Jetheth), one
of the phylarchs (A. V. "dukes") who came of
Esau (Gen. xxxvi. 40 ; 1 Ch. i. 51), enumerated
separately from the genealogy of Esau's children
in the earlier part of the chapter, " according to
their families, after their places, by their names,"
and " according to their habitations in the land
of their possession " (sr. 40-3). This record of
the Edomite phylarchs may point specially to the
places and habitations, or towns, named after or
occupied by them ; and even otherwise, we may
look for some trace of their names, after the
custom of the wandering tribes to leave such
footprints in the changeless desert. Identifica-
tions of several in the list have been proposed:
Jetheth, as far as the writer knows, has not been
yet recovered. He may perhaps be found if with
Gesenius ( Thescmr. s. v.) we adopt the likely
suggestion of Simonis, njV = JTJ IV, " a peg,
" a tent-pin " (and metaphorically " a prince "
or "chief," like the masculine form 1JV.
Zech. z. 4; cp. Is. xxii. 23) = Arab. £.
watid, " a peg," which is said to be used in the
like metaphorical sense. Al-Watidah, jjj A\
(n. of nnity of the former), is a place in Nag'd,
said to be in the Dahna (see Ishbak) ; there is
also a place called Al- Watid; and Al-Watidat
(perhaps pi. of the first-named), which is the
name of mountains belonging to Banu 'Abd-
Allah Ibn Ghataftn (Marand, s. vv.). The
objection is (1) that Jetheth is a doubtful word
in the Hebrew text itself, as is clear from the
LXX. Jeber, with which might be compared
j ijo, Jabrln, a place E. of Temama ; (2) Cen-
tral Arabia is a long way from the original
settlements of the tribes of Esau-Edom.
[E.S. P.] [C. J. B.]
JETH-LAH (TlSlV, »'.«. Jithlah; SiAo9o,
B. ItiKaBd, A. 'USkd; Jethela), one of the
cities of the tribe of Dan (Josh. xix. 42), named
with Ajalon, Elon, and Thimnathah. In the
Onomasticon it is mentioned, without any de-
scription or indication of position, as 'U9h.ii/
{08.* p. 269, 78). The site is not certainly
known, but Conder has suggested Beit Tut,
3 miles S.E. of Tdlo, Ajalon (PEF. Mem.
Hi. 43). [G.] [W.]
JETHBO (i"in^,i.«. Jithro; "Iofld», called
also Jether and Hobab, the son of Reuel, was
priest or prince of Midian, both offices probably
being combined in one person. Moses spent the
forty years of his exile from Egypt, or part of
them, with him, and married his daughter
JETHRO
1708
Zipporah. By the advice of Jethro, Moses
appointed deputies to judge the congregation
and share the burden of government with
himself (Ex. xviii.). On account of his local
knowledge he was entreated to remain with the
Israelites throughout their journey to Canaan ;
his room however was supplied by the Ark of
the covenant, which supernaturally indicated
the places for encamping (Num. x. 31, 33). The
idea conveyed by the name of Jethro or Jether
is probably that of excellence; and as Hobab
may be connected with loving or beloved, it is
quite possible that both appellations were given
to the same person for similar reasons. That
the custom of having more than one name was
common among the Jews we see in the case of
Benjamin, Benoni ; Solomon, Jedidiah, &c. Sic.
It is said in Ex. ii. 18 that the priest of
Midian whose daughter Moses married was
Reuel ; afterwards, at ch. iii. 1, he is called
Jethro, as also in ch. xviii. ; but in Num. x. 29
"Hobab the son of Raguel the Midianite" is
called Moses' father-in-law : assuming the iden-
tity of Hobab and Jethro, we must suppose that
" Reuel, their father," in Ex. ii. 18, was really
their grandfather, and that the person who said,
"How is it that ye are come so soon to-
day?" was the priest of v. 16: whereas, pro-
ceeding on the hypothesis that Jethro and
Hobab are not the same individual, it seems
difficult to determine the relationship of Reuel,
Jethro, Hobab, and Moses. The hospitality,
freehearted and unsought, which Jethro at once
extended to the unknown homeless wanderer,
on the relation of his daughters that he had
watered their flock, is a picture of Eastern
manners no lets true than lovely. We may
perhaps suppose that Jethro, before his ac-
quaintance with Moses, was not a worshipper
of the true God. Traces of this appear in the
delay which Moses had suffered to take place
with respect to the circumcision of his son
(Ex. iv. 24-26) : indeed it is even possible that
Zipporah had afterwards been subjected to a
kind of divorce (Ex. xviii. 2, IVraW), on
account of her attachment to an alien creed, but
that growing convictions were at work in the
mind of Jethro, from the circumstance of Israel's
continued prosperity, till at last, acting upon
these, he brought back his daughter, and de-
clared that his impressions were confirmed, for
"note he knew that the Lord was greater than
all gods, for in the thing wherein they dealt
proudly He was above them : " consequently we
are told that "Jethro, Moses' father-in-law,
took a burnt-offering and sacrifices for God:
and Aaron came, and all the elders of Israel,
to eat bread with Moses' father-in-law before
God ; " as though to celebrate the event of his
conversion. Whether or not the account given
at Num. x. 29-32 refers to this same event, the
narrative at Ex. xviii. 27 coincides with Hobab's
own words at Nnm. x. 30 ; and, comparing the
two, we may suppose that Moses did not prevail
upon his father-in-law to stay with the congre-
gation. Calvin (in 5 lib. ifosis Comment.)
understands m. 31, 32 thus : " Thou hast gone
with us hitherto, and hast been to us instead of
eyes ; and now what profit is it to thee if, having
suffered so many troubles and difficulties, thou
dost not go on with us to inherit the promised
Digitized by
Google
1704
JETUB
blessing ? " And Matthew Henry imagine* that
Hobab complied with this invitation, and that
traces of the settlement of his posterity in the
land of Canaan are apparent at Judg. i. 16 and
1 Sam. xv. 6. Some, and among them Calvin,
take Jethro and Reuel to be identical, and call
Hobab the brother-in-laic of Moses. The present
punctuation of the English Bible does not war-
rant this. Why, at Judg. i. 16, Moses' father-in-
law is called *3*(5 (Kenite, cp. Gen. zv. 19), or
why, at Nam. xii. 1, Zipporah, if it be Zipporah,
as indeed does not seem probable, is called JVC'S,
A. V. Ethiopian, is not clear. Those who see in
the apparent discrepancies of the existing kind
evidence of separate and independent narratives
must account for their place and connexion as
well as for the fact of their combination in it.
The Mohammedan name of Jethro is Shoaib
(Koran 7 and 11). There is a tale in the
Midrash that Jethro was a counsellor of
Pharaoh, who tried to dissuade him from
slaughtering the Israelitish children, and con-
sequently, on account of his clemency, was
forced to flee into Midian, but was rewarded by
becoming the father-in-law of Moses (see
Weil's Biblical Legends, p. 93, note). [Jetiier ;
Hobab.] [S. L.]
JETU'B(-WD? : in Gen. B. 'ltroip, DE. 'Ur-
ro&p ; in 1 Ch. i., BA. 'Urroip ; in v., B. Tovpaitn,
A. 'Irovpaioi : Jeihur), Gen. xxv. 15; 1 Ch. i. 31,
V. 19. [ITURAEA.]
JE-U-EL. l.(^K«T; B. 'Eir^A, A. 'Ie^A;
.level.) A chief man of Jndah, one of the Bene-
Zerah ; apparently at the time of the first
settlement in Jerusalem (1 Ch. ix. 6; cp. 2).
[Jeiel.]
2. (B. r<ot>4A, A. 'ItmttK; GeM.) One of
the Bene-Adonikam who returned to Jerusalem
with Esdras (1 Esd. viii. 39). [Jeiel.]
JEU'SH (SW ; Jehus, Jans).
1. Son of Esauj by Aholibamah, the daughter
of Anah, the son of Zibeon the Hivite (Gen.
xxxvi. 5 [A. 'leo*j, E. 'IeoVJovr], 14 [A. 'U6t,
DE. *I«owj], 18 [A. 'IeovA, D. 'Icoi^A, E. 'If our] ;
1 Ch. i. 35 [BA. 'IcouA]). It appears from Gen.
xxxvi. 20-25, that Anah is a man's name (not a
woman's, as might be thought from r. 2), and,
by comparison with r. 2, that the Horites were
Hivites. Jeush was one of the Edomitish dukes
(c. 18). The Ketbib has repeatedly C"1P, Jeish.
2. (B. 'Iaovr, A. 'I«»s.) Head of a Benjamite
house, which existed in David's time,' son of
Bilhan, son of Jediael (1 Ch. vii. 10, 1 1).
3. (BA. 'Idas.) A Levite, of the house of
Shimei, of the family of the Gershomites. He
and his brother Beriah were reckoned as one
house in the census of the Levites taken in the
reign of David (1 Ch. xxiii. 10, 11).
4. (B. 'Ioovf, A. om.) Son of Rehoboam king
of Judah, by Abihail, the daughter of Eliab, the
son of Jesse (2 Ch. xi. 18, 19). [A. C. H.]
JEU'Z Q"UT; B. 'I8<m, A. 'Uois; Jehus),
head of a Benjamite house, in an obscnre gene-
alogy (1 Ch. viii. 10), apparently son of Shaha-
raim and Hodesh his third wife, and born in
Moab. [A. C. H.]
JEW
JEW CttiT ; 'lovSoui ; Judaeus, Le. Judaean ;
'Iovoatfu, Esth. viii. 17 ; 'XovSaJafiis, 2 Mace ii.
21). This name was properly applied to a
member of the kingdom of Judah after ti*
separation of the ten tribes. In this sense it
occurs twice in the Second Book of Kings (2 E.
xvi. 6, xxv. 25), and seven times in the later
chapters of Jeremiah (xxxii. 12, xxxiv. 9 fin
connexion with Hebrew], xxxviii. 19, xl. 12, xli.
3, xliv. 1, lii. 28). After the Return the word
received a larger application. Partly from the
predominance of the members of the old kingdom
of Judah among those who returned to Palestine,
partly from the identification of Judah with the
religious ideas and hopes of the people, all the
members of the new state were called Jew*
(Judaeans), and the name was extended to the
remnants of the race scattered throughout the
nations (Dan. iii. 8, 12 ; Ezra iv. 12, 23 ; Ken. i.
2, ii. 16, v. 1, &c. ; Esth. iii. 4 sq., etc Cp. Jo*.
Ant. xi. 5, § 7, iKK^Briaew SirooVo/ia piou&uu]
<°{ f)s illitpas aye0rjatu> 4k Ba&vKaivos 6arh r»)j
'Iovoa <t>v\f)s . . .).
Under the name of " Judaeans," the people of
Israel were known to classical writers. Th*
most famous and interesting notice by a heathen
writer is that of Tacitus {Hist. v. 2 sq. ; cp.
Orelli's Excursus). The trait of extreme ex-
clusiveness with which he specially charged
them is noticed by many other writers (Jot.
Sat. xiv. 103; Diod. Sic Eel. 34, 1; Quint.
Inst iii. 7, 21). The account of Strabo (xvi.
pp. 760 sq.) is more favourable (cp. Just, xxxvi.
'_'), but it was impossible that a stranger coulJ
clearly understand the meaning of Judaism as a
disciple and preparation for a universal religioa
(F. C. Meier, Judaica sett vetcrum scriptorvm
profanorum de rebus Judaids fragmenta, Jenae,
1832).
The force of the title 'louooios U seen particu-
larly in the Gospel of St. John. While the
other Evangelists scarcely ever use the word
except in the title " King of the Jews " (as given
by Gentiles),* St. John, standing within the
boundary of the Christian age, very rarely uses
any other term to describe the opponents of our
Lord. The name, indeed, appeared at the dose
of the Apostle's life to be the true antithesis to
Christianity, as describing the limited and
definite form of a national religion ; but at an
earlier stage of the progress of the faith, it wis
contrasted with Greek (*EAAi|i>) as implying an
outward covenant with God (Rom. i. 16, ii. 9,
10; Col. iii. 11, tic). In this sense it was of
wider application than Hebrew, which was the
correlative of Hellenist [Hellenist], anJ marked
a division of language subsisting within the
entire body, and at the same time less expressive
than Israelite, which brought out with especial
clearness the privileges and hopes of the children
of Jacob (2 Cor. xi. 22 ; John i. 47 j 1 Mace. i.
43, 53, and often).
The history of Judaism is divided by Jost —
the most profound writer who has investigated
it — into two great eras : the first extending to
the close of the collections of the oral laws, 536
• The exceptions arc, Matt xxvill. 15 (a note of tbt
Evangelist of later date than the substance of tar
Gospel); Mark vii. 3 (a similar note) ; Luke vii. 3
xxlll. 61.
Digitized by
Google
JEW
B.C. — 600 A.D. ; the second reaching to the
present time. According to this view, the first
is the period of original development, the second
of formal construction ; the one furnishes the
constituent elements, the second the varied shape
of the present faith. But as far as Judaism was
a great stage in the Divine revelation, its main
interest closes with the destruction of Jerusalem
in 70 A.D. From that date its present living
force was stayed, and its history is a record of
the human shapes in which the Divine truths
of earlier times were enshrined and hidden.
The old age (aiiiy) passed away, and the new
age began when the Holy City was finally
wrested from its citizens and the worship of the
Temple closed.
Yet this shorter period from the Return to
the destruction of Jerusalem was pregnant with
•jreat changes. Four different dynasties in
succession directed the energies and influenced
the character of the Jewish nation. The
dominion of Persia (536-333 B.C.), of Greece
(333-167 B.C.),of the Asmonaeans (167-63 B.C.),
of the Herods (40 B.C.-70A.D.) sensibly furthered
in various ways the discipline of the people of
< iod, and prepared the way for a final revelation.
An outline of the characteristic features of the
several periods is given in other articles.
Briefly it may be said that the supremacy of
I'ersia was marked by the growth of organisa-
tion, order, ritual [Cyrus ; Dispersion of the
Jews], that of Greece by the spread of liberty
and speculation [Alexander ; Alexandria ;
Hellenists], that of the Asmonaeans by the
strengthening of independence and faith [MaC-
oabees], that of the Herods by the final separa-
t ion of the elements of temporal and spiritual
dominion into antagonistic systems [HebOD] ;
and so at length the inheritance of six centuries,
painfully won in times of exhaustion and perse-
cution and oppression, was transferred to the
treasury of the Christian Church. [B. F. W.]
jew 0"wnp, jews (DHin», eh. jw-nrr
in Ezra and Dan.). Originally " man or men of
Judah." The term first makes its appearance
just before the Captivity of the ten tribes, and
then is used to denote the men of Jndah who
held Elath, and were driven out by Rezin king
of Syria (2 K. xvi. 6). Elath had been taken by
Azariah or Uzziah, and made a colony of Judah
(2 K. xiv. 22). The men of Judah in prison
with Jeremiah (Jer. xxxii. 12) are called " Jews "
in our A. V., as are those who deserted to the
Chaldeans (Jer. xxxviii. 19), and the fragments
of the tribe which were dispersed in Moab, Edom,
and among the Ammonites (Jer. xl. 11). Of
these latter were the confederates of Ishmael
the son of Nethaniah, who were of the blood-
royal of Judah (Jer. xli. 3). The fugitives in
Egypt (Jer. xliv. 1) belonged to the two tribes,
and were distinguished by the name of the more
important ; and the same general term is applied
to those who were carried captive by Nebuchad-
nezzar (Jer. lii. 28, 30) as well as to the remnant
which was leTt in the land (2 K. xxv. 25 ; Neh.
i. 2, ii. 16, &c). That the term Yihudl or
•' Jew " was in the latter history used of the
members of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin
without distinction is evident from the case of
Mordecai, who, though of the tribe of Benjamin,
ta called a Jew (Esth. ii. 5, &c), while the
JEZANIAH
1705
people of the Captivity are called " the people
of Mordecai " (Esth. iii. 6). After the Captivity
the appellation was universally given to those
who returned from Babylon. [\V. A. W.]
JEWEL. [Precious Stokes.]
JEWESS ('IouSofa; Judaea), a woman of
Hebrew birth, without distinction of tribe (Acts
xvi. 1, xxiv. 24). It is applied in the former
passage to Eunice the mother of Timothy, who
was unqnestionably of Hebrew origin (cp. 2 Tim.
iii. 15), and in the latter to Drusilla, the wife
of Felix and daughter of Herod Agrippa I.
JEWISH ('lovSaiit6s ; Judaicus), of or belong-
ing to Jews : an epithet applied to the Rabbini-
cal legends against which the elder Apostle
warns his younger brother (Tit. i. 14).
JEWRY (llfT ; "UvSala; Judaea), the same
word elsewhere rendered Judah and Judaea. It
occurs but once in the O. T., Dan. v. 13, in
which verse the Chaldee is translated both by
Judah and Jewry : the A. V. retaining the
latter as it stands in Coverdale, Tyndale, and
the Geneva Bible. The variation possibly arose
from a too faithful imitation of the Vulg., which
has Juda and Judaea. Jewry comes to us
through the Norman-French, and is of frequent
occurrence in Old English. It is found besides
in 1 Esd. i. 32, ii. 4, iv. 49, v. 7, 8, 57, vi. 1,
viii. 81, ix. 3; Bel, 33; 2 Mace. x. 24; Luke
xxiii. 5 ; John vii. 1. In the N. T. the earlier
English Versions have generally Jewry (Jurie)
for Judaea.
JEWS' LANGUAGE, IN THE (nnW).
Literally " Jewishly : " for the Hebrew must be
taken adverbially, as in the LXX. ('lovSafrrr!)
and Vulgate (Judaici). The term is only used
of the language of the two southern tribes after
the Captivity of the northern kingdom (2 K.
xviii. 26, 28 ; 2 Ch. xxxii. 18 ; Is. xxxvi. 11, 13),
and of that spoken by the captives who returned
(Neh. xiii. 24). It therefore denotes as well the
pure Hebrew as the dialect acquired during the
Captivity, which was characterised by Aramaic
forms and idioms. Elsewhere (Is. xix. 18) in
the poetical language of Isaiah it is called " the
lip of Canaan."
JEWS' RELIGION (2 Mace. viii. 1, xiv. 38 ;
Gal. i. 14, 15>
JEZANl'AH (liVOr = 1?VJ Tt£ = Jehovah
hears: BN. "Efocfat, A. "'lifoWat in' Jer. xl. 8:
rP3r ; 'Afapias in Jer. xlii. 1 : Jexmias), the
son of Hoshaiah, the Maachathite, and one of
the captains of the forces, who had escaped from
Jerusalem during the final attack of the be-
leaguering army of the Chaldaeans. In the
consequent pursuit, which resulted in the
capture of Zedekiah, the army was scattered
from him and dispersed throughout the open
country among the neighbouring Ammonites
and Moabites, watching from thence the progress
of events. When the Babylonians had departed,
Jezaniah, with the men under his command, was
one of the first who returned to Gedaliah at
Mizpah. In the events which followed the
assassination of that officer Jezaniah took a
prominent part. He joined Johanan in the
Digitized by
Google
1706
JEZEBEL
pursuit of Ishrr.ael and his murderous associates,
and in the general consternation and distrust
which ensued he became one of the foremost
advocates of the migration into Egypt, so
strongly opposed by Jeremiah. Indeed in their
interview with the prophet at the Khan of Chim-
ham, when words ran high, Jezauiah (there
called Azariah) was apparently the leader in the
dispute, and for once took precedence of Johanan
(Jer. xliii. 2). In 2 K. xxv. 23 he is called
Jaazaniah, in which form the name was easily
corrupted into Azariah.
JEZ'EBEL^t'K; LXX. and N. T. 'U(a-
fM)K; Joseph. 'U(a$a\n ; Jezabel: probably a
name, like Agnes, signifying " chaste," sine coitu,
Gesenius in voc. [see Miiller's conjecture in
M.V."]), wife of Ahab, king of Israel, and
mother of Athaliah, queen of Judah, and Ahaziah
and Joram, kings of Israel.* She was a Phoe-
nician princess, daughter of " Ethbaal king of
the Zidonians " (or Ithobal king of the Syrians
and Sidonians, Menander apud Joseph. Ant. riii.
13, § 2 ; c. Apion. i. 18). Her marriage with
Ahab was a turning point in the history of
Israel. Not only was the union with a
Canaanitish wife unprecedented in the northern
kingdom, but the character of the queen gave
additional force and significance to what might
else have been regarded merely as a commercial
and political measure, natural to a king devoted,
as was Ahab, to the arts of peace and the
splendour of regal luxury. She was a woman
in whom, with the reckless and licentious habits
of an Oriental queen, were united the sternest
and fiercest qualities inherent in the Phoenician
people. The royal family of Tyre was re-
markable at that time both for its religious
fanaticism and its savage temper. Her father
Ethbaal united with his royal office the priest-
hood of the goddess Astarte, and had come to
the throne by the murder of his predecessor
Phelles (Joseph, c. Ap. i. 18). The next genera-
tion included within itself Sichaeus, or Matgenes,
king and priest of Baal, the murderer Pygmalion,
and Elisa or Dido, foundress of Carthage (t'6.).
Of this stock came Jezebel. In her hands her
husband became a mere puppet (1 K. xxi. 25).
Even after his death, through the reigns of his
sons, her influence was the evil genius of the
dynasty. Through the marriage of her daughter
Athaliah with the king of Judah, it exteuded
even to the rival kingdom. The wild license of
her life, the magical fascination of her arts or
of her character, became a proverb in the
nation (2 E. ix. 22). Long afterwards her
name lived as the byword for all that was
execrable, and in the Apocalypse it is given to
a church or an individual 11 in Asia Minor,
• Amongst the Spanish Jews the name of Jezebel was
given to Isabella " the Catholic," in consequence of the
detestation in which her memory was held as their
persecutor (Ford's Handbook of Spain, 2nd ed. p. 486).
Whether the name Isabella was originally connected
with that of Jezebel is doubtful.
b According to the reading of AB. and the older
Versions, It is ttj** ywdiica <rav, "thy wife." In that
case she must be the wife of the "Angel;" and the
expression would thus confirm the Interpretation which
makes " the Angel " to be the Bishop or presiding officer
of the Clmrchvof Tbyatlra ; and this woman would thus
JEZEBEL
combining in like manner fanaticism and
profligacy (Rev. ii. 20). If we may trast tar
numbers of the text, she must hare married
Ahab before bis accession. He reigned 22 years :
and 12 years from that time her grandson
Ahaziah was 21 years of age. Her daughter
Athaliah must have been born therefore at least
37 years before.
The first effect of her influence was the imme-
diate establishment of the Phoenician worship
on a grand scale in the court of Ahab. At htr
table were supported no less than 450 prophet?
of Baal, and 400 of Astarte (1 K. xvi 31, 32:
xviii. 19). The prophets of Jehovah, who up
to this time had found their chief refuge in tht
northern kingdom, were attacked by her orders
and put to the sword (1 E. xviii. 13 ; 2 K. ix. 7).
When at last the people, at the instigation
of Elijah, rose against her ministers, and
slaughtered them at the foot of Carmel, and
when Ahab was terrified into submission, she
alone retained her presence of mind ; and whes
she received in the palace of Jezreel the tiding
that her religion was all but destroyed (1 K.
xix. 1), her only answer was one of those fearful
vows which have made the leaders of Semitic
nations so terrible whether for good or evil — a-
pressed in a message to the very man who, as it
might have seemed but an hour before, had hex
life in his power: — "As surely as them art
Elijah and as 7 am Jezebel (LXX.), so may God
do to me and more also, if by this time to-
morrow I make not thy life as the life of oae
of them " (1 E. xix. 2). Elijah, who had en-
countered undaunted the king and the whole
force of the prophets of Baal, " feared " (LXX)
the wrath of the awful queen, and fled for
his life beyond the furthest limits of Israel
(1 E. xix. 3). [Elijah.]
The next instance of her power is still more
characteristic and complete. When she found
her husband cast down by his disappointment at
being thwarted by Naboth, she took the matter
into her own hands, with a spirit which reminds
us of Clytemnestra or Lady Macbeth. " Dost
thou now govern the kingdom of Israel ? (play
the king, tomis ftatrihia. LXX.). Arise and
eat bread and let thine heart be merry, and /
will give thee the vineyard of Naboth tke
Jezreelite " (1 E. xxi. 7). She wrote a warrant
in Ahab's name, and sealed it with his seal. It
was couched in the official language of the
Israelite law — a solemn fast — witnesses — a
charge of blasphemy — the authorized punish-
ment of stoning. To her, and not to Ahab, was
sent the announcement that the royal wishes
were accomplished (1 K. xxi. 14), and she bad?
her husband go and take the vacant property :
and on her accordingly fell the prophet's corse,
as well as on her husband (1 E. xxi. 23).
We hear no more of her for a long period.
But she survived Ahab by 14 years, and still, as
queen-mother (after the Oriental customX was
a great personage in the court of her sons, and,
as such, became the special mark for vengeance
when Jehu advanced against Jezreel to over-
throw the dynasty of Abab. " What peace so
long as the whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel
be his wife. Modern texts and critics, however, gene-
rally adopt the reading tV yvraUa, " the woman " (*«?
Speaker's Cnnm. In loco).
Digitized by
Google
JEZEBEL
and her witchcrafts are so many ?" (2 K. ix. 22).
But in that supreme hour of her house the
spirit of the aged queen rose within her, equal
to the dreadful emergency. She was in the
palace, which stood by the gate of the city,
overlooking the approach from the east. Beneath
lay the open space under the city walla. She
determined to face the destroyer of her family,
whom she saw rapidly advancing in his chariot.*
She painted her eyelids in the Eastern fashion
with antimony, so as to give a darker border to
the eyes and make them look larger and brighter
(Keil), possibly in order to induce Jehu, after
the manner of Eastern usurpers, to take her, the
widow of his predecessor, for his wife,* bat more
probably as the last act of regal splendour. She
tired (" made good ") her head, and, looking
down upon him from the high latticed window
in the tower (Joseph. Ant. ix. 6, § 4), she met
him by an allusion to a former act of treason in
the history of her adopted country, which
conveys a different expression, according as we
take one or other of the different interpretations
given to it. (1) "Was there peace to Zimri,
who slew his ' lord ' ? " as if to remind Jehu,
now in the fulness of his triumph, how Omri,
the founder of the dynasty which he was de-
stroying, had himself come into power as the
avenger of Zimri, who had murdered Baasha,
as he now had murdered Jehoram; or (2) a
direct address to Jehu, as a second Zimri : " Is
it peace ? " (following up the question of her
son in 2 K. ix. 21). "Is it peace, Zimri,
slayer of his lord ? " (So Keil and LXX. y tlph-
vr\ Za/u(3pl 6 ipovtvr^t rov Kvptov ofrroD.) Or
(3) "Peace to Zimri, who slew his 'lord'" —
(according to Josephns, Ant. ix. 6, § 4, koXos
SovKos i iwoicrilyas rbr tt(rw<rrtiv) — which again
may be taken either as an ironical welcome, or
(according to Ewald, iii. 166, 260) as a reminder
that as Zimri had spared the seraglio of Baasha,
so she was prepared to welcome Jebu. The
general character of Jezebel, and the doubt as
to the details of the history of Zimri, would
lead us rather to adopt the sterner view of her
speech. Jehu looked up from his chariot — and
his answer, again, is variously given in the
LXX. and in the Hebrew text. In the former
he exclaims, '• Who art thou f — Come down to
me." In the latter, "Who is on my side,
who 1" In either case the issue is the same.
Two or three eunuchs of the royal harem show
their faces at the windows, and at his command
dashed* the ancient princess down from the
chamber. She fell immediately in front of the
conqueror's chariot. The blood flew from her
mangled corpse over the palace-wall behind, and
over the advancing horses in front. The merci-
less destroyer passed on ; and the last remains
of life were trampled out by the horses' hoofs.
The body was left in that open space called in
modern Eastern language " the mounds," where
offal is thrown from the city-walls. The dogs
of Eastern cities, which prowl around these
localities, and which the present writer met on
JEZOAR
1707
< A graphic conception of this scene occurs in Racine's
Athalit, Act II. Sc. 6.
* According to the explanation of S. Ephrem Cyras
adUx.
• BDt?> " dash," as from a precipice (Ps. exll. 6).
this very spot by the modern village which
occupies the site of Jezreel, pounced upon this
unexpected prey. Nothing was left by them
but the hard portions of the human skeleton,
the skull, the hands, and the feet. Such was
the sight which met the eyes of the messengers
of Jehu, whom he had sent from his triumphal
banquet, struck with a momentary feeling of
compassion for the fall of so much greatness :
"Go, see now this cursed woman and bury
her, for she is a king's daughter." When he
heard the fate of the body, he exclaimed in
words which no doubt were long remembered as
the epitaph of the greatest and wickedest of the
queens of Israel : " This is the word of Jehovah,
which He spake by His servant Elijah the Tish-
bite, saying, In the portion' of Jezreel shall
'the' dogs eat the flesh of Jezebel; and the
carcase of Jezebel shall be as dung on the face
of the earth ; so that they shall not say, This is
Jezebel " (2 K. ix. 36, 37). [A. P. S.]
JEZETiUS ("IcfljAot ; Zechotera). 1. The
same as Jahazif.l (1 Esd. viii. 32).
2. (Jehelue.) Jewel, the father of Obadiah
(1 Esd. viii. 35).
JE'ZER (yg= formation: "l<r<ra<u> in Gen.
xlvi. 24 ; B. 'Uoip, A. 'Uapt, in Num. xxvi. 49 ;
B. 'lcrtreitp, A. Sadp, in 1 Ch. vii. 13 : Jeter), the
third son of Naphtali, and father of the family
of the Jezerites, who were numbered in the
plains of Moab.
JEZ'EBITES, THE(nVf!l; B. 6 'Iwtptt,
A. o 'Uapi, F. t 'Uatpt ; Jeseritae'). A family of
the tribe of Naphtali, descendants of Jezer
(Num. xxvi. 49).
JEZI'AH (iWJs Jehovah makes to spring
up [MV. 11 ]; B. T, Af«cJ, K. 'A8e«I, A. 'Aflaj
Jezia), properly Yizziyyah, a descendant of
Parosh, and one of the laymen who, after the
return from Babylon, had married strange wives,
and at Ezra's bidding had promised to put them
away (Ezra x. 25). In 1 Esd. ix. 26 he is called
Eddias. The Syriac of Ezra reads Jeianiah.
JEZrEL (foil 4 , Qeri fo'?*, which is the
reading of some MSS. ; B. "I»^A, A. 'Afi^A ;
Jaxief), one of the skilled Benjamite archers
or slingers who joined David in his retreat at
Ziklag. He was probably the son of Azmaveth.
of Bahurim, one of David s heroes (1 Ch. xii. 3).
In the Syriac Jeziel is omitted, and the sons of
Azmaveth are there Pelet and Berachah.
JEZLI'AH (f1K^t»; B. Zaftii, A. *E0u<O,
one of a long list of Benjamite heads of houses,
sons of Elpaal, who dwelt at Jerusalem (1 Ch.
viii. 18). [A. C. H.]
JEZO'AR ("lrty ; 2<u£p ; Itaar), the son of
Helah, one of the wives of Asher, the father or
founder of Tekoa, and posthumous son of Hezron
(1 Ch. iv. 7). The Qeri has "imtl " and Zohar,"
which was followed by the LXX. and by the
A. V. of 1611.
M-
«« smooth field."
Digitized by
Google
1708
JEZBAHIAH
JEZBAHTAH (iTnnt* = Jetocak ahme$
forth; om. BK*A. ; Jezraia), a Levite, the
leader of the choristers at the solemn dedication
of the wall of Jerusalem under Nehemiah
(Neh. xii. 42). The singers had built themselves
villages in the environs of the city and the
Oasis of the Jordan, and with the minstrels
they gathered themselves together at the first
summons to keep the dedication with gladness.
JEZ'HE-EL (Sunt' = God kM sow; B.
'K{pa4)\, A*. 'lc£prfi\; Jezrahd), according to
the received text, a descendant of the father or
founder of Etam, of the line of Judah (1 Ch.
iv. 3). But as the Terse now stands, we must
supply some such word as "families:" "these
(are the families of) the father of Etam." Both
the LXX. and Vulg. read '33, "sons," for '3K,
'• father," and six of Kennicott's MSS. have the
same, while in two of De Rossi's the readings
are combined. The Syriac is singularly different
from all : " And these are the sons of Aminodob,
Achizar'el, &c., Neshmo, and Dibosh," the last
clause of t>. 3 being entirely omitted. But,
although the Syriac text of the Chronicles is so
corrupt as to be of little authority in this case,
there can be no donbt that the genealogy in
re. 3, 4 is so confused as to be attended with
almost insuperable difficulties. Tremellius and
Junius regard Etam as the proper name of a
person, and Jezreel as one of his sons, while
Bertheau considers them both names of places.
The Targum on Chron. has, " And these are the
Rabbis dwelling at Etam, Jezreel," &c. In v. 4
Hur is referred to as the ancestor of this branch
of the tribe of Judah, and therefore, if the pre-
sent text be adopted, we must read, " and these,
-viz. Abi-Etam, Jezreel," Sic. But the probability
is that in v. 3 a clause has been omitted.
[\V. A. W.]
JEZ-RE-EL fautfV : LXX. 'Ie.rpae'A, 'Ief-
4>a4\, 'UfarfiX, 'E<rpa4; B. 'Ia^A, 'Icrpo^A,
'E(f pt4\ ; A. also 'U(afH\ x Jetrahel, Jezragl,
Jesraet: Joseph. 'UapinKa, Ant. viii. 13, § 6;
'If opdtKa, Ant. ix. 6, § 4 ; 'Ifdpa,* Ant. viii. 15,
§§ 4, 6 ; 'EaSp^\a>fi, or 'EvSptiKmv, Judith i. 8,
iii. 9 ; B. 'Zoprn\6», A. 'E<r(pi)x&, Judith iv. 6 ;
Eusebius, 'Eatpan^A, s. v. 'U(pa4\ [0S.» p. 268,
52]; Jerome, IezraKal[OS.* p. 165, 14]; Bordeaux
Pilgrim [Itin. Hicrosol. p. 586], Latinized into
Stradcla). Its modern name is ZerHn, which is in
fact the same word, and which first appears in
William of Tyre (xxii. 26) as Oerin (Gerinum),
and Benjamin of Tudela as Zarzin. The history
■of the identification of these names is well given
in Robinson, B. R. 1st ed. iii. 163, 165, and is
curious as an example of the tenacity of a local
tradition, in spite of the carelessness of modern
travellers. According to Eusebius and Jerome
(J. c), it was in the great plain between Legio,
Lcjjun, and Scythopolis, Bcisan. In the Itin.
Merotci. its distance from Scythopolis is given
as xii. M.P.
The name is used in Josh. xvii. 16, Judg. vi.
33, 2 Sam..ii. 9 and (?) iv. 4, and Hos. i. 5, for
* In Jos. Ant. viii. 13, y «, it Is called 'Ie<rp«^Xa,
•Ifipm (Havercunp., 'Io-agapiw) »iA« ; In viii. 13, } »,
'H'apou mjAic singly ; in vlU. 1 5, $$ 4, 6, 'Ifapa. Various
ladings are given of"lc£«p*, •Axipm, 'Afifim, 'Afopo.
JEZBEEL
the valley or plain between Gilboa and Little
Hermon ; and to this plain, in its widest extent,
the general form of the name Esdraelon (first
used in Judith i. 8) has been applied in modern
times. It is probably from the richness of tbc
plain that the name is derived, " God soweth,"
"God's sowing." For the events connected
with this great battle-field of Palestine, see
Esdraelon.
In its more limited sense, as applied to the
city, it first appears in Josh. xix. 18, where it
is mentioned as a city of Issachar, in the neigh-
bourhood of Chesulloth and Shunem ; and it
had citizens (1 K. xxi. 1-3), elders, and nobles
of its own (1 K. xxi. 8-11, 2 K. x. 1-11). Bat
its historical importance dates from the reign ef
Ahab ; who chose it for his chief residence, as
Omri had chosen Samaria, and B — hT Tirzah.
The situation of the modern village of ZerHn
still remains to show the fitness of his choice.
It is on one of the gentle swells which rise out of
the fertile plain of Esdraelon; but with two
peculiarities which mark it out from the rest.
One is its strength. On the N.E. the hill pre-
sents a steep rocky descent of at least 100 fret
(Robinson, 1st ed. iii. 162; PEF. Mem. ii. 88;
Guerin, Samarie, i. 311 sq.). The other is ife
central locality. It stands at the opening of the
middle branch of the three eastern forks of the
plain, and looks straight towards the wide
western level ; thus commanding the view to-
wards the Jordan on the east (2 K. ix. 17), and
visible from Carmel on the west (1 K. xvni.
45, 46).
In the neighbourhood, or within the town pro-
bably, was a temple and grove of Astarte, with
an establishment of 400 priests supported br
Jezebel (1 K. xvi. 33 ; 2 K. x. 11). The palace
of Ahab (1 K. xxi. 1, xviii. 46), probably con-
taining his " ivory house " (1 K. xxii. 39), was
on the eastern side of the city, forming part of
the city wall (cp. 1 K. xxi. 1 ; 2 K. ix, 25, 30,
33). The seraglio, in which Jezebel lived, was
on the city wall, and had a high window facing
eastward (2 K. ix. 30). Close by, if not forming
part of this seraglio (as Josephus supposes, erara
M roS ripyov, Ant. ix. 6, § 4), was a watch-
tower, well known as " the tower in Jezreel,*' oa
which a sentinel stood, to give notice of arrivals
from the disturbed district beyond the Jordan
(2 K. ix. 17). The gateway of the city on the
east was also the gateway of the palace (2 K. ix.
34). Immediately in front of the gateway, and
under the city wall, was an open space, such as
existed before the neighbouring city of Beth-
shan (2 Sam. xxi. 12), and is usually found by
the walls of Eastern cities, under the name of
" the mounds " (see Arabian Xights, passim),
whence the dogs, the scavengers of the East.
prowled in search of offal (2 K. ix. 25). Here
Jezebel met with her end (2 K. ix. 35)
[Jezebel,] A little further East, but adjoining
to the royal domain (1 K. xxi. IX was s smooth
tract of land cleared out of the uneven vallev
(2 K. ix. 25), which belonged to Naboth, 'a
citizen of Jezreel (2 K. ix. 25), by an hereditary
right (1 K. xxi. 3) ; but the royal grounds were
so near that it would have been easily turned
into a garden of herbs for the royal use (1 K.
xxi. 2, cp. v. 23) Here Elijah met Ahab, Jehu,
and Bidkar (1 K. xxi. 17, 18); and here Jens
met Joram and Ahaxiah (2 K. ix. 91, 25).
Digitized by
Google
JEZBEEL '
(Kmjah; Jehu.] Whether the vineyard of
Naboth was here or at Samaria 1> a doubtful
question. [Naboth.] Jezreel is also mentioned
in 1 Sam. zxix. 11 ; 1 K. iv. 12 ; 2 K. viii. 29, ix.
10, 15, 37 ; 2 Ch. xxii. 6.
Still in the same eastern direction are two
springs, one half a mile, the other one and a half
miles from the town. The former, 'Ain el-
Mciyiteh, issues from the rock, and affords a good
supply of clear water. The latter, 'Ain Jalid,
" flows from under a sort of cavern in the wall
of conglomerate rock, which here forms the base
of Gil boa. The water is excellent ; and issuing
from crevices in the rocks, it spreads out at once
into a fine limpid pool, 40 or 50 feet in diameter,
full of fish " (Robinson, B. S. iii. 168). The
Mm Jalud, both from its size and situation,
would appear to have been the spring known as
" the (A. V. a) fountain which is in Jezreel "
(1 Sam. xxix. 1), »'.«. in the valley of Jezreel (cp.
Josh. xvii. 6 ; 2 Sam. ii. 9, &c). Perhaps also
the Mis Jalid was the spring (A. V. well) of
HarOD, where Gideon encamped before his night
attack on the Midianites (Jodg. vii. 1).
According to Josephus (Ant. viii. 15, §§ 4, 6),
the fountain of Jezreel, and the pool attached
to it, was the spot where Naboth and his sons
were executed, where the dogs and swine licked
up their blood and (hat of Ahab, and where the
harlots bathed in the blood-stained water (LXX.).
But the natural inference from the present text
of 1 K. xxii. 38 makes the scene of these erents
to be the pool of Samaria. [See Naboth.]
With the fall of the house of Ahab the glory
of Jezreel departed. No other king is described
as living there, and the name was so deeply
associated with the family of its founder, that
when the Divine retribution overtook the house
of their destroyer, the eldest child of the pro-
phet Hosea, who was to be a living witness of
the coming vengeance, was called " Jezreel : "
" for I will avenge the blood of Jezreel upon the
house of Jehu . . . and at that day I will
break the bo w of Israel in the valley of Jezreel ;
. . . and great shall be the day of Jezreel "
(Hos. i. 4, 5, 11). And then out of that day
and place of humiliation the name is to go back
to its original signification as derived from the
beauty and fertility of the rich plain, and to
become a pledge of the revived beauty and
richness of Israel. " I will ' hear and answer '
the heavens, and ' they will hear and answer '
the earth, and the earth shall ' hear and an-
swer ' the corn and the wine and the oil [of that
fruitful plain], and they shall ' hear and answer'
Jezreel [that is, the seed of God], and / will
sow her unto me in the earth " (Hos. ii. 22 ; see
Ewald ad loc, and Gesenius in voce Jezreel).
From this time the image seems to have been
continned as a prophetical expression for the
sowing the people of Israel, as it were broad-
cast ; as though the whole of Palestine and the
world were to become, in a spiritual sense, one
rich plain of Jezreel. " I will low them among
the people, and they shall remember me in far
countries" (Zech. x. 9). "Ye shall be tilled
and sown, and I will multiply men upon you "
(Ezek. xxxvi. 9, 10). " I will sow the honse of
Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of
men and with the seed of beast " (Jer. xxxi. 27).
Hence the consecration of the image of "sow-
ing," as it appears in the N. T., Matt. xiii. 2.
JIPHTAH
1709
2. (B. 'laprtK A. 'ItftpaeA in Josh. ; B. 'I<r-
pari\*7ris, A. EijJxnjAfiTii: A. 'IfparjAeiTw in
1 Sam. xxx.). A town in Judah, in the neigh-
bourhood of the southern Carmel (Josh. rv. 56).
Here David in his wanderings took Ahinoam
the Jezreelitess for his first wife (1 Sam. ixvii. 3,
xxx. 5). The site is unknown.
[A.P.S.] [W.]
JEZ-KE-EL (^Kff")?',; 'U{pi*\; Jezrahel).
The eldest son of the Prophet Hosea (Hos. i. 4),
significantly so called because Jehovah said
to the Prophet, « Yet a little while and I will
avenge the blood of Jezreel upon the honse of
Jehu," and " I will Ibreak the bow of Israel in
the valley of Jezreel." [W. A. W.]
JEZ'EE-ELITE ('Wli! : B - •«'". A - -m* ;
once 2 K. ix. 21 'IjjxnjAfnjir' : JczraMita). An
inhabitant of Jezreel (1 K. xxi. 1, 4, 6, 7, 15,
16; 2K. ix. 21, 25). [W. A. W.]
JEZBE-ELITESSOvWip.: B. 'lo-pav-
Xtiris and -Aitijj ; A. Ei^ranAf <r<s, 'l(pai)\»7rts,
'lapanKeris : Jezrahelitii, JezrSelites, Jezraelitit).
A woman of Jezreel (1 Sam. xxvii. 3, xxx. 5 ;
2 Sam. ii. 2, iii. 2; 1 Ch. iii. 1). [W. A. W.]
JIB'SAM, R. V. IB'SAM (Dfe»3»; 'Uiuuriv,
B. Bairdr, A. 'Ufiaaiv ; Jebsem), one of the
sons of Tola the son of Issachar, who were
heads of their father's house and heroes of
might in their generations (1 Ch. vii. 2). His
descendants appear to have served in David's
army, and with others of the same clan mus-
tered to the number of upwards of 22,000.
JIDXAPH (C|Vv ; A. 'I«ASd>, D. om. j Jed-
laph), a son of Nahor (Gen. xxii. 22), or a Naho-
rean ; probably a chief and clan or tribe of the
Nahorites (Arameans) who were settled at Har-
ran (Carrhae) on the E. side of the Euphrates.
See Ewald, Hist. Itr. i. 287, Eng. Tr. As to the
meaning of the name Jidlaph, cp. the Aramaic
-** \ * yedlaph, stillat, |«»X«. delpha, stil-
latio, with Num. xxiv. 7, whence we may infer
that the name signifies "prolific." [C. J. B.]
JIbTNA, R. V. IM'NAH(fUD^; 'lo/ifc, A.
'laptiv ; Jemna), the firstborn of Asher, repre-
sented in the numbering on the plains of Hoab
by his descendants the Jimnites (Num. xxvi.
44). He to elsewhere called in the A. V.
Jisikah (Gen. xlvi. 17) and Ixnah (1 Ch. vii.
30), the Hebrew in both instances being the
same.
JIM'NAH, R. V. ISrNAxKjHiy; 'Ic^d,
A. 'leprd; Jamne) =Jimna = Imnah (Gen. xlvi.
17).
JIMTOTES, R. V. IM'NITES, THE
(rOD'n, i.e. the Jimnah; Sam. and one MS.
MDV1: i 'IopiW, B. 'la/tttnt, A. i lapuwl:
Jemnaltae), descendant* of the preceding (Num.
xxvi. 44).
JIPH'TAH, R. V. IPH'TAH (TWIT, ie.
Tiftach ; B. omits, A. 'U<p6d ; Jephtha), one of
the cities of Judah in the maritime lowland, or
Shefelah (Josh. xv. 43). It to Darned in the
Digitized by
Google
1710
JIPHTHAH-EL
same group with Hareshah, Nezib, and others.
Both the last-meutioned places hare been dis-
covered, the former to the south, the latter to
the east of Beit Jibrin, not as we should expect
on the plain, but in the mountains. Here Jiph-
tah may some day be found, though it has not
yet been met with. [G.] [W.]
JIPHTHAH-EL, R. V. IPHTAH-EL,
THE VALLEY OF f3>t«-nnB» »3: rwpafa
Ik Tal koI *$ai4i\; A. Tat 'Ied>Mx, iv Tol
'UtpSafa : taUit Jephtahel), a valley which
served as one of the land-marks for the boun-
dary both of Zebulun (Josh. xix. 14) and Asher
<c. 27). The position of this ravine, Oai, is not
known. Robinson suggested (Later Set. p. 107)
that Jiphthah-el was identical with Jotapata,
the city which so long withstood Vespasian
(Joseph. B. J. iii. 7), and that they survive in
the modern Jefut, a village in the mountains of
Galilee, half-way between the Bay of Acre and
the, Lake of Gennesareth. But this is too far
to the south. Conder (llbk. p. 267) with more
probability identifies it with the valley running
from the plain of Bameh to the sea. Conder
has also suggested (PEF.Qy. Stat. 1883, p. 137)
Wady el-Ktu-n; but this valley lies to the
north of the ridge that so sharply separated
Upper from Lower Galilee, and possibly marked
the northern limit of Zebulun. [G.] [W.]
JOAB (3NV = Jehovah-father ; 'luifi ; Joab).
1. The eldest and most remarkable of the three
nephews of David, the children of Zeruiah,
David's sister. Their father is unknown,* but
seems to have resided at Bethlehem, and to have
died before his sons, as we find mention of his
sepulchre at that place (2 Sam. ii. 32). They
all exhibit the activity and courage of David's
constitutional character. But they never rise
beyond this to the nobler qualities which lift
him above the wild soldiers and chieftains of the
time. Asahel, who was cut off in his youth,
and seems to have been the darling of the family,
is only known to us from his gazelle-like agility
(2 Sam. ii. 18). Abishai and Joab are alike in
their implacable revenge. Joab, however, com-
bines with these ruder qualities something of
a more statesman-like character, which brings
him more nearly to a level with his youthful
uncle ; and unquestionably gives him the second
place in the whole history of David's reign.
I. He first appears after David's accession to
the throne at Hebron, thus differing from his
brother Abishai, who was already David's com-
panion during his wanderings (1 Sam. xxvi. 6).
He with his two brothers went out from Hebron
nt the head of David's " servants," or guards, to
keep a watch on the movements of Abner, who
with a considerable force of Benjamites had
crossed the Jordan, and come as far as Gibson,
perhaps on a pilgrimage to the sanctuary. The
two parties sat opposite each other, on each side
of the tank by that city. Abner's challenge, to
which Joab assented, led to a desperate struggle
between twelve champions from either side.
[Gibbon.] The left-handed Benjamites, and the
right-handed men of Judah — their sword-hands
* By Josephus (Ant. vii. 1, $ 3) his name is given as
Sort (Xoupi) ; but this may be merely a repetition of
Saroulah (Sopovfo).
JOAB
thus coming together— seized each his adversary
by the head, and the whole number fell by the
mutual wounds they received.
This roused the blood of the rival tribes; a
general encounter ensued ; Abner and his com-
pany were defeated, and in his flight, being hard
pressed by the swift-footed Asahel, he reluctantly
killed the unfortunate youth. The expressions
which he uses, " Wherefore should I smite thee
to the ground ? how then should I hold up my
face to Joab thy brother ?" (2 Sam. ii. 22). imply
that up to this time there had been a kindly, if
not a friendly, feeling between the two chiefs.
It was rudely extinguished by this deed of blood.
The other soldiers of Judah, when they came »p
to the dead body of their young leader, halted,
struck dumb by grief. But his two brothers,
on seeing the corpse, only hurried on with
greater fury in the pursuit. At sunset the
Benjamite force rallied round Abner," and he
then made an appeal to the generosity of Joab
not to push the war to extremities. Joab re-
luctantly consented, drew off bis troops, and
returned, after the loss of only nineteen men, t<>
Hebron. They took the corpse of Asahel with
them, and on the way halted at Bethlehem ia
the early morning, or at dead of night, U
inter it in their family burial-place (2 Sam.
ii. 32). *
But Joab's revenge on Abner was only post-
poned. He had been on another of these pre-
datory excursions from Hebron, when he was
informed on his return that Abner had in his
absence paid a visit to David, and been received
into favonr (2 Sam. iii. 23). He broke out int*
a violent remonstrance with the king, and thea,
without David's knowledge, immediately seat
messengers after Abner, who was overtaken bj
them at the well of Sirah, according to Josephtu
(Ant. vii. 1, § 5), about two miles from Hebron.'
Abner, with the unsuspecting generosity of
his noble nature, returned at once. Joab and
Abishai met him in the gateway of the town ;
Joab took him aside (2 Sam. iii. 27), as if with
a peaceful intention, and then struck him s
deadly blow " under the fifth rib." It is possible
that with the passion of vengeance for his
brother may have been mingled the fear lest
Abner should supplant him in the king's favour.
David burst into passionate invective and im-
precations on Joab when he heard of the act,
and forced him to appear in sackcloth and tors
garments at the fnneral (iii. 31). But it was
an intimation of Joab's power which David
never forgot. The awe in which he stood of the
sons of Zeruiah cast a shade over the whole re-
mainder of his life (iii. 39).
II. There was now no rivaljleft in the way
of Joab's advancement, and soon the opportunity
occurred for his legitimate accession to the
highest post that David could confer. At the
siege of Jebus, the king offered the office of
chief of the army, now grown into a " host,'* to
b The word describing the halt of Abner's band, sad
rendered " troop " In the A. V. and •* band " In the R. V.
(2 Sam. 11. 26), Is an unusual one, *1***M (spadda*).
elsewhere employed for a bunch or knot of hyssop.
• Possibly the spring which still exists about that
distance out of Hebron on the left of the road going
northward, and bears the name of 'AinScrah. The read
has doubtless always followed the same track.
Digitized by
Google
JOAB
any one who would lead the forlorn hope, and
scale the precipice on which the besieged fortress
stood. With an agility equal to that of David
himself, or of his brother Asahel, Joab succeeded
in the attempt, and became in consequence com-
mander-in-chief — " captain of the host " — the
same office that Abner had held under Sanl, the
highest in the state after the king (1 Ch. xi. 6 ;
2 Sam. viii. 16). His importance was immedi-
ately shown by his undertaking the fortification
of the conquered city, in conjunction with David
<1 Ch. xi. 8).
In this post he was content, and served the
king with undeviating fidelity. In the wide
range of wars which David undertook, Joab was
the acting general, and he therefore may be con-
sidered as the founder, as far as military prowess
was concerned, the Marlborough, the Belisarius,
of the Jewish empire. Abishai, his brother,
still accompanied him, as captain of the king's
" mighty men " (1 Ch. li. 20 ; 2 Sam. x. 10).
He had a chief armour-bearer of his own,
Naharai, a Beerothite (2 Sam. xxiii. 37 ; 1 Ch.
xi. 39), and ten attendants to carry his equip-
ment and baggage (2 Sam. xviii. 15). He had
the charge, formerly belonging to the king or
judge, of giving the signal by trumpet for
advance or retreat (2 Sam. xviii. 16). He was
called by the almost regal title of " Lord " (2
Sam. xi. 11), " the prince of the king's army "
(1 Ch. xxvii. 34). His usual residence (except
when campaigning) was in Jerusalem ; but he
had a house and property, with barley-fields
adjoining, in the countrv (2 Sam. xiv. 30), in the
" wilderness" (1 K. ii. 34), probably on the N.E.
of Jerusalem (cp. 1 Sam. xiii. 18 ; Josh. viii. 15,
20), near an ancient sanctuary, called from its
nomadic village "Baalhazor" (2 Sam. xiii. 23 ;
cp. with xiv. 30), where there were extensive
sheepwalks. It is possible that this " house of
Joab" may have given it* name to Ataroth,
Beth-Joab (1 Ch. ii. 54), to distinguish it from
Ataroth-adar. There were two Ataroths in the
tribe of Benjamin [see Ataroth].
1. His great war was that against Ammon,
which he conducted in person. It was divided
into three campaigns, (a) The first was against
the allied forces of Syria and Ammon. He
attacked and defeated the Syrians, whilst his
brother Abishai did the same for the Ammon-
ites. The Syrians rallied with their kindred
tribes from beyond the Euphrates, and were
finally routed by David himself. [Hadare-
zer.] (6) The second was against Edom. The
decisive victory was gained by David himself in
the " valley of salt," and celebrated by a tri-
umphal monument (2 Sam. viii. 13). But Joab
had the charge of carrying out the victory, and
remained for six months, extirpating the male
population, whom he then buried in the tombs
of Petra (1 K. xi. 15, 16). So long was the
terror of his name preserved that only when the
fugitive prince of Edom, in the Egyptian court,
heard that " David slept with his fathers, and
that Joab the captain of the host voa$ dead," did
he venture to return to his own country (ib. xi.
21, 22). (c) The third was against the Ammon-
ites. They were again left to Joab (2 Sam. x.
7-19). He went against them at the beginning
of the next year " at the time when kings go
<>ut to battle"— to the siege of Rabbah. The
Ark was sent with him, and the whole army was
JOAB
1711
encamped in booths or huts round the belea-
guered city (2 Sam. xi. 1, 11). After a sortie ot
the inhabitants, which caused some loss to the
Jewish army, Joab took the lower city on the
river, and then, with true loyalty, sent to urge
David to come and take the citadel, " Rabbah,"
lest the glory of the capture should pass from
the king to his general (2 Sam. xii. 26-28).
2. The services of Joab to the king were
not confined to these military achievements. In
the entangled relations which grew up in
David's domestic life, he bore an important part,
(a) The first occasion was the unhappy corre-
spondence which passed between him and the king
during the Ammonite war respecting Uriah the
Hittite, which led to the treacherous sacrifice
of Uriah in the above-mentioned sortie (2 Sam.
xi. 1-25). It shows both the confidence reposed
by David in Joab, and Joab's too unscrupulous
fidelity to David. From the possession which
Joab thus acquired of the terrible secret of the
royal household, has been dated, with some
probability,' his increased power over the mind
of the king.
(6) The next occasion on which it was dis-
played was in his successful endeavour to
reinstate Absalom in David's favour, after the
murder of Amnon. It would almost seem as if
he had been guided by the effect produced on
the king by Nathan's parable. A similar
apologue he put into the mouth of a " wise
woman of Tekoah." The exclamation of David
on perceiving the application intimates the high
opinion which he entertained of his general, " Is
not the hand of Joab in all this ? " (2 Sam. xiv.
1-20). A like indication is found in the con-
fidence of Absalom that Joab, who had thus
procured his return, could also go a step further
and demand his admission to his father's pre-
sence. Joab, who evidently thought that he
had gained as much as could be expected (2 Sam.
xiv. 22), twice refused to visit the prince, but,
having been entrapped into an interview by a
stratagem of Absalom, undertook the mission,
and succeeded in this also (ib. xiv. 28-33).
(c) The same keen sense of his master's
interests that had prompted this desire to heal
the breach in the royal family ruled the conduct
of Joab no less, when the relations of the father
and son were reversed by the successful revolt
of Absalom. His former intimacy with the
prince did not impair his fidelity to the king.
He followed him beyond the Jordan, and in the
final battle of Ephraim assumed the responsi-
bility of taking the rebel prince's dangerous life
in spite of David's injunction to spare him, and
when no one else had conrage to act so decisive
a part (2 Sam. xviii. 2, 11-15). He was well
aware of the terrible effect it would have on the
king (ib. xviii. 20), and on this account possibly
dissuaded his young friend Ahimaaz from bearing
the news ; but when the tidings had been broken,
he had the spirit himself to rouse David from
the frantic grief which would have been fatal
to the royal cause (2 Sam. xix. 5-7). His stern
resolution (as he had himself anticipated) well-
nigh proved fatal to his own interests. The
king could not forgive it, and went so far in his
unreasonable resentment as to transfer the com-
» See Blunt's Coincidences, li., ch. xi.
Digitized by
Google
1712
JOAB
mand of the army from the too faithful Joab to
his other nephew Am™, the son of Abigail,
who had even sided with the insurgents (2 Sam.
xix. 32). In like manner he returned only a
reproachful answer to the vindictive loyalty of
Joab's brother, Abishai (ib. 22).
(d) Nothing brings out more strongly the good
and bad qualities of Joab than his conduct in
this trying crisis of his history. On the one
hand, he remained still faithful to his master.
On the other hand, as before in the case of
Abner, he was determined not to lose the post
he so highly valued. Amasa was commander-
in-chief, but Joab bad still his own small
following of attendants ; and with him were
the mighty men commanded by his brother
Abishai (2 Sam. xz. 7, 10), and the body-guard
of the king. With these he went out in pur-
suit of the remnants of the rebellion. In the
heat of pursuit, he encountered his rival Amasa,
more leisurely engaged in the same quest. At
" the great stone " in Gibeon, the cousins met.
Joab's sword was attached to his girdle ; by
design or accident it protruded from the sheath.
Amasa rushed into the treacherous embrace, to
which Joab invited him, holding fast his sword
by his own right hand, whilst the protruding
sword in his left hand plunged into Amasa's
stomach; a single blow from that practised
arm, as in the case of Abner, sufficed to do its
work. Joab and his brother hurried on to
discharge their commission, whilst one of his ten
attendants stayed by the corpse, calling on the
royal party to follow after Joab. But the deed
produced a frightful impression. The dead
body was lying in a pool of blood by the
roadside; every one halted, as they came up,
at the ghastly sight, till the attendant dragged
it out of the road, and threw a cloak over it.
Then, as if the spell was broken, they followed
Joab, now once more captain of the host (2 Sam.
xx. 5-13). He too, when they overtook him,
presented an aspect long afterwards remembered
with horror. The blood of Amasa had spirted
all over the girdle to which the sword was
attached, and the sandals on his feet were red
with the stains left by the falling corpse (1 K.
ii. 5).
(e) But, at the moment, all were absorbed in
the pursuit of the rebels. Once more a proof
was given of the wide-spread confidence in
Joab's judgment. In the besieged town of Abel-
Bethmaachah, far in the north, the same appeal
was addressed to his sense of the evils of an
endless civil war, that had been addressed to
him years before by Abner near Gibeon. He de-
manded only the surrender of the rebel chief,
and on the sight of his head thrown over the
wall withdrew the army and returned to Jeru-
salem (2 Sam. xx. 16-22). [Sheba.]
(/) His last remonstrance with David was
on the announcement of the king's desire tb
number the people. "The king prevailed
against Joab " (2 Sam. xxiv. 1-4). But Joab's
scruples were so strong that he managed to
avoid numbering two of the tribes, Levi and
Benjamin (1 Ch. xxi. 6).
3. There is something mournful in the end of
Joab. At the close of his long life, his loyalty,
so long unshaken, at last wavered. " Though
he had not turned after Absalom [or, as in LXX.
or Joseph. Ant. viii. 1, § 4, " He turned not after
JOAOHIM
Solomon"], he turned after Adonijah " (1 1
ii. 28). This probably filled up the meuirea
the king's long cherished resentment V>
learn from David's last song that his powerle*-
ness over his courtiers was even then present n
his mind (2 Sam. xxiii. 6, 7), and now, on his
deathbed, he recalled to Solomon's recolledia
the two murders of Abner and Amasa (lS.il
5, 6), with an injunction not to let the tpd
soldier escape with impunity.
The revival of the pretensions of Adociji*
after David's death was sufficient to awaken tt»
suspicions of Solomon. The king deposed u>
high-priest Abiathar, Joab's friend and felloi-
conspirator — and the news of this event it ffl»
alarmed Joab himself. He claimed the right «t
sanctuary within the curtains of the sacred tew
under the shelter of the altar at Gibeon. H-
was pursued by Benaiah, who at first hesitit*!
to violate the sanctuary of the refuge; kit
Solomon urged that the guilt of two m.
murders overrode all such protection. With i*
hands on the altar therefore, the grey-beadr
warrior was slaughtered by his successor. IW
body was carried to his house " in the wilder-
ness," and there interred. He left descend*.
but nothing is known of them, unlets it bk
be inferred from the double curse of tarn
(2 Sam. iii. 29) and of Solomon (1 E. ii. 3)
that they seemed to dwindle away, stricken h
a succession of visitations — weakness, lenmn,
lameness, murder, starvation. His name is h
some supposed (in allusion to his part a
Adonijah's coronation on that spot) to be p
served in the modern appellation of Enrogel,"*
well of Job," corrupted from Joab. [A. P. &]
2.(3tO»; B. 'I»j84S, A. 'land; Joab.) »
of Seraiah, and descendant of Kenaz (1 Ch. i'-
14). He was father, or prince, as Jir*
explains it, of the valley of Charashim (B.1
" Ge-harashitn "), or "craftsmen," so afr-
according to the tradition quoted by J«ras
(Quaest. Hcb. m Parol.), because the arcoitf^
of the Temple were selected from among to
sons.
8. Qlud$ ; Job in 1 Esd.) The head of i
family, not of priestly or Levitical rank, ik*
descendants, with those of Jeshua, were '■-
most numerous of all who returned with Zen'-
babel (Ezra ii. 6, viii. 9 ; Neh. vii. 11 ; 1 W-
viii. 35). It is not clear whether Jeshni «d
Joab were two prominent men among ths
children of Pahath-Moab (A. V. and R. V.), tk*
ruler or sultan (shiiltdn) of Hoab, as the Syrfe
render, or whether, in the registration of th«
who returned, the descendants of Jeshns ■*"
Joab were represented by the sons of Pakuk-
Moab. If the latter be accepted, the vera
(Ezra ii. 6; Neh. vii. 11) should be renderd-
" the sons of Pahath-Moab, for (i.«. representitf)
the sons of Jeshua and Joab." In this ok t«
Joab of Ezra viii. 9 and 1 Esd. viii. 35 w*
probably a distinct personage.
JOA'OHAZ (B. 'Iexorfw, A. 'lirf; £
choniot) = Jehoahaz (1 Esd. i. 34 [LXX. «• ##
the son of Josiah. The LXX. and Vulgate iff
in this case followed by St. Matthew (;• ")> "
have been altered so as to agree with bin-
JO'ACHIM CI»««'m; JoaUm). L (*"■
i. 3) = Jehoiakim, called also Joacio.
Digitized by
Google
JOACIM
2. A " high-priest " (A Itptbs) at Jerusalem
in the time of Baruch " the sod of Chelcias,"
i.e. Hilkiah (Bar. i. 7). The name does not
occur in the list in 1 Ch. vi. 13 sq. [B. F. W.]
JO'ACIM (LXX. usually 'lcnucti/x; Joacim).
1. = Jehoiakim (1 Esd. i. 37, 38, 39). [Joa-
chim, 1.]
2. (.foachin) = Jehoiachin (1 Esd. i. 43).
3. — Joiakim, the son of Jeshua(l Esd. T. 5).
He is by mistake called the son of Zerubbabel,
as is clear from Neh. xii. 10, 26. Burrington
(Oeneal. i. 72) proposed to omit the words
'Ianjcl/u i toS altogether as an interpolation.
[W. A. W.]
4. "The high-priest which was in Jeru-
salem " ( Jud. iv. 6, 1 4) in the time of Judith,
who welcomed the heroine after the death of
Holofernes, in company with "the ancients of
the children of Israel " (4 ytpowia ruy vlav
'\afai\K, xv. 8 sq.). The name occurs with the
various reading Eliakim, but it is impossible to
identify him with any historical character. No
such name occurs in the lists of high-priests in
1 Ch. vi. (Joseph. Ant. x. 8, § 6) ; and it is a mere
arbitrary conjecture to suppose that Eliakim,
mentioned in 2 K. xviii. 18, was afterwards raised
to that dignity. Still less can be said for the
identification of Joacim with Hilkiah (2 K.
xxii. 4 ; 'EXicuclas, Joseph. Ant. x. 4, § 2 ;
XeAxfas, LXX.). The name itself ('< The Lord
will set np ") is appropriate to the position
which the high-priest occupies in the story of
Judith, and the person must be regarded as a
necessary part of the fiction.
5. The husband of Susanna (Sus. r. 1 sq.).
The name seems to have been chosen, as in the
former case, with a reference to its meaning ;
and it was probably for the same reason that
the husband of Anna, the, mother of the Virgin,
is called Joacim in earlv legends (Protev. Jac.
i., &c).
JO-A'DANUS ClaaSdvos; Joadeus), one of
the sons of Jeshua, the son of Jozadak (1 Esd. ix.
19). His name occupies the same position as
that of Gedaliah in the corresponding list in
Ezra x. 18, but it is uncertain how the corrup-
tion originated.
JO'AH (tlXh' : 'I«&x in Isaiah ; BA.' lmcrcupkr
in 2 K. xviii. 'l8 ; BA. '\ctas in vv. 26, 37, and
A. 'laaatpa-r in t. 18 : Joahe). 1. The son of
Asaph, and chronicler, or keeper of the records,
to Hezekiah. He was one of the three chief
officers sent to communicate with the Assyrian
general at the conduit of the upper poo) (Is.
xxx vi. 3, 11, 22), and probably belonged to the
tribe of Levi.
2. (BA. 'ludfi ; Joah.) The son or grandson
of Zimmah, a Gershonite (1 Ch. vi. 21), and
apparently the same as Ethan (v. 42), unless,
.is is not improbable, in the latter list some
names are supplied which are omitted in the
former, and vice versa. For instance, in v. 42
Shimei is added, and in v. 43 Libni is omitted
(cp. r. 20). If Joah and Ethan are identical,
the passage must have been early corrupted, as
all ancient Versions give it as it stands at
present, and there are no variations in the MSS.
3. (B. 'lade, A. 'load; Joaha.) The third
son of Obed-edom (1 Ch. xxvi. 4), a Korhite,
BIBLE DICT.— VOL. 1.
JOANNA
1713
and one of the door-keepers appointed by David.
With the rest of his family he is characterised
as a man of excellence in strength for the
service (r. 8). They were appointed to keep
the southern gate of the Temple, and the house
of Asuppim, or "gatherings," which was either
a store-house or council-chamber in the outer
court (». 15).
4. (B. om., A. 'lad; Joah.) A Gershonite,
the son of Zimmah, and father of Eden (2 Ch.
xxix. 12). As one of the representatives of the
great Levitical family to which he belonged, he
took a leading part in the purification of the
Temple in the reign of Hezekiah. In the last
clause of the verse the LXX. have 'luaxd,
which is the reading of both MSS. ; but there is
nothing to show that the same person is not in
both instances intended, nor any MS. authority
for the variant reading.
6. (B. 'lovdx, A. 'lads; Joha.) The son of
Joahaz, and keeper of the records or annalist to
Josiah. Together with the chief officers of state,
Shaphan the scribe, and Maaseiah, the governor
of the city, he superintended the repair of the
Temple, which had been neglected during the two
previous reigns (2 Ch. xxxiv. 8). Josephus calls
him 'ludrrfs, as if he read T\t<S' 1 . The Syriac
and Arabic omit the name altogether.
joa'Haz (T™<i*; A - ' I »<*x<»C. B - "i«»*x;
Joachaz), the father of Joah, the chronicler or
keeper of the records to king Josiah (2 Ch. xxxiv.
8). One of Kennicott's MSS. reads tflN, i.e.
Ahaz, and the margin of Bomberg's Bible gives
TntOiT, i.e. Jehoahaz. In the Syr. and Arab.
Versions the name is omitted.
JOATCAN (B. 'lava, A. 'luavdv ; Jonaihas)
=Johanan, the son of Eliashib (1 Esd. ix. 1).
JOAN'NA ('laayyas, 'luiwdv; Joanna), son
of Rhesa, according to the text of Luke iii. 27,
and one of the ancestors of Christ. But accord-
ing to the view explained in a previous article,
son of Zerubbabel, and the same as Hananiah in
1 Ch. iii. 19. [Geneal. of Christ ; Hananiah,
8.] " [A. C. H.]
JOAN'NA ('Imbra, modern form "Joan,"
of the same origin as 'lcaawat, the reading of
most MSS. ; also rendered A. V. " Joanna," St.
Luke iii. 27. and 'ludrvris=HebT. Jehohanan),
the name of a woman, occurring twice in Luke
(viii. 3, xxiv. 10), but evidently denoting the
same person. In the first passage she is ex-
pressly stated to have been " wife of Chusa,
steward (Mrpowos) of Herod ; " that is, Antipas,
tetrarch of Galilee. Prof. Blunt has observed
in his Coincidences, that " we find here a reason
why Herod should say to his servants (Matt,
xiv. 2), ' This is John the Baptist ' . . . because
his steward's wife was a disciple of Jesus, and
so there would be freqnent mention of Him
among the servants in Herod's court " (Alford,
ad loc. ; cp. Lnke ix. 7). Professor Blunt adds
the still more interesting instance of Manaen
(Acts xiii. 1), the tetrarch's own "foster-
brother" (irimpotpos, Blunt, p. 263, ed. 1859).
Another coincidence is, that our Lord's ministry
was mostly confined to Galilee, the seat of
Herod's jurisdiction. Farther, if we might sup-
pose Herod at length to have dismissed Chusa
5 R
Digitized by
Google
1714
JOANNAN
from his service, on account of Joanna's attach-
ment to one already in ill odour with the higher
powers (see particularly Luke xiii. 31), the sup-
pression of her husband's name, now no longer
holding a distinguished office, would be very
natural in the second passage. However, Joanna
continued faithful to our Lord throughout His
ministry ; and as she was one of those whose
circumstances permitted them to " minister unto
Him out of their substance" during His life-
time, so she was one of those who brought
spices and ointments to embalm His Body when
dead. [E. S. Ff.]
JOAN'NAN Ol-awdV, A. 'Wwis ; Joannes),
the eldest brother of Judas Maccabaeus (1 Mace,
ii. 2). He had the surname of Caddis, and is
elsewhere called John. [John, 2.]
JO-ABIB QluaplQ, A. 'luaptl/i; Joarib),
chief of the first of the twenty- four courses of
priests in the reign of David, and ancestor of the
Maccabees (1 Mace ii. 1). His name appears
also in the A. V. as Jehoiarib (1 Ch. xxiv. 7)
and Jarib (1 Mace xiv. 29). Josephus retains
the form adopted by the LXX. (Ant. xii. 6, § 1).
JO'ASH (EM*, the contracted form of the'
name Jehoash, in which it is frequently found ;
'lads ; Joas). 1. Son of Ahaziah king of Judah,
and the only one of his children who escaped the
murderous hand of Athaliah. Jehoram having
himself killed all his own brethren; and all his
sons, except Ahaziah, having been killed by the
irruption of the Philistines and Arabians; and
all Ahaziah's remoter relations having been slain
by Jehu ; and now all his sons having been put
to death by Athaliah (2 Ch. xxi. 4, 17 ; xxii. 1,
8-10), the house of David was reduced to the
lowest ebb, and Joash appears to have been the
only surviving descendant of Solomon. After
his father's sister Jehoshabeath, the wife of
Jehoiada, had stolen him from among the king's
sons, he was hid for six years in the chambers of
the Temple. In the 7th year of his age and of
his concealment, a successful revolution placed
him on the throne of his ancestors, and freed
the country from the tyranny and idolatries
of Athaliah. [Jehoiada.] For at least twenty-
three years, while Jehoiada lived, his reign was
very prosperous. Excepting that the high-
places were still resorted to for incense and
sacrifice, pure religion was restored ; large con-
tributions were made for the repair of the
Temple, which was accordingly restored ; and
the country seems to have been free from foreign
invasion and domestic disturbance. But, after
the death of Jehoiada, Joash, who was evidently
of weak character, fell into the hands of bad
advisers, at whose suggestion he revived the
worship of Baal and Ashtaroth. When he was
rebuked for this by Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada,
who had probably succeeded to the high-priest-
hood, with base ingratitude and daring impiety
Joash caused him to be stoned to death in the
very court of the Lord's House, " between the
Temple and the Altar" (Matt, xxiii. 35). The
vengeance imprecated by the murdered high-
priest was not long delayed. That very year,
Hazael king of Syria, after a successful campaign
against the Philistines, came up against Jeru-
salem, and carried off a vast booty as the price
of his departure. A decisive victory, gained by
JOASH
a small band of Syrians over a great host of the
king of Judah, had thus placed Jerusalem at his
mercy. This defeat is expressly said to be i
judgment upon Joash for having forsaken the
God of his fathers. He had scarcely escaped
this danger, when he fell into another and a fatal
one. Two of his servants, taking advantage nf
his severe illness, some think of a wound received
in battle, conspired against him, and slew him
in his bed in the fortress of Millo, thus avengiag
the innocent blood of Zechariah. He was buried
in the city of David, but not in the sepulchres of
the kings of Judah. Possibly the fact of Jehoiada
being buried there had something to do with
this exclusion. Joash's reign lasted forty yean,
from 837 to 798 B.C. (Riehm). He was testa
king from David inclusive, reckoning the reign
of the usurper Athaliah. He is one of the thr«
kings (Ahaziah, Joash, Amaziah) omitted by &
Matthew in the genealogy of Christ.
With regard to the different accounts of the
Syrian invasion given in 2 K. and in 2 Ch., whici
have led some to imagine two distinct Syriia
invasions, and others to see a direct contradic-
tion or at least a strange incompleteness in tie
narratives, the difficulty exists solely in the
minds of the critics. The narrative given above,
which is also that of Keil and E. Bertheau (£j*j.
Handh. z. A. T.) as well as of Josephus, periectjy
suits the two accounts, which are merely dil-
ferent abridgments of the one fuller sccona*.
contained in the original chronicles of tl»
kingdom.
It should be added that the prophet ElUt..
flourished in Israel throughout the days of Joa&a :
and there is some ground for concluding witi
Winer (agreeing with Credner, Movers. Hitne.
Meier, and others) that the prophet Joel sb»
prophesied in the former part of this rop.
(See Movers, Chnmik, pp. 119-121.)
2. Son and successor of Jehoahaz on the throe*
of Israel from B.C. 798 to 783 (Riehm), and fcr
two full years a contemporary sovereign witi
the preceding (2 K. xiv. 1 ; cp. with xii. 1, xiii.
10). When he succeeded to the crown, tb?
kingdom was in a deplorable state from the de-
vastations of Hazael and Benhadad, kings of
Syria, of whose power at this time we had al*<
evidence in the preceding article. In spite at'
the perseverance of Joash in the worship set s|>
by Jeroboam, God took compassion upon the
extreme misery of Israel, and in remembrance ot
His covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,
interposed to save them from entire destruction.
On the occasion of a friendly visit paid by Joash
to Elisha on his deathbed, where he wept over hi*
face, and addressed him as " the chariot of Israel
and the horsemen thereof," the Prophet promised
him deliverance from the Syrian yoke in Apnea.
the scene of Ahab's great victory over a former
Benhadad (1 K. xx. 26-30). He then bade him
smite upon the ground, and the king smote
thrice and then stayed. The Prophet rebuked
him for staying, and limited to three his vic-
tories over Syria. Accordingly Joash did beat
Benhadad three times on the field of battle, and
recovered from him. the cities which Hazael had
taken from Jehoahaz. The other great military
event of Joash's reign was his successful war
with Amaziah king of Judah. The grounds of
this war are given fully in 2 Ch. xxv. [Ama-
ziah.] The hiring of 100,000 men of Israel lot
Digitized by
Google
JOASH
100 talents of silver by Amaziah is the only in-
stance on record of such a transaction, and
implies that at that time the kingdom of Israel
was free from all fear of the Syrians. These
mercenary soldiers having been dismissed by
Amaziah, at the instigation of a prophet, with-
out being allowed to take part in the Edomitish
expedition, returned in great wrath to their own
country, and sacked and plundered the cities of
Judah in revenge for the slight put upon them,
and also to indemnify themselves for the loss of
their share of the plunder. It was to avenge
this injury that Amaziah, on his return from his
triumph over the Edomites, declared war against
Joash, in spite of the warning of the Prophet,
and the contemptuous dissuasion of Joash under
the fable of the cedar and the thistle. The
result was that the two armies met at Beth-
shemesh, that Joash was victorious, put the
army of Amaziah to the rout, took him prisoner,
brought him to Jerusalem, broke down the wall
of Jerusalem, all along the north side from the
gate of Ephraim to the'corner gate, a distance of
400 cubits, plundered the Temple of its gold and
.silver vessels, seized the king's treasures, took
hostages, and then returned to Samaria, where
he died, probably not very long afterwards, and
was buried in the sepulchres of the kings of
Israel. He died in the loth year of Amaziah
king of Judah, and was succeeded by his son
Jeroboam II. There is a discrepancy between
the Bible account of his character and that given
by Josephus. For whereas the former says of
him, " He did that which was evil in the sight
of the Lord " (2 K. ziii. 11), the latter says that
he was a good man, and very different from his
father. Josephus probably was guided by the
account of Joash's friendly intercourse with
Elisha, which certainly indicates some good dis-
position in him, although he followed the sin of
Jeroboam. [A. C. H.]
3. The father of Gideon, and a wealthy man
among the Abiezrites. At the time of the
Midianitish occupation of the country, he appears
to have gone so far with the tide of popular
opinion iu favour of idolatry, that he had on his
own ground an altar dedicated to Baal, and an
Asherah. In this, however, he submitted rather
to the exigencies of the time, and the influence
of his family and neighbours, and was the first
to defend the daring act of his son, and protect
him from the vengeance of the Abiezrites, by
sarcasm only less severe than that which Elijah
employed against the priests of Baal in the
memorable scene on Carmel (Judg. vi. 11, 29, 30,
31 ; vii. 14 ; viii. 13. 29, 32). The LXX. B. puts
the speech in vi. 31 most inappropriately into
the mouth of Gideon, but this is corrected in
the Alex. MS. In the Vnlg. the name is omitted
in vi. 31 and viii. 13.
4. Apparently a yonnger son of Ahab, who
held a subordinate jurisdiction in the life-
time of his father, or was appointed viceroy
(HpXorra, LXX. of 2 Ch. xviii. 25) during his
absence in the attack on Ramoth-Gilead (1 K.
xxii. 26 ; 2 Ch. xviii. 25). Or be may have been
merely a prince of the blood- royal. The Vulgate
calls him " the son of Amelech," taking the
article as part of the noun, and the whole as a
proper name. Thenius suggests that he may
have been placed with the governor of the city
tor the purpose of military education.
JOB
1715
6. A descendant of Shelah the son of Judah
(1 Ch. iv. 22). The Vulgate rendering of this
name by Securta, according to its etymology, as
well as of the other names in the same verse, is
very remarkable. The Hebrew tradition, quoted
by Jerome (Quaest. Hebr. in Parol.) and Rashi
(Comm. in foe.), applies it to Mahlon, the son of
Elimelech, who married a Moabitess. The ex-
pression rendered in A. V., " who had the do-
minion (1?1?3, bd'ilii) in Moab," would, according
to this interpretation, signify " who married in
Moab." The same explanation is given in the
Targum of R. Joseph.
6. A Benjamite, son of Shemaah of Gibeah
(1 Ch. xii. 3). He was one of the heroes,
" helpers of the battle," who resorted to David
at Ziklag, and assisted him in his excursions
against the marauding parties to whose attacks
he was exposed (t>. 21). He was probably with
David in his pursuit of the Amalekites (cp.
1 Ch. xii. 21 with 1 Sam. xxx. 8, where 1113
should be "troop" in _ both passages). The
Peshitto-Syriac, reading 133 for '33, makes him
the son of Ahiezer.
7. One of the officers of David's household, to
whose charge were entrusted the store-houses of
oil, the produce of the plantations of sycamores
and the olive-yards of the lowlands of Judah
(1 Ch. xxvii. 28). [W. A. W.]
JO' ASH (triri', a different name from the
preceding ; 'Utds ; Joas), son of Becher, and head
of a Benjamite house, which existed in the time
of king David (1 Ch. vii. 8). [A. C. H.]
JO'ATHAM OWltyu; Joatham),= Jotham
the son of Uzziah (Matt. i. 9).
JOAZAB'DUS (B. Kar4t(afiSos, A. ml
'ld(a$Sos ; Jbradus) =Jozabad the Levite (1 Esd,
ix. 48 ; cp. Neh. viii. 7).
JOB (3V ; A. 'leuroi<p, D. -$ ; ./oo), the third
son of Issachar (Gen. xlvi. 13), called in another
genealogy Jashub (1 Ch. vii. 1, B. 'lturiroip, A.
'loffoi/3), which is the reading of the Sam. Codex
in Genesis, and of some MSS. of the LXX.
JOB (Heb. 31»8* ; Greek 'lw$), one of the
Hagiographa, of the class of literature called
Khochmah, consisting of a poetical dialogue with
prologue and epilogue in prose. It is the only
specimen in Hebrew of this form of composition
which has been compared with Greek Tragedy,*
and, less correctly, with the Makamas of the
Arabs. In respect of the matter it has analogues
in the Book of Ecclesiastea and in some of the
Psalms, especially Pss. xxxvii., xlix., and Ixxiii.
1. Plan of the Book. — Job, in the Prologue, is
represented as a man of the highest integrity
and piety, and corresponding prosperity. *' The
Satan " in the heavenly council asserts that his
• Attempts at analysing the poem In accordance with
dramatic terminology have been made by II. Hnpfeld
(DeuUche Zrittchrift filr chrittlicht Wiluruckaft und
cKruUichtt Ubai, 1850, No. 35) and F. Delltuch
(Henog's Encydopiidie, art. Hiob). The Justice of the
comparison Is discussed with great care by Onstav Baur
(Tkeol. Studim und Kritiken, 1856, pp. 581-652), who
calls it " a lyrical, or, more accurately, didactic-lyrical
poem."
5 R 2
Digitized by
Google
1716
JOB
worship U mercenary, and that he will blaspheme
as soon as the prosperity is withdrawn. That
this may be put to the proof, " the Satan " is
allowed to deprive Job of all his worldly goods,
including hi* children. This trial Job undergoes
with resignation. " The .Satan " then obtains
permission to attack his person, and smites him
with a sore disease (probably elephantiasis) from
head to foot. This second test Job also endures
at first resignedly, although his wile tempts him
to blaspheme. Three friends theu come to com-
fort him, and the dialogue with them occupies
the bulk of the Book, divided as follows: — Job's
complaint (ch. iii.) ; addresses to Job by the
three friends, two of whom speak three times
and the third twice, each speech being answered
by Job (chs. iv.-xxvi.) ; soliloquy of Job iu two
parts (chs. xxvi., nvii., and chs. xxviii.-xxxi.).
A fifth speaker then comes forward, who delivers
four continuous discourses (chs. xxxii., xxxiii. ;
ch. xxxiv. ; ch. xxxr. ; chs. xxxri., xxxvii.), and
is followed by the Deity " from the whirlwind,"
who delivers two discourses (chs. xxxviii.,
xxxix. ; chs. xl., xli.), with brief answers from
Job. In a final speech (ch. xlii. 7, 8) the Deity
gives a verdict on the foregoing controversy, and
we learn in the epilogue that Job was healed,
and restored to a greater prosperity than he had
previously possessed.
The original question therefore to which Job's
sufferings were intended to give the answer is
left undecided, or has to be inferred by the reader
from the course of the dialogue; for Satan is
not mentioned after the Prologue." Since in
xlii. 6 Job prays for forgiveness, it would seem
that he must in the course of the dialogue have
fallen away from his sinlessuess (i. 22, ii. 10);
and this supposition has the sup|>ort of the
Targuin (on ii. 10) and the Talmud of Babylon
(llaba Bathra, f. 15 b). Nevertheless many
writers (e.g. in recent times A. Hahn, S. Cox,
B. Szolt) maintain that Job endures the second
trial successfully to the end. whereas some (<•.</.
J. B. Mozley) endeavour to find an intermediate
course. The difficulty of deciding this question
is partly occasioned by the uncertainty of the
import of the phrase "Tp"D' in i. 11, and of the
degree and nature of the impiety which it
implies.* It will be assumed in the following
section that the first of the foregoing accounts is
the true one.
2. Sco/K and purpose. — Although the bril-
liancy and power of the dialogue are almost
universally acknowledged, much difference of
opinion has existed concerning the scope of the
whole work, which some regard as theoretical,
others as practical, with further differences
among the former concerning the theorem which
is proved, among the latter concerning the
precept which is inculcated. The literature on
this subject is very fully given by August Hahn,
Commentar uber das Such Hiob (1850), pp. 5-8,
and W. Volck, de sumtna sententia carminie Iobi
(Dorpat, 1869), to whose collections little has
been added of importance. It is generally
» Hoffmann (Biob, 1890) would read In v. 21, 01G>3
Vtf?* with reference to 1. 7. See also T. K. Cueyne fn
the Expositor for May 1891.
< The best discussion of tbis subject is In the Dutch
Commentary of Matthes, 2nd ed. pp. 18-21.
JOB
agreed that the subject of the discussion is the
relation of suffering to sin, and the question why
the righteous suffer. To this question some
suppose that no answer is given, and that the
author would demonstrate that the world is not
governed according to human ideas of justice.
" It is the discovery of the Book of Job," sap
Hoffmann, " that man's suffering is greater than
his sin before God." This opinion has found its
most eloquent exponent in J. B. Mozley {Essay*
Historical and Theological, ii. 164 aqq.), who
among other striking ideas suggests that the
purpose of the Book in the scheme of the Bible
was to prepare the Jews for a Christ who should
be a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief,
by showing that suffering need not imply sin in
the sufferer. Others suppose that the Book b a
theodicy, and does attempt to justify the ways
of God : in the opinion of Volck, by showing
that the problems of the world are insoluble
without a direct revelation, such as the Jews
possessed ; in that of Ewald, and more recently
of W. H. Green (The Argument of the Book if
Job unfolded, New York, 1874), by pointing to
the doctrine of immortality ; while K. Bndde and
Hengstenberg hold that we are to learn that the
purpose of Job's suffering (and therefore of that
of every righteous roan) was to bring to the
surface the sin that slumbered at the bottom «t
his heart, that he might repent of it and k»
forgiven. Others suppose that more than ok
answer is offered, the work containing merely
penstes on the great question of suffering ; the
appearance of unity which it offers being due t<-
interpolation and revision (so T. K. Cheyne, M-
and Solomon, 1886). Of those who suppose t'a*
Book written with a practical purpose, we may
notice the theory of B. Szolt, that it is to point oat
generally the reflections from which a just nun
should seek consolation in the time of trial : that
of Rabiger (de sententia primaria libri Jobi, 1861).
that it teaches that real virtue should be inde-
pendent of circumstances; and also theories
which suppose the consolation contained in it is
addressed not to an individual but to a nation : tb*
nation allegorically personified in Job being the
whole nation of Israel, according to Bruno Baser
(Die Religion des A. Testamentes, ii. 478) ; the
northern kingdom, according to Hermann von
der Hardt (1728) and Hitzig ; the kingdom of
Jndah, according to Warbnrton, Joannes Clerirns.
and Bernstein ; the " Servant of the Lord." it.
the pious kernel of the latter, according t»
Seinecke (Der Gntndgedanke das B. Hub, Clau*-
thal, 1863) and Hoekstra (Theologisch Tij4-
schrift for 1871, pp. 1-56 ; see on this question
Kuenen, Theol. Tijd. for 1873, pp. 493-542).
On this subject the following suggestions may
be made : —
(a) If the Book of Job were, as was Ion;
supposed, 11 a historical record of speeches actually
delivered, we should not demand from it any
unity of design, but at most inquire for what
purpose the discourses had been perpetuated
Viewed as a work of art, the Book may admit of
similar treatment. It does not, like a Platonic
dialogue, work out a definition through a sexief
d Modem representatives of this position are the Rev.
W. Turner, Studies Biblical and Oriental, p. ire.
W. H. Green, ut supra, p. 11; and, it would seem.
Dr. Samuel Cox.
Digitized by
Google
JOB
of objections, but rather portrays a scene. That
scene is, the most perfect man on earth afflicted,
and consoled by the wisest of his contemporaries.
The hero is one who will bear affliction as well
:is it can be borne, and the friends persons who
will administer the best of human comfort.
And because neither party understands God's
counsel, Job, who has the honour of proving by
his conduct the sterling worth of the human
race and of beating down Satan under his feet,
summons God to trial for ill-treating him, and the
friends maintain that Job must be suffering for
some sin when in reality he is suffering because
he is sinless. Both parties rely for their state-
ments on a partial experience, grow warmer as
the discussion proceeds, and heap reproaches on
each other; reproaches which the reader is of
course not intended to re-echo, for the poet has
made all the speeches refined, dignified, eloquent,
and impressive. The irony of this situation is
intended to awake in the spectator the same
feelings as the irony of the Greek dramas calls
out ; and from the Greek theatre, too, can be
paralleled the procedure by which the characters
are made to leave the stage still ignorant of the
solution of which the spectator has from the
commencement been in possession. The doctrine
which the whole scene impresses is the same as
that which is poetically explained in ch. xxviii. ;
viz., that the secret of the government of the
world is not to be discovered by human re-
search ; that God possesses the solution, but
what He communicates to mankind ia not
theoretical, but a practical law for life. Only
what the poet of ch. xxviii. expresses in
aphorisms, the Book itself personifies : we see on
the stage human patience exhausted and human
wisdom baffled ; and instead of a philosophical
contemplation of nature God is made to speak
(somewhat as Mature in the 3rd book of Lucretius
addresses mankind), asking whether the wisdom
and power manifest in His works are not a
guarantee of His justice when it is least apparent.
The explanation of the Prologue is not given to
Job, lest the reader should conclude that the
same explanation holds good in every case in
which men fail to get their deserts ; whereas
the author's doctrine is rather that in every case
there is a ground, which human wisdom has no
means of fathoming, and for the discovery of
which submission and faith must be substituted
(cp. Hupfeld, /. c. p. 286, note).
(6) The three friends maintain the opinion
that suffering is the result of sin, and indeed
proportionate to it; and that the world is
morally governed in detail as well as in general.
They do not represent different standpoints
(this is stated in xlii. 7), but rather different
sorts of persons. If Job be a historical or semi-
historical personage, it is likely that his friends
are such also ; and the poet's purpose in bring-
ing them to console Job will be similar to that
with which Herodotus brings Solon and Croesus
together. The fact that Eliphaz repeats' a
particular saying (iv. 17-19=xv. 15, 16) is
somewhat in favour of this (Schlottmann). Or,
if all the characters be fictitious, the fame of
Teman for wisdom (Jer. xlix. 7 ; Baruch iii. 22,
23) may have been the ground for bringing the
first speaker thence ; the reason for the nation-
ality of the others — Bildad the Shuhite from the
Keturaean Shuah (Gen. xxv. 2), and Zophar the
JOB
1717
Naamathite (perhaps from Xaamah in Judaea,
Joseph, v. 41)— is less obvious.' Reuss(//i'o6, 1888)
suggests that their coming from different regions
symbolises the universality of the doctrine
which they maintain. It cannot be said with
exactitude that "Eliphaz relies for his statements
on revelation, Bildad on the wisdom of the
ancients, Zophar on common-sense " ; perhaps
Eliphaz is most dignified, Zophar more coarse
than the others (see especially K. Budde,
Beitrage zur Kritik des Buchet Hiob, pp. 147-8).
By introducing three representatives of the
doctrine, the poet has provided variety in its
treatment, and has also gained time for the
development of Job's character and ideas.
Similarly the three cycles of speeches do not
represent fresh stages in the argument so much
as progressive states of mind in the speakers/
In the first cycle all offer Job the prospect of a
bright future if he will accept his chastisement
and turn to God : in the second they all paint
vividly the fearful end of the wicked: in the
third Eliphaz accuses Job openly of crimes of
which Job afterwards solemnly declares himself
innocent,* whereas Bildad merely makes a brief
reiteration of Eliphaz's maxim ; by making
Zophar silent the poet gives it to be understood
that Job has won. By the author's making this
doctrine of rewards and punishments universal,
it is clear that no special polemic against the
Mosaic doctrine is intended ; and indeed with
regard to the individual no such doctrine is
taught in the Old Testament.* Concerning the
speeches themselves, the remark of Delitzsch
seems true, that " what the friends say con-
sidered in itself is true; the error lies in its
inadequacy and inapplicability to the case before
them." And indeed, without violent rearrange-
ment of the text, we cannot get rid of the fact
that Job himself repeats some part of what they
have said, and that in some places they even
anticipate the Deity.
(c) The eleven discourses of Job are not pro-
gressive, nor do they answer directly his inter-
locutors' addresses, but present the expression
of different emotions. " The elevation of Job's
conception of God into a higher unity is the goal
of the development of the drama " (Delitzsch),
but a goal which is not reached till the very
end. Job is represented as "accusing God in
order that he may justify himself" (xl. 8): the
curses heaped on his birthday (ch. iii.), and the
prayer for death from the standpoint of a re-
' If Derenbourg's conjecture about Vt («. infra) be
correct, perhaps *niC* may be meant to suggest nib''
" to meditate." W. H. Green, I. c. p. 264, thinks the
names Ram and Buz In Elthu's pedigree suggest a land
of divine Intervention as opposed to the land of the
highest earthly wisdom. Other conjectures In Wright,
p. 138.
' The statements e.g. of B. Szolt (Baltimore, 1886) that
the first cycle deals with the particular, the second with
the general, and that in the first It ia argued that all
suffering is for sin and in the second that all sin Is
punished, are uot justified by close analysis.
s Yet the view of Szolt that xxIL 5 sqq. are a supposed
quotation of what God would Bay has much in its
favour.
» K. Stnder (Au Buck Ifiob far Geiitliche, Bremen,
1881) endeavours to prove the contrary ; cp. Seinecke,
I. c. pp. 1-1. See on the other side, Hengstenberg (1870),
1. 26, 27.
Digitized by
Google
1718
JOB
ligion in which God wa» the God of the living,
exhibit the state of mind of one who is near
abandoning God (Ribiger). He denies the moral
government of the world (ix. 22, 23) ; attributes
to God a spiteful design in creating him (x. 13) ;
summons God to judgment against Himself (xvi.
18, 19); complains bitterly that God does not
appear at his demand (xxiii. 8, 9) ; and, it
would seem, somewhat exaggerates his calamities
(chs. xxix., xxx.)' These bitter utterances are
mixed with pathetic and even affectionate
appeals ; just as his addresses to his friends are
composed of angry reproaches and of supplications
for sympathy. " Of this compound character is
the complaint of angry Job, charging the Divine
government of the world with injustice. He
sees a world in disorder, and, looking simply to
the responsibility of absolute power, he lays the
blame of it on the Divine Possessor of that power.
But simultaneously with this charge came a
recollection of God's absolute goodness. He thus
alternates from anger to love, and from blame
to adoration ; with fiery quickness the indignant
complaint dart* from him, and immediately he
is a tender suppliant, according as his idea of
responsible power, or according as his whole
religious conviction, including the belief of God's
absolute goodness, is expressed " (Mozley, Etsay;
ii. 218). The main position of Job, however, is
that human justice is greater than God's (ix. 21,
22) : in this sense he is said to represent a school
(xxxv. 4 6; cp. xxxiv. 8, xxii. 15).
(d) Job's complaints culminate in xix. 6, where
he gives a verdict in his own case against God,
Whom in xiii. 22 he had formally summoned to
trial. This prepares the way for the Theophany,
the necessity of which had already been indicated
by Zophar (xi. 5) ; and that Job's calling God to
judgment is the most important result of the
dialogue is shown by the numerous allusions to
it («.j. by Elihu, xxxiii. 7, 13). The Deity,
however, does not appear in the Theophany, as
Job had desired, as an equal antagonist (xiii. 19-
22), in order to justify His conduct; nor, as
Zophar had wished, to prove to Job that his
punishment was not so great as he had deserved ;
but to bring home to Job by a series of ironical
questions the truth that finite power and
knowledge have no rights against infinite power
and knowledge ; and that those for whom the
arrangement of the universe is an impenetrable
mystery, and who are too weak to grapple with
God's creatures, must not criticise His doings or
array themselves against Him. Hence of the
two discourses put into the mouth of Jehovah
the first deals mainly with His wisdom, the
second with His power. There is psycho-
logical truth also in the reflection of Mozley
(p. 219), that as "in very truth mere power wins
by subduing, and the intense consciousness that
some one has the absolute power to do what he
will with us puts us into the position of love to
him ; making us imagine him as our benefactor
and friend, because we turn beforehand his
absolute choice of saving or destroying, into
the alternative most favourable to ourselves :
just so the power of the Almighty Maker and
Governor of the world impresses Job; such
amazing power softens him."
In the Epilogue Jehovah fulfils the wish
expressed by Job in xvi. 21 that He would decide
between Job and God and between Job and his
JOB
friends. Both Job and they in the dialogue had
assumed that God is under some obligation to
reward a man according to his works ; and Job
finding himself not so recompensed accuses God
of injustice, whereas the friends, supposing that
God must be just, accuse Job on no other
evidence than that of his sufferings of indefinite
crimes. The verdict in the Theophany (xiii. T)
makes it clear that the Utter standpoint is more
to be condemned than the former ; and that the
wilful rejection of experience in favour of a
preconceived notion is more culpable than a
blasphemous conclusion arrived at in accordance
with a partial experience. Hence, as Job had
predicted (xiii. 7-11), the friends are more
severely rebuked than he; and the fact that
Job intercedes for them before his restoration
(xiii. 10) is a sign of his complete submission,
and also a convincing proof of hia innocence
(cp. xi. 13).
3. Authorship, time, and place of composition.'
— To these questions very different answers were
given by the early Rabbis, whose opinions are
recorded in the Talmud (Bab. Baba Batkra, 14-
16), although the favourite hypothesis ascribed
the Book to Moses; possibly, as Im. Deutach
suggests (de ElUtvi termonum origan; atqme
auctore, Breslau, 1873), because there was a
tradition that God revealed to Moses on Sinai
the reason why men were not always recom-
pensed according to their works (B. Berackotk.
7 a), and this Book seemed to deal with the
problem. With equal arbitrariness Heman the
Ezrahite, Solomon, Isaiah, Bsruch, Ezra, and,
most recently, Jeremiah have been suggested as
authors. The question whether Job had any
existence, mythical or historical, is closely con-
nected with these. The LXX. translator who
identified him with the Idumaean king Jobab
(Gen. xxxvi. 33, 34), was misled by a similarity
of name which belongs to the Greek rather
than to the Hebrew form. An early critic
(Resh Lakesh in Baba Bathra, 1. c) suggested
that the Book of Job was altogether a parable ;
and some of the later Rabbis allow this to be s
possible view, although fhey do not ordinarily
regard it with favour. Modern writers who
regard Job as a purely imaginary character
(e.g. Reuse, Merx, Hengstenberg) insist mainly
on the numerical symmetry of his family,
possessions, and calamities, which points to the
efforts of the fancy; and urge against those
(e.g. Ewald, Renan, Schlottmann) who would
endeavour to sever the historical from the
fictitious elements in the Book, that enough is
not left of the former to constitute a myth,
much less a record.
If Job be a creation of this Book, it most be
earlier, and indeed much earlier, than Ezefcjel,
who (xiv. 14) mentions Job among the three
perfect men, it might seem with special refer-
ence to xxii. 30 and xiii. 9. If on the other
hand he be mythical or historical, the passage
of Ezekiel throws no light on this question.'
1 Opinions up to 18*5 are collected by Kneneu, Onder-
toek. III. 160.
k Bernstein, Ueber das Alter u. s. to. d*> Bm&u Riob.ta
Keil and Tischirner's Analtkten, 1813, p. 13, suagecSrd
that the passage of Eseklel was interpolated. A stranger
conjecture is offered by Bnnsen, Oett in ier Oackickte.
1. 473.
Digitized by
Google
JOB
This last alternative has in iU favour the fact
that the name 7yo'> (although its similarity to
oyeb, "an enemy," is played upon in xiii. 24
and elsewhere) has no etymological . appropri-
ateness to the situation, 1 whether it be inter-
preted from the Hebrew, " the attacked one," or
from the Arabic, " the returner," as the Prophet
Mohammed seems to suggest." It is also main-
tained (without due ground) that the invention
of character is alien from the methods of the
ancients, who preferred borrowing their heroes
from the man of current tradition. The allusions
to historical events which some critics (e.g.
Ewald, Uitzig, Wright) have endeavoured to
find are too vague to afford any note of time ;
and the same must be said of the state of society
described (e.g. in x. 24). A terminus a quo is
given by the mention of the gold of Ophir
(xxviii. 16), with the use of Ophir as a name of
gold (xxii. 24), which points to some post-
Solomonic period; whereas a terminus ad
quern is given by the use of the name Satan
without the article in 1 Ch. xxi. 1 (circa 400
B.C.), which must evidently be a later usage
than that with the article which appears in this
Book and Zechariah. In default of other
evidence, special attention has been paid to the
parallels between this Book and the rest of the
Old Testament," which are very numerous. In
most, if not all, of these, it is uncertain whether
the ideas are borrowed by or from the author of
Job; but little force can be assigned to the <J
priori argument urged by Canon Cook, that if
the author of Job be supposed in most of these
cases to be the borrower, his work becomes a
kind of cento ; for in a highly artificial poem
of this sort (to judge from the Arabic Makamas)
one of the beauties would naturally consist in
reminiscences of the classics. Of the hemistichs
which are common to Job and other Books, the
most noticeable are (1) xii. 19 = Isaiah xli. 20;
here it seems certain that Job is quoting the
prophet, for otherwise it is difficult to under-
stand why the name !Hfl\ which is elsewhere
(cp. however xxviii. 28) avoided in the dialogue,
should be employed; and (2) Job xiv. 11, which
would seem to be a quotation of Isaiah xix. 5 :
in the case of (3) Job xii. 21 and (4) Job xii.
24 6, it seems more probable that the writer of
Job quoted Ps. cvii. 40 in two separate passages,
than that the author of the Psalm united two
hemistichs of Job into a verse. It seems prob-
able that the author of Job bad before him
both parts of Isaiah (cp. besides Is. lviii. 2
with Job xxi. 14 ; Is. lix. 4 with xv. 35 ; Is. lx.
G with xxii. 11). His relation to Jeremiah has
JOB
1719
< It la a sign of the difficulty of arriving at certainty
in these matters that some writers {e.g. Bernstein,
Bruch, Selnecke, Hengatenbcrg) found an argument
«gainst the historical existence of Job on the supposed
appropriateness of his name.
•> Hatao suggests " the enemy of the gods ; " J. Deren-
bourg (Aevue da ituda Juives, 1880, p. 6), " the com-
plalner," from the root 3V = 33' : 'Wright (p. 134),
from the same root + *g{ privative, "the non-exultant."
Other conjectures are collected by Carptovius, Introd.
II. 32.
• A very careful collection has been made by O. H. B.
'Wright In the preface to his translation. They can also
be conveniently studied In the Hebrew Commentary of
B. Szolt.
been much more questioned. The most im-
portant passage is Job iii. 3-26 compared with
Jer. xx. 14-18 ; whereas most critics (e.g. Renan,
Reuss, Tolck) regard Jeremiah as the imitator,
it has been urged (with more reason) by Kleinert
(Theol. Stud. u. Krit. 1886, p. 272) and Hoffmann
(Biob, 1890, p. 30) that the imaginary situation
is far more likely to be an imitation than the
real one. The other parallels with Jeremiah
(e.g. vi. 23 with Jer. iv. 21, vi. 20 with Jer. xiv.
3, xviii. 19 with Jer. xliv. 11), and especially
with the Lamentations, make it probable that
the author had Jeremiah before him also. Of
the minor Prophets he would seem to have made
use of Hosea (cp. xiii. 2 with Job xv. 2, xiii. 12
with Job xiv. 17) and Amos (cp. i. 11 with
Job xv. 9, according to Szolt's explanation).
The question whether he employed Zechariah or
not is of some importance. Besides such parallels
as Zech. ix. 3 with Job xxvii. 16, and ix. 14 with
Job xx. 5, Hoffmann (/. c. pp. 31-34) points to
the heavenly council (Zech. i. 9, iii. 1 ; cp. Job i.
6), the person of " the Satan " (Zech. iii. 1 ;
regarded by Hoffmann as' an invention of the
Prophet), the crown (Zech. vi. 11 ; Job xxxi.
36), and finds Zechariah everywhere original.
Great attention has also been paid to the
parallels with the Proverbs, which the author
of Job would seem to have possessed in their
existing form : thus Job xv. 7 seems definitely
to refer to Prov. viii. 24, the simile of vi. 3 finds
its explanation in a reminiscence of Prov. xxvii.
3, iii. 25 seems consciously modelled on Prov. x.
24. (The attempt of Barth [v. m/ra] to prove
that the author of Job was acquainted with the
" first collection " of Proverbs [i.-xxv.j, but not
with the second, must be regarded as unsuc-
cessful.) The parallels with the Psalms are
especially numerous, and these too the author
may have possessed in their present form : e.g.
Job x. 9 sqq. might seem to be suggested by
Ps. cxxxviii. 8, followed by Ps. cxxxii., and
Job xxxv. 14 to follow a worse reading of
Ps. xxxvii. 6. The evidence therefore of the
parallels would seem to be in favour of a very
late date, e.g. the Persian period to which the
Book is assigned by Vatke, Bruno Bauer, Cheyne,
Hoffmann ; the brilliancy of the language must
in this case be accounted for by a hypothetical
renaissance, or an endeavour on the part of the
writer to renovate the Hebrew language. Many
others place it somewhat earlier, during the
Babylonian captivity (so Graetz, C. P. Tiele);
the large majority of critics at some period
prior to Jeremiah (Renan, Ewald, Reuss, Herx,
Hitzig, Barth, Volck) ; Hahn, Schlottmann, and
Delitzsch, in the Solomonic age ; Vaihinger
somewhat earlier (see F. Barth, Ueber die
EntstehungsseU da Bucket Biob, Jahresbe-
richt des Rabb. Seminars fir das orthodoxe
Judenthum, Berlin, 5634 ; T. K. Cheyne, Job and
Solomon, 1886; F. Seyring, Die Abhangigkeit
der SprSche Salomonis Cap. i.-ix. vom Biob,
Halle, 1889).
The place of composition is no less uncertain.
A suggestion made by lbn Ezra (on ii. 12), which
however has found little favour, was that the
Book was a translation : in this case there would
be some ground for supposing the " land of Hz "
(see below) to be the country of the author as
well as of his hero. The descriptions of the
crocodile and hippopotamus (in chs. xL and xli.),
Digitized by
Google
1720
JOB
supposing them to be genuine, would point to
Egypt (although some scholars profess to detect
errors in these descriptions) ; and Hitzig and
Hirzel insist that the Book has throughout an
Egyptian colouring, in illustration of which the
former points to iii. 14, 15 (according to Ewald's
interpretation), vii. 12, viii. 11, ix. 11, zii. 21,
liv. 11, xxviii. 10, xxix. 18, xxxi. 36, xxxix. 19.
A few more phrases which tell of Egypt are
noticed in the commentary of Canon Cook ; and
Studer suggests that the simile of the white of
an egg in vi. 6 (supposing that to be the true
interpretation) would be more naturally drawn
in Egypt than in Palestine (cp. Delitzsch). Those
who maintain that the author was a contempo-
rary of Jeremiah suppose him to have fled to
Egypt with the other Israelites whose flight is
recorded by Jer. xliii. 7. Much of this Egyptian
colouring is, however, clearly fallacious, as
Hengstenberg (pp. 51, 52) shows; nor are the
arguments by which the author is shown to
have lived in the South of Judaea (by Schlott-
mann and others) more valid.* The use of the
Jordan in xl. 23, as a» example of a great river,
makes it more likely that the author lived in
Palestine ; and the a priori arguments urged by
Hengstenberg in favour of Jerusalem as the
place of composition have considerable force.
The locality of the hero, the "land of Uz," is
also very doubtful. The LXX. (after xlii. 17)
places it on the boundaries between Idumaea and
Arabia ; this may have been suggested by Lam.
iv. 21, where the daughter of Edom is described
as dwelling in the land of Uz. Sprenger (Das
Leben und die Lehre des Mohammad, iii. 205)
places it yet further south, near the later Jewish
settlement Khaibar. A tradition which can
be traced up to abont 300 A.D. makes the land
of Uz part of Batanaea in the Hauran (see
Wetzstein in Delitzsch's Commentary, E. T. ii.
395-447). Fricdrich Delitzsch (Zeitschrift fur
Keilschriftforschung, ii. 87-98), on the authority
of cuneiform inscriptions, removes it further
north towards Palmyra ; and also discovers
from inscriptions the localities of Shuah and
Buz. The theory of J. Derenbourg (Rem* des
Etudes Juives, vol. i.) that y\J) is merely a sym-
bolical name, signifying the land of HVl?, or
" the Divine counsel," has much to recommend
it ; and would agree with the opinion of Hoff-
mann (Mob, p. 35), that the author may have
known as little as we of the locality. An old
opinion (Rashi) that the "land of Uz" is a
poetical name for Aram or Syria has still many
adherents.
4. Range of ideas. — The consistency which the
author maintains with regard to the patriarchal
age in which he places the story has won much
admiration. To this belong the age of Job
(xlii. 16), the nature of his wealth (i. 3 com-
pared with Gen. xii. 16), the coin mentioned in
xlii. 21 (cp. Gen. xxxiii. 19), and the musical
instruments to which incidental allusion is made
(xxi. 12, xxx. 31, compared with Gen. iv. 21,
xxxi. 27). The shortness of life of which the
speakers sometimes complain when comparing
tneir lives with those of their ancestors (viii. 9)
corresponds with the diminished longevity of the
* Oratz, GachickU der Judtn, ii. 33, supposes the
work to bave been composed in Babylon.
JOB
later patriarchs. It is possible, as Schlottmann
suggests, that Job is represented as a strange
prince, like Abraham, living among a heathen
population (cp. xxix. 7) ; but it is more probable
that he is a member of an aristocracy (ch. xxix.) :
to the oppressed and subject castes which are
described in chs. xxiv. and xxx. it is diflficnlt to
find in the Old Testament an exact analogue.
The only form of idolatry alluded to is star-wor-
ship (xxxi. 27 ; xii. 6 must not be interpreted of
idolatry), perhaps a trait of antiquity. The
head of the family is represented as performing
priestly functions (chs. i n xlii.), modelled, it
would seem, on those performed by Balak, the
Moabite king (Derenbourg, I.e. ; Wright) ; and
in the only mention that is made of priests (xii.
19) the context implies that prince-priests are
signified. The ancient Versions find an allusion
to concubinage in xix. 17 ; and polygamy would
seem to be referred to in xxvii. 15.* Never-
theless the state of things with which the
author is familiar is rather the advanced civilisa-
tion of the Solomonic or post-Solomonic age
(Bernstein, /. c, p. 81 aqq.) : to this belong the
war-horse (xxxix. 18-25), the taste for the pre-
cious metals and precious stones (xxii. 24-26.
&c), the elaborate forms of judicial procedure
(ix. 33, xvii. 3, 4, xxxi. 37 ; see especially
Kleinert, Das spezifisch Hebraische im Bitch JJief)
in Theotogische Stud. u. Krit. 1886, p. 274),
writing on stone, lead, and parchment (xix. 23,
xxxi. 36), aealing-clay (xxxviii. 14), glass (xxviii.
17). Existing literature is noticed in xxxvi. 24,
and perhaps xxi. 29. Wetzstein has endeavoured
to trace special allusions to the customs of the
Hauran in xxi. 32, xxiv. 5-8, 16, 24, xxx. 3-6;
the mention of the customs of the Israelites
would seem to be intentionally avoided by the
author (unless the ?NJ of xix. 25 and the
" vows " of xxii. 27 be considered to fall under
this head ; the Mosaic law of inheritance.
Num. xxxvi. 8, seems purposely contradicted in
xlii. 15); the existence of a written law is dimly
indicated in vi. 10, xxi. 14, xxiii. 12 ; no refer-
ence is made to the national history ; and the
passages in which patriarchal history is thought
to be noticed (xviii. 15, the Cities of the Plain ;
xxii. 16, the Flood ; xxxi. 33, Adam) all admit
of other interpretations. It was owing to the
apparent oblivion of Israel that many writers
supposed the author to have been an Idumaean
or Arab (an idea refuted by Bernstein, J. c).
Among the peculiar characteristics of the Book
should be noticed the astronomical allusions
(ix. 9, xxxviii. 31-33), regarded by some writers
as indicating Arabian authorship, which show
the author in possession of a somewhat fuller
and more developed nomenclature than appear*
elsewhere in the Bible, and also familiar with
some astronomical myths,* such as are found
among other nations ; a similar myth would
seem to be the destruction of Rahab and Rabat'*
helpers (ix. 13, xxvi. 12), and of the Leviathan
whom conjurers can wake up (iii. 8 ; cp. xxvi.
13); compare also the phrases xviii. 13, 14,
• Tbst the supposed patriarchal colouring b) confiaed
to details Is brought out by Bruno Bauer, L c. p. 484.
and Kuenen, I. c.
4 This is emptaaUcallv denied by Hengstenberg, i. 12! .
fcc.
Digitized by
Google
JOB
xxxiii. 22. The stores of snow and hail provided
against the day of war and battle (xxxix. 23)
belong to this class of idea. Somewhat after
the style of the Arabic poets, too, are the accu-
rate descriptions of the habits of the animals of
the desert, and of physical phenomena, in which
the author delights : " It would not be too much
to say," writes Baur (/. c. p. 621), " that as many
descriptions of nature are crowded together in
Job as can be found in the whole Bible." These
passages are collected by G. H. Gilbert, in The
Poetry of Job (Chicago, 1889), who has attempted
to analyse their beauties. The frequent refer-
ence to Angela deserves notice : they are called
the Sons of God (both in the Prologue, i. 6, and
in the dialogue, xxxviii. 7), Holy Ones (v. 1,
xv. 15), God's Servants (iv. 18), Angels. The
context in which they are mentioned would seem
to imply that they are co-ordinate, and in a
manner identified with the heavenly bodies (com-
pare xxv. 5 with iv. 18). Their power of media-
tion is especially dwelt on by Elihu in xxxiii. 23
(a very remarkable passage), and perhaps alluded
to by Eliphaz in v. 1.' Although superior to
mankind, their imperfections and infirmities are
often dwelt on. From these Angels it is (to some)
difficult to separate " the Satan," whose name
would seem to suggest the double function of
" accuser" and " wanderer;" that he in no way re-
presents an evil power, antagonistic to the Divine
power, such as appears in the Zoroastrian reli-
gion, is now largely affirmed; Hoffmann finds
the advance in the conception of his personality
which appears in this Book in the fact that he
carries out physical evil, whereas in 1 Ch. xxi. 1
and 1 Sam. xvi. 14-23 he only suggests moral
evil. This latter function would seem to be
indicated in ii. 2. The doctrine of a resurrection
is mentioned (xiv. 13-15) as a possible solution
of the difficulties of the moral government of the
world, but emphatically rejected ; it is not prob-
able that there is any reference to it in the loon
classicus, ch. xix. 25-28 (the literature on which
is collected by Stickel, de Goele commentatio,
Jena, 1832 ; Volck, /. c, p. 6 sqq. ; and Hirxel
and Hitzig, ad loc). The doctrine of " original
sin " is not unfrequently indicated, but nowhere
clearly analysed. A highly advanced and spiri-
tual code of morals is taught by the author in
oh. xxxi., with a remarkable distinction between
" capital " offences and others (m. 10, 28). Of
" scepticism " properly so called (Bruch, p. 191)
no accurate analysis will find any trace (cp.
Kleinert, Das spezifisch Hebraische im Buch Hiob) :
the words of Job in xlii. 2 imply that he re-
quired the Theophany not in order to be con-
vinced of God's existence, but to receive a per-
sonal assurance that the world was morally
governed. (For an analysts of the ideas of the
• Book of Job on God, the world, mankind,
morality, and the future, see Bruch, Weisheits-
lehre der Hcbraer, 1851, pp. 199-226.)
5. Integrity. — The integrity of the Book of
Job, like that of other Books of the Old Testa-
ment, has been the subject of much discussion.
A large number of verses were omitted in the
JOB
1721
' A remarkable suggestion about this passage Is made
by W. H. Kosters on p. 117 of bta essay. Bet onrtaan
en de mtmkding der AngeMogie onder lvraA (JTKeol.
Tijdxkrift, x. 3*-«», 113-141), to which reference may
generally be given.
LXX. translation (§ 7 a), and Dr. Hatch (Studies
m Biblical Greek, p. 215 sqq.) endeavours to
show that these formed no part of the original
text, but were interpolations in the Hebrew
copies. The subscription after ch. xxxi., " the
words of Job are ended " (if genuine), might also
imply that the work once ended there. Modern
criticism has especially attacked the following
portions : —
(a) The speeches of Elihu ' (chs. xxxii.-
xxxvii.). The genuineness of these was first
disputed by Stuhlmann (Hiob, 1804), with whom
Eichhorn and Bernstein (I.e. pp. 130-132) agreed,
and is denied by most modern critics. The
speeches of Elihu differ from the others (1) in
the length of the proems, (2) in quoting the
words of Job, (3) in addressing Job by name,
(4) in following each other continuously with-
out answers from Job. Moreover (5), no allu-
sion is made either in the prologue or epilogue
to " Elihu, the son of Barachel," whose names,
unlike the others, follow Jewish nomenclature,
and whose tribe (Buz) seems suggested by that
of Job (Uz : see Gen. xxii. 21), while his family
(Ram, " the exalted ") would seem to contain
an allusion to xxxi. 34, and to be intended to
prevent any misconception arising from the name
Buz (" contempt ") ; the syntax of iii. 1 also
almost excludes the existence of a fourth friend.
Although, however, these chapters might be
omitted without their loss being directly felt,
" the whirlwind " of xxxviii. 1 may well be the
whirlwind described in ch. xxxvii., and it should
not be argued that the opening words of the
Theophany (ch. xxxviii. 2), which evidently
refer to Job, show that another speaker cannot
have intervened ; for the speech of Job may stilt
be uppermost in the hearer's mind. The argu-
ment from the language urged by many writers
against the speeches has been refuted by Stickel
(Das Buch Hiob, 1842) and K. Budde (Beitrw/e
ztir Kritik des Buches Hiob, p. 92 sqq.), who, by
a careful series of arithmetical calculations,
proves that the vocabulary of these discourses
does not differ in character from that of any
other portion of the Book ; and, indeed, the
similarity of expression is so striking that many
who have regarded these speeches as constituting
no portion of the original work hare supposed
them to be an addition by the author himself
(e.y. Renan, Wright); their occasional obscurity
and apparent incoherence may be reasonably
ascribed to corruptions of the text. The argu-
ment drawn especially by Renan, Delitzsch (in
Herzog's Encyclopadie, vi. 132), and Volck (who
once maintained their genuineness), from the
want of poetical power and vigour displayed in
them, depends too much on personal taste to
have much weight in the discussion. It must
be added that the judgments passed on Elihu
both in the Christian (cp. Schlottmann, p. 53
sqq.) and in the Jewish Church (Deutsch, I. c.
pp. 14, 15) have been very various : while some
think his speeches a mere cento collected from
the rest of the Book, others regard him as the
one wise speaker on the stage ; and different
writers have identified him with Christ and with
Satan (the clever essay of Voigtlander in Keil
• The literature on this question (down to 1873) Is
given most fully by Immamiel Deutsch, I. e. pp. 21-33.
Digitized by
Google
1722
JOB
and Tzschirner's Analekttn, 1813, p. 27, in which
this last view is maintained, deserves notice).
It is now, however, generally agreed that Elihu
does represent a different standpoint from the
friends, and really provides a solution of the
problem which they discuss. Whereas they
supposed that punishment implied sin, and was
proportionate to the sin, he regards it as neces-
sary to perfection, and therefore most likely to
overtake the relatively most perfect. This posi-
tion is best explained by Hengstenberg (i. p. 8),
who does not differ materially from other de-
fenders of these speeches (Bruno Bauer, Budde,
Im. Deutsch, M. Bolicke, Die Elihu Reden, &c,
Halle, 1879; C. Clanssen, Das Verhallniu der
Lehre des Elihu xu derjmigen der drei Freunde
IIMs, in the Zeitschr. fur kirchliche Wissenschaft
und hirchliches Leben, 1884, pp. 505-515).' This
doctrine of perfection by suffering, or, as Heng-
stenberg terms it, " the mystery of the Cross," is
regarded by these writers as the true solution
of the problem of the Book ; and they suppose
it to be pnt in the mouth of Elihu rather than
in that of the Deity, " because it wonld not have
comported with the Divine dignity for the in-
finite God to place Himself on a level with His
dependent creature and enter into an argument
with him " (W. H. Green, I. c. p. 260). This
explanation seems unsatisfactory, because it
makes the speeches of the Deity superfluous;
and as such Hengstenberg seems to regard them
when he says (i. 22) that " the importance
of the Theophany consists in the fact that God
appears, not in what He says." Hence Simson
(Zur Kritik del Bushes Hiob, 1861, p. 34) and
others who regard the standpoint of Elihu as an
advance on that of the original author reject
the speeches on that account ; and the descrip-
tion of them as a " first theological criticism on
the contents of the Book " (T. K. Cheyne) is the
most probable. It should be added that the
doctrine of the " mystery of the Cross " is only
taught in certain portions of Elihu's discourse ;
and the nature of the rest corresponds sufficiently
well with the theory that some reader, finding
in the Book many sayings which bordered on
blasphemy not sufficiently refuted by the friends,
nor retracted by Job in ch. xxvii., thought pro-
per to collect these offensive sayings, and in the
person of Elihu expressly to refute them.
(6) Chapters xl. 15-xli. 26 (description of the
hippopotamus and the crocodile). The spurious-
ness of ch. xli. 4-26 was suggested by Stuhlmann
«7. c. p. 183), who made some further altera-
tions; Eichhorn (Einleitung, v. 207) followed
him, and added xl. 15-xli. 3 to the athetosis.
This was approved by Ewald (T&binger Theol.
Jahrbb. 1843, p. 740 sqq.), whose grounds are
also stated in his Commentary (E. T. p. 318
sqq.), and of more modern writers by Dillmann,
Simson {Zur Kritik des Baches Hiob, p. 24),
Wright, Cheyne, and Grill. These examples
are thought inappropriate, because the omni-
potence of God in the government of the world
rather than His omnipotence in creation is the
point to be proved ; and fault is found with the
length and minuteness of the descriptions, in
which the person of the Speaker is almost
forgotten. Some scholars have regarded the
' The view of Grits (Cm»ic*fe der Judm, II. 43-44)
Is similar, but not quite identical.
JOB
animals described as fabulous. The purpose of
the interpolator is supposed to have been "li
strengthen the argument of the Deity by tat
description of powerful creatures which indicate
the omnipotence of the Creator "(Grill). Bunsen.
Gott in der Oeschichte, i. 497, arranged the pat-
sage as follows : xl. 15-26; xl. 1-14.
(c) Chapter xxviii. is regarded as a later ad-
dition by Knobel, Reuss, Cheyne, Grill, and othen.
It gives an interesting description of mining
operations, which, difficult and elaborate as they
are, are insufficient to produce Wisdom, which
is only to be found with God, Who has given U>
man no part of it but the practical rule to fear
Him. The chapter is isolated, and would seem
to contain an independent answer to the problem
of the Book, not different from the final answer,
but surprising in Job's mouth.
(d) Chapter xxvii. 7-23. This passage is one
of the most difficult in the Book, for in it Job
would appear to adopt the standpoint which he
has been combating throughout. Kennicott,
followed by several modern critics (e.g. Reuss,
Hoffmann, Cheyne), assigned this passage t*
Zophar, who according to the tradition*!
arrangement speaks twice only ; and Griti
(Monatschrift, 1872, p. 246) assigns to him
ch. xxviii. also. (Brnch, Weisheitslehre dp
Hebrder, p. 170, would transpose xxri. 5-14
after xxvii. 23.) Bernstein, Wellhausen, and
Grill delete it, as the work of an interpolator,
who desired to put into Job's month u
acknowledgment of the Divine justice. If the
passage be retained, the view of Hitrig and
others that Job is here quoting the theory ot
his opponents seems preferable to that of EwsH
and Delitzsch, according to which he adopts it
in a modified form.
(«) The Prologue, and Epilogue were obelized
(after a suggestion of A. Schultens) by Stub)-
mann, Bernstein, De Wette, and more recentlv
by C. P. Tiele: Prof. Cheyne is inclined tit
regard them as belonging to a prose Book of Job.
which the poet may have made the basis of his
composition. They differ from the rest of the
work chiefly in the use of the name JTliT for
the Deity, who is called in the Book itself ^jc
'It?, D1?K, rarely DTPM, and in recognisnu:
ritual observances, of which the moral code of
ch. xxxi. takes no notice. However, without
the Prologue, the situation is unintelligible :
and it is difficult to separate the Epilogue from
it, althongh the latter has offended the taste of
many, and is characterised by a certain irony.
(/) The verses 38-40 of ch. xxxi. would seem
to be displaced, and are transposed by Delitzsch
and many others after to. 8, 25 or 34.
For further athetoses, see Grill, Zur Kritik der
Komposition des Buches Hiob (Tubingen, 1890),
who would also omit xii. 4-xiii. 2 ; xxiv. 5—9.
14-21 ; xxvi. 2-xxvii. 1 ; xxix., xxx., xxxi. 1 :
T. K. Cheyne, Job and Solomon; and J. G.
Hoffmann, Hiob (1890). The striking recon-
struction by Studer (Bremen, 1881) also
deserves notice : perhaps the most attractive
suggestion which it contains is that cha. xxix.,
xxx. constituted the original Prologue.
6. The language. — The language of the Book
of Job is rich and classical; and the author pos-
sesses a peculiar felicity of expression, and, like
Ezekiel, delights in displaying the wealth of
Digitized by
Google
JOB
the Hebrew language. The rhetorical devices of
the Arabic poets are employed, but with
moderation; e.g. paronomasias* (xx. 27, 28;
xxii. 24, 25 ; xxiv. 18 ; xxix. 4 ; xxxi. 33, 34),
attempts at rhyme (xxvii. 23 ; xxviii. 8 ; xxxix.
3), double entendre* (xxix. 18 ; xxx. 4 ; xxxi. 7,
with reference to Deut. xiii. 17), employment of
the same word indifferent senses (xi. 7 ; probably
xxii. 30, xxiv. 17, xxxi. 10). Much has been said
of the Arabisms of Job, which were noticed even
by Jerome (Praef. m Daniel.), who professes to
interpret the Book with the aid of the Syriac
and Arabic (Praef. in lobum). This " Arabiam "
appears (1) in the employment of certain Hebrew
roots in their Arabic senses, ejg. tpV, " to turn
aside," xxiii. 9 ; pltf, " to speak truly," xxxiii.
12; t6onn, "to form companies," xvi. 10;
503, " tribe," xix. 17 (Kosegarten) ; KW, " fall,"
xxxvii. 6 ; 1DK, " business," xx. 29, xxii. 28, &c :
(2) in the employment of certain grammatical
forms which resemble the Arabic rather than the
Hebrew idiom, e.g. *K"*, xxxiii. 21 ; ID?. IrtJD—
similarly npB J'K, xxxv. 15 (Delitzsch), Di"ipD
xii. 4, seem to follow Arabic syntax : (3) in,
the employment of vocables existing in Arabic,
but not found elsewhere in Hebrew literature,
e.g. DHriD, "thighs," xl. 17; »V3p, "nets,"
xviii. 2; ne«t3»," sneezing," xli. 10; n, xxxvii.
11 (Delitzsch; see a list given by Bottcher,
Ausf. Lehrb. i. p. 16). Bernstein is right in
saying that these Arabisms do not differ in
quality from those which are to be found
in other Books of the Bible, and are to be
explained by the original affinity of the Semitic
dialects and the fact that our knowledge of
ftebrew is fragmentary. It is by something of
an exaggeration therefore that Delitzsch and
Wetzstein speak of the dialect of this Book as
"Hauranitic" or "Hebrew-Arabic," and the
best critics have been sober in their employ-
ment of the Arabic vocabulary in its interpre-
tation. Equally important therefore are the
Aramaisms (most fully collected by Bernstein,
/. c. pp. 49-79), which some critics have
endeavoured, but without success, to distinguish
from those which are to be found in the later
Books of the Bible generally. It is remarkable that
in xviii. 20 the author desiring a synonym for wit-
ness (Heb. 117) borrows one from the Aramaic
(**inB'X without accommodating it to Hebrew
vocaYism. The speeches of Elihu are especially
replete with Aramaisms (e.g. xxxvi. 2, '? "IJ13
"pnKI TW)i bnt attempts which have been
made to show that the other speakers are
distinguished by their dialect (see e.g. Hitzig
«n iv. 6, viii. 8, 11, 17) are evidently fanciful.
A few words are explained by scholars from the
Aethiopic (e.g. D^fin, iv. 18, according to Dill-
raana) ; and besides the Egyptian words in the
verses noticed above, the Egyptian name for
" crocodile " seems certainly alluded to in xl. 25.
There remain, however, a great number of hapax
Ugomena which have not as yet been illustrated
from any dialect, and the meaning of which was
unknown to the ancient translators. Great
similarity has otherwise been traced between the
Hebrew of Job and that of the Book of Proverbs.
• Collected by Wright, pp. 32, 33.
JOB
1723
The orthography throughout shows some peculi-
arities, snch as the omission of matres lectionis,
e.g. 'n¥\ i- 21 ; the contraction of consonantal
K, e.g. non, viii. 21 ; interchange of K and il,
e.g. fPD% viii. 21 : all of which appear also
in the Elihu discourses.
Jerome states that in the original the
dialogue was written in " hexameters, composed
of dactyls and spondees, sometimes admitting
other feet, not of the same syllables, but of the
same metrical value," yet occasionally rhyihmus
ipse dulcis et tinnulus fertur numeris lege metri
solutit ; and he refers to the ordinary autho-
rities (Josephus, Philo, and Origen) in proof of
these assertions. These metres Bickell in his
Carmina Hebraica has attempted to restore ; a
somewhat more elaborate attempt has been
made by 6. H. B. Wright (see the explanation
in his translation of Job, pp. 23-31), whereas
Prof. Briggs and Merx have attempted simpler
analyses. Strophic arrangements of different
sorts have been introduced by Koster (1831),
Delitzsch, Merx (1872), and others.
7. Ancient Versions.— (a) The SEPTOAOINT
translation was the work of a writer well versed
in Greek literature; among the authors whom
he occasionally imitates are Homer, Aeschylus,
and perhaps Apollonius Rhodius and Calli-
machus (E. Egli in Shemisches Museum, xii. 444-
448); his language, however, is not free from
the dialectic peculiarities of the LXX. His
knowledge of Hebrew (if, indeed, he had the
original before him) must have been very slight ;
and although he sometimes interprets words
after the Syriac (e.g. x. 17, *UJ> iV trart*
liov), and perhaps the Arabic (e.g. xxxix. 20,
1TTU ; onjflsW ahrov ; cp. Arab. ^ ; xvi. 12,
'DTD ; rift KoVqs)> his translation is for the most
part too free to be of any use for the criticism
of the text, and too ignorant to be of any help
in interpreting it. One trace of traditional
exegesis seems to be preserved in xxix. 18,
where for crr«A.«x oJ folvutos it is probable
that e>ou>i{ (i.e. the bird Phoenix) should be
read. The translator follows the method of
the Targums in avoiding all offensive anthropo-
morphisms ; he makes a rhetorical addition in
ii. 8, and adds an epilogue which is of some
interest. These various characteristics make
the middle of the 2nd century B.C. the
probable date of this translation (Bickell, de
indole ac rations versionis Alexandrinae in inter-
pretando libro lobi, Marburg;, 1862). There is
no doubt that the original LXX. text was much
shorter than that which has come down in our
MSS. ; it omitted of the Hebrew verses " some-
times three or four, sometimes fourteen or
nineteen" (Origenes, Ep. ad Africanum) ; the
whole number of the omissions being reckoned
by Jerome (Praef. in lobum) at 700 or 800, by
Hesychius at 600. The Greek of these verses
was supplied by Origen from Theodotion, and
marked by him in the Hexapla with asterisks ;
and they are not translated in the pre-Hexa-
plarian Sahidic Version, whence we learn that
the whole number did not exceed 400 (Dillmann,
Textkritisches zum Buche Hiob in Sitzungsberichte
der k. p. Akademie zu Berlin, Dec. 18, 1890).
Bickell (pp. 48-50), who gave an enumeration
of them from the authorities then accessible,
Digitized by
Google
1724
JOB
reckoned the number at 373. An attempt is
made by Hatch (Essays in Biblical Greek, pp. 220-
245) to show that the verses omitted by the
LXX. may have been Inter interpolations in the
Hebrew copies (e.g. xvii. 3-5 ; xxi. 28-33 ; xxiv.
14c-18a; xxviii. 13-22, the last of which is
quoted by Clem. Alex.); and it is certainly re-
markable that many of them should occur in
the speech of Elihu. We regard the opinion of
Bickell (and Dillmann, who I. c. examines them
in detail) that these verses were omitted arbi-
trarily on grounds of difficulty or of taste, as
more probable.
Daughter Versions of the LXX. — Of these the
Sahidic (Thebaic) was made before the recension
of Origen ; it exists in a MS. in the Museum
Borgianum at Rome, except the last leaves,
which are at Naples; the first chapter was
published, with Latin translation, by Giovanni
Tortoli (Atti del io Congresso dei Orientalisti,
Firenze, 1880, p. 79), who promised an edition
of the whole ; a project achieved by A. Ciasca
(Sacrorum Bibliorum Fragmenta Copto-Sahidica,
Rome, 1885). A Memphitic Version, closely fol-
lowing the Alexandrian MS., was published by
H. Tattam (London, 1850). The critical mark's
of Origen are preserved in the Syro-Hexaplar
Version (made A.o. 617), which exists in a Milan
MS. (edited by Middeldorpf, 1835, facsimiled by
Ceriani 1876). This version is carefully in-
vestigated by Middeldorpf, Curat Hexaplare's in
Jobum, Breslau, 1817. The Armenian Version
(in its printed form) closely follows the Alex-
andrian MS. The Aethiopic Version is in MS. ;
the copy in the Bodleian Library exhibits a text
on the whole similar to MS. Alex., but very
ignorantly rendered (e.g. BiAoaS 6 Soi»x'tt(j is
throughout rendered Bt\Saio; Aixfrns) ; not
unfreqnently second renderings of verses are
introduced (according to Dillmann, Lex. Aeth.
col. 90, " from the Syriac and Arabic ; " this
source however will not account for all, e.g.
xxxiv. 9, where 1J1V13 is rendered by his run-
King) : in this case the new translation regularly
precedes that which follows the LXX.
(6) Peshifto Syriac. — An account of this ver-
sion, which was made directly from the Hebrew,
is given by Edv. Stenij (de Syriaca lobi inter-
pretatione quae Peschita vacatur, Helsingfon,
1881), who collects (1) the various readings;
(2) the better readings ; (3) the variants of the
Hebrew text. The last are of little importance.
It is the basis of the Commentary of S. Ephraem.
(c) Targum. — The best edition is by P. de
Lagarde (Hagiographa Chaldaice, Leipzig, 1873).
There are dissertations on it by S. Cohn (1867),
A. Weiss (de libri Jobi paraphrasi Chaldaica,
Breslau, 1873), and W. Bacher (in GrStz's
Monutschrift, 1871, pp. 208-223). According to
the last writers it is the work of a Palestinian
Jew of the 4th century A.D., interpolated by a
hand of the 8th century. Its variations from
the Massoretic text are very remarkable.
(d) Latin Versions. — The Old-Latin was made
from the Greek, and omitted the same verses.
Jerome is said to have translated the Book twice,
once from the Greek, where he marked verses
which he had added from the Hebrew with an
asterisk, verses which were wanting in the
Hebrew with an obelus ; and a second time from
the Hebrew (Augustine, ed. Migne, ii. 242). The
former of these, however, would seem to have
JOB
been no more than a revision of the Old-Latin ;
and hence two MSS. of it preserve Jerome's
critical marks, — Bodl. 2426, and a Cod. Mawrit
Monasterii printed in Martianaeus' edition of
S. Jerome, and thence in Sabatier's BUM. Lot.
Versiones Antiquoe, vol. i., now Turonensis 18.
De Lagarde (Mittheilungen, ii. 189-327) has
published a text of this version with the read-
ings of both MSS. Jerome agrees sometimes
with Jewish tradition (e.g. xxxriii. 6) ; his work
has received, not undeservedly, high praise.
(«) Arabic Versions. — The Version in the Poly-
glott is from the Peshitto ; Tattam (/. c.) made
use of a MS. Version from the Coptic The same,
or a similar Version made from the Coptic, i«
printed by P. de Lagarde in his Psalterium Jib
Proverbia Ardbice (GSttingen, 1876), where the
Polyglott Version also is reprinted. An Arabic
Version made from the LXX. (perhaps through
or with the aid of a daughter Version) was
described by Fleischer, ZDUQ. 1864, p. 288,
and afterwards edited by Baudissin (Trantla-
tionis antiquoe Arabkae libri lobi quae superswd,
Lips. 1870). Arabic Versions made from the
Hebrew are many ; that by the Gaon Saadja
(06. 942) has been edited by Dr. J. Cohn (Alton*.
1889).
8. History of Exegesis. — The Book of Job most
have been much studied in early times, since we
find constant imitations of it in the " Wisdom
of Ben-Sira," who however makes no mention of
Job (just as he makes no mention of Daniel)
among the heroes of the world, although (accord-
ing to the Syriac Version of xlix. 11) he refer*
to the passage of Ezekiel in which Job is men-
tioned. In the "Wisdom of Solomon," v. 10.
1 1 seem to be suggested by the LXX. of Job ii
26, and in the " Psalms of Solomon " parts of
Ps. iii. by Job iii. He is referred to in the Book
of Tobit, and by St. James (v. 11); the Book i»
quoted by St. Paul (1 Cor. iii. 19 = r. 13 a) and
is alluded to by Christ (Matt. xxiv. 28 = xxxii.
30). There are copious references to it in the
Mishna, Talmudim, and Midrashim (collected by
Rabbi Israel Schwarz in the first volume of hi
work t?UK mpn, Berlin, 1868). It is assigned
different places in the Canon in different lists
(W. H. Proby, On certain Questions connected xith
the Book of Job, 1886, pp. 5-10 ; Carpxovias,
Introductio ad libros Biblicos Vet. Test. ii. 31):
being regarded by some authors as a poetical
book, by others as historical. The latter view
is thought to have been held by Josephns
(c. Apian, i. c 10), and was long maintained in
the Christian Church. Augustine (contra Prix.
et Origen. cd. Migne, viii. 676) denies that
the speeches of the three friends have Divine
authority, although "a man of discernment
potest ex eorum verbis aliquam sanam scntentian*
in testimonium teritatis assumere ; " but the view
taken of Job was on the whole favourable ; and
even in the Moralia of Gregorins Magnus u the
tendency to minimise Job's sin during hi>
afflictions is clearly visible " (Schlottmann.
p. 45). After Calvin (Sermon exxix. on Job) had
asserted his sin with some emphasis, Rom. Catb.
and especially Jesuit theologians maintained hie
complete sinlessness ; on the other hand, Luther
was attacked by the Rom. Caths. for denying
the completely historical character of the work
(see Carpzovius, Introd. ii. p. 34); but when
after the initiative of Richard Simon freer idea*
Digitized by
Google
JOB
on this subject circulated among the Rom. Caths.,
the Protestants became stricter, and Luther's
utterances were explained away (Schlottmann,
pp. 6, 7 and 44, 45). The Book of Job was
violently attacked in early times by Theodore of
Mopsuestia (ob. 428), who regarded Job himself
as a historical character, viz. a pious Edomite,
but the author of the Book (whom he identified
with the LXX. translator) as a vainglorious
man, who, in order to parade his learning and
poetical skill, had fabricated the whole of the
Dialogue (Fritzsche, de Theod. Mopsuest. 1836,
pp. 60, 61). A very similar attack was made
on the Book in later times by Spinoza (Tract.
T/teol. Polit. ch. x.).
The inaccuracy of the LXX. Version impeded
the understanding of the Book among the Greek
fathers, whose comments are collected in the
Catena of Nicetas (London, 1637); another Catena
(in Latin) was published by Paul us Comitolus
(Leyden, 1586, and Venice, 1587). The Com-
mentary of Jerome, which would have been of
great value, is lost; that which is printed
among his writings is by Philippus Presbyter
(A.D. 455). Commentaries were also written by
Ambrose and Augustine. The Moralia in Jobum
of Gregorius Magnus (ob. 604) was the most
important of the early Latin commentaries, and
is commended by G. Bradley, Lectures on the
Book of Job (1887) ; another work with the
same title was composed by Odo Cluniacensis
(10th century). The earliest Jewish exposition
printed is by R. Saadja Gaon (v. supra), consisting
of brief notes in Arabic, not free from scholastic-
ism : the commentary of his Karaite opponent, R.
Jephet ibn Ali, exists in MS. in English libraries.
Of early Rabbinical commentators, besides Rashi
and Ibn Ezra, R. Moses b. Nachman (ob. 1270),
R. Levi b. Gerson (pb. 1378), R. Simon b.
Zemach (pb. circa 1400; his Comm. is called
ODStJ 3mK), and R. Abraham b. Farissol
(born 1451) are often cited. R. Levi (Gersonides
or Ralbag) explained the Book philosophically,
as Maimonides had done (More Nebuchim, iii.
§ 22), and as R. Jehudah b. Saadja (13th
century) is said to have done. Some others are
mentioned by Carpzov, I. c. p. 82, in the Histoire
Litte'raire de la France, xxvii. pp. 551-6, and in
A. Neubauer's Catalogue of Hebrew MSS. in the
Bodleian Library, col. 1052. Schiller-Szinessy
(Catalogue, p. 40) praises very highly the Com-
mentary of R. Berachyah existing in the Cam-
bridge Library. The Vatican MS. 188 con-
tains a fragment of a Cabbalistic explanation of
ch. xxxviii. ; fragments of an early commentary
have been published with very careful notes
by R. Gildemeister (Bruchstucke eines Babbini-
schen Hiob-Commentars, Bonn, 1874); see also
Krankel, Monatschrift, 1856, p. 223, and "WIN
DnSDH, Vilna, 1880, p. 460. The work of
R. Schwarz, referred to above, embodies the
Commentaries of R. Isaiah of Trani, RR. Moses,
Daniel, and Joseph Kimchi, and R. Zechariah
b. Isaac of Barcelona (1160-1290). Many others
have been printed in the last and the present
centuries. The most recent Hebrew Commentary
(by B. Szolt, Baltimore, 1886) contains much
that is valuable, but entirely neglects what has
been done by non-Jewish scholars. This class
of exposition is represented in English by the
extensive work of H. H. Bernard (The Booh
of Job as expounded to his Cambridge Pupils
JOBAB
1725
by H. H. B., edited by F. Chance, London,
1884).
More than sixty authorities, chiefly Christian
commentators, were employed by A. Schultens
(Leiden, 1737), who assigns the palm among
Rom. Cath. scholars to Pineda (Venice, 1608),
among Lutherans to Sebastian Schmid (Stras-
burg, 1690). His own Commentary is monu-
mental, not only as embodying the labours of
his predecessors, but as the result of profound
acquaintance with Semitic idioms, and charac-
terised throughout by sound judgment and
modesty. His application of Arabic to the in-
terpretation of Job, although excessive, is
moderate, if compared with the procedure of
scholars both before and after his time. An
abridged edition of his work was issued by
Vogel (Halle, 1769). Of Schultens' successors
De Wette (in his Introduction) is thought to
have done most for the interpretation of the
work as a whole : for the explanation of parti-
cular difficulties Renan (Ze Litre de Job, 1860)
assigns the palm to Ewald (Oichter des Alten
Bundes, 1836, 2nd ed. 1866; trauslated in the
Theological Translation Fund Library), while he
specially commends for industry the JTandbucIt
of Hirzel (Leipzig, 1839, re-edited by J. Ols-
hausen, afterwards by A. Dillmann, 1869).
The Commentary of A. Hahn (Berlin, 1850) is
valuable for its grammatical analysis ; that of
Schlottmann (Berlin, 1851) chiefly for the
varied learning of its introduction, in which
parallels both to the plan and to the thought of
the Book of Job are collected from the sacred
literature of the Indo-Germanic races. The
Biblical Commentary of F. Delitzsch (Leipzig,
1864, 2nd ed. 1876, translated in Clark's Foreign
Theological Library) is justly regarded as one
of the most successful of its author's produc-
tions. Much that is original and valuable was
added by F. Hitzig in his Commentary (Leipzig,
1874). The posthumous work of E. W. Heng-
stenberg (Berlin, 1870-6) is controversial and
homiletic. The most recent German commen-
tary is by W. Volck in Strack and Zdckler's Exe-
getisches Handbuch (1890). The commentaries
of the Rom. Caths. Welte (1849) and Zschokke
(1882), and the translations of A. Merx (1871)
and J. G. Hoffmann (1890), deserve mention.
The most important commentary in Dutch is
that by J. C. Matthes (Het boek Job vertaald en
verklaard, 2nd ed., GrSningen, 1876).
Of recent English works the most elaborate
is the unfinished Commentary of A. B. Davidson
(Edinburgh, 1862); the Commentary in the
Speaker's series is by Canon F. C. Cook (London,
1880). The work of G. H. B. Wright (The Book
of Job : a nevo critically revised Translation, with
Essays, London, 1883) is mainly critical, that of
Samuel Cox (A Commentary on the Book of Job,
with a new Translation, London, 1880) mainly
homiletic. Some of the special literature has
been noticed in the preceding sections.
[D. S. M.]
JO'BAB. 1. (33^: in Gen. A. 'lu$d$,
E. 'lu$a ; in Ch. A. 'ojxf/t, B. om. : Jobab.) The
last of the thirteen sons of Joktan (Gen. x. 29 ;
1 Ch. i. 23) and the tribal father of a branch
of the Joktanide clans. His name has not
been discovered among the Arab names of
places in Southern Arabia, where he ought to
Digitized by
Google
1726
JOCHEBED
be found with the other sons of Joktan.
But Ptolemy (vi. 7, 24) mentions the 'I«/3a-
plrai near the Sachalitae on the S. coast of
Arabia; and Bocbart, followed by Salmasius
and Gesenius, suggests the reading 'lu(ia(itrai,
by the common interchange of p and 0. The
identification is possibly correct, but it has not
been connected with an Arab name of a tribe or
place ; and Bochart's conjecture of its being i. q.
w
Arab. i_„>VjJ, yabib, "a desert," from i .< .
though regarded as probable by Gesenius and
Michaelis, seems to be unworthy of acceptance.
Kalisch {Com. on Gen.) says that it is, "accord-
ing to the etymology, a district in Arabia
Deserta" in apparent ignorance of the famous
desert near Hadhramaut, called al-Ahkaf, of
proverbial terror ; and the more extensive waste
on the north-east of the former, called the
"deserted quarter," Er-Ruba el-Khali, which is
impassable in the summer, and fitter to be called
desert Arabia than the country named deserta
by the Greeks. But Kautzsch definitely rejects
Bochart's combination Jobabites = jobarites
(Riehm, 1IWB. s. v. Jobab).
2. Jobab ben Zerab, of Bozrah, the second in
the list of "the kings that reigned in the land
of Edom, before there reigned auy king over the
children of Israel " (Gen. xxxvi. 33, 34 ; 1 Ch.
i. 44, 45). [Edom.] An addition to the LXX.
version of the Book of Job identifies him with
Job, his father being Zerah son of Esau, and his
mother Bosorra (Cod. Vat.) or Bossora (Cod.
Al.) ; a name obviously derived from the Bozrah
of the original text.
8. Jobab, king of Hadon, an ally of Jabin
king of Hazor, against Joshua (Josh. xi. 1).
i. Jobab, the name of two clans of Benjamin
(1 Ch. viii. 9, 18). [E. S. P.] [C. J. B.]
JO-CHEBED ("133^ if of Hebrew origin =
Jehovah is gloriousness [MV. 11 ] ; for the Egyp-
tian interpretation, see Nestle, Die Israelii.
Eigennamen, p. 77 sq. ; 'luixa&iS ; Jochabed),
the wife and at the same time the aunt of
Am ram, and the mother of Moses and Aaron
(Ex. vi. 20). In order to avoid the apparent
illegality of the marriage between Amram and
his aunt, the LXX. and Vulg. render the word
dOdah " cousin " instead of " aunt " (see Knobel-
Dillmann in loco). Bnt this is unnecessary :
the example of Abraham himself (Gen. xx. 12)
proves that in the pre-Mosaiu age a greater
latitude was permitted in regard to marriage
than in a later age. Moreover it is expressly
stated elsewhere (Ex. ii. 1 ; Num. xxvi. 59)
that Jochebed was the daughter of Levi, and
consequently sister of Kohath, Amram 's father.
[W.L.B.] [F.]
JO'DA('l»8d; Vulg.om.)=Judah the Levite
(1 Esd. v. 58, see Speaker's Comm. in loco ; cp.
Ezra iii. 9). Some words are probably omitted.
The name elsewhere appears in the A. V. in the
forms Hodaviah (Ezra ii. 40), Hodevah (Neh.
vii. 43), Hodijah (Neh. x. 10), and Sudias (1 Esd.
v.26). " i - "
JO'ED Hiri' = Jehovah is witness [MV.»]; I T '/**"!! * ron< ** T » f «"» "»»» «* '*"*' * nrf
, , V= . L J ' Judsh from the time of Jehu and Athaliah, see Driver
IetdJ j Joed), a Benjamite, the son of Pedaiah / n iah, kit Life and Times, p. 13. Uesher's chrooofcgT
(Neh. xi. 7). Two of Kennicott's MSS. read I must be given up.
JOEL
Wi ie. Joezer, and two 7KV, t>. Joel, con-
founding Joed with Joel the son of Pedaiah the
Manassite. The Syriac most have read XT1V.
JCEL 6«i» = Jehovah is God; cp. the
Phoenician W[MV." ; see Nestle, Israelit. Eigen-
namen, p. 86] : 'IeWjA : Joel and Johef). 1. Eldest
son of Samuel the prophet (1 Sam. viii. 2 ; 1 Ch.
vi. 33, xv. 17), and father of Heman the singer.
He and his brother Abiah were made judges in
Beersheba when their father was old, and no
longer able to go his accustomed circuit. But
they disgraced both their office and their
parentage by the corrupt way in which they
took bribes and perverted judgment. Their
grievous misconduct gave occasion for the change
of the constitution of Israel to a monarchy. It
is in the case of Joel that the singular corrup-
tion of the text of 1 Ch. vi. 13 {v. 28, A. V.) has
taken place. Joel's name has dropped out ; anil
Vashni, which means " and the second,*' and i-
descriptive of Abijah, has been taken for a prnper
name. The R. T. reads the verse " the rirstbon.
Joel, and the second Abiah."
2. Joel in 1 Ch. vi. 36, A. V. and R. V., fc
replaced by Shaul in r. 24. [A. C. H.]
3. One of the Minor Prophets, the son <i
Pethuel, or, according to the LXX., BaBtvtX.
Nothing further is known of his origin : th-
statements that he was from Bethom of Reuben
(Pseudo-Epiphanius, De tit. Proph. xir.X «r
from the tribe of Zebulun, seem to be qoit-
untrustworthy. Nor again can any infor-
mation be gleaned from his writings as to bu.
condition of life : he speaks indeed of the priests
with respect (i. 9, 13; ii. 17); but this is n<<
proof that he was himself a priest or Levite. as
has been sometimes supposed. We must submit
to be ignorant of all the personal history • :
Joel, however desirous we may be to know more
of one who was by no means the least remarkable
of the Minor Prophets.
As to the date of his writings extreme
diversity of opinion still continues to exist : it
is a point which cannot be settled with cer-
tainty any more than the authorship of the
Epistle to the Hebrews: only probability is
attainable. It has been put (by Credner and
Movers) as early as the first years of Joash of
Judah (837 B.C.),* or even earlier (Bunsen); by
Men it has been brought down as late as 445';
by others it has been placed at various inter-
vening dates. This uncertainty is due to th<
fact that there is in Joel no marked allusion t<
foreign politics, such as meets us in Isaiah ; n-
description of the social condition of the people
no denunciation of national sins, which might
serve to fix his date: only drunkenness is men-
tioned. The enemies of Judah who are to be
punished for their oppressions are not Assyria
and Babylon, who came upon the scene at
definite, well-known times : they are Phoenicia.
Philistia, Egypt, and Edom, and it is difficult t»
assign any time for the particular acts of hos-
tility for which they are denounced by the
Prophet. Our knowledge of the relations ot
Digitized by
Google
JOEL
the«e peoples to Israel and Judah is probably
too fragmentary for us to build any safe con-
clusion! upon it : the Prophet may be alluding
to acts which have not been recorded in the
chronicles which have descended to us. So in
the Psalms it is often impossible to fix upon any
known historical facts as the basis of the
Psalmist's meaning. From the scattered notices
which meet us we may fairly conclude that the
enmity of these nations was chronic, venting
itself whenever an opportunity might occur.
The date of Joel must, it would seem, be placed
either early or very late. For although the
Prophet seems to allude to coming captivity
(ii. 20; iii. 1), yet there is.no evidence in his
writings of the struggle between idolatry and
the worship of Jehovah which meets us in
Hosea, Amos, and later Prophets, and continued
till the Captivity, when it finally ceased. And
yet this very absence of pointed allusion to
known historical events may be of value in
determining the age of the Prophet. The fact
that we find no mention of Assyria or Babylon,
that no denunciation of them meets us in Joel,
as in Isaiah z. and xiv., would seem to show
that these nations had not yet appeared upon
the political scene. For when the Prophet
speaks (iii. 2) of the gathering of " all nations "
to Jerusalem for judgment, he does not mention
these overwhelming oppressors, over whose
downfall Isaiah exults with such patriotic
fervour : he mentions only the petty plunderers
of gold and silver and slaves. It may there-
fore, with some confidence, be assumed that he
wrote at a time when these great empires had
not yet come into collision with Israel and
Judah; that is, before the end of the 8th cen-
tury B.C. On the other hand, his probable
allusion to Jehoshaphat's victory (2 Ch. xx.)
over Moab, Edom, and Ammon (iii. 2, 12) would
make him subsequent to that event, i.e. to the
middle of the 7th century ; bis time may there-
fore fairly be sought at some period between
these two dates. And many allusions in his
Book harmonise well with this assumption.
The office of prophet was still highly respected
as in the days of David. The nation was
apparently more simple in its ways than in the
time of Amos. The Temple was still standing,
and its ritual cherished. The Prophet dreads
lest the offerings of meal and wine should be
interrupted (i. 9, 13, 16; ii. 14). The old war-
like spirit of Deborah and David seems to be
revived in the summons, of the Prophet (iii. 9)
to all the nations to come and have vengeance
dealt to them for the wrongs done by them
against the people of the Lord. The purity of
Joel's style tends also in the same direction,
and there is no reason for supposing that this is
due to a careful study of literary models, as
has been suggested. Again, the Prophets often
quote one from the other, as if to carry on the
message entrusted to an older colleague. And
so we find the words of Joel iii. 16 (Heb. ir.
16) also occurring in Amos i. 2. Did Joel
quote Amos, or Amos Joel ? If we may judge
from a comparison of the two passages, Joel
was the older writer: in him the words in
question appear from the construction to be
part of an original passage, whereas in Amos
they have the look of z quotation. It seems as
if Amos had taken almost the concluding words
JOEL
1727
of the older Prophet's message and placed them
at the head of his own Book, thus associating
his own ministry with that of Joel. Again,
Joel iii. 18 (iv. 18) seems to be a component
part of the same prophecy, whereas in Amos
ix. 13 it has the air of being an insertion.
Further correspondences may be found be-
tween Joel and other Prophets, as will be seen
below, but these do not show from their form
which are the originals and which the quo-
tations.
The arguments for assigning a late, post-
exilic, date to Joel do not on examination appear
to be very convincing. Thus it has been said :
" Joel gives no indication of political life at
Jerusalem. In chap. i. only elders or sheikhs
and priests are mentioned: not the king or
princes or warriors or councillors, as before the
Exile. The nation has only a municipal organ-
ization with a priestly aristocracy, as it had
under the Persian empire." k It is doubtful,
however, whether in any one of the four
passages (i. 2, 14 ; ii. 16 ; iii. 1) in which Joel
uses the word taqen, he employs it in an
official sense. Even if he did, the term is so
commonly used under the kings that no argu-
ment can be built upon it. That the king is
not mentioned may be due to the fact that the
prophecy was possibly delivered during the
minority of Joash of Judah. If again the
Prophet had no special message for the king
and other officials, why was he bound to mention
them ? Again (2) : " Joel suits best with a later
date, when Syrian slaves were in special request
in Greece." Why so ? What evidence is forth-
coming that the Phoenicians were not slave-
dealers as early as the 9th and 8th centuries
b.c. ? They are mentioned as such in Amos i. 6
In Is. xi. 11 captives of Israel are to be brought
back from other parts and from the " islands of
the sea," i-e. the coasts of the Mediterranean.
There is no reason to suppose that this trade
sprung up then and was not in existence
centuries earlier. Again (3) : " The name Javan
(Ionians) is not found in any part of the 0. T.
certainly older than Ezekiel." Even if it could
be proved that the genealogy in Gen. z. 4 is of
post-exilic origin, this would not be enough.
To serve as an argument for the late date of
Joel, it must be shown that the name " Javan "
was not known in Palestine till after the Exile :
this cannot be proved, and is most improbable.*
Again (4) : " In Joel Israel has disappeared : only
Jndah is mentioned. This is inconceivable in
the case of an early prophet." Why ? Earlier
prophets than Joel, Elijah (with one exception,
2 Ch. xxi. 12) and Elisha, seem to have occupied
themselves entirely with the affairs of Israel :
why should not Joel's ministry have been
confined to Judah? Again (5): "The 'daily
offering' (i. 9) is cut off and its restoration
(ii. 14) promised. Under the monarchy it was
the king's private offering ; not till Ezra was it
the affair of the community." Even if these
statements could be proved, they would be be-
side the mark. Joel is not speaking exclusively
of the special daily offering of meal and wine
(Ex. xxix. 40), the tninhath ha-tamldh of Neh. x.
► R. W. Smith, EncycL Brit. (1881), ». v. Joel.
• The name is found in an inscription ol Sargon
(B.C. 723-704) : Schrader, £47-.* p. 81.
Digitized by
Google
1728
JOEL
33 ; Dan. viii. 11, &c. He has been describing
the ravages of the locusts : " The corn is wasted :
the new wine is dried up," and so there is none
left for a meal- and drink - offering, the in-
variable accompaniments of all the bloody
sacrifices, not of the special morning and evening
offerings alone. Again (6) : " Joel's allusion to
the walls (ii. 7, 9) shows him to be after Ezra
and Nehemiah." Were there, then, no walls to
Jerusalem before the Exile ? Again (7): "It is
an assumption inconsistent with history that
before the prophetical conflicts of the 8th
century spiritual prophecy had unchallenged
sway, when there was no gross idolatry or
superstition, and when prophets like Joel were
in accord with the priests and held the same
position as they did after the Exile." If,
however, as Credner suggests, Joel is to be
placed in the early years of Joash, when idolatry
had been put down (2 Ch. xxiii.) and the
Temple-worship restored by Jehoiada, the lan-
guage of the Prophet presents no difficulty.
Again (8) : " Joel must be a late Prophet, for he
has copied the assembling of the nations to
judgment from Zeph. iii. 8 and Ezek. xxxviii.
22, where the wonders of fire and blood are also
mentioned, and his picture of the fertility of the
land is taken from Amos ix. IS, &c." But, as
we have seen above, the probability is that Joel
was the original writer whose predictions were
adopted by later Prophets. We shall therefore
not be rash in assigning Joel a date between
350 and 700 B.C., but his exact position is
difficult to settle more accurately. The early
reign of Joash (837-797) has been selected by
Credner, Movers, Hitzig, and other writers of
eminence as his most probable date, and there is
much to be said in its favour, as has been al-
ready remarked. By others he has been placed
somewhat later. " There being no internal
indication of the date of Joel, we cannot do
better than acquiesce in the tradition by which
his Book is placed next to that of Hosea, and
regard Joel as the Prophet of Judah during the
earlier part of Hosea's office towards Israel, and
rather earlier than Isaiah." d
The prophecy opens with a vivid account
(i. 2-13) of the ruin wrought in the land by
drought and by the successive inroads of locusts.
What one flight had left another had consumed,
till crops and fruit-trees had alike been destroyed.
Kour different names are employed to describe
the swarms of destroyers, and thus signify the
completeness of the havoc brought about by
them.' But yet worse is to come. More
terrible ravagers(ch. ii.) are on their way. Is it
another flight of locusts which is foretold in
this chapter, or are they human enemies? The
matter has been warmly disputed by successive
generations of commentators, and is not yet
-.ettled. Perhaps it may be best to suppose that
the Prophet in vision sees the new enemies
approaching in the shape of locusts of terrible
size and strength, such as those described in
Itev. ix. Some parts of the description (e.g. ii. 7)
seem to necessitate this view. But that more
is implied than mere locusts is evident both
4 Fraey, Minor Prophelt, p. *«.
• Credner attempted, but unsuccessfully, to show that
• llfferrot stages In the growth of the same insect were
intended CPusey, p. 97).
JOEL
from the general description and from the ex-
pression (ii. 17), "Give not thine heritage to
reproach that the heathen should rule over
them ; " ' and again (ii. 20), " I will remove far
off from you the northerner." How are we to
interpret this last obscure expression which hai
been the despair of commentators? It can
hardly refer to locusts, as they would naturally
make their way from their usual breeding
grounds in the Arabian desert on the sooth of
Judah: they would not come from the north.
Passages in Jeremiah and Ezekiel ' suggest tot
answer. The invading armies of Babylon are
described in them as coming from this quarter,
as they would naturally take the road to Judas
through Northern Palestine. In the time of
Joel the expression would include Assyria as
well, the northern kingdoms of Syria and lane!
being always the first to feel the attack of these
invaders. The precipitate retreat of Sennacherib
after his great losses in South Palestine (Is
xxxvii. 36) illustrates the latter part of Joe'
ii. 20.
The prophecy from ii. 18 onwards is full ef
promises of mercy to follow upon the repentance
of the people. The verbs in v. 18 hare been
taken by the R. V. and several commentators
in the past tense, " Then the Lord answered and
said." Indeed Merx characterises the future
sense as an " exegetical monstrosity." Never-
theless, as no past tense has previously occurred.
it seems right to take the verbs, though joined
with vau conversive, in a future sense, as *i<
done in the A. V. h The former and the latter
rain shall again descend in their season, and the
land shall again give her increase ; the heathen
enemies shall be removed. But greater promise
follow. The Holy Spirit shall be poured forti
upon all flesh. Wonders shall be seen in heaves
and earth, ushering in the great and terrible
day of the Lord, in which however deliverance
shall be found in Mount Zion and Jerusalem, and
in the faithful remnant whom the Lord shall
call. This theme of the coming Day of Judg-
ment is enlarged upon in ch. iii. All nations
are to be summoned to the Valley of Jehosha-
phat, not probably the valley outside Jerusalem
on the east, but the scene of the victory de-
scribed in 2 Ch. xx.' There the ancient wrongs
of His people will be avenged, the captives will
be restored, while their oppressors Tyre and
Zidon, who had sold them to foreign bands for
pitifnl sums, shall receive a due recompense for
their evil deeds. The Lord will roar out of
Zion in His fury at the foe, but He will be the
hope of His people and the Strength of Israel.
Egypt and Edom will be desolate, while plenty
shall reign in Judah : the mountains shall be
covered with vineyards, and the hills with herds
of cattle ; and more than this, spiritual blessings
< Some prefer to make the sense, " that the heathen
should Jest at them." This is doubtful, but the result
of the passage will be much the name.
f e.g. Jer. lv. 6, vi. 22, x. 22, &c ; Esek. xxvL " : cp
Zeph. 11. 13.
■> The words " the former rain moderately " have also
been translated "ateacherof righteousness," and applied
to the Messiah : but this Is unlikely.
> See Jbhoshafhat, Vallet or. The tradition
Identifying It with the Kldron cannot be traced before
the 4th century a.i>.
Digitized by
Google
JOEL
like a fertilising stream shall issue from the
Temple, and water not only Jndah but even the
arid valley of the Acacias on the further side of
Jordan.
If the date assigned above to Joel be correct,
this Prophet must have exercised considerable
influence upon his successors. For not only
thoughts which first appear in his writings are
taken up by them, but his very words are re-
produced.* Thus the nearness of the day of the
Lord when He shall come for judgment, and its
accompanying gloom and darkness, are described
in Joel i. 15, ii. 1, 31, iii. 14, and again reappear
in Is. xiii. 6; Amos v. 18, 20; Ezek. xxx. 2;
Ob. e. 15 ; Zeph. i. 14 ; Mai. iv. 5. The requital
of the enemy for their violence, as threatened in
Joel iii. 4, 19, is repeated in Obad. vv. 10, 15 ;
their cruelty in having cast lots for the captives
is mentioned in Joel iii. 3, and again in Obad.
v. 11, Nahum iii. 10; the universality of the
judgment to come is foretold in Joel iii. 2
(iv. 2), and also in Is. lxvi. 18, Jer. xxv. 31, and
Zech. xiv. 1. The majestic figure of the Lord
protecting His people, and roaring from out of
Zion as a lion roars at the sight of his enemies,
first occurs in Joel iii. 16 (Heb. iv. 16), and
again in Amos i. 2 and Jer. xxv. 30. The doc-
trine that a remnant only, not all Israel, shall
be saved, meets us in Joel ii. 32 (iii. 5), and
is taken up again by Isaiah (xi. 11, &c.),
Jeremiah (xxxi. 7), and Micah (iv. 7, v. 6, 7).
Deliverance in Mount Zion is promised in Joel
ii. 32 (iii. 5), and repeated in Ob. r. 17. The
prophecy that Jerusalem is to be holy, Joel
iii. 17 (iv. 17), and unpolluted henceforth by
strangers, is taken up by Is. Iii. 1 and Obad. v. 17.
The figure of the waters (iii. 18, Heb. iv. 18)
which shall flow from beneath the Temple and
fertilise distant lands, is reproduced with varia-
tions in Zech. xiv. 8, and expanded in Ezek.
xlvii. Joel's summons to the nations in iii. 10
(iv. 10) to beat their ploughshares into swords,
and their spears into pruning-hooks, is reversed
in Mic. iv. 3 and Is. ii. 4, and becomes a pro-
phecy of universal peace. The vision of plenty
when the mountains shall flow with new wine,
Joel iii. 18 (iv. 18), is repeated literally in
Amos ix. 13. Above all, the great promise of the
outpouring of the Spirit upon all flesh in Joel
ii. 28, which is expressly quoted by St. Peter
in Acts ii. as fulfilled on the Day of Pentecost,
meets us again in Is. xliv. 3, Ezek. xxxix. 29,
and Zech. xii. 10. St. Paul (Rom. x. 13) notes
the universality of the salvation offered in Joel
ii. 32. Indeed it is in the N. T. even more than
in the Old, that these great subjects, which first
appear in the writings of Joel, are taken up and
further developed.
The style of Joel is singularly easy and grace-
ful. He has no ruggedness and obscurity like
Hosea. But yet he is full of power and at the
same time overflowing with tenderness. In
these respects he is, perhaps, surpassed by none
of the Prophets but Isaiah.
The literature connected with Joel is of con-
siderable extent. A very full list, commencing
from the earliest times, may be found in Wiinsche,
Die Weissagungen d. Proph. Joel (1872),
pp. 61-64. The most noticeable works which
JOEL
1729
* t.g, - gather blackness " (Joel 11. 6) is found besides
only In Nahum il. 11.
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
have appeared of late bearing upon the subject
are those by Rosenmiiller, Scholia in V. T.
(1827-36) ; Holzhausen, Joel (1829) ; Credner,
Joel (1831); Maurer, Commentar (1840);
Ewald, Die Proph. dee Alien Bxmdes (1840-1) ;
Dmbreit, Commentar (1844) ; Hitzig in Kvrzge-
tasst. exeg. Handb. zum A. T., 4 Ann. (1881),
and in his Propheten dee A. T. (1854); Heng-
etenberg, Christol. d. A. T* (1854), transl. in
Clark's For. Theol. Libr. (1854-8); Reinke,
Messian. Weissag. (1859-62), vol. 3; Keil,
Propheten (1866) ; Renss, Lee Prophites (1876) ;
Merx, Die Prophetie des Joel und ihre Ausleger
(1879); J. P. Lange, Commentar, Eng. transl.
ed. by Schaff, Edinb. ; besides useful articles in
Hamburger, Real-Encydop. (1870); Herzog,
RE* (1880). In England have been pub-
lished Henderson, Minor Prophets (WAS) ; Pusey,
Minor Prophets (1860); Meyrick, Joel in
Speaker's Comm. (1876); W. L. Pearson, Joel
(1885); Farrar, Minor Prophets in Men of the
Bible Series (1890. He follows Merx) ; Driver,
in Introduction to the Literature of the 0. T.
(1891). [J.W. N.]
4. (W ; 'I«4A; Jolt.) The head of one of
the families of the Simeonites (1 Ch. iv. 35).
He formed part of the expedition against the
Hamites of Gedor in the reign of Hezekiah.
5. A descendant of Reuben. Junius and Tre-
mellius make him the son of Hanoch, while
others trace his descent through Carmi (1 Ch.
v. 4). The Syriac for Joel substitutes Carmi,
but there is reason to believe that the genealogy
is that of the eldest son. Burrington (Qeneal.
i. 53) maintains that the Joel mentioned in v. 8
was a descendant, not of Hanoch, but one of his
brethren, probably Carmi, as Junius and Tre-
mellius print it in their genealogical table. But
the passage on which he relies for support (v. 7),
as concluding the genealogy of Hanoch, evi-
dently refers to Beerah, the prince of the
Reubenites, whom the Assyrian king carried
captive (see Oettli in Strack u. Zockler's Kgf.
Komm. in loco). There is, however, sufficient
similarity between Shemaiah and Shema, who
are both represented as sons of Joel, to render it
probable that the latter is the same individual
in both instances. Bertheau conjectures that
he was contemporary with David, which would
be approximately true if the genealogy were
traced in each case from father to son.
6. Chief of the Gadites, who dwelt in the land
of Bashan (1 Ch. v. 12).
7. (A. 'MA, B. *Po^A ; Johel.) The son of
Izrahiah, of the tribe of Issachar, and a chief of
one of " the troops of the host of the battle "
(R. V. "bands of the host for war"), who
numbered in the days of David 36,000 men
(1 Ch. vii. 3). Four of Kennicott's MS3. omit
the words " and the sons of Izrahiah ; " so that
Joel appears as one of the five sons of Ozzi.
The Syriac retains the present text, with
the exception of reading " four " for " five." If
the number "five" be accurate, a name
would seem to have dropped oat of the list
(cp. QPB.').
S. The brother (LXX. A. ; B. reads viht here
and in 2 Sam. /. c.) of Nathan of Zobah (1 Ch.
xi. 38), and one of David's guard. ' He is called
Igal in 2 Sam. xxiii. 36 ; bnt Eennicott con-
tends that in this case the latter passage is
Digitized by VjOOQIC
1730
JOELAH
corrupt, though in other words it preserved the
true reading.
9. The chief of the Gershomites in the reign
of David, who sanctified themselves to bring np
the ark from the house of Obed-edom (1 Ch. zv.
7,11).
10. A Gershomite Levite in the reign of
David, son of Jehiel, a descendant of Laadan,
and probably the same as the preceding (1 Ch.
xxiii. 8 ; xxvi. 22). He was one of the officers
appointed to take charge of the treasures of the
Temple.
11. The son of Pedaiah, and prince or chief
of the half-tribe of Manasseh. west of Jordan, in
ihe reign of David (1 Ch. xxvii. 20).
12. A Kohathite Levite in the reign of Heze-
kiab. He was the son of Azariah, and one of
the two representatives of his branch of the
tribe in the solemn purification by which the
Levites prepared themselves for the restoration
of the Temple (2 Ch. xxix. 12).
13. One of the sons of Nebo, who returned
with Ezra, and had married a foreign wife (Ezra
x. 43). He is called Jnel in 1 Esd. ix. 35.
14. The son of Zichri, a Benjamite, placed in
command over those of his own tribe and the
tribe of Judah, who dwelt at Jerusalem after
the return from Babylon (Neh. xi. 9).
[W. A. W.]
JO-BliAH (ffoai' for n$>rt\ ?=i% Be
[God] help! BK. 'EXirf, A. 'ImfXi '; JoSa), son of
Jeroham of Gedor, who with his brother joined
the band of warriors who rallied round David at
Ziklag (1 Ch. xii. 7).
JO-rTZEB OJJ^V = J«hmxtk i$ aid; B.
'lu(dpa, KA. 'la(adp ; Joezer), a Korhite, one
of David's captains who fought by his side
while living in exile among the Philistines (1 Ch.
xii. 6).
JOG'BEHAH (nnar = elevated: in Num.
t : :t
the LXX. has translated it as if from rDJ —
S\btitrca> auras ; in Judg. B. 'ltytfidX ; A. i( 4rav-
riat ZcjBee: Jegbaa), one of the cities on the
east of Jordan which were built and fortified
by the tribe of Gad when they took possession
of their territory (Num. xxxii. 35). It is there
mentioned between Jaazf.r and Beth-nikbah,
places which are probably now represented by
Kh. Sir on the plateau, and Tell Nimrin in the
Jordan valley. It is mentioned once again,
this time in connexion with Nobah, in the
account of Gideon's pursuit of the Midianites
(Judg. viii. 11). They were at Karkor, and he
made his way from the upper part of the
Jordan valley at Succoth and Penuel, and
" went np " — ascended from the Ghor — by the
way of the dwellers in tents — the pastoral
people, who avoided the district of the towns —
to the east of Nobah and Jogbehah ; making
his way towards the waste country in the south-
east. Here, according to the scanty informa-
tion we possess, Karkor would seem to have
been situated. Ewald (Gcsch. ii. 504, note 4)
suggests el-Jubeihdt, or el-Jebeiha, a large site on
the plateau between 'Amman and es-SSlt ; and
this has been adopted by Conder (PEF. item. E.
Pal. p. 111). The ruins are very extensive,
but apparently later than the Christian era.
JOHANAN
If, however, we may infer from Num. xxxii. S5
that Jogbehah was between Jaszer and Beth-
nimrah, its site must be looked for to the west
of the road from the Jabbok, through Heshboa,
to Moab, which wonld in that case be the wit
of the dwellers in tents. [G.] [W.]
JO'GLI ("hi) = exiled; B. 'Ey\tt, A. nUKL
P. 'If«ai; Jogli), the father of Bukki. a chief
man among the Danites (Num. xxxiv. 22)..
JCHA. 1. (Kni\ ? a corrupt form of IW1'
[MY. 11 ] ; B. 'I**'*'. A. 'luaxd ; Joha.) One of
the sons of Beriah, the Benjamite who was s
chief of the fathers of the dwellers in Aijaloo,
and had put to flight the inhabitants of Gath
(1 Ch. viii. 16). His family may possibly have
founded a colony, like the Danites, within thr
limits of another tribe, where they were exposed,
as the men of Ephraim had been, to the attacks
of the Gittites. Such border-warfare was to-
common to render it necessary to suppose that
the narratives in 1 Ch. vii. 21 and viii. 13 refer
to the same encounter, although it is not »
little singular that the name Beriah occurs a
each.
2. Clowfa/.) The Tizite, one of Davitf.
guard (1 Ch. xi. 45). Kennicott decides the
he was the son of Shimri, as he is represented
in the A. V. and R. V., though in the marges
the A. V. has put " Shimrite " for " the sozTof
Shimri " to the name of his brother Jedihel.
JOHA-NAN QVft ; B. 'l*ards, A. -«,), »
shortened form of Jehohanan = Jehovah hath tai
mercy. It is the same as John. [JehohajjaiC
1. Son of Azariah [Azariah, 2], and grandsci
of Ahimaaz the son of Zadok, and father o:
Azariah, 3 (1 Ch. vi. 9, 10, A. V.). In Joseph..
(Ant. x. 8, § 6) the name is corrupted to Jor»-
mus, and in the Seder 01am to joahax. The
latter places him in the reign of Jehoshaphat :
but merely because it begins by wrongly plaeuu
Zadok in the reign of Solomon. Since however
we know from 1 K. iv. 2, supported by 1 Ch. vi
10, A. V., that Azariah the father of Jobaiia-
was high-priest in Solomon's reign, and Amarnl
his grandson was so in Jehoshaphat's reign, w*
may conclude without much doubt that Johs-
nan's pontificate fell in the reign of Behoboao
(see Hervey's Genealogies, fat *n, z.).
8. (B. 'luav&v, A. -a/a.) Son of Elioenai, the
son of Neariah, the son of Shemaiah, in the line
of Zerubbabel's heirs [Shkmaiah], (1 Ch. iii
24). [A. C. H.]
3. (B. 'Iawt, A. 'ItDovav in 2 E. xxv. 23, in
Jer. usually 'luavSw or 'ludyyay; Jokanan.)
The son of Eareah, and one of the captains of
the scattered remnants of the army of Judah,
who escaped in the final attack upon Jerusalem
by the Chaldeans, and, after the capture of the
king, remained in the open country of Moab and
the Ammonites, watching the tide of events.
He was one of the first to repair to llixpah,
after the withdrawal of the hostile army, and
tender his allegiance to the new governor ap-
pointed by the king of Babylon. From his
acquaintance with the treacherous designs of
Ishmael, against which Gedaliah was unhappily
warned in vain, it is not unreasonable to suppose
that he may have been a companion of Ishmaei
Digitized by
Google
JOHANNES
in his exile at the court of Baalis king of the
Ammonites, the promoter of the plot (Jer. xl.
8-16). After the murder of Gedaliah, Johanna
was ose of the foremost in the pursuit of his
assassin, and rescued the captives he had carried
off from Mizpah (Jer. xli. 11-16). Fearing the
vengeance of the Chaldeans for the treachery
of Ishmael, the captains, with Johanan at their
head, halted by the Khan of Chimham, on the
road to Egypt, with the intention of seeking
refuge there; and, notwithstanding the warnings
of Jeremiah, settled in a body at Tahpanhes.
They were afterwards scattered throughout the
country, in Migdol, Noph, and Pathros, and
from this time we lose sight of Johanan and his
fellow-captains.
4. ('Iewdr.) The firstborn son of Josiah king
of Judah (1 Ch. iii. 15), who either died before
his father, or fell with him at Megiddo. Junius,
without any authority, identifies him with Zar-
aces, mentioned in 1 Esd. i. 38.
6. A Taliant Benjamite, one of David's cap-
tains, who joined him at Ziklag (1 Ch. xii. 4).
6. (BK. 'lair, A. 'lucid'.) The eighth in
number of the lion-faced warriors of Gad, who
left their tribe to follow the fortunes of David,
and spread the terror of their arms beyond
Jordan in the month of its overflow (1 Ch. xii.
12).
7. (IjmPP; B. 'Iwoj^i, A. -<u>.) The father
of Azariah, an Ephraimite in the time of Ahaz
(2 Ch. xxviii. 12).
8. The son of Hakkatan, and chief of the
Bene-Azgad who returned with Ezra (Ezra viii.
12). He is called Johannes in 1 Esd. viii. 38.
9. (IjrtlT.) The son of Eliashib, one of the
chief Levitea (Neh. xii. 23), to whose chamber
(or "treasury," according to the LXX.) Ezra
retired to mourn over the foreign marriages
which the people had contracted (Ezra x. 6).
He is called Joanan in 1 Esd. ix. 1 ; and some
have supposed him to be the same as Jonathan,
descendant of another Eliashib, who was after-
wards high-priest (Neh. xii. 11).
10. (tjrft.T; B 'toitV, K*. 'luarir, K"A.
'lvvaSdv.) The son of Tobiah the Ammonite,
who had married the daughter of Meshullam
the priest (Neh. vi. 18> [W. A. W.]
JOHAN'NES ClcdV^jr; Joannes) = Jeho-
banan son of Bebai (1 Esd. ix. 29 ; cp. Ezra x.
28). [Jkhohanan, 4 ; cp. Johanan, 8.]
JOHN Claimns), in the Apocrypha. 1. The
father of Mattathias, and grandfather of the
Maccabaean family (1 Mace. ii. 1).
2. The (eldest) son of Mattathias Qlaawiv),
sumamed Caddis (Ko88(s: cp. Speaker's Comm.
on 1 Mace. ii. 2), who was slain by " the
children of Jambri " [JaMBRi] (1 Mace. ii. 2 ;
ix. 36-38). In 2 Mace viii. 22 he is called
Joseph, by a common confusion of name. [Mac-
cabees.]
3. The father of Eupolemus, one of the envoys
whom Judas Maccabaeus sent to Rome (1 Mace.
viii. 17; 2 Mace. iv. 11).
4. The son of Simon, the brother of Judas
Maccabaeus (1 Mace. xiii. 53, xvi. 1), " a valiant
man," who, under the title of Johannes Hyr-
canus, nobly supported in after-time the glory
>t ,iis house. [Maccabees.]
JOHN
1731
5. An envoy from the Jews to Lysiaa (2 Mace,
xi. 17). [B. F. W.]
JOHN fltodVrnr; Cod. Bezae, 'IwrdSas:
Joannes). 1. One of the high-priest's family,
who, with Annas and Caiaphas, sat in judgment
upon the Apostles Peter and John for their cure
of the lame man and preaching in the Temple
(Acts iv. 6). Lightfoot identifies him with R.
Johanan ben Zaccai, who lived forty years
before the destruction of the Temple, and was
president of the great Synagogue after its
removal to Jabne, or Jamnia (Lightfoot, Cent.
Chor. Matth. praef. ch. 15 ; see also Selden, De
Synedriis, ii. ch. 15). The identification does
not appear to be recognised by Schurer (Oesch.
d. Jiid. Voltes, ii. 172). Grotius merely says that
he was known to Rabbinical writers as " John
the priest" {Comm. m Act. iv.); and he may
well have been one of those priests who by
courtesy or for merit's sake, and as a member
of the high-priest's family, was known by the
title of ipxupti' (Schurer, I. c).
3. The Hebrew name of the Evangelist St.
Mark, who throughout the narrative of the
Acts is designated by the name by which be
was known among his countrymen (Acts xii. 12,
25 ; xiii. 5, 13 ; xv. 37).
JOHN, the Apostle OWmtjs)- It will be
convenient to divide the life which is the subject
of the present article into periods corresponding
both to the great critical epochs which separate
one part of it from another, and to marked
differences in the trustworthiness of the sources
from which our materials are derived. In no
instance, perhaps, is such a division more neces-
sary than in this. One portion of the Apostle's
life and work stands out before us as in the
clearness of broad daylight. Over those which
precede and follow it there brood the shadows
of darkness and uncertainty. In the former
we discern only a few isolated facts, and are
left to inference and conjecture to bring them
together into something like a whole. In the
latter we encounter, it is true, images more
distinct, pictures more vivid ; but with these
there is the doubt whether the distinctness and
vividness are not misleading — whether half-
traditional, half-mythical narrative has not taken
the place of history.
I. Before the call to the discipleship. — We have
no data for settling with any exactitude the
time of the Apostle's birth. The general im-
pression left on us by the Gospel narrative is
that he was younger than the brother whose
name commonly precedes his (Matt. iv. 21, x. 3,
xvii. 1, &c. ; but cp. Luke ix. 28, where the
order is inverted), younger than his friend St.
Peter, possibly also than his Master. The life
which was protracted to the time of Trajan
(Euseb. H. E. iii. 23, following Irenaeus. See
note in Wace and SchafTs edit, in loco) can
hardly have begun before the year B.C. 4 of the
Dionysian era. The Gospels give us the name
of his father Zebedaeus (Matt. iv. 21) and his
mother Salome (Matt, xxvii. 56, compared with
Mark xv. 40, xvi. 1). Of the former we know
nothing more. The traditions of the fourth
century (Epiphan. iii. Baer. 78) make the latter
the daughter of Joseph by his first wife, and
consequently half-sister to our Lord. By some
5 S 2
Digitized by
Google
1732
JOHN
recent critics ahe ha* been identified with the
siater of Mary the mother of Jesus, in John xix.
25 (Wieaeler, Stud, in Krit. 1840, p. 648).*
They lived, it may be inferred from John i. 44,
in or near the aame town [Bethsaida] as those
who were afterwards the companions and
partners of their children. There on the shores
of the Sea of Galilee the Apostle and bis brother
grew up. The mention of the " hired servants "
(Mark i. 20), of his mother's " substance " (oWo
r&r {nmpx6 yrar i Luke viii. 3), of "his own
house " (ra tiut, John xix. 27), implies a position
removed by at least some steps from ■ absolute
poverty. The fact that the Apostle was known
to the high-priest Caiaphas, as that knowledge
was hardly likely to have begun after be had
avowed himself the dinciple of Jesus of Nazareth,
suggests the probability of some early intimacy
between the two men or their families.' The
name which the parents gave to their younger
child was too common to serve as the ground of
any special inference: but it deserves notice
(1) that the name appears among the kindred
of the high-priest Caiaphas (Acts iv. 6); (2) that
it was given to another priestly child, the son
of Zacharias (Luke i. 13), as the embodiment and
symbol of Messianic hopes. The frequent occur-
rence of the name at this period, unconnected as
it was with any of the great deeds of the old
heroic days of Israel, is indeed in itself significant
as a sign of that yearning and expectation which
then characterised, not only the more faithful
and devout (Luke ii. 25, 38), but the whole
people. The prominence given to it by the
wonders connected with the birth of the future
Baptist may have given a meaning to it for the
parents of the future Evangelist which it would
not otherwise have had. Of the character of
Zebedaeus we have hardly the slightest trace.
He interposes no refusal when his sons are
called to leave him (Matt. iv. 21). After this
be disappears from the scene of the Gospel his-
tory, and we are led to infer that he had died
before his wife followed her children in their
work of ministration. Her character meets us
as presenting the same marked features as those
which were conspicuous in her son. From her,
who followed Jesus and ministered to Him of
her substance (Luke viii. 3), who sought for her
two sons that they might sit, one on His right
hand, the other on His left, in His Kingdom
(Matt. xx. 20), he might well derive his strong
affections, his capacity for giving and receiving
love, his eagerness for the speedy manifestation
of the Messiah's kingdom. The early years of
the Apostle we may believe to have passed under
this influence. He would be trained in all that
constituted the ordinary education of Jewish
boyhood. Though not taught in the schools of
Jerusalem, and therefore, in later life, liable to
the reproach of having no recognised position as
» Ewald (fiacK. IrraAt, v. p. 171) adopts Wieseler's
conjecture, and connects it with his own hypothesis
that the sons of Zebedee, and our Lord, as well as the
Baptist, were of the tribe of Levi. This conjecture is
also adopted by Westcott (in loco). On the other hand,
Neander (Pflani. u. leit. p. 609, 4th ed.) and Locke
{Johanna, 1. p. 9) reject both the tradition and the
conjecture.
» Ewald (I. c.) presses this also into the service of his
strange hypothesis.
JOHN
a teacher, no Rabbinical education (Acts ir. 13),
he would yet be taught to read the Ltw and
observe its precepts, to feed on the writings <i
the Prophets with the feeling that their acom-
plishment was not far off. For him too, a
bound by the Law, there would be, at the i^
of thirteen, the periodical pilgrimages to Jera-
salem. He would become familiar with tb>
stately worship of the Temple, with the uenfict,
the incense, the Altar, and the priestly rote
May we not conjecture that then the unprwsitK
were first made which never afterwards wok oc?
Assuming that there is some harmony bet**,
the previous training of a Prophet and the for.
of the visions presented to him, rosy we os
recognise them in the rich liturgical imager
of the Apocalypse — in that union in one »«■
derful vision of all that was most woaderfa
and glorious in the predictions of the »!i-;
Prophets ?
Concurrently with this there would be li-
the boy's outward life as sharing in his fitb«.
work. The great political changes vhfc
agitated the whole of Palestine would ia me
degree make themselves felt even in the villi?-
town in which he grew up. The Galilean tub-
man must have heard, possibly with to
sympathy, of the efforts made (when he wat "
young to join in them) by Judas of Ganuli.-
the great asserter of the freedom of Israel ttfH
their Roman rulers (cp. Schiirer, (fetes. 4 *
Volies im Zeitalter Jem Christi, i. 406) lit
other Jews, he would grow up with strong &
bitter feelings against the neighbouring So.*
ritans. Lastly, before we pass into a pen'M
greater certainty, we must not forget to nn
into account that to this period of as k*
belongs the commencement of that isms*
fellowship with Simon Bar-jonah of whka "
afterwards find so many proofs. That frieafc
may even then have been, in counties) win
fruitful for good upon the hearts of both.
II. From the call to the dtaaplaMp h f*
departure from Jerusalem. — The ordinary life 11
the fisherman of the Sea of Galilee trust 'j*
broken in upon by the news that a Prophet W
once more appeared. The voice of Mo *
Baptist was heard in the wilderness of Jwha
and the publicans, peasants, soldiers, and fat*
men of Galilee gathered round him. A» r 4
these were the two sons of Zebedaeus and u»;
friends. With them perhaps was One Whoa *
vet they knew not. They heard, it may be.
his protests against the vices of their own re'
— against the hypocrisy of Pharisees and ScrJs
But they heard also, it is clear, words wfc-
spoke to them of their own sins — of their •**
need of a deliverer. The words "Behold te
Lamb of God Which taketh away the sin of *
world " (R. V.) imply that those who heir-
them would enter into the blessedness of wk :
they spoke. Assuming that the unnamed wr
ciple of John i. 37-40 was the Evangelist lis-
self, we are led to think of that meeting, of ,iie
lengthened interview that followed it a* &'•
starting-point of the entire devotion of °eii<
and soul which lasted through his whole lilt
Then Jesus loved him as he loved all earne^
seekers after righteousness and truth (cp- Man
x. 21). The words of that evening, tboago
unrecorded, were mighty in their effect. •"'
disciples (John apparently among them) fofloww
Digitized by
Google
JOHN
their new Teacher to Galilee (John i. 44), were
with Him, as such, at the marriage-feast of Cana
(ii. 2), journeyed with Him to Capernaum, and
thence to Jerusalem (ii. 12, 22), came back
through Samaria (iv. 8), and then, for some
uncertain interval of time, returned to their
former occupations. The uncertainty which
hangs over the narratives of Matt. iv. 18 and
Luke r. 1-11 (cp. the arguments for and against
their relating to the same events in Lampe,
Comment, ad Joann. p. 20) leaves us; in doubt
whether they received a special call to become
" fishers of men " once only or twice. In either
case they gave up the employment of their life
and went to do a work like it, and yet unlike,
in God's spiritual Kingdom. From this time
they take their place among the company of
disciples. Only here and there are there traces
of individual character, of special turning-points
in their lives. Soon they find themselves in
the number of the Twelve who are chosen, not
as disciples only, but as their Lord's delegates —
representatives — Apostles. In all the lists of the
Twelve those four names of the sons of Jonah
and Zebedaeus stand foremost. They come
within the innermost circle of their Lord's
friends, and are as the ttcKtieriv iitXtKT&Ttpoi.
The three, St. Peter, St. James, and St. John,
are with Him when none else are, in the chamber
of death (Mark v. 37), in the glory of the Trans-
figuration (Matt. xvii. 1), when He forewarns
them of the destruction of the Holy City (Mark
xiii. 3, St. Andrew, in this instance, with them),
and in the agony of Gethsemane. St. Peter is
throughout the leader of that band ; to St. John
belongs the yet more memorable distinction of
being the disciple whom Jesus loved. This love
is returned with a more single undivided heart
by him than by any other. If St. Peter is the
<f>iX4xptoToi, St. John is the (piAi-qaois (Grotius,
Pralegom. in Joann.). Some striking facts in-
dicate why this was so ; what the character was
which was thus worthy of the love of Jesus of
Nazareth. They hardly sustain the popular
notion, fostered by the received types of Christian
art, of a nature gentle, yielding, feminine. The
name Boanerges (Mark iii. 17) implies a vehe-
mence, zeal, intensity, which gave to those who
had it the might of Sons of Thunder.' That spirit
broke out, once and again, when they joined
their mother in asking for the highest places in
the kingdom of their Master, and declared that
they were ready to face the dark terrors of the
cup that He drank and the baptism that He was
baptized with (Matt. xx. 20-24 ; Mark x. 35-41)
— when they rebuked one who cast out devils in
their Lord's Name because he was not one of
their company (Luke ix. 42) — when they sought
to call down fire from heaven upon a village of
the Samaritans (Luke ix. 54). About this time
Salome, as if her husband had died, takes her
place among the women who followed Jesus in
Galilee (Luke viii. 3), ministering to Him of
their substance, and went up with Him in His
last journey to Jerusalem (Luke xxiii. 55).
Through her, we may well believe, St. John
• The consensus of patristic Interpretation sees in
this name the prophecy of their work as preachers of
the Gospel. This, however, would deprive the epithet
of all distinguishing force (cp, Suicer, Thetmrut, s. v.
/Spovnj ; and Lampe, I. p. 27).
JOHN
1733
first came to know that Mary Magdalene whose
character he depicts with such a life-like touch,
and that other Mary to whom he was afterwards
to stand in so close and special a relation. The
fulness of his narrative of what the Evangelists
omit (John xi.) leads to the conclusion that he
was united also by some special ties of intimacy
to the family of Bethany. It is not necessary
to dwell at length on the familiar history of the
Last Supper. What is characteristic is that he
is there, as ever, the disciple whom Jesus loved ;
and, as the chosen and favoured friend, reclines
at table with his bead upon his Master's breast
(John xiii. 23). To him the eager Peter — they
had been sent together to prepare the supper
(Luke xxii. 8) — makes signs of impatient ques-
tioning that he should ask what was not likely
to be answered if it came from any other (John
xiii. 24). As they go out to the Mount of Olives
the chosen three are nearest to their Master.
They only are within sight or hearing of the
conflict in Gethsemane (Matt. xxvi. 37). When
the betrayal is accomplished, St. Peter and St.
John, after the first moment of confusion, follow
afar off, while the others simply seek safety in
a hasty flight d (John xviii. 15). The personal
acquaintance which existed between St. John
and Caiaphas enabled him to gain access both
for himself and St. Peter, but the latter remains
in the porch, with the officers and servants, while
St. John himself apparently is admitted to the
council-chamber, and follows Jesus thence, even
to the praetorium of the Roman Procurator
(John xviii. 16, 19, 28). Thence, as if the
desire to see the end, and the love which was
stronger than death, sustained him through all
the terrors and sorrows of that day, he followed
— accompanied probably by his own mother,
Mary the mother of Jesus, and Mary Magdalene
—to the place of Crucifixion. The Teacher Who
had been to him as a brother leaves to him a
brother's duty. He is to be as a son to the
mother who is left desolate (John xix. 26-27).
The Sabbath that followed was spent, it would
appear, in the same company. He receives St.
Peter, in spite of his denial, on the old terms of
friendship. It is to them that Mary Magdalene
first runs with the tidings of the emptied
sepulchre (John xx. 2) ; they are the first to go
together to see what the strange words] meant.
Not without some bearing on their respective
characters is the fact that St. John is the more
impetuous, running on most eagerly to the
rock-tomb ; St. Peter, the least restrained by
awe, the first to enter in and look (John xx.
4-6). For at least eight days they continued
in Jerusalem (John xx. 28). Then, in the in-
terval between the Resurrection and the Ascen-
sion, we find them still together on the Sea of
Galilee (John xxi. 1), as though they would
calm the eager suspense of that period of ex-
pectation by a return to their old calling and
their old familiar haunts. Here, too, there is a
characteristic difference. St. John is the first
to recognise in the dim form seen in the morn-
ing twilight the presence of his risen Lord ; St.
Peter the first to plunge into the water and swim
* A somewhat wild oonjocture is found in writers
of the Western Church. Ambrose, Gregory the Great,
and Bede, identify the Apostle with the naruritot nc
of Hark xlv. 51, 53 (Lamps, I. 38).
Digitized by
Google
1734
JOHN
towards the shore where He stood calling to
them (John xxi. 7). The last words of the
Gospel reveal to as the deep affection which
united the two friends. It is not enough for
Peter to know his own future. That at once
suggests the question — "And what shall this
man do?" (John xxi. 21). The history of the
Acts shows the same onion. They are of coarse
together at the Ascension and on the Day of
Pentecost. Together they enter the Temple as
worshippers (Acts iii. 1) and protest against
the threats of the Sanhedrin (iv. 13). They
are fellow-workers in the first great step of the
Church's expansion. The Apostle whose wrath
had been roused by the unbelief of the Samari-
tans overcomes his national exclusiveness, and
receives them as his brethren (viii. 14). The
i>ersecution which was pushed on by Saul of
Tarsus did not drive him or any of the Apostles
from their post (viii. 1). When the persecutor
came back as the convert, he, it is true, did not
see him (Gal. i. 12), but this of coarse does not
involve the inference that he had left Jerusalem.
The sharper though shorter persecution which
followed under Herod Agrippa brought a great
sorrow to him in the martyrdom of his brother
(Acts xii. 2). His friend, St. Peter, was driven
to seek safety in flight. Fifteen years after St.
Paul's first visit St. John was still at Jerusalem,
and helped to take part in the great settlement
of the controversy between the Jewish and the
Gentile Christians (Acts xv. 6). His position
and reputation there were those of one ranking
among the chief " pillars " of the Church (Gal.
ii. 9). Of the work of the Apostle during this
period we have hardly the slightest trace.
There may have been special calls to mission-
work like that which drew him to Samaria.
There may have been the work of teaching,
organising, exhorting the Churches of Judaea.
His fulfilment of the solemn charge entrusted to
him may have led him to a life of loving and
reverent thought rather than to one of conspicu-
ous activity. We may, at all events, feel sure that
it was a time in which the natural elements of
his character, with all their fiery energy, were
being purified and mellowed, rising step by step
to| that high serenity which we find perfected
in the closing portion of his life. Here too we
may, without much hesitation, accept the
traditions of the Church as recording a historic
fact when they ascribe to him a life of celibacy
(Tertull. de Monog. c xiii.). The absence of
his name from 1 Cor. ix. 5 tends to the same
conclusion. It harmonises with all we know
of his character to think of his heart as so
absorbed in the higher and diviner love that
there was no room left for the lower and the
human.
III. From hit departure from Jerutalem to hit
death. — The traditions of a later age come in,
with more or less show of likelihood, to fill up
the great gap which separates the Apostle of
Jerusalem from the Bishop of Ephesus. It was
a natural conjecture to suppose that he re-
mained in Judaea till the death of the Virgin
released him from his trust.* When this took
place we can only conjecture. There are no
• The hypothesis of Bsronlos and Tillemont, that the
Virgin accompanied him to Ephesus, has not even the
authority of tradition (Lampe, 1. 51).
JOHN
signs of his being at Jerusalem at the time of
St. Panl's last visit (Acts xxi.). The Pastoral
Epistles set aside the notion that he had come
to Ephesus before the work of the Apostle of
the Gentiles was brought to its conclusion. Out
of many contradictory statements, fixing his
departure under Claudius, or Nero, or as late
even as Domitian, we have hardly any data for
doing more than rejecting the two extremes.'
Nor is it certain that his work as an Apostle
was transferred at once from Jerusalem t«
Ephesus. A tradition current in the time of
Augustine (Quaest. Evang. ii. 19), and embodied
in some MSS. of the N. T., represented the
1st Epistle of St. John as addressed to the
Parthians, and so far implied that his Apostolic
work had brought him into contact with* them.
When the form of the aged disciple meets us
again, in the twilight of the Apostolic age, we
are still left in great doubt as to the extent of
his work and the circumstances of his outward
life. Assuming the authorship of the Epistles
and the Revelation to be his, the facta which
the N. T. writings assert or imply are— (1)
that, having come to Ephesus, some persecution,
local or general, drove him to Patmos (Rev. i. S) r*
(2) that the seven Churches, of which Alia was
the centre, were special objects of his solicitude
(Rev. i. 11); that in his work he had to en-
counter men who denied the truth on which hU
faith Tested (1 John iv. 1 ; 2 John r. 7), and others
who, with a railing and malignant temper, dis-
puted his authority (3 John «re. 9, 10). if to
this we add that he must have outlived all, or
nearly all, of those who had been the friends
and companions even of his maturer years—
that this lingering age gave strength to u
old imagination that his Lord had promised him
immortality (John xxi. 23) — that, as if re-
membering the actual words had been this
perverted, the longing of his soul gathered
itself up in the cry, "Even so, come, Lord
Jesus" (Rev. xxii. 20) — that from aome who
spoke with authority he received a solemn
attestation of the confidence they reposed ii
him (John xxi. 24) — we have stated all that has
any claim to the character of historical truth.
The picture which tradition fills up for us has
the merit of being full and vivid, but it blendi
together, without much regard to harmosy,
things probable and improbable. He is ship-
wrecked off Ephesus (Simeon Metaph. m tit*
Johan. c. 2 ; Lampe, i. 47), and arrives there is
time to check the progress of the heresies which
sprang up after St. Paul's departure. Then, or
at a later period, he numbers among his du-
t Lampe fixes a.d. M, when Jerusalem was bs t fcgea
by the Roman forces under Cessna, as the most probata
date.
* In the earlier tradition which made the Apostles
formally partition out the world known to them. Par-
tus falls to the lot of Thomas, while John received
Proconsular Asia (Euseb. H. B. Iii. 1. Cp. note In
Wsoe and SchafPs edition, in loco). In one of the
legends connected with tbe Apostles' Creed, 8L Peter
contributes the first article, St. John tile second, bet
the tradition appears with great variations ss to tuna
and order (cp. Pseudo-August. Serm. ccxL, ocxli.).
k Here again the hypotheses of commentators range
from Claudius to Domitian, tbe consensus of patristic
tradition preponderating in favour of the latter. [Cp.
Revelation.]
Digitized by
Google
JOHN
ciplei men like Polycarp, Papist, Ignatius
(Hieron. de Vir. Illust. c. xvii.). In the perse-
cution under Domitian he is taken to Rome, and
there, by his boldness, though not by death,
gains the crown of martyrdom. The boiling oil
into which he is thrown has no power to hurt
him (Tertull. de Praacript. c. xxxvi.). 1 He is
then sent to labour in the mines, and Patmos is
the place of his exile (Victorinns, in ^poc. ix. ;
Lampe, i. 66). The accession of Nerva frees
him from danger, and he returns to Ephesus.
There he settles the canon of the Gospel-history
by formally attesting the truth of the first
three Gospels, and writing his own to supply
what they left wanting (Euseb. H. E. iii. 24).
The elders of the Church are gathered together,
and he, as by a sudden inspiration, begins with
the wonderful opening, " In the beginning was
the word " (Hieron. de Vir. Jlltut. 29). Heresies
continue to show themselves, but be meets them
with the strongest possible protest. He refuses
to pass under the same roof (that of the public
batbs of Ephesus) as their foremost leader, lest
the house should fall down on them and crush
them (Iren. iii. 3; Euseb. H. E. iii. 28, ir. 14).*
Through his agency the great temple of Artemis
is at last reft of its magnificence, and even
levelled with the ground (Cyril. Alex. Orat. de
Mar. Tirg. ; Nicephor. H. E. ii. 42 ; Lampe,
i. 90). He introduces and perpetuates the
Jewish mode of celebrating the Easter Feast
(Euseb. H. E. iii. 3). At Ephesus, if not before,
as one who was a true priest of the Lord,
he bears on his brow the plate of gold (rfraXoy ;
cp. Suicer. Thee, s. t.), with the sacred name
engraved on it, which was the badge of the
Jewish pontiff (Poly crates, in Euseb. H. E, iii.
31, v. 24).' In strange contrast with this
ideal exaltation, a later tradition tells how the
old man used to find pleasure in the playfulness
and fondness of a favourite bird, and defended
himself against the charge of unworthy trifling
by the familiar apologue of the bow that must
sometimes be unbent (Caasian. Collat. xxiv.
JOHN
1735
1 The scene of the supposed miracle was outside the
Porta Latins, and hence the Western Church commemo-
rates it by the special festival of " St. John Port. Latin."
on May 6th.
k Euseblus and Irenaem make Cerlnthus the heretic.
In Epipbanius (TIaer. xxx. c. 24) Ebion Is the hero of
the story. To modem feelings the anecdote may seem
at variance with the character of the Apostle of Love,
bnt it Is hardly more than the development In act of the
principle of 2 John 10. To the mind of Epiphanius
there was a difficulty of another kind. Nothing less
than a special Inspiration could account for such a
departure from an ascetic life as going to a bath at all.
1 The story of the »<toAok Is perhaps the most
perplexing of all the traditions as to the age of the
Apostles. What makes it still stranger Is the appear-
ance of a like tradition (Hegeslppus In Euseb. B. B. II.
33 ; Rptph. Boer. It) about James the Just. Measured
by our notions, the statement seems altogether Impro-
bable, and yet how can we account for its appearance
at so early a date? Is it possible that this was tho
symbol that the old exclusive priesthood had passed
away? Or are we to suppose that a strong state-
ment as to the new priesthood wss misinterpreted,
and that rhetoric passed rapidly Into legend? (Cp.
Keand. Pfianr. u. Leit. p. 013 ; Stanley, Sermons and
Aiayt on ApatUic Age, p. 283.) Ewald (I. e.) finds In
it an evidence in support of the hypothesis above
referred to.
c. 2).* More true to the N. T. character of the
Apostle is the story, told with to ranch power
and beauty by Clement of Alexandria (Quit dives.
c. 42), of his special and loving interest in the
younger members of his flock ; of his eagerness
and courage in the attempt to rescue one of
them who had fallen into evil courses. The
scene of the old and loving man, standing face
to face with the outlaw-chief whom, in days
gone by, he had baptized, and winning him to
repentance, is one which we could gladly look
on as belonging to his actual life — part of a
story which is, in Clement's words, oh pvBos
oAAa X070J. Not less beautiful is that other
scene which comes before us as the last act of
his life. When all capacity to work and teach
is gone— when there is no strength even to
stand — the spirit still retains its power to love,
and the lips are still opened to repeat, without
change and variation, the command which
summed up all his Master's will, " Little children,
love one another " (Hieron. in Oal. vi.). Other
stories, more apocryphal and less interesting, we
may pass over rapidly. That he pot forth his
power to raise the dead to life (Euseb. H. E.
e. 18) ; that he drank the enp of hemlock which
was intended to cause his death, and suffered
no harm from it * (Pseudo-August. Soliloq. ;
Isidor. Hispal. de MorU Sonet, c 73); that
when he felt his death approaching he gave
orders for the construction of his own sepulchre,
and when it was finished calmly laid himself down
in it and died (Augustin. Tract, in Joan*.
exxiv.); that after his interment there were
strange movements in the earth that covered
him (ibid.) ; that when the tomb was subse-
quently opened it was found empty (Niceph.
H. E. ii. 42) ; that he was reserved to reappear
again in conflict with the personal Antichrist in
the last days (Suicer. Thee. s. T. 'IwdVynt):
these traditions, for the most part, indicate
little else than the uncritical spirit of the age in
which they passed current. The very time of
his death lies within the region of conjecture
rather than of history, and the dates that have
been assigned for it range from A.D. 89 to
A.D. 120 (Lampe, i. 92).
The result of all this accumulation of apocry-
phal materials is, from one point of view, dis-
appointing enough. We strain our tight in
vain to distinguish between the false and the
true — between the shadows with which the
gloom is peopled, and the living forms of which
we are in search. We find it better and more
satisfying to turn again, for all our conceptions
of the Apostle's mind and character, to the
scanty records of the N. T., and the writings
which he himself has left. The truest thought
that we can attain to is still that he was " the
■ The authority of Caasian Is but slender In such a
case ; but the story Is hardly to be rejected, on o priori
grounds, as incompatible with the dignity of an Apostle.
Does It not Illustrate the truth—
" He preyeth best who loveth best
AU things both great and small " ?
• The memory of this deliverance Is preserved In the
symbolic cup, with the serpent issuing from it, which
appears In the mediaeval representations of the Evan-
gelist. Is it possible that the symbol originated In
Mark x. 38, and that the legend grew out of the
symbol?
Digitized by
Google
1736
JOHN
disciple whom Jesus loved"— i twiarifitot —
returning that lore with * deep, absorbing,
unwavering devotion. One aspect of that feeling
it seen in the teal for his Master's glory, the
burning indignation against all that seemed to
outrage it, which runs, with its fiery gleam,
through his whole life, and makes him, from
first to last, one of the Sons of Thunder. To
him, more than to any other disciple, there is
no neutrality between Christ and Antichrist.
The spirit of such a man is intolerant of com-
promises and concessions. The same strong
personal affection shows itself, in another form,
in the chief characteristics of his Gospel. While
the other Evangelists record principally the
discourses and parables which were spoken to
the multitude, he treasures up every word and
accent of dialogues and conversations, which
must have seemed to most men less conspicuous.
In the absence of any recorded narrative of his
work as a preacher, in the silence which be
appears to have kept for so many yean, he
comes before us as one who lives in the unseen
eternal world, rather than in that of secular
or even spiritual activity. If there is less
apparent power to enter into the minds and
hearts of men of different temperament and
education, leas ability to become all things to
all men than there is in St. Paul, there is a
perfection of another kind. The image mirrored
in his soul is that of the Son of Man, who is
also the Son of God. He is the Apostle of
Love, not because he starts from the easy temper
of a general benevolence, nor again as being of
a character soft, yielding, feminine, but because
he has grown, ever more and more, into the
likeness of Him Whom he loved so truly. No-
where is the vision of the Eternal Word, the
glory as of the only-begotten of the Father, so
unclouded: nowhere are there such distinctive
personal reminiscences of the Christ, Kara aipua,
in His most distinctively human characteristics.
It was this union of the two aspects of the
Truth which made him so truly the "Theo-
logus " of the whole company of the Apostles,
the instinctive ^opponent of all forms of a
mystical, or logical, or docetic Gnosticism. It
was a true feeling which led the later inter-
Sreters of the mysterious forms of the four
iving creatures round the throne (Rev. iv. 7) —
departing in this instance from the earlier
tradition * — to see in him the eagle that soars
into the highest heaven and looks upon the
unclouded sun. It will be well to end with
the noble words from the hymn of Adam of
St. Victor, in which that feeling is embodied : —
" Coelum transit, vert rotaxn
Soils vldlt, Ibi totam
Mentis figens adem ;
Speculator spiritaUs
Quasi seraphim sub alls,
Delvidlttaciem."r
Cp. the exhaustive Prolegomena to Lampe's Com-
mentary ; Ncander, Pfianz. u. Lett. pp. 609-652 ;
• Toe older Interpretation made Mark answer to the
eazle, John to the Hon (Suloer. Tkes. s. v. tvayycAumrc).
» Another verse of this hymn, "Volat avis sine
met*," et seq., is familiar to most students as the
motto prefixed by Olshaueen to his commentary on St.
John's OospeL The whole hymn is to be found in
Ternch's Sacred Latin Poetry, p. 11.
JOHN THE BAPTIST
Stanley, Sermons and Essays an the Apostolic
Age, Sermon iv., and Essays on the TraMou
respecting St. John; Maurice On the Gospel of
St. John, Sermon i. ; and an interesting article
by Ebrard, s. v. Johannes, in Hereof Sal-
Encyclopadie. [L H. P.]
JOHN THE BAPTIST Qlmim,s i Bor-
Tia-His), a saint more signally honoured of God
than any other whose name is recorded in either
the 0. or the N. T. John was of the priestly
race by both parents, for his father Zachariss
was himself a priest of the course of Abia,
or Abijah (1 Ch. xxiv. 10), offering incense it
the very time when a son was promised to
him ; and Elizabeth was of the daughters of
Aaron (Luke i. 5). Both, too, were devout per-
sons — walking in the commandments of God,
and waiting for the fulfilment of His promise to
Israel. The divine mission of John wis the
subject of prophecy many centuries before his
birth, for St. Matthew (iii. 3) tells us that it
was John who was prefigured by Isaiah as "tie
Voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare
ye the way of the Lord, make His paths
straight" I (Is. xl. 3), while by the prophet
Malachi the Spirit announces more definitely.
" Behold, I will send My messenger, and be
shall prepare the way before Me " (tii. 1). Ha
birth — a birth not according to the ordinary
laws of filature, but through the mirsraloai
interposition of Almighty power — was foretell
by an Angel sent from God, who announced it
as an occasion of joy and gladness to may—
and at the same time assigned to him the db»
of John to signify either that he was to be bon
of God's especial favour, or, perhaps, that he vu
to be the harbinger of grace. The Angel Gibrel
moreover proclaimed the character and office oi
this wonderful child even before his concept**
foretelling that he wonld be filled with the
Holy Ghost from [the first moment of his exist-
ence, and appear as the great reformer of he
countrymen — another Elijah in the boldae*
with which he would speak truth and rebuke
vice — but, above all, as the chosen foreran"
and herald of the long-expected Messiah.
These marvellous revelations as to the cha-
racter and career of the son, for whom he bid
so long prayed in vain, were too much for the
faith of the aged Zacharias ; and when he sough'
some assurance of the certainty of the promised
blessing, God gave it to him in a judgment— the
privation of speech — until the event foretold
should happen ; a judgment intended to serve s»
at once a token of God's truth, and a rebuke of his
own incredulity. And now the Lord's ptae®
promise tarried not — Elizabeth, for greater pri-
vacy, retired into the hill-country, whither she
was soon afterwards followed by her kinswoman
Mary, who was herself the object and channel of
Divine grace beyond measure greater and more
mysterious. The two cousins, who were this
hononred above all the mothers of Israel, cam*
together in an unnamed city belonging to the
tribe of Judah in the hilly district, south of
Jerusalem, of which Hebron was the centre (see
Speaker's Comtn, in loco) ; and immediately G*> *
purpose was confirmed to them by a miraculous
sign ; for as soon as Elizabeth heard the saluta-
tions of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb,
thus acknowledging, as it were even before birth,
Digitized by
Google
JOHN THE BAPTIST
the Presence of his Lord (Luke i. 43, 44). Three
months after this, and while Mary still remained
with her, Elizabeth was delivered of a son. The
birth of John preceded by six months that of
our blessed Lord. [Respecting this date, see
Jesus Christ, p. 1700.] On the eighth day the
child of promise was, in conformity with the
Law of Moses (Lev. iii. 3), brought to the priest
for circumcision ; and as the performance of this
rite was the accustomed time for naming a
child, the friends of the family proposed to call
him Zacharias after the name of his father. The
mother, however, required that he should be
called John — a decision which Zacharias, still
speechless, confirmed by writing on a tablet,
" his name is John." The judgment on his want
of faith was then at once withdrawn, and the
first use which he made of his recovered speech
was to praise Jehovah for His faithfulness and
mercy (Luke i. 64). God's wonderful inter-
position in the birth of John had impressed the
minds of many with a certain solemn awe and
expectation (Luke iii. 15). God was surely
again visiting His people. His providence, so
long hidden, seemed once more about to mani-
fest itself. The child thus supernaturally born
must doubtless be commissioned to perform
some important part in the history of the chosen
people. Could he be the Messiah? Could he
be Elijah 1 Was the era of their old Prophets
about to be restored ? With such grave thoughts
were the minds of the people occupied, as they
mused on the events which had been passing
under their eyes, and said one to another, " What
manner of child shall this be 1 " while Zacharias
himself, "filled with the Holy Ghost," broke
forth in that glorious strain of praise and pro-
phecy so familiar to us in the morning service of
our Church — a strain in which it is to be ob-
served that the father, before speaking of his
own child, blesses God for remembering His
covenant and promise, in the redemption and
salvation of His people through Him, of Whom
his own son was the prophet and forerunner.
A single verse contains all that we know of
John's history for a space of thirty years — the
whole period which elapsed between his birth
and the commencement of his public ministry :
" The child grew and waxed strong in the spirit,
and was in the deserts till the day of his show-
ing unto Israel " (Luke i. 80). John, it will be
remembered, was ordained to be a Kazarite (see
Mum. vi. 1-21) from his birth, for the words of
the Angel were, " He shall drink neither wine
nor strong drink " (Luke i. 15). What we are
to understand by this brief announcement is
probably this: — The chosen forerunner of the
Messiah and herald of His Kingdom was required
to forego the ordinary pleasures and indulgences
of the world, and live a life of the strictest self-
denial in retirement and solitude. It was thus
that the holy Nazarite, dwelling^by himself in
the wild and thinly peopled region westward of
the Dead Sea, called " Desert " in the text, pre-
pared himself by self-discipline, and by constant
communion with God, for the wonderful office
to which he had been divinely called. Here
year after year of his stern probation passed by,
till at length the time for the fulfilment of his
mission arrived. The very appearance of the
holy Baptist was of itself a lesson to his country-
men ; his dress was that of the old prophets — a
JOHN THE BAPTIST 1737
garment woven of camel's hair (2 E. i. 8), at-
tached to the body by a leathern girdle. His
food was such as the desert afforded — locusts
(Lev. xi. 22) and wild honey (Ps. lxxxi. 16)
And now the long-secluded hermit came forth
to the discharge of his office. His supernatural
birth — his hard ascetic life — his reputation for
extraordinary sanctity — and the generally pre-
vailing expectation that some great one was
about to appear — these causes, without the aid
of miraculous power, for " John did no miracle "
(John x. 41), were sufficient to attract to him a
great multitude from " every quarter " (Matt,
iii. 5). Brief and startling was his first exhorta-
tion to them — " Repent ye, for the Kingdom of
Heaven is at hand." Some score verses contain
all that is recorded of John's preaching, and the
sum of it all is repentance ; not mere legal
ablution or expiation, but a change of heart and
life. Herein John, though exhibiting a marked
contrast to the Scribes and Pharisees of his own
time, was but repeating with the stimulus of
a new and powerful motive the lesions which
had been again and again impressed upon them
by their ancient Prophets (cp. Is. i. 16, 17,
lv. 7 ; Jer. vii. 3-7 ; Ezek. xviii. 19-32, xxxvi.
25-27 ; Joel ii. 12, 13; Mic. vi. 8 ; Zech. i. 3,4).
But while such was his solemn admonition to
the multitude at large, he adopted towards the
leading sects of the Jews a severer tone, de-
nouncing Pharisees and Sadducees alike as "a
generation of vipers," and warning them of the
folly of trusting to external privileges as de-
scendants of Abraham (Luke iii. 8). Now at
last he warns them that " the axe was laid to
the root of the tree " — that formal righteous-
ness would be tolerated no longer, and that none
wonld be acknowledged for children of Abraham
but such as did the works of Abraham (cp. John
viii. 39). Such alarming declarations produced
their effect, and many of every class pressed
forward to confess their sins and to be baptized.
What then was the baptism which John
administered ? Not altogether a new rite, for
it was the custom of the Jews to baptize prose-
lytes to their religion — not an ordinance in
itself conveying remission of sins, but rather a
token and symbol of that repentance which was
an indispensable condition of forgiveness through
Him, Whom John pointed out as " the Lamb of
God Which taketh away the sin of the world "
(R. V.). Still less did the baptism of John im-
part the grace of regeneration — of a new spiri-
tual life (Acts xix. 3, 4). This was to be the
mysterious effect of Baptism "with the Holy
Ghost," which was to be ordained by that
" Mightier One," Whose coming he proclaimed.
The preparatory baptism of John was a visible
sign to the people, and a distinct acknowledg-
ment by them, that a hearty renunciation of
sin and a real amendment of life were necessary
for admission into the Kingdom of Heaven, which
the Baptist proclaimed to be at hand. But the
fundamental distinction between John's baptism
unto repentance, and that Baptism accompanied
with the gift of the Holy Spirit which our Lord
afterwards ordained, is clearly marked by John
himself (Matt. iii. 11, 12).
As a preacher, John was eminently practical
and discriminating. Self-love and covetousness
were the prevalent sins of the people at Urge :
on them therefore he enjoined charity, and con-
Digitized by
Google
1738 JOHN THE BAPTIST
JOHN THE BAPTIST
sideration for other*. The publicans he cautioned
against extortion, the soldiers against violence
and plunder. His answers to them are, no doubt,
to be regarded as instances of the appropriate
warning and advice which he addressed to every
class.
The mission of the Baptist — an extraordinary
one for an extraordinary purpose — was not
limited to those who had openly forsaken the
covenant of God, and so forfeited its principles.
It was to the whole people alike. This we
must infer from the baptism of one who had no
confession to make, and no sins to wash away.
Jesus Himself came from Galilee to Jordan to
be baptized of John, on the special ground that
it became Him ",to fulfil all righteousness," and,
as Man, to submit to the customs and ordinances
which were binding upon the rest of the Jewish
people. John, however, naturally at first shrank
from offering the symbols of purity to the sinless
Son of God. But here a difficult question arises
— How is John's acknowledgment of Jesus at
the moment of His presenting Himself for bap-
tism compatible with his subsequent assertion
that he knew Him not, save by the descent of
the Holy Spirit upon Him, which took place
after His baptism (see Westcott in loco) ? If it
be difficult to imagine that the two cousins were
not personally acquainted with each other, it
must be borne in mind that their places of resi-
dence were at the two extremities of the country,
with but little means of communication between
them. Perhaps, too, John's special destination
and mode of life may have kept him from the
stated festivals of his countrymen at Jerusalem.
It is possible therefore that the Saviour and the
Baptist had never before met. It was certainly
of the utmost importance that there should be
no suspicion of concert or collusion between
them. John, however, must assuredly have
been in daily expectation of Christ's manifesta-
tion to Israel, and so a word or sign would have
sufficed to reveal to him the Person and Pre-
sence of our Lord, though we may well suppose
such a fact to be made known by a direct com-
munication from God, as in the case of Simeon
(Luke ii. 26 ; cp. Jackson on the Creed, Works,
Ox. Ed. iv. 404> At all events, it is wholly
inconceivable that John should have been per-
mitted to baptize the Son of God without
being enabled to distinguish Him from any
of the ordinary multitude. Upon the whole,
the true meaning of the words K&yai o6«r IjSfiy
atrov would seem to be as follows : — And I, even
I, though standing in so near a relation to Him,
both personally and ministerially, had no assured
knowledge of Him <u the Messiah. I did not
know Him as such, and I had not authority to
proclaim Him as such, till I saw the predicted
sign in the descent of the Holy Spirit upon Him.
It must be borne in mind that John had no
means of knowing by previous announcement,
whether this wonderful acknowledgment of
the Divine Son would be vouchsafed to His
forerunner at His Baptism, or at any other
time (see Dr. Mill's Hitt. Character of St.
Luke's Gospel, and the authorities quoted by
him).
With the Baptism of Jesus John's more especial
office ceased. The King had come to his Kingdom.
The function of the herald was discharged. It
was this that John had with singular humility
and self- renunciation announced beforehud :
" He must increase, but I must decrease."
John, however, still continued to present him-
self to his countrymen in the capacity of m'nuu
to Jesus. Especially did he bear testimony to
Him at Bethany beyond Jordan (for Bethany,
not Bethabara, is the reading of the best MSS.).
So confidently indeed did he point out the Lamb
of God, on Whom he had seen the Spirit alighting
like a dove, that two of his own disciples, St.
Andrew, and probably St. John, being convinced
by his testimony, followed Jesus as the trw
Messiah.
From incidental notices in Scripture we learn
that John and his disciples continued to baptize
some time after our Lord entered upon Bit
ministry (see John iii. 23, iv. 1 ; Acts xii. 3).
We gather also that John instructed his disciples
in certain moral and religious duties, as fasting
(Matt. ix. 14; Luke v. 33) and prayer (Lni<
xi. 1).
But shortly after he had given his » estimonv
to the Messiah, John's public ministry vas
brought to a close. He had at the beginning of
it condemned the hypocrisy and worldlinas of
the Pharisees and Sadducees, and he now aid
occasion to denounce the lust of a king. la
daring disregard of the Divine laws, HertJ
Antipas had taken to himself the wife of hi-
brother Philip ; and when John reproved hire
for this, as well as for other sins (Luke iii. IS),
Herod cast him into prison. The place of la
confinement was the castle of Machaerat— >
fortress on the eastern shore of the Dead Sea.
It was here that reports reached him of tit
miracles which our Lord was working in Jndaa
— miracles which, doubtless, were to Joto'*
mind but the confirmation of what he eipected
to hear as to the establishment of the Messiah''
Kingdom. But if Christ's Kingdom were indeed
established, it was the duty of John's own d»
ciples no less than of all others to acknowledge it
They, however, would naturally cling to thai
own master, and be slow to transfer their
allegiance to another. With a view therefore
of overcoming their scruples, John sent two of
them to Jesus Himself to ask the qnestina,
" Art Thou He that should come ? " They vert
answered not by words, but by a series of
miracles wrought before their eyes — the Terr
miracles which prophecy had specified si tie
distinguishing credentials of the Messiah (Is.
xxxv. 5, lxi. 1) ; and while Jesus bade the two
messengers carry back to John as His only
answer the report of what they had seen and
heard, He took occasion to guard the mnltitsde
who surrounded Him, against supposing that
the Baptist himself was shaken in mind, hy i
direct appeal to their own knowledge of his hit
and character. Well might they be appealed to
as witnesses that the stern prophet of the
wilderness was no waverer, bending to every
breeze, like the reeds on the banks of Jordan.
Proof abundant had they that John was no
worldling with a heart set upon rich clothing
and dainty fare — the luxuries of a king's court
— and they must have been ready to aefcoo*-
ledge that one so inured to a life of haxdnea
and privation was not likely to be affected by
the ordinary terrors of a prison. But our Lord
not only vindicates His forerunner from any
suspicion of inconstancy, He goes on to proclaim
Digitized by
Google
JOHN THE BAPTIST
him a prophet, and more than a prophet ; nay,
inferior to none born of woman, though in
respect to spiritual privileges behind the least
of those who were to be born of the Spirit and
admitted intp the fellowship of Christ's Body
(Matt. xi. 11). It should be noted that the
expression i 8« /iuepirtpos, k.t.A. is understood
by Chrysostotn, Augustin, Hilary, and some
modern commentators, to mean Christ Himself,
but this interpretation is less agreeable to the
spirit and tone of our Lord's discourse.
Jesus further proceeds to declare that John
was, according to the true meaning of the
prophecy, the Elijah of the new covenant,
foretold by Malachi (iii. 4). The event indeed
proved that John was to Herod what Elijah had
been to Ahab, and a prison was deemed too light
a punishment for his boldness in asserting God's
Law before the face of a king and a queen.
Nothing but the death of the Baptist would
satisfy the resentment of Herodias. Though
foiled once, she continued to watch her oppor-
tunity, which at length arrived. A court
festival was kept at Machaerus in honour of
the king's birthday. After supper, the daughter
of Herodias came in and danced before the com-
pany, and so charmed was the king by her grace
that he promised with an oath to give her what-
soever she should ask.
Salome, prompted by her abandoned mother,
demanded the head of John the Baptist. The
promise had been given in the hearing of his
distinguished guests, and so Herod, though loth
to be made the instrument of so bloody a work,
gave instructions to an officer of his guard, who
went and executed John in the prison, and his
head was brought to feast the eyes of the
adulteress whose sins he had denounced.
Thus was John added to that glorious army
of martyrs who have suffered for righteousness'
sake. His death is supposed to have occurred
just before the third Passover, in the course of
the Lord's ministry. It is by Josephus (Ant.
xviii. 5, § 2) attributed to the jealousy with
which Herod regarded his growing influence
with the people. Herod undoubtedly looked
upon him as some extraordinary person, for no
sooner did he hear of the miracles of Jesus than,
though a Sadducee himself, and as such a dis-
believer in the Resurrection, he ascribed them
to John, whom he supposed to have risen from the
dead. Holy Scripture tells us that the body of
the Baptist was laid in the tomb by his disciples,
and Ecclesiastical history records the honours
which successive generations paid to his memory.
The brief history of John's life is marked
throughout with the characteristic graces of
self-denial, humility, and holy courage. So
great indeed was his abstinence that worldly
men considered him possessed. "John came
neither eating nor drinking, and they said he
hath a devil." His humility was such that he
had again and again to disavow the character,
«nd decline the honours which an admiring
multitude almost forced upon him. To their
questions he answered plainly, he was not the
Christ, nor the Elijah of whom they were
thinking, nor one of their old Prophets. He
was no one — a voice merely — the Voice of God
calling His people to repentance in preparation
for the coming of Him whose shoe latchet he
was not worthy to unloose.
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
1739
For his boldness in speaking truth, he went a
willing victim to prison and to death.
The student may consult the following works,
where he will find numerous references to
ancient and modern commentators : — Tillemont,
Hist. Eccies. ; Witsius, Miscell. vol. iv. ; Thomas
Aquinas, Catena Aurea, Oxford, 1842 ; Neander,
Life of Christ; Le Bas, Scripture Biography;
Taylor, Life of Christ; Olshausen, Comm. on the
Gospels. [E. H— s.]
ST. JOHN, GOSPEL OF. The questions
which occur at the threshold of an exami-
nation of any writing which has confessedly
come down from remote antiquity are: Who
is its author? How do we know this from
history, how from the writing itself? What
are the contents of the writing ? Is there any-
thing special in their matter or their form?
At what date was it written, and what object
did the writer put before himself? Are there
other extant writings of the same author, or
other extant writings on the same subjects by
other authors? and, if so, how is this writing
related to them ? Does the present copy faith-
fully represent the original text ? These ques-
tions are not logically distinct, and the answers
to them must here and there overlap, but, as
applied to the present writing, they will fall
with sufficient accuracy into the following
scheme : —
I. Authorship.
(i.) Evidence of History.
A. The witness of the second century,
p. 1739.
B. The silence of sixteen centuries,
p. 1745.
C. The criticism of the present cen-
tury, p. 1745.
(ii.) Self-evidence of the writing.
A. Direct evidence, p. 1749.
B. Indirect inference, p. 1749.
II. Date, p. 1756.
III. Matter and Characteristics.
A. Purpose and scheme, p. 1756.
B. Relation to the Apocalypse, p. 1758.
C. Relation to the Johannine Epistles,
p. 1759.
D. Relation to the Synoptic Gospels,
p. 1760.
IV. The Text, p. 1762.
V. Literature, p. 1764.
I. Authorship.
(i.) Evidence of History.
A. The Second Century. — It is beyond question
that from the close of the third quarter of the
second century the Fourth Gospel was accepted
as the work of St. John. The evidence is cumu-
lative. Asia Minor and Gaul, Alexandria and
Carthage ; Irenaeus, Clement, and Tertullian ;
the Peshitto Syriac and the Old Latin Versions ;
the Muratorian Canon (cp. Canon, p. 513),
are witnesses whose evidence cannot be dis-
puted and whose authority cannot be gainsaid.
But the fact of this wide-spread testimony
carries with it the further fact of acceptance
stretching back into the earlier decades of the
century.
To trace the distinct lines of this earlier ac-
ceptance is not an easy task, inasmuch as the
Digitized by
Google
1740
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
extant literature is on the one band fragmentary,
and on the other hand frequent reference or
quotation does not fall within it* scope. The
argummtum ex silentio, precarious everywhere,
if powerless here ; and to ask for exact quota-
tion, and nothing less than exact quotation, from
writers who habitually quoted from memory or
whose copies of the texts were imperfect or cor-
rupt or not at hand, is to prejudge the ques-
tion by demanding evidence which in the very
nature of the case cannot exist. Going backwards
from Irenaeus, our chief witnesses are the
following: —
(a.) Celsus (cf. Keim, Celsus' Wahres Wort ;
AelUste Streitschrift, etc., Zurich, 1873).— The
one work of Celsus, the Aiyos AAjtfftjs, is
known only by the reply of Origen, Contra
Celsum, and Origen was himself left wholly to
conjecture as to the history of the author. The
date is A.D. 176-180 (Keim, a.d. 177 or 178).
Keim is at least not biassed in favour of the
Johannine authorship of the Gospel, but he is
certain that the whole standpoint of Celsus is
taken from St. John ( Wahrtt Wort, &c, 229 sq.).
So is his reviewer Harnack (Evang.-Luther-Kir-
chmzeitung, 1873, p. 657).
(6.) Churches of Viehwe add Lyons (Euseb.
Hist. Eccles. v. 1, 15).— This letter was ad-
dressed to the churches of Asia and Phrygia,
and gives an account of the suffering under
Marcus Aurelius in a.d. 177. It is often as-
signed, and perhaps rightly, to Irenaeus. It
mentions the Paraclete, and formally quotes
with almost verbal accuracy John xvi. 2.
(c.) Athenaooras (Supplicat. pro Christ, and
De JResurr., ed. Otto, 1857) is not named by
Eusebius or Jerome, Photius or t Suidas, but
there is no reason to donbt that the Apology
and Treatise are both genuine, and that the date
is o. a.d. 176-7. The tenth chapter of the
Apology is based upon the Prologue of St.
John, and implies a knowledge of cap. xvii.
21-23.
(d.) Apolin aris (Chron. Paschal., ed. Dindorf
1832, i. p. 14; Kouth, Eel. Sac i. pp. 160, 161;
and Lightfoot, Essays on Supernatural Religion,
1889, p. 237 sq.) was Bishop of Hierapolis in
Phrygia (A.D. 171). Of his writings (imperfect
list in Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iv. 27 ; cp. Theodoret.
Haer. Fab. i. 21) only a few fragments remain.
They contain the following passages : — (1) 3Str
a<rv)i(ptav<fs tc vipJf fl vinois abruv, Ka\ orcurl-
a(tw SoKfT Kar' airrobs ra etoayyiXia, which im-
plies that St. John is to be included among the
tbayyiAut : and (2) i rV aylav wXfvpav iiactv-
TTjOiXs 6 ixx^as «V ttis wXtvpas atrrov ra tio
rd\iv Ka0dp<Tta Stup xal alua- \6yor xal wtuvua,
which can only be explained by reference to
John xii. 34.
(«.) Melito of Sardis (c. a.d. 176, Otto,
Corpus Apoiogetarum, 1872, pp. 374-511; Routh,
Rel. Sac. i. 113-153; Bp. Lightfoot, Essays,
ut supra, p. 223 sq.) is named by Polycrates
(Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii. 31, and v. 24), and his
fragments are of special interest as containing the
phrase ra ttji xaXoiaj &iaB4\Kns ftifixla (Euseb.
Hist. Eccles. iv. 26). For the present purpose
the phrase . . . tV tier itonrra ahrov tia r&v
(fnnelwr iv rfj rpitrla rf u*ra rb Pdirrivua
(Otto, p. 416) is more important as testifying
in word and matter to St. John. (Cp. Irenaeus,
Adv. Haer. ii. 22.
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
(/.) Polycrates of Ephesus (Euseb. flirt.
Eccles. v. 24) designates St. John as i M to
orijffot tov Kvplov Imawta&r, with obvious
reference to capp. xiii. 25 and xxi. 20 of tie
Gospel. He was bishop of Ephesus in the last
decade of the 2nd century.
(g.) Tatiaji, fl. 150-170 (Otto, Corpus Apokg.
vi. 1851 ; Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iv. 29).— The
Aiyos vpbs "EAAt|»<« was written soon after the
death of Justin (? 150). It does not perhaps
contain any reference to the Synoptic Gospels,
but the following passages taken as a whole
seem clearly to imply a knowledge of St.
John : —
Btbs tV ir ipxp, tV Si &f>xV XoV" M"* 1 "
wapfiK^tpa/itr (Oratio ad Graecos, cap. 5 ; Otto,
pp. 20, 22). Cp. John i. 1 and 12.
wAvra 6*' atorov seal x°»p' J «* T0 '' fry*'
oiti l» (Ad Oraec. cap. xix. ; Otto, p. 88). Cp.
John L 3 in Westcott and Hort's text.
leal rovro Itrrur &pa rb flpijuirov ' h o*mti«
to o>»» oi KaraXaufiifti (Ad Oraec. cap. xiii. ;
Otto, p. 60). Cp. John i. 5.
On the romantic history of the recovery «t
least of the substance of Tatian's Harmony of
the Gospels or Diatessaron, it must suffice U
refer to the Bampton Lectures for 1890, pp.
375-387, and the authorities there quoted. Id
the words of Dr. Adolf Harnack, no partial judge:
"We learn from the Diatessaron that shout
160 A.D. our four Gospels had already taken a
place of prominence in the Church, and that so
others had done so ; that in particular the Fourth
Gospel had taken a fixed place alongside of the
three synoptics " (Encyc. Brit., 1888, xxiii- 81)
(a.) valentihu8 and his school: plotb-
maeus, Hebacleon, Marcus, Theodotr
(Irenaeus, Adv. Haeres. iii. 4, 3; Duncker
et Schneidewin, Hippolyti Befutatio ommm
Haeresium, 1859). — Valentinus came to Rome
under Hyginus (? 135-141), and lived on is the
time of Anicetus ("sub Aniceto inviluit")
[? 154(6)-166(7)]. He was working in Alex-
andria before this, and his period may therefore
be fixed at a.d. 130-160. Tertullian repre-
sents Valentinus in contrast to Mansion : " • • •
Neque enim si Valentinus mtetjro mstrmato
uti videtur, non callidiore ingenio quam Msraos
manus intulit veritati. Marcion enim eierte et
palam machaera, non stilo usus est, quoniam si
materiam suam caedem scripturarum confeeU:
Valentinus autem pepercit, quoniam non sd
materiam scripturas, sed materiam ad scripturss
excogitavit " (De Braes. Haeret. xixviii.). Th*'
in Tertullian's use videtur = constat, see Oehler's
note in loco, and cp. especially Adv. Marc ir.
2, " Lucam videtur Marcion elegisse quo
caederet."
Ptolemaeub is the oldest of the disciples of
Valentinus, and represents with Heracleon the
Italian division of the school. He had himself
become the centre of a party (ol rtpl Unto-
uaioy, Adv. Haer. i. Praef. 2), at the time when
Irenaeus was beginning his work, and this
necessarily leads far back into the decade
A.D. 170-180, and probably indicates a d«te
nearer to 160 than to 170. Of Ptolemy there
is an extant Epistle to Flora preserved is
Epiphanius, stavi Klpio-iur, cap. xxxiii. J- 7 -
and it quotes John i. 3 with the formula A«V<
... o asroWoAoi. In the account of the Valen-
tinian system Irenaeus makes Ptolemy quo'*
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
St. John : cp. iv ry elfynx^vai ' icctl rt eX-wu obit
oTSa (Adv. Haeres. i. ch. viii. 2) with John xii. 27 ;
and name St. John as the writer of the Gospel
. . . Kiyti ft ovrws' iv ifXV $" & Aoyo* . . .
{Adv. Haeres. i. ch. viii. 5). The Old Latin Ver-
sion says at the close of this section : " et Ptole-
maeus qaidem ita."
Heracubon (Hilgenfeld, Ketzergeschichte,
1884, pp. 60 sq., 288 sq., 464 sq. ; and especially
the Cambridge Texts and Studies, vol. i. No. 4) is
coupled by Irenaeus (Adv. Haer. ii. ch. iv. 1) with
Ptolemaeus, and is called by Clement " the most
esteemed representative of the school of Valen-
tinns " (Clem. Alex. Strom, iv. 9, 73). He wrote
a Commentary on St. John, of which large ex-
tracts are preserved by Origen (cp. Stieren,
Irenaeus, i. 938-971, where they are collected
after Grabe and Massuet). These extracts give
continuous comments on passages of consider-
able length. It cannot be doubted that the
writer of the notes regarded the text as of
Divine authority. Origen uses of Heracleon
(Ioannem, torn. ii. 8) the phrase yvciptfwv top
ObaXtrrlrov, in the sense probably of a disciple
or pupil.
Marcos does not add to the quotations from
St. John (Adv. Haeres. i. xiii.-xxi.), but this
negative result is confirmatory of the abundant
positive results from his associates. The way
in which Irenaeus makes an elder of Asia Minor
speak of him tends to throw back his date — and
if his date, then the date of his older colleagues
— towards the middle of the century.
THKODOTUS is known from the Excerpta
Theodoti and Doctrina Orientalis, which is
ascribed to Clement of Alexandria, and printed
with his works (Opp. ed. Dindorf, iii. 424 sq.).
The quotations from St. John are frequent. De
Groot counts twenty-six (Basilides, 1868, p. 102).
The facts before us then fully establish that
which Irenaeus asserts ..." Hi autem qui a
Valentino sunt, eo quod est secundum Johannem
rEvangelio] plenissime utentes . . . ." (Adv.
Haeres. iii. 11, 7).
Of this plenissime utentes the account of the
Thirty Aeons (Adv. Haeres. i. 1) is evidence.
This may in form be Ptolemaean rather than
Valentinian, but in substance the essential fac-
tors of the system are the master's, not the
pupil's. Ptolemaeus is the exponent of Valen-
tinus, and from this point of view one with
him. If the complex is later than the simple,
if development follows the germ, if the stream
is lower down than the spring, the Aeons of
the Valentinians necessarily assert at the date
of Valentinus the pre-existence of the Gospel
according to St. John.
The testimony of Hippolytus to the use of
the Gospel by the Valentinians is also clear. Cp.
ip-qol, . . . Tldvrtt oi irpo ipov iAvXvSinrts
K\brrai itol AijffTal thrl (Refut. omn, Haeres.
vi. 35) with John x. 8, and see the distinctively
Johannine 6 apx"" vov koV/ioi; robrov (John xii.
31, xiv. 30, xvi. 11) in the Sefutatio (vi. 33,
34). The use of <pr)<r}r in Hippolytus may not
warrant the inference that he here makes
Valentinus a direct witness to St. John, but he
identifies the founder with his school ; and the
general result of the Valentinian testimony is
not less than proof that this Order of Gnostics
which flourished in the middle of the second
century (a.d. 130-180) accepted the authen-
JOHN, GOSPEL OP 1741
ticity of the Fourth Gospel, and felt bound to
harmonize their own systems with it.
(i.) Basilides, 8. in the reign of Hadrian,
A.D. 117-138 (Euseb. H. E. iv. 7 ; Hippolytus,
Sefutatio, ut supra, vii. 20-27 ; Clem. Alex.
Strom, iv. §§ 83 sq. ; Exegetica printed by
Stieren after Massuet and Grabe, Irenaeus,
pp. 901-3 ; Hort, art. ' Basilides ' in Diet, of
Chr. Biog. i. 271 ; and an article by Dr. James
Drummond inj Journ. of Bibl. Lit. 1892). —
Eusebius (I. c.) represents Agrippa Castor as
stating that Basilides wrote "twenty-four
books (fiifi\la) on the Gospel (to tbayyiXiov),"
i.e. on probably the Book of the Gospels. These
are almost certainly the Exegetica quoted by
Clement (Strom, iv. 83 sq.) ; for there is no
reason to believe that to tbayytMov is here =fi
t&v vTKfKoayiav yyucrts (Bef. Haer. vii. 27), and
there is no other trace of a " Gospel by
Basilides " (Origen, Horn, in Luc i. — ? another
name for the Exegetica ; Ambrose, Exp. m Luc.
i.), nor any trace of his use of an apocryphal
Gospel. There is every reason for believing
further that these Exegetica form the founda-
tion of the exposition of doctrine by Hippolytus
(Bef. vii. 20-27 ut supra), and that Hippolytus
in contrast with Irenaeus is quoting at first
hand from Basilides. That Basilides is quoting
from St. John will not be questioned. Cp. xal
toSto, tynalv, tort to Key&iitvov tr toij (bay-
ythlots • *Hv to Q&s to a\i\9iv6v, t <pirr((ei
irdVro avOpwwor tpxo'fifvoi' tis rbv x6fffioy (Bef.
ut supra, vii. 22) with John i. 9 ; and Sri Se,
<pri<jlv, txairror itlovt t%tt Katpobs, ikcwoi i
awr\p Kiywv • Othro» */««» y &pa ftou (ibid. vii.
27) with John ii. 4. The doubt as to what
stress can be laid upon <pva\r occurs here, as
in the quotations from Valentinus (supra').
The second quotation is followed in the next
sentence by 4 kot' abrobs rwoij/Urot, which
may identify Basilides with his followers ; but
in the first instance he is singled out by name
just before, and the sense of (p-qalv is undoubted.
"Basileides, therefore, about the year 125 of
our era, had before him the Fourth Gospel."
(Cp. Matthew Arnold, God and the Bible, ed.
1875, p. 268 sq. ; Ezra Abbot, Authorship, &c.
p. 86 ; Bampton Lectures, 1890, pp. 365 sqq.).
(J.) The Oriental Gnostics : the Ophites
ob Naaseni; the Pebatici; the Sethians;
the Gnostic Justin (Hippolytus, Befut. ut
supra, v. 7-9, and 12, 16, 17). — Here the quota-
tions from St. John are both numerous and un-
doubted, bnt it is not so certain that Hippolytus
is describing the first representatives of these
early Gnostic sects. Still the evidence is at
least proof that, in the second half of the cen-
tury, these Gnostic sects also made familiar use
of St. John as of Divine authority. Here,
again, the acceptance in the second half of the
century necessarily leads back to acceptance at
an earlier date.
(k.) The Clementines (Lagarde, Clementina,
1865, and Becognitiones, Syriace, 1861 ; Geisdorf,
Becognitiones, 1838). — These Ebionite writings,
falsely ascribed to Clement of Rome, exist in two
forms : the Homilies, eitant in Greek, which has
been assigned by modern writers to every decade
of the second century ; and the Recognitions, a
composite, and probably later (?) work which
exists only in the untrustworthy translation of
Rufinus, and is for the present purpose therefore
Digitized by
Google
1742 JOHN, GOSPEL OF
not available. The Syriac Version is made up
of portions of the Recognition* and of portions
of the Homilies (Lagarde, Preface, 6 and 7),
and the older of the two extant codices is thus
described: "A oblongus, M. Brit. add. 12150,
tcriptns Edessae a. 41 1 ; " ie. it leads back to
within one year of the death of Rufinus, and it
is itself a copy of a yet older MS. Lagarde in
his preface to the Clementina (p. 30) gives fif-
teen instances of quotation from or reference to
St. John; to these may be added a*tp iorlv
(wr Stop (p. 4, 1. 26; cp. p. 117, 11)— cp. John
ir. 10 ; while some in the list should perhaps
be omitted, except in so far as the definite
quotations bring the slighter references also
within the range of probability.
The uncertainty is not now as to the use of
St. John by the Christian Judaizers, who
assumed the name of Clement to give authority
to their own hostility to St. Paul, but as to the
date at which such use was made. A consensus
of critical opinion assigns the Clementines to
the middle of the second century; and this
may perhaps be taken as the nearest approxima-
tion to the date which is attainable. The
impression which the work leaves on my own
mind is that in its present Roman form it
belongs to the end rather than the middle of
the century, and that it is based upon earlier
Eastern forms, which cannot be later and are
probably much earlier than the middle of the
century.
(/.) Mabcion is to be excepted from the
direct witnesses to the Fourth Gospel. His
floruit is not later than 138-142 a.d. Mar-
cion's Gospel was a mutilated St. Luke, and he
rejected the other Gospels (including the " anti-
Jewish " St. John) on account of their Jewish
prejudices (Iren. Haer. iii. 12, § 12). That he
knew the Fourth Gospel and knew it to be
apostolic may be inferred from Tertullian
(" . . . connititur ad destruendum statum eorum
evangeliorum quae propria et sub apostolorum
nomine eduntur, vel etiam apostolicorum, ut
scilicet fidem, quam illis adimit, suo conferat ; "
"etsi reprehensus est Petrus et Johannes et
Jacobus," Adv. Marc. ir. 3 ; "Si scriptural
opinioni taae resistentes non de Industrie alias
rejecisses, alias corrupsisses, confudisset te in
hac specie erangelium Joannis," De Came
Christi, iii.). Against the argument that St.
John would have suited him better, and that if
he had known it he would have used it, see
Mangold in note to his edition of Bleek's Ein-
leitung, 1875, p. 158 (" It was simply impossible
for Marcion to choose the fourth Gospel "), and
refs. in Ezra Abbot, Authorship, &c. p. 82 sq.
This is the only argument that can be based
upon the silence of an avowedly eclectic writer.
Marcion is then in reality a witness for, not
against, the Gospel; and the witness is from
Rome, a.d. 140, and from Asia Minor for some
earlier period.
(m.) Montanus appeared in Phrygia about
A.D. 157. The terms wapixkrtTos, \6yos, which
he adopted, place him as a witness to distinct
Johannine phraseology, as then accepted in the
Church.
(n.) Justin Martyr (Opera, ed. Otto, 1876-
81 ; Apologiae, ed. Braunin, 1883). — The
writings consist of two Apologies (the first A.D.
145 or 146 ; the second, if really a separate
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
treatise, a year later), which were addressed to
the Roman Emperor and Senate ; and a Dialogue
with Trypho, a Jew, about the same date as
the Second Apology (Dial, c 120 ; cf. Apol. L
c. 26). For the earlier date (138 or 139) for the
First Apology there is, however, the high authority
of Waddington (iftfm. de FAcad. des Itacr. et
Belles Lettres, xxvi. i. p. 264 sqq.), and Hamacfc
(Theol. Literaturzeitung, 1876, Mo. 1, col. 14),
who is able to support himself by the opinions
of Caspari (Quellen t. Gesch. d. TaufsymboU,
ttc. Thl. iii. 1875), which he reviews.
In these writings Justin quotes certain
" Memoirs " or " Recollections " (*A«-ojtnt /i i mf -
para) of the Apostles which he himself identifies
with the Gospels (ft icakterm cbayyiXia, ApoL i.
66). These Memoirs by the Apostles were read
on the day called Sunday in the public Church
meetings, with the same authority as — they are
indeed named before — the writings of the Pro-
phets (Apol. i. 67). That Justin includes
among these Memoirs the Fourth Gospel and
definitely quotes from it, may now be regarded
as an established result of English criticism.
See especially the full discussion by Ezra Abbot
(Authorship, ttc. pp. 20 sqq.), Drummond ( Theo-
logical Review, xii. 471-488; xiv. 155, 323; and
xvi. 365 sqq.), and Sanday (Gospels in the Second
Century, 1876, p. 287). The crucial passage is in
the Apology (i. 61, ed. Otto, i. 164-166) : col
-yap i Xpiorbs thtr ta> pi) irayf m ) tT) > t, ei
fiil elotK&nre els rijv fiaotXtlay ruv obpapw. trt
it koI iiivaror tit rat plfrpas rir rtKOvcmr
root ftrat ytwa/itravs infirirai, Qattpbr waerlr
tori. Cp. John iii. 3-5, 7, and Matt, xviii. 3.
The connexion here between Justin and St
John is so obvious in word and thought, that
men who cannot deny it and yet approach the
question with the a priori conviction that
Justin cannot quote St. John, are driven to
the opinion that St. John is quoting Justin.
This is happily a case in which every man
can form hit own opinion. Justin's remark,
"that it is impossible for those who have
once been born to enter into the wombs of
those who brought them forth is manifest to
all," is in itself, and in connexion with his con-
text, absolutely meaningless. In St. John's
context where Nicodemus prefers a redvctio ad
absurdum in order to lead the Rabbi to fuller
explanation, the meaning is perfectly clear.
There can be only one conclusion. Others lay
stress on the differences in expression and on
the fact that Justin's text is supported by the
Clementine Homilies (xi. 26, ed. Lagarde, p. 117).
The agreement between Justin and the Clemen-
tines is scarcely more eiact than that between
Justin and St. John. There is, moreover, every
reason to think that the author of the Clemen-
tines made use of Justin ; and his free quotation
may have been in this way influenced. Both
need no further explanation than the habit of
quoting from memory, and the influence of
Matt, xxviii. 19 and xviii. 3. The assumption
of an apocryphal Gospel from which these
quotations are made, is justified only when
every other explanation fails. It cannot be
verified ; and if it could, and if Justin quotes
from an X Gospel as the Gospel of the Hebrews,
then X must here quote from St. John; »*.<•.
St. John is on this assumption thrown back to
a still earlier date. (On this text see especially.
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
Supernatural Religion, ed. 7, ii. 304 sqq.;
Dr. Edwin Abbott, Encyc. Brit., art. " Gospels ;"
Dr. Ezra Abbot and Prof. Drummond ut supra).
This one passage may now be taken to be
conclusive as to Justin's use of St. John, but
other instances are not wanting ; cp. ol &y6panrot
vwikiji&avov atrrbr tlvai rby Xpioriy • not obs
Koi atrrbt 40ia- oliK tip) S Xpurris, iXXa (favi)
fioayros • (Dial. c. Tryph. Ixxxviii.) with John
i. 20, 23, and iii. 28. Negative criticism is
destructive not of its subject but of itself, when
it asks ns to believe that we have here not a
reference to St. John but an expansion of Acts
xiii. 25.
Cp. robt 4k ytytrrjs m/pois (Dial. c. Tryph.
Ixix. and Apol. i. 60, ? mjpoiij for irontpobt) with
John ix. 1. The Constit. Apost (ed. Lagarde,
1862) have S 4k ytytrrit mipbs (v. 7, 17) in a
context which makes the reference to St. John
undoubted. So have the Clementines (rtpl rou
ix ytrtrjjs irnpov, ut supra, xix. 22). The con-
text in Justin shows that irnpos here = rv<p\6s,
as it constantly does (Otto's note in loco) :
and 4k ytytrrit is distinctively Johannine. The
Synoptists have no instance of congenital
disease.
Cp. aifKa xal ttpa (Apol. i. 66) with John vi.
51-56.
Cp. i &*b rov irarpbt atnov \afiaiy f^tt
(Dial. c. Tryph. c.) with John x. 18 (tKafioy
wapi rov tar pit f-ov).
Cp. Justin's quotation of Hosea (Apol. i. 52 ;
cp. Dial. c. Tryph. xxxii., lxiv., cxviii.) and John
xii. 37. Both have t<fioyr<u tit of 4(tK4y-
rr/aay, which is also the reading of Apoc. i. 7,
for the LXX. 4Tt$\tyoyrai -rpis pt bxft ay
KaTapxhvayro. That this reading occurs in ten
HSS. of the LXX., and that it is probably a
correction made to establish the fulfilment of
prophecy, does not take from the remarkable
coincidence. These MSS. of the LXX. may have
been themselves corrected from the text of
St. John (cp. p. 1750).
Justin contains beyond doubt the doctrine of
the Logos in a developed Johannine form. The
incarnation of the Logos (the Divine Logos) and
the historic person cannot have been derived
from any other source ; and yet aapKoiroaiBtU
occurs in this sense frequently (Apol. i. cc 32,
66 (bis) ; Dial. cc. 45, 84, 87, 100 : cf. Dial. cc.
48, 76). In like manner we have arOpmcot
yty6ptvot (Apol. i. cc. 5, 23 (bis), 32, 42, 50, 53,
63 (Ms) ; Apol. ii. c. 13 ; Dial. c. Tryph. cc 48,
57, 64, 67, 68 (bis), 76, 85, 100, 101, 125 (bis).
See these references and the whole relation of
Justin to St. John worked out by Drummond
and Ezra Abbot ut supra.
(o.) Epistle to Dioonetus (Otto, Epist. ad
Diognetum, Gr. et Lat., ed. iii. 1879 ; Harnack,
Patr. Apost. Opp. Fasc. ii., 1, 1878, p. 142 sqq. ;
Draseke, Der Brief an Diognetos, 1881 ; Lightfoot,
Apost. Fathers, 1891, p. 484 sq.). — Our know-
ledge of the date of this fragment is too uncertain
for us to lay great stress on its evidence. If we
cannot with Bishop Westcott place it as early
as the close of the reign of Trajan (a.d. 117;
Canon, p. 79), everything points to a date not
much later. A.D. 135 (Reuss and Bnnsen) or
a.d. 150 (Lightfoot) is certainly a wide margin,
its testimony to the Fourth Gospel is un-
doubted. Cp. e.g. the passage oIik tlai 8< 4k rov
■<6<rpov (cap. vi.) with John xvii. 14, or cap. x.
JOHN, GOSPEL OP 1743
with John iii. 16 and 1 John iv. 19, or cap. xi.
with John i. 1. (See also Westcott, /. o.)
(p.) P API as (Euseb. Bist. Secies, iii. 39 ;
Iren. Adv. Haeres. t. 33, 4: cp. Lightfoot,
Essays on Supernatural Religion, 1889, pp. 142-
216, and Apost. Fathers, 1891, p. 515 sq.)
wrote an Exposition of Oracles of the Lord
(Aoytuy KvpiaKuy 4tf)yno-tt or /{iry^ffcu) in
five Books which are lost, and known only
by some fragments, chiefly in Irenaeus and Eu-
sebius. He is described as a " hearer of John
and companion of Poly carp " Qlwdvyov * ply
iucovffrfit, TloXvKdpwov 8} iraipos ytyoy&t, Iren.
/. c). Bp. Lightfoot's remarkable investigation
(Essays, ut supra) places the question of the date
of Papias in an altogether new light ; and if we
assign the birth to the decade a.d. 60-70, and
the work to the decade a.d. 130-140, as we may
now with great probability, both assertions of
Irenaeus are placed beyond the reach of criticism,
and a writer who was himself a pupil of Poly-
carp may be accepted as a convincing witness.
Irenaeus may well have met this "old-time
man " (ipxtuos iyilp he calls him I. c), and we
get here, as in the case of Polycarp, a definite
link between the age of St. John and that of
Irenaeus.
Now Eusebins tells ns that Papias used the
First Epistle of John (Ki\pnrai 8' i abrbt pap-
rvplait 4»o TJji 'luiyyov nportpat eVioYoAijs,
/. c), and it is not seriously disputed that
this Epistle is by the writer of the Gospel
(p. J765). This fragmentary notice rises there-
fore to evidence of the first class. Nor is other
indirect testimony wanting. Papias gives a list
of the disciples about whose sayings he inquired,
"Andrew, Peter or Philip; Thomas, James,
John, Matthew " (Euseb. /. c). Andrew pre-
cedes Peter (John i. 44 : cp. Mark i. 29) ;
Philip and Thomas are prominent disciples onlv
in St. John ; the only plausible explanation of
the connexion of St. John and St. Matthew is
that both were known to be Evangelists.
(q.) The Presbttees (Lightfoot, Essays on
Supernatural Religion, and Apost. Fathers,
1891, p. 590 sq.). — Irenaeus in a well-known
passage introduces certain presbyters, and re-
presents them as quoting John xiv. 2 : 'tit ol
TptoUvrtpot \4yovtri, rore xal ol ply Karofie>-
tiyrtt rijt 4y obpayf 8iaTpi£r)i, ixtiirt X"f^'
aovaiy . . . ol Si rln> woKiy KtrroiKfiaov&iy •
koI Jii toSto tlpnKiyai rby Kipioy, iv rott rov
mrpit pov poyiis elvvu voKKi* (Adv. Haer. v.
36, 1, 2; cp. the context). This extract has
been made familiar in late years by the attempt
of the author of Supernatural Religion, in
defiance alike of grammar and of context, to
represent Irenaeus as giving only the " exegesis
of his own day " (Sup. Rel. ii. 328). But it is
beyond real question that the quotation from
St. John is assigned to "the Presbyters," "the
Fathers " as we should now say of the genera-
tion of Irenaeus, and that these are identified
with the "disciples of the Apostles." Bishop
Lightfoot has shown good reason for believing
that the quotation of Irenaeus is here made from
a book, and further that this book is the work of
Papias (Essays, ut supra, pp. 4 sq., 196 sq.). The
identification with Papias is accepted by scholars
of different schools like Harnack and Salmon
(Tntrod., ed. 2, p. 106). If it be so, we have
another definite proof of the acceptance of the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
1744 JOHN, GOSPEL OF
Fourth Gospel by Papias, and its cogency is
strengthened by the indirect method by which
it is traced ; if it be not so, we hare another
of the school of St. John of the age of Papias
produced as a witness, and the evidence is
stronger still.
(/•.) Poltcabp (cp. John, First Epistle of).
— The evidence for the First Epistle is indirect
evidence for the Gospel.
(«.) Martyrdom of Polycarp (Lightfoot,
Apost. Fathers, 1889, Part ii. vol. i. 646 sq. ;
and. vol. iii. 388. — Date, soon after martyrdom
in A.o. 155 or -6). This Letter of the Church
at Smyrna gives the martyr's final prayer,
which contains in close contiguity the expressions
(Is iwdtrraaiv (tnjs aiavlov and aXri$tvos S»6s
(cp. John t. 29 and xvii. 3 ; ut supra, vol. iii.
p. 388>
(t.) Hermas (Zahn, Der Hirt des Bermas ;
Gebhardt and Harnack, Patrum Apost. Op. Fasc.
iii. 1877 ; Lightfoot, Philipp. p. 166 sq., and
Apost. Fathers, 1891, p. 289 sq. ; Salmon, Introd.
ed. 2, p. 57 1 sq.). — The questions connected with
the authority, text, and date of the Shepherd
of Hennas are too intricate to be discussed here,
and its influence on our present question is to
be felt rather than stated. It cannot well be
placed later than the middle of the second
century, and the current of best opinion seems
to be setting in favour of the first decade. The
student who will compare the following
passages — John iii. 5 and Sim. ix. 16, 2 ; John
iii. 35 and S. ix. 15, 3 ; John iv. 34 (v. 36, xvii.
4) and S. r. 2, 4 sq. and ix. 11, 8 ; John if. 38
and S. v. 6, 20 ; John v. 31 sq. and S. v. 2, 6 ;
John viii. 34 and Vis. i. 1, 8 ; John x. 7, 9, and
S. ix. 12, 1 sq. ; John x. 12 and S. ix. 31, 5 ;
John x. 18 (iii. 49 sq., xiv. 31, xv. 10) and
S. v. 6, 3, 4 ; John xi. 25 (xiv. 6) and Vis. ii. 2,
8 ; John xii. 40 and Hand. xii. 4, 4 ; John xii.
49 sq. and S. v. 5, 3 ; John xv. i. sq. and S.
viii. ; John xvii. 24 (xii. 36, xiv. 3) and S. ix.
24, 4 (cp. Zahn, p. 467 sq., and note the refs. to
the First Ep.) — will probably feel the cumula-
tive strength of argument which compelled
even Eeim and Wittichen and Holtzmann (who is
disposed to think, however, that Hennas comes
first) to admit the necessary connexion between
the Shepherd and St. John.*
(«.) Ignatius (Lightfoot, Apost. Fathers,
1889, Part. ii. vol. ii. ; Zahn, Ignatius von An-
iiochien, Gotha, 1873; Patr. Ap. Op. Fasc. ii.
1876). — The middle (Vossian) Recension may
now be taken as established, and we have the fol-
lowing evidence of the acceptance of St. John in
the opening years of the second century : —
Compare Ephes. v. and Horn. vii. with John
vi. 27, 31, 33, 48, and indeed the whole passage
John vi. 27-59 ; also iv. 10, 11, and if with
Lightfoot we read (&t> aWipfvon, John iv. 14;
Ephes. vi. with John xiii. 20 ; Ephes. xvii. with
John xii. 3 (vid. Zahn and Lightfoot); in the
same chapter of Ephes. and passim, the phrase
* Since the above was In print, the evidence of Hennas
baa been carefully examined by Dr. Taylor in The
Witness of Bermas to the Four Gospels, 1893. He comes
to the conclusion that '* the evidence adduced seems to
Jut-tify the conclusion that the Gospel known to Hennas
was (so to say) a Dtatessaron, having for Its elements
the Four Gospels of to-day " (p. 146). Cp. also note In
Journal of PhUology, jod. (1892), pp. 69, TO.
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
tov Spx orTO$ vo" oXwvos tovtov with John xii.
31, xiv. 30, xvi. 11 ; Magn. vii. 'Simp oh i
Kipios, K. r. A., with John v. 19, 30, x. 30,
xv. 4, ivi. 15 (Zahn and Lightfoot), also <u hi
Srra with John i. 1, 18, xiii. 3, eVc ; Magn. rUi.
ad fin. with John viii. 29; Horn. iii. ad fin. with
John vii. 7, &c Philad. vii. : otter "jrip ritn
(pxtrat Kal tov {rtiyei is a definite quotation
from John iii. 8 (vid. Lightfoot ad lot).
(v.) Barnabas (Geb. and Ham. Patr. Ap.Op.
Fasc. i. 2, 1878 ; Hilgenfeld, Barnabae Epishlae;
Salmon, Introd. ed. 2, 557 sq. ; Lightfoot, Apost.
Fathers, 1891, p. 240 sq.>— The date cannot be
fixed accurately. "Itaque intra ann. 71-133
epistulam delegamus " (Geb. and Ham. 1. 1. p.
lxviii.); " probably between a.d. 70-79 " (Light-
foot, p. 241). It may then be earlier than St
John, and represent the area of thought from
which the Fourth Gospel springs rather thai tat
Gospel itself. All that concerns ns here is that,
if a witness at all, it is clearly a witness for tin
reception of St. John. This appears not »
much from isolated passages as from the genml
doctrinal position. We cannot say with Witti-
chen, that the expressions are too characteristic
to have any other root than that of the Gospel
(Oesch. Character d. Ev. Joh. 1868, p. 104) ; »«
Keim's honest avowal — it is against his on
position — that for this sphere of ideas too*
is no analogy in St. Paul, nor even in the Epistk
to the Hebrews, but only in this Gospel (fern
of Ifazara, Eng. tr. 1876, i. 194 sqq. with reft;
cp. Sandav, Gospels in Second Cent., pp. 27t u
272), is of great weight.
(to.) Clement of Rome (Lightfoot, Ajet.
Fathers, Pt. i. 1891 ; Geb. and Harn. Put Af-
Op. Fasc. i. 1, 1876 ; Salmon, Introd. ed. % 5«
sq.). — Probable date about a.d. 95 or 96 (light-
foot, I. c, i. 27 and 346 sq.); "intra an-
93-97 " (cp. Consensus of Opinion, Geb. sa!
Harn. pp. lix., Ix.). This is a time at which tin
Fourth Gospel may not have been promulgate!
or may not have reached Rome. Some interest-
ing parallels are noted in Geb. and Harn. hia,
which however go to show rather thst tit
writer is influenced by the Johannine circle «f
thought than that he is quoting from tfe
Gospel in its final form.
(x.) The Testament of the Twelve Pi-
TRIABCBS (Sinker, Test. XII. Patriarch. 1859;
Hilgenfeld, Novum Testamentum extra Cause*,
1866 ; Schurer, Geschichte des jidische* Forts.
1886, ii. pp. 662-669).— This work, which ii
probably from the hands of a Jewish Christua,
is in the form of a legacy of pious coot*!'
from each of the sons of Jacob. Its content!
make it probable that it is earlier thai the
revolt of Bar-Kochba (a.D. 135). Sinker pU»
it at the end of the first or the beginning of tk<
second century.
The following passages will show its en-
nexion with the phraseology of St. John :— *»
wei/ia Trjt &An0«uu (Jude 20 ; cp. John xv.JS);
tok Btbv ttji elpr)vris (Dan. v. ; cp. John xvL S3);
bnaprlav (Is Bttyaroy (Is. vii. ; cp. 1 John J. l*)i
Stio ft rots aytots tpaytiv ix rev ff Aoi» tt|J (*V
(Lev. xriii. ; cp. Apoc. ii. 7).
(y.) The Didache (Bryennios, Aitotfi f "
StiSeica Inroffrikttv, K. r. A. Const 1883;
Harnack, Die Lehre der *<rilf Apostel, 1884;
Lightfoot, Apost. Fathers, 1891, p. 212 sq.;
Hitchcock and Brown, Teaching of the 1^"
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
Apostles, ed. 2, 1885; Taylor, The Teaching of
the Twelve Apostles, 1886). — The date is too
uncertain to enable us to say whether it pre-
ceded or followed the Gospel. The limits
assigned by most competent critics (80-1 10 a.D.)
would allow either view to be held. We have
no right therefore to expect definite quotation
or reference, but the following and other resem-
blances will strike the thoughtful reader of the
two writings. They are at least consistent with
-the belief that the Gospel belongs to the last
decade of the first century. Those who place
tie Didache in the first years of the second
century will regard them as strongly confirma-
tory of that belief.
ibxaptarovfuir arot, wirtp tytt, vwlp rov
ayiov iriparit crov, oZ KartffK^vaaas . . .
(cap. x. 2 ; cp. John i. 14, xvii. 6, 11 — which is
the only place where. -ri-rip iyit occurs in the
Sew Test.).
TLi>Xapurrovp.iv <roi, wittp r^wv, birip tjjs
aylas ifir4\ov Aaixil ... (cap. ix. 2; cp.
John xr. 1.)
fl i iyvcbpioas {Ibid., and cap. x. 2 ; cp. John
xxr. 15 and xvii. 26).
Cp. also Didache x. 5 with 1 John ii. 5 ; Did.
x. 6 with 1 John ii. 17 ; Did. xi. 11 with 1 John
iv. 1 ; Did. xi. 2 with 2 John 10 ; Did. x. 3
(rcarroKpdrop) with the frequent usage of the
word in the Apocalypse (nine times — once be-
sides in N. T. and that from the LXX.).
B. The Silence of Sixteen Centuries. — From
the close of the second century to the close of
the eighteenth century, the Fourth Gospel has
been received as the work of the Apostle St.
John, with hardly a mnrmar to break the
harmony of all men's assent. The so-called
Alogi (Epiphanius, Haer. 51, 3, 4; Philaster,
Haer. 60; cp. lrenaeus, Adv. Haer. iii. 11, 9)
are indeed often quoted as early dissentients
from the common belief, but their evidence in so
far as it is of any real value is distinctly in
favour of a first-century date, for they ascribe
the Gospel and Apocalypse to Cerinthus, a
eontemporary of St. John (cp. Bampton Lec-
tures, 1890, pp. 123 sqq.). Nor did the Fourth
Gospel escape the attacks of the eighteenth-
<-.entury English Deists, Collins {Discourse of
Free-thinking, 1713) and Toland {Nazarenus,
1719) ; but these are characterized with hardly
too much severity by Lampe {Comment, i.
146): "Ilia enim adeo turbida, adeo ab omni
ratione abhorrentia et stulta sunt, ut vel ex iis
ipsis patescat, quanto veritatis odio mentes
eorum sint excaecatae, qui telis ita stramineis
inconcussam populi Dei arcem se debellare posse
aibi persuadent." From the intervening cen-
turies other objections of like weight and
importance may be quoted ; but these are as
dust in the balance, and they do not sensibly
affect the enormous weight of evidence on the
other side. It is not denied by any one whose
opinion is worthy of serious thought, that during
the whole of sixteen centuries the Johannine
authorship of the Fourth Gospel was universally
accepted.
C. The Criticism of the Present Century. —
When Keim asserts that " our age has cancelled
the judgment of centuries " {Jesus of Natara,
1873, i. 142), it must be admitted that he asserts
what is not indeed impossible, but what is a
priori in the highest degree improbable, and can
DIDLK DICT.— VOt. I.
JOHN, GOSPEL OF 1745
be accepted on nothing short of clear and rigid
proof. The onus proband! lies entirely with
" our age." This cannot be shifted by imputa-
tion of prejudice or of bias, and cannot be
diminished by discounting the arguments of
so-called " Apologists." The judgment of cen-
turies can be cancelled only by new facts or
new and proved results from old facts, and it
will rightly hold the ground until it is in this
way dislodged, and until a new judgment more
in accord with all the known facts and more
exactly satisfying all the known conditions is
supplied in its place."
The main outlines of the modern criticism of
the Fourth Gospel may be summarized as
follows.
Evanson, Edward (1731-1805), The Disson-
ance of the Four generally received Evangelists,
&c. (Ipswich, 1792 ; ed. 2, 1805).— It has been
customary to trace the development of the hostile
criticism from this work, but it is little worthy
of the notice which it has attracted {B. L.
pp. 174-176).
Bretschneider, Earl Gottlieb (1776-1848),
Probdbilia de Evangelii et Epistolarum Joannis
Apostoli indole et origine, &c (Leipzig, 1820). —
This is a work of a very different spirit and of
very different merit. It proved the real foun-
dation of subsequent criticism, though Bret-
schneider himself withdrew*his objections (jB. L.
pp. 179-190).
Strauss, David Friedrich (1808-74), Das
Leben Jesu, 1835-6 ; ed. 2, 1837 ; ed. 3, 1838
39; ed. 4, 1840: cp. Das Leben Jesu, far
das deutsche Volk, 1864.— The criticism of
Strauss on the Fourth Gospel is but part of
his general Mythical Theory. The legends of
the Old Testament which grew round the
Messianic idea were interpreted of the personal
Jesus, and the writers of the Gospels have
pictured Him as they thus thought Him, not
as He really was. The Messianic idea has
itself sprung from centering in an individual
that which is true of the race. The miraculous
is impossible.
From these premises the conclusion as to the
Gospels, and especially the Fourth Gospel, is
obvious. But Strauss makes no important
addition either of fact or of argument to the
criticism. His weapons are chiefly those of
Bretschneider, fitted into his own system, and
wielded with his own peculiar force, though
with many vacillations {B. L. pp. 191-219).
Baur, F. C. (1792-1860; Johannine criticism
beginning with an art. in Zeller's Theol. Jahrb.
1844; Kritische Ohtersuchungen Sber die Kan.
Evang. 1847, pp. 327-389).— It was with Baur
that negative criticism may be said to hare
culminated. His fundamental idea was the
Hegelian trichotomy of thesis, antithesis, and
higher unity. The antagonisms of early Chris-
tianity he found fully developed in the pseudo-
Clementines. Working back from these, he
o As some considerable reduction In this article had
become necessary, and as the writer had had occasion
quite recently to treat at length of this historical side of
bis subject, the sketch which follows has been unavoid-
ably restricted to little more than a bare enumeration of
names, reference being made for those who desire
fuller details to the Bampton Ucturu tot 18»0 (here-
after quoted as B. £.).— Editobs.
5 T
Digitized by
Google
1746
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
distributed the Books of the New Testament
over three periods: (1) to the destruction of
Jerusalem, A.D. 70, the document* being 1 and
2 Cor., Gal., Rom. (the only genuine Pauline
Epistles), and Apocalypse, which is the work of
St. John, and represents an original Ebionite
Christianity in opposition to Paulinism. (2) a.d.
70-140. The documents are the Gospels of
Matthew and Luke, which belong to the Jewish
wars under Hadrian. Then come Acts and
Mark, the Hebrews, and the pseudo-Pauline
Epistles, and finally the Catholic Epistles.
The characteristics of this period are the
first steps on both sides towards moderating
the antagonism. The Jewish Christians aban-
doned the requirement of circumcision : the
Pauline party were interested in healing the
breach, and the Epistles to the Ephesiuns and
Colossians were therefore invented. (3) After
A.D. 140 the Ebionitic and Gnostic extremes
were abandoned. This is marked in practice by
the Roman Church and their watchword " Peter
and Paul," and in idea by the Fourth Gospel.
The writings which date from this period are
the Pastoral Letters and the Johannine Gospel
and Epistles. The Fourth Gospel itself was
nothing more than a Tendenzschrift belonging
to somewhere about the year 170, and to Asiu
Minor or more probably Alexandria.
The negative effect of Baur's theory of Ten-
dency was the deathblow of Strauss's theory
of Myth. Myth and History, simplicity and
forgery, ignorance and purpose, cannot be
made to grow together, even by the exigencies
of a theory.
The positive effect of Baur's theory, or rather
of the attractive power of the author — and in
this he stands in marked contrast to Strauss —
was to draw to himself as centre a band of
writers who took their name in part from the
sphere of the great "Meister's" work, and
became known as the Tubingen School.
Chief among these would be Schwegler
(Xachapost. Zeitalt. 1846); Ritschl (Etglm.
Martian's, 1846; Entstehumj d. alt-Kath.
Kirche, ed. 1, 1850: the author altered his
standpoint considerably in ed. 2, 1857) ; Kostlin
(Lehrbegriffs d. Evangeliams, 1843); Zeller,
joint-editor with Baur of Theol. Jahrbucher
from 1848 ; Hilgenfeld from 1849 onwards
(editor of ZeiUchr. f. wiss. Theol. from 1859,
Einleitung, 1875) ; Volkmar (1852-1882). [On
this group of writers and their works, see D. L.
pp. 234-240.]
Never was theory more ably supported ;
never did theory more completely collapse,
through its own inherent weakness. The
pillars of the theory itself proved unstable : the
date of the Clementines is found to be much
too late ; the date of the Fourth Gospel is by
the confession of its foes much too early for the
requirements of Baur's development. Fresh
and exact study of history has shown that there
was no such chasm between Ebionitism and
Paulinism as Baur imagined [Acts or the
Ai-ostles], and with the chasm the theory dis-
appears. At the time of Baur's death (1860)
he had one faithful disciple, Holsten, and
Holsten's position is really different (Die drei
« sprung. Evany. 1883 ; Die synopt. Enang.
1KS5; B. L. p. 243).
The Partition Theories. — From the earliest
JOHN, GOSPEL OP
days of the negative criticism of the Fourth
Gospel to the present time, a line of writers
has existed, more or less connected with each
other, and more or less holding that portions
of the Gospel are authoritative, bnt that it is
not as a whole the work of St. John.
Weisse, C. H. (Evangeiische Geschichte, 1838;
Die Exangelienfragc, 1656), first gave prominence
to this line of criticism. He held that the dis-
courses of Jesus and of John Baptist arc studies
from the Apostle's hand, and that after the
writer's death the disciples combined these
studies with connecting historic matter and oral
teaching into the present Gospel.
Schenkel, D., began (Stud. u. Krit. 1840) by
developing the main ideas of Weisse, but ended
(Charakterlild Jean, ed. 4, 1873) by giving up
the Johannine authorship altogether, and
placing the Gospel in the middle of the second
century.
Schweizer, A. (Evangel. Johannes, 1841), en-
deavoured to show that the events which haTe
Galilee as their scene (capp. ii. 1-12, iv. 44—54.
vi. 1-26), and also cap. xxi., and some smaller
insertions (capp. i. 21 sq., xvi. 30, xviii. 9. xii.
35-37), are in their present form by a later
hand. The Johannine ministry of Jesus was
limited to Judaea, but this portion is of true
historical character, and the discourses are
authoritative. The additions were later thaa
John's death, but before the Gospel was first
published.
Tobler, J. R. (1867 and other dates), thought
that some portions of the Gospel came from
the Apostle himself in Aramaic, but that these
portions were added to and worked op by
Apollos (B. L. pp. 246-250). The place is Epae-
sus, and the time the first century.
EWald, Heinrich (1803-1875: Johanneisci.
Schrift. 1861, i. 1-59 ; Geschichte d. Voties Isna!,
1868, vii. 237 sq. ; cp. B. L. p. 250 sq.), held
with characteristic freedom and characteristic
strength his own views of the historic value of
the discourses and the narratives of the miracles
in the Fourth Gospel ; but this does not weaken
the force of his position as to the authorship.
The Apostle somewhere about the year 80 com-
posed his Gospel, availing himself of the hand
of trusted friends, who ten years later, but still
before the Apostle's death, added cap. xxi.
Here (rti. 24, 25) another hand appears more
freely than in the Gospel itself, though it was
not whoUy absent even there (cap. xii. r. 35).
Ewald's views as to the authenticity of the
Gospel were expressed with clear emphasis
(Gdttmg. Qet.Anz., Aug. 1863, review of Kenan;
Gratrv, Jtfsas-Christ, p. 119; Liddon, B. I.
1866, ed. 13, 1889, p. 220; Westcott, ItUndm-
tion to the Gospels, ed. 3, p. x.).
Hase, K. A. von (1800-1889 : Geschichte Jem,
1876, i.e. an enlargement of the Lebeu Jew,
edd. 1-5, 1829-65; Die Tubinger SchvU — Sexd-
schreiben an Baur, 1855), had been known to
successive generations for more than half a
century not only as a learned Church historian,
but as a defender of the Fourth Gospel in the
method of Schleiermacher (cp. infra, p. 1748).
differing from his master chiefly in that he
ascribed the Apocalypse also to the Apostle.
But in the Geschichte (pp. 50, 51) he advances
not without hesitation, the opinion of his old
age, that the Gospel is not the immediate work
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
of the Apostle. After the death of John, per-
haps a decade or more, the Johannine tradition
was written down by a gifted disciple of the
Apostle. The disciple has lived in the
thoughts of his illustrious master, and has only
written as he wonld himself hare written.
Thus arose a " Gospel according to John," which
in the next generation became a "Gospel of
John " (B. L. p. 252).
Reuss, Edouard (1804-1891 : Ideen zur Ein-
leitung in das Evangeliwn Johannes [Dcnkschrift
d. theologisch. QeseUschaft jru Strasourg, 1840];
— Die Geschichte der Heiligen Schriften, A'eues
Testament, ed. 1, 1842; ed. 2, 1853; ed. 5,
1874 [Eng. tr. 1884] ; ed. 6, 1887 ;—Histoire de
la theologie chrilienne au Steele apostolique, 1852
[Eng. tr. 1872]; Thtologie Johannique in La
Bible, Nouveau Test, vi* partie, 1879). In the
earlier works he accepts the Johannine author-
ship, but thinks that the speeches are to be
largely traced, not with Baur to metaphysical
conceptions, but to religious mysticism. In the
Inter editions of the Geschichte he admits the
" double element," and in the The'ologie Johan-
nique (pp. 40 sqq.) he no longer holds the direct
Johannine authorship. The author distinguishes
himself from St. John in more than one passage,
but derives his materials immediately from him
(11. L. p. 253 sq.).
Renan, Ernest (1823 seq. : Vie de Jesus,
1863 ; ed. 17, 1882), draws a sharp distinction
between the authentic and the unauthentic
portions of the Gospel, but his principle of di-
vision is exactly opposed to that of those who
preceded him. It is not the historical setting,
but the discourses, which are now questioned.
The history indeed is to be preferred to that of
the Synoptists, but the discourses are " tirades
pretentieuses, lourdes, mal ecrites." Kenan's
view in ed. 13 and afterwards is, " The Fourth
Gospel is not the work of the Apostle John. It
was attributed to him by one of his disciple*
about the year 100. The discourses are almost
wholly fictitious ; but the narrative portions
contain valuable traditions, which go back in
part to the Apostle John " (ed. 13, pp. x. xi. ;
ep. ed. 17, 1882, pp. lviii. sqq., 477 sqq.).
Sabatier, L. A. (1839 seq. : Essai sur les
Sources de la Vie de Jesus, les trois premiers
JEctngiles et le quatrieme, 1866). This little
work, which is largely devoted to the Fourth
Gospel, was intended to support the Johannine
authorship. But in a later article in the Ency-
clopedic des Sciences religieuses (1880, vii.
181-193) M. Sabutier gives up the immediate
authorship, and thinks the writer to be one of
John's disciples who has edited the Gospel history
after the form known in Asia Minor. The
Apocalypse was the work of the author himself:
the Gospel is a spiritualized apocalypse written
by a disciple (B. L. p. 256).
Weizsacker, K. H. von (1822 seq.), after
several essays in the Jahrb. fur deutsche Theol.,
of which he was editor (1857, pp. 154 sqq. ;
1859, pp. *>85 S( W- i 1862, pp. 619 sqq.), pub-
lished in 1864 the able Untersuchungen uber die
evang. Geschichte. John is the indirect, a trusted
disciple of the Apostle is the direct, author ; or
it might have been composed by disciples after
the Apostle's oral teaching or notes. The whole
Gospel has a double character. At every point
it is an historical report of the sayings and deeds
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
1747
of Christ, but it is also an ideal composition,
and every detail of the representation has a
double sense. In his latest work (Dos Aposto-
tische Zeitalter, 1886, ed. 2, 1890) Weizsacker
takes the age of the Apostles properly so-called
to end at the year 70. The following thirty
years are the Johannine period. There was a
Johannine school in Ephesus. The two principal
works which bear the name of John probably
came from the school of the Apostle, but
neither is the work of John (pp. 504 sqq.). At
the time the Gospel was written the Apostle
was dead, but his death had not long taken
place (p. 536 ; B. L. p. 257).
Wendt, H. H. (1853 seq.), Professor in Hei-
delberg {Die Lehre Jesu, 1886, i. 215 sqq.),
has in part renewed and carried to fresh
issues the theories of Weisse and Schenkel. He
thinks that there is a genuine historical docu-
ment issuing from John which corresponds to
the Logia used by St. Matthew, but that it
relates to only the last days of Jesus. He finds
traces of Hebrew origin in the part which has
this original document for a basis, and thinks
that the writer was an Ephesinn disciple of
John. (Cp. review by Holtzmann in Theolog.
Lit. Ztg. 1886, pp. 197 sqq. ; B. L. p. 258.)
Kkext Nkoative Criticism. — Considera-
tions of space compel the reduction of this and
the following section to the skeleton of a
bibliography. The writers are all more or less
lineal descendants of the Tubingen School, but
treat the works of their predecessors with
freedom. They fall into three main divisions —
German, Dutch, and English (B. L. p. 258 sqq.).
The German Negative School. — Keim, Thcodor
(1825-1878 : Geschichte Jesu von Nazara, 1867-
71, i. 103-172; Dritte Bearb. 1875, pp. 38
sqq., 377 sqq. : cp. Hausrath, Neutcstamentl.
Zeitgeschichte, 1873, iii. 565-625; 1877, iv. 376
sqq. : cp. B. L. p. 259).
Holtzmann, H. J. (1832 seq.), now Professor
in Strasburg [in Schenkel's Bibel-Lexiion, 1869-
1871, art. Evangeliwn nach Johannes (ii.
221 sqq.) and art. Johannes der Apostel
(iii. 328 sqq.); Lehrbuch der Einleitung in
das Neve Testament, ed. 2, 1886, pp. 438-488 ;
Die Gnosis und das Johann. Evang. 1877 : cp.
Zeitschrift f. wissensch. Theol. 1869, pp. 62 sqq.,
155 sqq., 446 sqq. ; 1871, pp. 336 sqq.; 187.'),
pp. 40 sqq. ; 1877, pp. 187 sqq. : cp. B. L.
p. 260].
HSnig, Wilhelm (Zeitschrift f. un'ssensch.
Theol. 1871, pp. 535 sqq. ; 1883, pp. 216 sqq.;
1884, pp. 85 sqq. : cp. Holtzmann, H. J., Ibid.
1881, pp. 257 sqq., Einleitung, vt supra, p. 451 :
cp. B. L. p. 261).
Thoma, Albrecht (1844 seq.: Zeitschrift f.
wissensch. Theol. 1877, pp. 289 sqq. ; 1879,
pp. 18 sqq., 171 sqq., 273 sqq. ; — Die Genesis des
Johannes-Evangeliums, 1882 : cp. B. L. p. 261
sqq.).
Mangold, D. W. (1825-1890), late Professor at
Bonn, in foot-notes appended to the later editions
of Bleek's Einleitung in das Neue Testament,
ed. 4, 1886 (cp. B. L. p. 262).
Holtzmann, Oscar (Das Johanncs-Evangelimn
untcrsucht und erklart, 1887 : cp. Schiirrr's
review in Theologische Literaturzeitung, 1887,
No. 14, and B. L. p. 262 sq.>
The Dutch Negative School. — The modern
Dutch School, which has of late years taken a
5 T 2
Digitized by
Google
1748
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
prominent place in advanced criticism and sub-
jective theories, may for the present purpose be
represented by Scholten, the late Emeritus Pro-
fessor of Leyden.
Scholten, J. H. (1811-1885: Historisch-kri-
tische Inleidung in de Schriften da Nieuiee Testa-
ments, 1853, ed. 2, and in German, 1856 ;
Schrifter van den Apostet Johanna in Bijbelsch
woordenboek, Amsterdam, 1855 — he here takes
the Gospel to be Johannine ; Het Evangelic naar
Johanna, 1864-66 — German by Lang, 1867 —
French by Reville, in Revue de Theologie, Stras-
burg, 1864-66 ; De oudste getuigenissen, and in
German, Die Sltesten Zeugnisse (by Manchot),
1867 ; Het Apostel Johannes in Klein- Asit, 1871,
and in German (Spiegel), 1872: cp. B. L.
p. 263 sqq.).
The English Negative School. — The chief
results of foreign negative criticism have been
adopted and presented to English readers by
several writers, of whom the most prominent
are: — Taylor, Rev. J. J. (An Attempt to ascer-
tain the Character of the Fourth Gospel, especially
in it* Relation to the Three First, London, 1867 ;
ed. 2, 1870;— Theological Review, vol. v.
pp. 373-401, July 1868 — review of the work
next mentioned : cp. B. L. p. 266 sq.). David-
son, Dr. Samuel (An Introduction to the Study of
the New Testament, 2 vols. 1868 ; ed. 2, 1882 :
these works should be compared with the
earlier Introduction to the New Testament by
the same author, 3 vols. 1848-51, in which the
opposite view was maintained: cp. B. L.
pp. 272-285). Supernatural Religion, an anony-
mous work (2 vols. 1874 ; ed. 7, 3 vols. 1879 :
cp. B. L. pp. 267-270). Abbott, Dr. Edwin A.
(art. 'Gospels' in Encycl. Britann. ed. 9, 1879;
' Justin's Use of the Fourth Gospel ' in Modern
Review, 1882, pp. 559-588, 716-756: cp. B. L.
pp. 270-272). Martineau, Dr. James (The
Seat of Authority in Religion, 1890, pp. 189-
243 : cp. B. L. pp. 286-292).
The Positive Criticism op this Century.
— A still longer succession of thinkers have been
led by the attack upon the Fourth Gospel to
examine the position of their opponents and to
re-examine the grounds of their own conviction,
and as a result of this testing process have main-
tained and strengthened their belief in the
Johannine authorship. The immediate results
of the work of Evanson and Bretschneider have
already been referred to (v. supra, p. 1745);
and the following names will sufficiently serve
to indicate the course of thought.
Schleiermacher, F. D. E. (1768-1834: Reden
Hber die Religion, ed. 3, 1821, ed. Schwarz, 1 868,
pp. 227-243; Einleitung ins Neue Testament,
1845, pp. 315-344; Leben Jem, 1832, ed.
Rutenik, 1864 : cp. B. L. pp. 299-304).
De Wette, W. M. L. (1780-1849 : Lehrbuch
der historisch-kritischen Einleitung in die kanoni-
schen Bucher des Neuen Testaments, ed. 1, 1826 ;
ed. 5,1848 ; — Kurxgefassta Exeg. Handbuch turn
Neuen Testament : Johannes, ed. 1, 1837 ; ed. 3,
1846 : cp. B. L. pp. 307-310).
Liicke, G. C. F. (1781-1855: Commentar Sber
die Schriften des Evangelisten Johannes, 1820;
ed. 2, 1833; ed. 3, part i., 1840: cp. B. L.
pp. 310-313), speaks of Schleiermacher as his
"spiritual father" (ed. 3, p. viii.).
Bleek, Friedrich (1795-1859), also a pupil of
Schleiermacher, published in 1846 Beitrage zur
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
Evangelien-Kritik. After Bleek's death his
Lectures on Introduction to the New Testament
were edited by his son T. F. Bleek (Einleitung
in das Neue Testament, ed. 1, 1860 ; ed. 2, 1866)
The later editions (ed. 4, 1886) have been edited
by Mangold (e. supra, p. 1747 : cp. B. L. pp.
313-315).
Ebrard, J. H. (1818-1888), may be taken to
represent the school of Erlangen, where he was
born and where (as well as at Zurich) he wu
Professor. His works on this subject are Wit-
tenschaftliche Kritik der evangeiiscken, Ge-
schichte (1842; ed. 3, 1868; Eng. tr. 1863);
Das Evangelium Johannis und die neueste Hypr-
these Sber seine Enstehung, 1845; Die Ofen-
barung Johannis (1853) ; Die Briefe Johamu
(1859 ; Eng. tr. 1860 : cp. B. L. p. 317 sq.>
Tholuck, F. A., of Halle (1799-1877 : Cam-
mentor sum Evangel. Johannis, 1827; ed, 7.
1857 ; Eng. tr., 1836 and 1859 ;— Die (Haabwur-
digkeit der Evang. Oeschichte, 1837-8), and
Hengstenberg, E. W., of Berlin (1808-1869:
Das Evangelium da heiligen Johannes, 3 vols.
1863 ; ed. 2, 1867 ; Eng. tr., 1865 : cp. B. L.
p. 318 sq.).
Meyer, H. A. W. (1800-1873 : Xritisch Esse.
Handbuch: Johanna, ed. 1, 1834; ed. 5, 1869;
Eng. tr., 1874; ed. 7, 1886: cp. B. L. pp.
319-321).
Weiss, Bernhard, Professor at Berlin (1827
seq. : Der Johanneische Lehrbegrijf, 1862 ; Lehr-
buch der biblischen Theologie da Neuen Testa-
ments, ed. 1, 1868; ed. 4, 1884; Eng. tr. 3 voU-
1885, esp. vol. ii. pp. 311-416; — Das Leben
Jesu, 2 vols. 1882; ed. 2, 1884; Eng. tr. 3 vol*.
1883-4, esp. vol. i. pp. 90-210 ;— Handbuch A
Enleitung, 1886 ; ed. 2, 1889 ; Eng. tr. 2 vols.
1887-8 ; — Meyer's Evangelium da Johannes, ed.
6, 1880 ; ed. 7, 1886 : cp. B. L. pp. 324-326).
Luthardt, C. £., Professor at Leipzig (1823
seq. : De Compositione Evangelii Joanna, 185.' ;
Das Johanneische Evangelium. 1852-3, 2 vols. :
ed. 2, 1875-6; Eng. tr. 1878, 3 vols.;— Der
Johanneische Ursprung da vierten Evangtlhm's,
1874 ; Eng. tr., with valuable bibliographical ap-
pendix by Gregory, 1875; — Evangelium naek
Johanna in Strack und Zflckler's Kurzgefassttr
Kommentar, 1886. Editor of the Theolog. Lite-
raturblatt, the Evang: luth. Kirchenxeiiung, sad
the Zeitschrift fur kirchl. Wissemahaft u. Leben.
Cp. B. L. p. 326 sq.).
Godet, Fredenc, Professor at Neuchitel
(1812 seq.), published his Commrntatrr jv
VJtmngUe de Saint Jean in 1863-65, 2 vols.;
ed. 2, " completement refondu," in 1876-7,
3 vols. ; ed. 3, " completement revue,** 1881-S5.
It has been translated into English (1877, and
from ed. 3, New York, 1 886), German (several
editions), Dutch and Spanish (cp. B. L. p. 328
sq.).
As above in the case of the English advocate
of the negative position, so now in that of the
upholders of the positive view, space can bt
here found for reference only. But the results
of the investigations which followed, especially
from the publication of the work entitled Super-
natural Religion, will be fresh in the mind of all
theological readers. See Bishop Lightibot (Con-
temporary Review, Jan., Aug., Oct. 1875, re-
published in Essays on Supernatural Religion^
1889; arts, in Expositor, 1890, pp. 1-21,81-
92, 176-188); Bishop Westcott (The Gos,*S
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPEL OP
according to St. John, 1881 ; On the Canonofthe
New Testament, ed. 6, 1889) ; Dr. Salmon (His-
torical Introduction to the New Testament, 1886 ;
ed. 5, 1891) ; Dr. Sanday (Gospels in the Second
Century, 1876; An Inaugural Lecture: The
Study of the New Testament, 1883 ; arts, in
Expositor, Nor., Dec 1891 ; Jan., Mar., Apr.,
and May 1892).
The following names may be added: — Ols-
hausen (Die Aechtheit der 4 canonischen Evan-
gelien, 1823; Nachweis der Echtheit des Neu.
Test^ 1832 , BHische Commentar, ed. by Ebrard
and Wiesinger, 1837-62 ; Commentary on the
Gospels, 1846); Thiersch (Versuch *ur Her-
sUUung des hist. Standpunkts f. die Kritik der
N. T. Schriften, 1845; Einige Worte Sber die
Aechtheit der N. T. Schriften, 1846 ; Die Kirche
m apost. Zeitalter in die Entstehung der N. T.
Schriften, 1852); Baumgarten-Crusius (Theol.
Ausligung der Johann. Schriften, 1843, pt. ii.,
1845, posthumous); Bunsen (Votlstdndiges
Bibelwerk, 1858); Neander (Das Leben Jesu,
1837; ed. 5, 1852); Andrews Norton (Genuine-
ness of the Gospels, 1837-44; ed. 2, 1846);
Alford (Greek Testament, 1849-61); Words-
worth (Greek Testament, 1856-1860, 1872);
Bishop Alexander (Commentary on Epistles of
St. John, 1881, ed. Canon Cook; and Epistles
of St. John in the Expositor's Bible, 1889);
Maurice (Gospel of St. John, 1857) ; Astie
(Explication de I'Evangile selon St. Jean, 1863-
1864) ; Tischendorf ( Wann vmrden unsere Evan-
gelien verfasstt 1865-6); Thenius (Das Evan-
gelism der Evangelien, 1865); Fisher (Super-
natural Origin of Christianity, 1866 ; article in
American edition of this Dictionary, 1868;
Grounds of Theistic and Christian Belief, 1885) ;
Ufclhorn (VortrSge...Lebens Jesu, 1866); Rig-
genbach (Die Zeugnisse, 1866, answer to Volk-
mar); De Pressense' (Jesus-Christ, 1866); Van
Oosterzee (Das Johannes -Evangelium, 1867 ;
Kng. tr. 1869, — answer to Scholten) ; Hutton,
R. H. (Theological Essays, 1871; ed. 3, 1888);
Lange-Schaff (Commentary, 1872); Beyschlag
(Zur Johanneischen Frage, 1874-5-6; Contem-
porary Review, Oct. and Nor. 1877 ; Das Leben
Jesu, 1885-6); Liddon (Sampton Lectures, 1866 ;
ed. 13, 1889); Milligan (Contemporary Review,
1867-68-71 ; Journal of Sacred Literature,
1867); and esp. with Moulton (Commentary,
1879); Leathes (Witness of St. John to Christ,
1870 ; Religion of the Christ, 1874) ; Wace (The
Gospel and it* Witnesses, 1883) ; McClellan (Four
Gospels, 1875); Lias (Doctrinal System of St.
John, 1875) ; Murphy (Scientific Bases of Faith,
1873); Ezra Abbot (External Evidences, 1880);
Charteris (Canonicity, 1880); Plummer (Greek
Testament: St. John, 1882); Lechler (Geschichte
des apostolischen und nachapostolischen Zeitalters,
ed. 3, 1885 ; Eng. tr. 1886); Schanx (Commentar,
1 885) ; Franke (Das Alte Testament bei Johannes,
1885); Zahn (Forschuhgen zur Gesch. des N. T.
Kanons u. der altkirchlichen Literatur, 1881,
&c ; Geschichte d. N: T. Kanons, Bd. i., 1888-9);
Reynolds (Pulpit Commentary : St. John, In-
trod., 1888) ; AbW Fillion (Introduction g€n€-
rale aux Evangiles; Sainte Bible avee Comm.,
1889) ; Ewald, P. (Bauptproblem d. Eeangelien-
frage, 1890) ; Gloag, P. J. (Introd. to the Johan-
nine Writings, 1891). Fuller details respecting
these works may be found by consulting the
Index to Bampton Lectures for 1890: in the
JOHN, GOSPEL OF 1749
same volume (Lect. vii. pp. 357-409) an account
is also given of a number of recent accessions to
knowledge, the general tendency of which is
decidedly to strengthen the evidence for the
Gospel.
The result of this necessarily brief examina-
tion of the external evidence and criticism of
the Fourth Gospel is that the negative criticism
by constant opposition weakens and destroys
itself, having no consistent and well-ascertained
results ; that it is powerless when it attempts
the task of construction; and that on every
hand the evidence for connecting the Fourth
Gospel with the immediate circle of St. John is
accumulating. (But cp. B. L. 1890, pp. 409
sqq.)
(ii.) Self-evidence of the Gospel.
The writing itself furnishes to some extent
direct evidence and to a large extent materials
for indirect induction, as to its authorship.
A. The direct evidence is contained in three
passages : chs. i. 14, xix. 35, xxi. 24.
(a.) Ch. i. 14 (compared with 1 John i.' 1),
iStaaAutSa. The usus loquendi, the tenses, the
context, the parallels, alike confirm the natural
impression that the writer is here placing him-
self among the immediate disciples of the Lord.
(b.) Ch. xix. 35. These words assert (1) that
the evidence is that of an eye-witness, (2) that
the witness answers to the idea of what true
witness should be, and (3) that the eye-witness
knows the facts to be as they are stated to be.
(See on this whole subject Bleek - Mangold,
Einleitung, §§ 92 and 107.) The force of
iiceirot is discussed fully by Steitz and A. Butt-
mann (Stud. u. Krit. 1859, pp. 497 sqq., 1860,
pp. 505 sqq., 1861, pp. 267 sqq.; and in Hil-
genfeld's Zeitschr. fUr wissensch. Theol. 1862,
pp. 204 sqq.). Steitz is said to have abandoned
his published opinions (Grimm's Wilke's Clavis,
ed. Thayer, p. 195) ; but even Buttmann admits
that a writer who in direct speech speaks of
himself in the third person may use lutivos.
(c.) Ch. xxi. 24 clearly assigns the authorship
of the Gospel to " the beloved disciple " of v. 21,
and that with regard to its form as well as to
its material contents. He is the writer as well
as the witness. A comparison of this passage
with ch. xix. 35 shows that, while that is the
statement of the writer, this is the evidence of
others who of their personal knowledge bear
testimony that the witness is true. From the
first then this writing bore in its own substance
the twofold assertion of autoptic testimony,
both on the part of the writer and on that of
those who published it.
B. The indirect inference furnished by the
writing.
1. The Nationality of the Author. — In a work
which looks backward so constantly to the Old
Testament, and of which the subject-matter is
so fully Jewish, it ought not to be difficult to
say whether the writer is dealing with it from
an intimate personal knowledge of Judaism past
and present, or from the acquired knowledge of
a stranger. And yet the Gospel must be studied
chapter by chapter and verse by verse by the
student who wishes to obtain a fresh impression
of the facts. The result of such study will, it
Digitized by
Google
1750
JOHN, GOSPEL OP
it believed, be the conviction that no one who
iu not trained from childhood in the Jewish
Scriptures, customs, life, hopes, could have
written the Fourth Gospel. The following heads
of subjects are given, not as in themselves full
proofs, but as centres of thought around which
the facta which are observed in study may be
grouped : —
i. The Citation* of the Old Testament. — The
student will find as he reads the Gospel that the
Old Testament is formally quoted sixteen times.
These quotations are not confined to any part of
the Gospel, nor to any persons. Some are in
the discourses of the Lord (vii. 38, viii. 17,
x. 34, xiii. 18, iv. 25) ; one is by John Baptist
(i. 23) ; one is by Galilaeans (vi. 31) ; some are
by the writer himself (ii. 17, xii. 14-15, 38, 40,
xii. 24, 36, 37).
For the most part they are taken from the
LXX. Some are quite free or reminiscences of
the text (i. 23, vi. 31, vii. 38,42); some occur in
the Synoptic Gospels or elsewhere (i. 23, viii. 17,
xii. 14-15, 38, 40, xix. 24, 37), and indicate a
common use among the Christian brotherhood.
It is moreover to be borne in mind that quo-
tation from the Greek is natural in a Greek
writing which is intended for Greek readers ;
but there are three instances in which com-
petent judges find good reason for thinking that
the writer shows a critical knowledge of the
original :
Ch. vi. 45. The LXX. (Is. liv. 13) connects
the words with the preceding verse. The quo-
tation takes them as complete in themselves;
following in this the Hebrew teit.
Ch. xiii. 18. Cp. Ps. xii. (xl.), 9 (10). The
LXX. reading is i iaSieoy aprovs pov i/u-
yiXvvty «V ipi wrtprurpiy. That of Aquil.,
Symm., and Theodot. is Kartp.tyu\<iv#n fiov. The
Hebrew text is 3p» "hv Vnjfl WlS \o\».
The quotation has in accordance with the Hebrew
aproy (sing.) where the LXX. has iprovs (plur.),
translates 3py by the ordinary Tripp* instead
of the exceptional wrcoriff/toV, and ?'13fl by
the quite unusual ix-aipa, which is the LXX.
word for NC3 or D'ln instead of /uyaKiva,
which is the ordinary word for ?Hjn, and is
here found in all the Greek Versions. The
English translation of the Psalm (A. V., and
R. V. more fully, for it omits the marginal note)
follows the reading of the Gospel. The Prayer
Book Version follows the LXX. (through the
Vulgate, magnificamt super me supplantationem)
in it* rendering, " hath laid great wait for me."
What is more remarkable, though it seems to
have escaped notice, is that our Lord is made to
use the almost technical TpAyay (cp. Matt. xxiv.
38, John vi. 54-58 — all in our Lord's discourses ;
nowhere else in N. T.) instead of the LXX.
ioSlmr.
Ch. xix. 37. Zech. xii. 10. The LXX.
reads «Vi#A«tyorr<u vpis /it ivB' &v Karaxpr)'
oarro, " they shall look upon me because they
have mocked me." The Hebrew is »^N Wani
npTlCN Jit*. The quotation here and in
Rev. i. 7 (a&Toy «'{eK«Vrn<rar) follows against all
Greek Versions a reading \?K or V7K, which
latter was afterwards supposed to be an anti-
Messianic invention of the Jews (cp. Pusev,
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
Minor Prophets in loc ; and De Rossi, Yoriat
Lectiones, iii. 217 sqq.). It also translates
with Rev. i. 7 llpl correctly; but this with
Theodot., tit or l&Kimioar ; Aqnil. and Symm.,
ittKtVTTi<rar, tVejeircVnio-ai'.' The rendering of
the LXX. is probably a mistake arising from the
interchange of "I and T. One of Kennicott's
MSS. (355) does read Hpl. Jerome notes the
difference, and the fact that the quotation is nude
direct from the Hebrew by one who is Hebram
ex Hebraeis (in loc. and Ep. Ivii. ad Pammach.y
It is in more than one way remarkable how
this rendering of St. John became the recog-
nized method of quotation in the post-Apostolic
age. Thus Ignatius, Trail, x., Smyrn. iii:
Barnabas, vii. 9; Justin, Apol. i. 53, Trypht
32 ; Irenaeus, Adv. Baer. iv. 33, 11 ; Tertuiliaa,
Adv. Marc. iii. 7.
The result of this examination of the citations
from the Old Testament seems to be that, while
it doe* not support all the statement* which
have been based upon them, it gives full support
to the belief that the writer was a Jew, aid
furnishes, at least to some extent, reason far
believing, and no shadow of reason for not
believing, that the writer was a Palestinian.
ii. The Formulae of Citation — The formulae
with which the writer introduces his quotations
furnish more distinct evidence of his relation to
the Old Testament Scriptures than the quota-
tions themselves. They may be classified as
follow* :—
statVSs (Otis' ytypcuifiiror twice.
ytypawityoy i<rrtv or tarar yrypafifiimr with
iy rots ■wpo^rrau or with iv rf ri/uft three
(four) time*.
These forms are peculiar to St. John, bnt ar?
linked by the iy t«£ roVp yiypawrai with tax
regular Pauline xaSit! yiyparrat, and repre-
sent the Rabbinic a'TOT
KaSiis tfcer ri ypattr), i) ypaQh elsrev (cp. T. 42),
which is parallel to the ypn<ph Kiytt, which b
used also by St. Paul and represents the Rab-
binic Kip ION.
The use of Ira vKripu0p with jj ypwpii avr-X.
may be compared with the regular formula ot
St. Matthew, Iva (eV«! ) xAtfywW) to frrfiir (t-TJL.
and St. Jamea.
Isaiah is quoted as " the Prophet." Cp. Matt,
frequently of Isaiah, and also of Jeremiah,
Daniel, Jonah: so Peter of Joel (Acts ii. 16); so
Acts viii. 28, 30 ; so Paul of Samuel (Act* xiii.
20) and of Isaiah (Acts xxviii. 25).
The people quote with the phrase qstcis fj«v-
vapuy Ik too v6/un> (ch. xii. 34), using the
term " Law " for' the Old Test, generally, as in
ch. x. 34, and suggest by their words that they
were speaking from memory of the Synagogue
lessons. Just in the same way our Lord says,
'Hmixrart 6Vi ippitri . . . (Mutt. v. 2).
iii. Other instances of minute knowledge of the
Old Testament Scriptures. — More striking than
the instance* of direct quotation are the light
« Dr. Hatch's opinion (Amy* in Biblical Ormk.
p. 213) that the common source was an ulder transla-
tion, and that the Jew* substituted maermxPI* * *'* ni tbe
LXX. tor the original 4{«cAm)<nu>, as adduced by Mr.
J. A. Cross In The Classical JWm, tr. *S3 sqq., t»
characterised by Prof. T. K. Abbott as "utterly prepos-
terous." See his reasons In The Classical Kenem, v. 11,
;iwl Mr. Crn'Vs Rn|»ly, ibid. p. 143.
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
and undesigned touches which occur at every
point in the Gospel, and give reminiscences of
almost every Book in the Old Testament. Of
Genesis and the other Books of Moses, of Samuel
and of Kings, of Psalms and of Proverbs, of
Isaiah in both parts, special knowledge will be
expected and will be found ; of Jeremiah, of
Ezekiel, and of David ; of Hosea, Joel, Micah,
Zephaniah, Zechariah, and Malachi. The touches
are of persons — Abraham, Moses, Jacob, David ;
of history, as of the manna, the circumcision,
the brazen serpent, the well and the flocks
at Sychar; of similes, as the Bridegooom, the
living Water, the Shepherd, the Vine ; of
doctrines, as Life, Light, Truth, Righteousness,
Peace.
iv. The Relation of the great doctrinal posi-
tions of the Gospel to the Old Testament, and to
the earlier Teaching of the Sea Testament. — An
exhaustive examination of the ideas of the Fourth
Gospel, and a comparison of them with the ideas
of the Old Testament, of the Synoptic Gospels,
of St. Paul, St. Peter, St. James, ought to tell
without much room for doubt whether the writer
is a Jew or a Gentile. While such an examination
would be in this place impossible, it is specially
satisfactory to be able to refer to it as already
•lone. The able treatises of Weiss (Biblical
Theology of the New Testament, 1885, esp. vol. ii.
pp. 311-416) and Lechler (Apostolic and post-
Apostolic Times, ed. 3, 1886, esp. vol. ii. 163 sqq.,
250 sqq.) are now easily accessible. The works
of Franke (Das alte Testament bei Johannes, 1885)
and Oscar Holtzmann (Das Johannesevangelium
untersucht und erklSrt, 1887) are from opposite
standpoints of great value, though Franke is
perhaps rather too much of an advocate. Two
English works on this part of the subject also
afford valuable guidance : Lias (Doctrinal System
of St. John, 1875), and the remarkable Intro-
duction by Dr. Reynolds in the Pulpit Com-
mentary, Gospel of St. John (1888, see esp. pp.
cxxviii.-cl.).
But two characteristic doctrinal positions
demand a brief exposition, both from their own
importance and as examples of the evidence
which is to be furnished by this method. One
of them, The Doctrine of the Logos,' will find
its more fit place of treatment in a separate
article [Loooe]. The other is the Messianic
Idea. The development of this doctrine is
stated by the writer to be the purpose of the
Gospel, Ira mffrsinrt Sri 'lnaovs iorlv 6
Xpurrbs i uibt toD 8cov (ch. xx. 31). Accord-
ingly, as Weizsacker notes, the Messianic ques-
tion is of all Jewish questions which are bound up
with the life of Jesus the one which is most fully
dealt with in the Fourth Gospel ( Untersuchungen,
1864, p. 260). It is moreover of all Jewish
questions just that one which forms the best
test of nationality and date. The destruction of
Jerusalem changed the whole aspect of Messianic
hope. If the Fourth Gospel is by St. John, the
* Cp. Westcott's St. John, pp. 14-18 ; Soulier, la
Doctrine du Lagos, 1816; Siegfried, Pktto V. Ala.,
1876 ; Edersheim, art. Philo in Diet. of Christ. Biog. ;
Klassen, Die altlat. Weisheit u. d. logos, 187* ; Re-
ville, La Doctrine du logos, 1881 ; Drummond, PkUo
Judatut, 1888 (specially); Excursus A in Klllcott's
yew Testament Commentary, i. 552-654, and Bampton
Lectures, 1890, p. 431.
JOHN, GOSPEL OF 1751
Messianic Idea ought to be treated with the
intimate knowledge of a born Jew ; and yet
the Jewish hope of a Messianic kingdom must
have ceased to exist for him when Jesus Christ
was crucified two generations ago, and the
national idea must have ceased to exist when
Jerusalem itself ceased to exist as the centre of
national life, and he who for a whole generation
had lived in a new region of life must, in
the blending of Judaism with Hellenism, have
passed far away from the streets of Jerusalem
or the shores of Galilee, and have found that
the true Messiah is indeed of the Jews but for
the world. This is what is a priori to be
expected. The following passages may be
taken as samples of what is actually to be
found (cp. Franke, Das alte Testament, &c,
pp. 166 sqq.): —
Ch. i. 19-28. Note the Messianic movement
and expectation among the Jerusalem Jews at
this period. John Baptist's answer, " I am not
the Messias " (v. 20), shows what the unuttered
question really was. " The prophet " (v. 21,
cp. Deut. xviii. 15 ; Matt. xvi. 14, and ch. vii.
41, where in the same way " the prophet " is
distinguished from the Messias) shows a know-
ledge which is natural and exact. If acquired,
it must have been more prominent and ex-
plained for those who had acquired it. The
Pharisees know (c. 25) that Baptism is connected
with the Messianic work (cp. Ezek. xxxvi. '25 ;
Zech. xiii. 1; Heb. x. 11).
Ch. i. 41 represents Andrew as telling his
brother that they had found — and they had
therefore previously sought together — the Mes-
sias. The term itself in its Hebrew (Aramaic)
form (M«r<rhu or Mtatas = NrvpTp, slat. emph.
of D'^Q) >s found only here and in ch. iv. 25 in
the New Testament.
Ch. i. 45 implies that these disciples had talked
together of the coming Messias (cp. Deut.
xviii. 18).
Ch. i. 49. Nathanael represents national
hopes, as do the people in ch. xii. 13, which
had no place after the destruction of Jerusalem ;
but their formula " King of Israel " exactly re-
presents the Rabbinic bnH^> *7& JCHpi p^O
and the Targumic NITCD K370-
Ch. i. 51 gives in sharp contrast to Nathanael's
" Son of God : King of Israel," as though at
once to protest against the merely national view
of the Messianic reign, the title which was
commonly used (more than seventy times) by
Jesus of himself, " the Son of Man."
Ch. vi. 14, 15. The sign, the Prophet that
cometh (cp. i. 21, 25; vii. 40, only in St.
John), the desire to make Him a king (cp. i. 49),
His withdrawal from those who had this desire
as contrasted with His statement to the woman
in ch. iv. 26, all is in complete harmony with
the current Messianic expectation.
Ch. vii. 25-31. Note the distinction between
Jerusalemites and provincials. Their question
shows how fully the expectation of the Messiah
had taken hold of their minds. This man dees
not seem to them to be the Christ ; but why do
the rulers who have plotted to kill Him, allow
Him this freedom? Have the rulers, whose
duty it is to decide, seen any reason to recognize
him?
Digitized by
Google
1752 JOHN, GOSPEL OF
Bat do! they themselves knew about this
man, and one of the Meuianic signs was a
sudden appearance (cp. Heb. vii. 3, iytvta\6-
yirrot, and the Rabbinic lnt< DlpOD ; Dan. vii.
13; Mai. iii. 1 ; Sanh. 97 a; Mid. on Cantic ii.
9; Justin, c Try ph. p. 226 B; Light foot, Hor.
Z/i-6. ; and the Commentaries ad loc).
Note also the conviction of the multitude
(not, or at least not chiefly, the Jerosalemites),
some of whom had seen more of the signs which
He had wrought. Are the signs which they
hare a right to expect as a proof of Messiah's
advent (cp. the answer to John Baptist in Matt,
xi. 4, S) greater than these ?
Vs. 40-42. The vague feeling of the people
about the Prophet and the Messias (cp. vi. 14,
15), while the Jerusalem officials distinguish
carefully the Messias, the Prophet, and Elias
(ch. i. 20-25). They knew that the Messias
should be born in Bethlehem (cp. Mic. v. 2 ; Is.
xi. 1 ; Jer. xxiiL 5), but are unaware of the
fact that Jesus was born there, and the writer
records the mistake as they made it.
Ch. xii. 13. Cp. ch. i. 49 and the parallels in
the Synoptists. St. Mark's is the fullest form
of the acclamation. St. John alone has the
characteristic " King of Israel."
V. 34. Cp. ch. x. 34 and Is. ix. 7 ; Ps. ex. 4,
lixxix. 4 sq. ; Ezek. xxxvii. 25. A statement
which it quite natural from a Jew, bnt almost
inexplicable on any other theory.
Ch. xix. 14-21. The examination before Pilate
turns wholly on the Kingship; and the answer
of the chief priests, " We have no king but
Caesar," is the surrender of the Messianic
hope.
The evidence then comes from every quarter,
and in its entirety — which can only be suggested
here— attains a strength which can hardly be
resisted, that whoever wrote the Fourth Gospel
wrote with a complete and full knowledge
which would be impossible for anyone who was
not a born Jew. And the more this evidence
ii examined, the more fruitful in conviction
does it become. Heinrich Holtzmann does not
believe that the writing ii by St. John, bnt he
sees no reason why it should not be as easily
the work of a born Jew of the Dispersion as the
Book of Wisdom or the Epistle to the Hebrews.
So even Keim and Thorns, against Baur, Hilgen-
feld, Strauss, Scholten, Schenkel (Einleitung, ed.
2, 1886, p. 468). Oscar Holtzmann thinks that
the writing is later than St. John, bnt he is
convinced that the writer is a Christian Jew of
the Dispersion (Am Johannesevangelium, 1887,
p. 74), and, what is much more important, his
reviewer Schiirer thinks this opinion to be in
the highest degree probable (TAeotog. LUg.
1887, No. 14>
In the face of these growing admissions, it
has come to be unnecessary to meet at any
length the old stock objections to the Jewish
authorship. They will be found set forth in
Davidson (Introduction, 1868, vol. ii. pp. 427
sqq.). In (0 far as they have any force they
oppose the Palestinian or First Century — not
the Jewish — authorship (cp. infra, p. 1754).
2. Home and local surroundings of the
Writer. — The Gospel contains a considerable
number of references to places in Palestine, and
an examination of these should furnish evidence
on the question whether the writer is dealing
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
with these with the natural ease of the familiar
knowledge of childhood, or is writing from the
acquired knowledge of distance in both pUvce
and time. The evidence should be the morc
decisive, as the time of Ordnance survey! and
geographical societies had not yet come, ojhI anr
minute acquaintance with the subject would
suggest with strong probability that the writer
had direct knowledge. Once again the evidence
is cumulative, and is furnished throughout the
Gospel. The writer knows that Bethany is
" beyond Jordan " (ch. i. 28), and a distinct
place from the Bethany which is " about fifteen
furlongs" from Jerusalem (ch. xi. 18). Philip
is of Bethsaida, and this is the city of Andrew
and Peter (ch. i. 44); Cana is "of Galilee"
(chs. ii. 1, 11, iv. 46, xxi. 2; nowhere die
named in the Bible) ; Capernaum on the shorn
of the lake is "down" from the higher land of
Cana (ch. ii. 12); Aenon is known (but known
to this writer only, for it is nowhere else men-
tioned) to be " near to Salim " (cp. Paiat.
Explor. Fund Report, 1874, pp. 141 sq.;
Pictwetq. Palest. voL ii. p. 237, and article
Aenon in this Dictionary), and is known, si its
name implies, to have " much water " (ch. in.
23) ; Sy char ('Askar) is near to the well-known
" parcel of ground that Jacob gave to his so*
Joseph " (ch. iv. 5), and there is no confusion
with Shechem by the writer, though there i»
by some of his critics (Palest. Explor. Fad
Report, 1877, pp. 149 sq., 1876, p. 197; EUicett's
New Test. Commentary : St. John, ad loc.). fie
knows too that " Jacob's well was there " (r. 6)
and that it was "deep" (v. 11), and thst Monti
Gerizim could be indicated ("this mountain,"
r. 20) by pointing to it. He alone of the New
Testament writers knows the Sea of Galilee
by its classical name of Tiberias (*I/ui' We-
fiiia, Pansanias, v. 7, 4), and he gins both
names in ch. v. 1 (cp. v. 23), bnt the later
name only in ch. xxi. 1. No name was after
the destruction of Jerusalem more sacred to
a Jew.
The minute knowledge of Jerusalem and the
Temple — a Jerusalem and a Temple, be it re-
membered, which the Roman armies destroyed
in a.d. 70 — is more striking even than that of
the geography of Palestine. Examples of this
occur in the scenes in ch. ii. 13-22, which
imply topographical details ; in ch. v. S,
where the present tense indicates reminiscence
of the place, and the gate, the pool, the fire
porches, the Hebrew name, all tell of personal
knowledge; in chs. vii. and viii., in technical
knowledge of the ritual of the Temple and of
the Treasury, where Jesus was teaching (c M,
vide Commentaries ad loc.) ; in ch. ix. 7, the
" Pool of Siloam " and the interpretation "Sent;"
in ch. x. 22, 23, where both time and place are
told ("winter," "Solomon's cloister "); inch,
xi. 18, where the distance of Bethany from
Jerusalem is given as the rough estimate of a
man who knows the places (" nigh nsto Jeru-
salem — about "fifteen furlongs off"); in &
xviii. 1 and 2, where the "brook Kidron,"
frequent in the Old Testament, occurs alone in
the New ; in ch. xix. 13, where " Gabbatha " ij
given in the Aramaic form (MIV3 33 ?)> *™
v. 41, where the " garden " (sriprot, cp. ch. ivih.
1) is peculiar to St. John. _
Nor are these more than examples of aettus
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
which constantly occur. The impression which
they leave deepens with every renewal of their
study, until there is no room for doubting that
the writer of this work was a Jew of Palestine,
and that he was intimately acquainted with
Galilee, Judaea, and Jerusalem before the occu-
pation by the Roman armies under Titus.
3. The Writer's relation to the events which
he narrates. — The Fourth Gospel is the pre-
sentation of a series of events in which a
number of persons, and many details of time
and place and circumstances, occur. It should
therefore furnish evidence on the question
whether the writer is describing that which he
saw and heard, or with which he was in close
contact, or is writing at a distance and giving
impressions which he bad received from others.
The realism of an eye-witness, or one who is
writing from direct reports, cannot be counter-
feited, and the attempt always betrays itself.
Here, too, the evidence is cumulative, and can
only be estimated as a whole. The following
examples are meant to suggest lines of study : —
Ch. i. 35-51. Note (a) The marks of time :
"on the morrow " (t>c 35, 43) ; " about the
tenth hour "(t>. 39).
(fi) Personal attitude : " was standing "
(v. 35), " looked upon ... as He walked "
(p. 36), " heard him speak and . . . followed "
(c. 37), "turned and beheld them following,
and saith " (t. 38), " brought him unto Jesus.
Jesus looked upon him and said " (v. 42), " was
minded " (v. 43), " saw Kathanael coming "
(v. 47), " Before Philip called thee, when thou
wast under the fig-tree, I saw thee " (v. 48).
(y) The actors in the scene. " John . . . and
two of his disciples" (c. 35). He is not " John
Baptist," but the John of this Gospel. " One of
the two . . . Andrew, Simon Peter's brother "
(r. 40), the other being the anonymous writer ;
" Simon the son of John . . . Cephas . . . Peter "
(». 42) ; " Philip . . . from Bethsaida, of the
city of Andrew and Peter" (t>. 44); "Na-
thanael" (to. 45-51, cp. ch. xxi. 2), the Bar-
tholomew 'of the Synoptists. All these are
living and moving characters in the incident.
They are all known to the writer, and by him
made known to us.
Ch. ix. The man born blind. Note these
touches of realism :" as Jesus passed by " (v. 1 ) ;
the disciples' question in strict accord with
Jewish belief, " this man or his parents " (t>. 2) ;
the details, " spat on the ground, and made clay
of the spittle, and anointed his eyes with the
clay . . . and came seeing " (vv. 6 and 7). The
chatter of the neighbours and the assertion of
the man (vv. 8-13); the appeal to the Pharisees,
the Sabbath, the division among them and their
question to the man (vv. 13-17); the appeal to
the parents, their difficulty and hesitancy, the
reason for it (vv. 18-24) ; the appeal to the man,
his blunt frankness, which is too much for their
subtlety, the exclusion from the synagogue
(or. 25-34): it is impossible to read all this
without feeling that the account is necessarily
that of one who saw and heard.
Ch. xxi. The appearance in Galilee. Note
the group of the disciples : Nathanael quite in-
cidentally called " of Cana in Galilee," explain-
ing his position in chs. j. 45 and ii. 1 ; the
" sons of Zebedee," occupying a position which
it is difficult to explain except on the supposi-
JOHN, GOSPEL OF 1753
tion that one of them is the writer (v. 2) ; the
very words of Peter, " I go a fishing," and the
reply (v. 3) ; the touch of time, " when day was
now breaking " (yivonirns) ; the standing on the
beach ; the ignorance of the disciples (v. 4) ; the
direct question and answer (t>. 5); the "right
side " (v. 6) ; the " disciple whom Jesus loved "
and Peter (v. 7); the draught of fishes, "two
hundred cubits " (v. 8) ; the " fire of charcoal "
(again only in ch. xviii. 9), "and a fish laid
thereon, and a loof"(t>. 9); the "great fishes, a
hundred and fifty and three "(v. 11); the feeling
of reverence (v. 12); the threefold commission
to Peter, iya-rfs-^iXtis, &pvla-irpo0iTia, wot-
fuuvt-p6aicf(m. 15-17) ; the prophecy of Peter's
future (vv. 18, 19); of that of the beloved
disciple (or. 20-22); the mistake and the correc-
tion of it (v. 23).
Here again the whole scene is pictured with
all the detail and life and movement which
belong to a contemporary record.
These three examples are taken from different
parts of the writing; but the whole of the
historical portion is written with this life-like
power and fulness of detail, which carries its
own evidence. Compare other instances in
ch. ii. 1-13 (the marriage at Cana), and vv. 14-16
(cleansing of the Temple) ; ch. vi. 5-14 (feeding
of the five thousand); ch. xi. (raising of Laza-
rus); ch. xii. 20-23 (the Greeks); ch. xiii. 4,
5, 12 (the feet washing); ch. xviii. 1-13
(the betrayal); chs. xviii. and xix. (details of
the Passion) ; ch. xx. 3-8 (the visit to the
sepulchre).
Note further the exact knowledge of the time
at which events took place. The knowledge of
the feasts and the greater divisions of time is
in itself much more full than in the Synoptists,
and this is an important consideration; but as
testifying to a personal witness, the smaller
trifling notes of time which are not worth
knowing, and yet, if known, are strong evidence
of actual memory of the events, are much more
important. Such are "the next day" (ch. i.
29, 35, 43), "the third day " (ch. ii. 1), "after
two days" (ch. iv. 43), "the day following"
(ch. vi. 22), "two days," " four days" (ch. xi.
6, 17), "six days before," "the next day"
(ch. xii. 1, 12), "the first day of the week,"
"the same day at evening" (ch. xx. 1, 19),
"about the tenth hour" (ch. i. 39), "by
night" (ch. iii. 2), "about the sixth hour," "at
the seventh hour " (ch. iv. 6, 52), " when even
was now come" (ch. vi. 16), "and it was
night" (ch. xi& 30), "and it was early"
(ch. xviii. 28), "early, when it was yet dark "
(ch. xx. IX " when the day was now breaking "
(ch. xxi. 4).
The same kind of knowledge furnishing the
same kind of evidence occurs with regard to
numbers of persons or objects. In some cases
they are known exactly, as "two disciples"
(ch. i. 35), "six water-pots " (ch. ii. 6), "five
husbands " (ch. iv. 18), " thirty and eight years "
(ch. v. 5), " five loaves and two small fishes "
(ch. vi. 9 ; also in Synoptists), " four soldiers "
(ch. xix. 23), " two hundred cubits " (ch. xxi.
8), " hundred and fifty and three fishes " (ch.
xxi. 11).
Sometimes an approximation or rough esti-
mate is given, and this is in the present con-
nexion more important than the exact statement.
Digitized by
Google
1754 JOHN, GOSPEL OF
It is the man who knows the circumstances
who can make the guess. The water-pots con-
tain " two or three firkins apiece " (ch. ii. 6) ;
the disciples had rowed " about five and twenty
or thirty furlongs" (ch. vi. 19); Bethany is
"about fifteen furlongs off" (ch. xi. 18); the
mixture of myrrh and aloes is " about a hundred
pound weight " (ch. lix. 39) ; the disciples are
not far from land, "about two hundred fur-
longs " (ch. zxi. 8).
The result of this examination, if we cannot
deduce from it that the writer was necessarily
an eye-witness, is to bring him at least into
immediate contact with those who were. The
argument has sometimes been overstated (cf.
Westminster Review, 1890, pp. 172-182). But
Bishop Lightfoot's final opinion, which records a
review of eighteen years, is : " Additional study
has only strengthened my conviction that this
narrative of St. John could not have been writ-
ten by any one but an eye-witness " (Expositor,
January 1890, p. 2).
The writer moves, moreover, and that with
the ease of familiar knowledge, in the inner
circle of " the disciples' " life and thought. The
following examples will illustrate this : —
Ch. ii. 11 ("believed on Him "), v. 22 (" . . .
when therefore He was risen from the dead, His
disciples remembered that He had said this unto
them ..."); ch. iii. 22 sqq. (knowledge of
what passed between John and his disciples);
ch. iv. 2 (correction of mistake in report:
" although ... but His disciples "), v. 33 (what
the disciples said " one to another ") ; ch. v. 6
(the spring of action : " when Jesus saw him
lying, and knew . . ."); ch. vi. 5-9 (Jesus,
Andrew, and Philip), xm. 22-24 (intricate move-
ment of the boats), w. 70, 71 (" . . . . one of
you is a devil? He spake of Judas Iscariot,
the son of Simon ..."); ch. vii. 3 (what " His
brethren " said unto Jesus) ; ch. ix. 2 (" His
disciples asked Him .... Jesus answered");
ch. xi. 7, 8 (" . . . saith He to His disciples . . .
His disciples say unto Him ...."), "• 16
("Thomas therefore, who is called tHdymus,
said unto his fellow-disciples ...."); ch. xii. 16
(" These things understood not the disciples at
the first "), vo. 20-22 (the Greeks and
Philip); ch. xiii. 6-11 (Simon Peter and the
feet-washing), r. 22 (" looked . . . ., doubting
of whom He spake "), t>. 28 (" no man at the
table knew .... Some thought ...."); ch. xiv.
5-14 (Jesus, Thomas, Philip, the Way, and the
Father); ch. xvi. 17 ("What is this that He
saith unto us ....?"); ch. xviii. 2 (" for Jesus
ofttimes resorted thither ...."); ch. xx. 9
(" For as yet they knew not the Scriptures "),
c. 1 9 (" when the doors were shut where the
disciples were for fear of the Jews, Jesus came "),
e. 25 (Thomas Didymus : " The other disciples
therefore said unto him .... But he said unto
them ") ; ch. xxi., especially re. 3-5 (the appear-
ance on the beach).
The writer is acquainted also with the feelings,
thoughts, and springs of action of Jesus Him-
self. See in proof of this : —
Ch. ii. 24, 25 (" Jesus did not trust himself
.... for He himself knew what was in man ") ;
ch. iv. 1 (" When therefore the Lord knew
...."); ch. v. 6 (Bethesda : " When Jesus saw
him lying, and knew ...."); ch. vi. 6 (Philip :
" This He said to prove him, for He himself knew
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
what He would do "), r. 15 (" Jesus therefore,
perceiving that ...."), «. 61 ("Bat Jesos
knowing in himself"), v. 64 (" For Jesui knew
from the beginning ...."); ch. vii. 1 ( u for He
would not walk in Judaea, because....").
r. 6 (" Jesus therefore saith unto them *), t. Is
("not publicly, but as it were in secret*);
ch. xi. 33 ("groaned in the spirit, and to
troubled "), v. 54 ("Jesus therefore walked »
more openly among the Jews"); ch. xiii. 1
(" Jesus knowing that His hour was come ....
loved them to the uttermost "), e. 3 ("knowing
that the Father had given all things into Hit
hands "), t. 11 (" For He knew him thit
should betray Him; therefore said He *\
v. 21 (" He was troubled in the spirit");
ch. xvi. 19 ("Jesus perceived that they wen
desirous to ask Him ...."); eh. xviii. 4 (" Jem
therefore, knowing all the things that ret
coming upon Him ....") ; ch. xix. 28 (" .tea
knowing that all things were now accompli»W
....").
By a series of indnctions then, each one hei«:
separately based upon a series of indiridoi
instances — and these, be it again noted, are but
examples of instances which are to be foo*
throughout the whole writing — the followiit,
results are arrived at : —
(1) The writer was a Jew : (2) he was s Je»
acquainted with the Hebrew language ; (3) k
was personally acquainted with the topogiifi?
of Palestine, and with minute details of the tit;
and temple of Jerusalem, and his knowledge «■'
therefore acquired before a.d. 70; (4) hen-'
intimately acquainted with the life of theitKt
circle of the Apostles, and was therefore ok ''
them ; (5) he had special knowledge of the woii
and inner life of John Baptist; (6) he t>:
special knowledge of the work and inner lift >
Jesus.
This is one set of conditions which is assert*'
of the writer by the writing itself.
There is another set of conditions which is
not less positively asserted by the writing rtseiC
and the problem of authorship require! tbit
both sets of conditions shall be satisfied.
(a) If the author is a Jew, with s fall «^
minute knowledge of Judaism, he is also a J"
to whom that Judaism is a thing of the fan*
past, from which he has himself advsneed urte >
new region of life and thought.
See as examples of this ch. ii. 6 (" after the
manner of the purifying of the Jews "); ch. f
9 (" The Jews have no dealings with the *
maritans"); ch. v. 2 ("which is called ia tfc
Hebrew tongue Bethesda"); ch. xix. 41 ("•*
manner of the Jews to bury ").
"The Jews " (ot 'IovSttioi) are not onlyspok"
of throughout as a body from whom the writer
is distinct, but they are represented ss tie
opponents of the Lord. It was "the Jew«
who said unto Him, "What sign shewed The*
unto us?" (ch. ii. 18); who "said unto km
that was cured, It is the Sabbath day," sod «•
" persecute Jesus and sought to slay Hist, ■*•
cause He had done these things on the Ssbta" 1
day " (ch. v. 10, 16) ; who " murmured aim"
because He said, 1 aui the bread which came down
from heaven " (ch. vi. 41) ; who ask, " Will Be
kill himself? because He saith, Whither I p> !*
cannot come" (ch. viii. 21); who upoa tn
occasions " took up stones to stone Him (<**'
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
▼iii. 59, 1. 31) ; who " said unto Him, Say we not
well that thou art a Samaritan and hast a devil "
(ch. viii. 48, 52, 57) ; who in the case of the
man who was born blind " did not believe con-
cerning him that he had been blind," and had
agreed about Jesus, " that if any man did confess
that He was Christ, he should be put out of the
synagogue " (ch. ix. 18, 22). Joseph of Ari-
mathaea was " a disciple of Jesus, but secretly
for fear of the Jews" (ch. xix. 28), and "the
doors were shut when the disciples were as-
sembled for fear of the Jews " (ch. xx. 19).
The writer thinks also of " the Passover of
the Jews " (chs. ii. 13, xi. 55) ; of the " feast of
the Jews " (chs. v. 1, vi. 4, vii. 2) j of a " ruler
of the Jews " (ch. iii. 1) ; of "the Jews' pre-
paration day " (rapao-ictvii, ch. xix. 42).
It is not surprising that many critics have
felt the force of this distinctness nnd distance
from Judaism so fully, that they have come to
the conclusion that the writer could not have
been himself a Jew ; but these thoughts and
words are to be considered in connexion with those
which have been adduced above (p. 1749 sq.), and
also with snch references as the following
(cp. Oscar Holtzmann, Das Johannesevangeliwm,
pp. 193-4):—
The woman of Samaria asks Jesus, " How is it
that thou being a Jew . . . 1 " and Jesus tells
her, " Ye worship ye know not what ; we know
what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews "
(ch. iv. 9, 22).
Moses is recognized as the true lawgiver
(chs. i. 17, vii. 19), and God spake unto him
(ch. ix. 29). Jesus says to the Jews, "Tour
father Abraham rejoiced to see my day " (ch.
viii. 56). Isaiah "saw His glory and spake of
Him"(ch. xii.41).
Nathanael is " an Israelite indeed in whom is
mo guile " ; and he uses the terms " Son of God "
and "King of Israel" as titles which coalesce
in the person of Jesus (ch. i. 47 ; cp. ch. xix.
15, 21).
(0) An exact study of the thoughts and words
of the Gospel makes it necessary to believe that
the writer was largely influenced by the teach-
ing of St. Paul — unless indeed it is admitted
that St. Paul was acquainted with the Johan-
nine tradition • — and in particular that he was
placed in philosophical and theological circles
identical with or closely allied to those of the
Epistle to the Colossians, and to those of the
encyclical Asiatic letter which is known to us as
the Epistle to the Ephesians^ The full proof of this
is to be found only in a complete list of parallel
passages and in a Greek concordance ; and if we
bear in mind the difference of subject-matter
between the Gospel and these letters, it is not
less than full proof. In this place space cannot
be found for more than a general reference, and
the student will not need more guidance than
is furnished by his concordance and his com-
mentaries. A specially valuable examination
of the relation between the Epistles to the
Ephesians and the Colossians will be found in
Heinrich Holtzmann's Kritik der Epheser- una*
Kohsserbriefe, 1872. The relations of both to
* Cp. P. Ewald, Dot HauptprobUm der Brangtlien-
frage 1890. The English ruder will find Ewald's argu-
ments' and further references ro Knowllng's Witness of
tkc epistles, 18*2, pp. S2S «qq.
JOHN, GOSPEL OF 1755
John are investigated in pp. 267-271, and
parallels are shown to exist between the Gospel
and the Colossian Epistle which must be more
than accidental, while in the Ephesian Epistle
they become even more striking. The follow-
ing examples are sufficient to show how real
the grounds of comparison are : —
OvoVif ava£tfh}K«v etc To av^vf ti ccmr <l fiij
top ovpavov tl pvij o « rov <m cat jtarc'Pif ;
ovpavov KVrafids. 'O xarstfSac auroc tcrnr
John HI. 13. xal o ara0af vntpivm way
rap rwr oiipavitv.
Epb. iv. 9, 10.
MaAAop <5« xat eArfyx'rc
(i.t the Spy* tov cncorovt).
TA Si irajra «'Aryxoft«'a
vvb rov $wrof ^apcpovrai*
nay yap TO $av*povp.evoy
4*if cortr.
Eph. v. 11, 13.
'Of TCftpa <ptoT<K wtpiira-
Tilrt. Eph. v. 8.
Tl&c; yap o tavAa irpatr-
OW V.UTCt TO $»f KOI OVK
«PX«T<U VOOC TO <pw? if O flif
*^*YX^J7 "r* *oya avrov,
'O Si rota,* r^y aXr/Qciay
SpXtrat wpbc to $wc 'iyu
<ftayep*ath/j avrov Ta ipya..
John 111. 20, 21.
IlcpMrar«tr« an to $wc
i\rrt. John xil. 35.
Cp. also John i. 5 with Eph. iv. 18, v. 8-14.
John i. 14 with Eph. i. 13.
John iii. 12 with Eph. i. 3, 20 ; ii. 6.
John iii. 13 with Eph. iv. 8-10.
John xiii. 34 with Eph. i. 15 ; iv. 2, 26, 32 ;
v. 21.
John xiv. 30 with Eph. ii. 2.
Cp. further John i. 4 and Col. i. 15-17.
John i. 14, 16 and Col. i. 19 ; ii. 9, 10.
John i. 18 and Col. i. 15.
" Light and darkness " (John generally), Col.
i. 12, 13.
John iii. 3 and Col. iii. 1, 2, 9, 10.
John vi. 32, 33 and Col. ii. 17.
John xiii. 34 and Col. iii. 13.
John xiv. 6 and Col. ii. 3.
John xviii. 37, xv. 15, xvii. 26 and Col. i.
26, 27.
See especially Oscar Holtzmann, op. cit. pp.
174-5, who thinks it certain that the Colossian
Epistle stands between St. Paul (!) and tiie
Fourth Gospel.
(7) A careful comparison of the Gospel with
the First Epistle of Peter brings out also points
of resemblance which are sufficiently striking
to warrant the deduction that the writings are
in some way connected with each other : —
Ot ovk f£* aiudrwr oi>6i 'AyayeyfvyvHulyoioiiK
ex eVAijparoc <rap*oc ovfic
fjc 6«Awiaroc aropoc iAA" in
0rov iytyvqviio'av.
John I. 13.
'Ear ui} tic; ytvyr/Sfj
iylgty. John III. 3.
(See the context.)
'Iii b ap.ro? rov oVov.
John I. 2», 36.
npo^ara, roi^F, vot*
pan* to. irpoflaTa pov.
Johnx. 2-16; xxl. 1C.1T.
o*vopa< tytaprifi aAAd
aQBaprov 6ia Aoyov £itVTOt
S,ov icai pcVorroc.
1 Pet. I. 23.
'O Kara to froAv avrov
cAcoc ayayiv rqcrac Tppac.
1 Pet. i. 3.
(The word occurs here
only in the New Testa-
ment. Cp. Justin Martyr,
Apology. I. 61.)
'Of as vo v ajuofiov.
1 Pet. 1. 19.
(Elsewhere In New Tes-
tament only In Acts viii.
32. In quotation from Is.
111). J.)
Mtrc yap wc vpofiara
wXayufttyou aAAa marpd-
c^t)t« yvy i*l rhv iroip.iva
irat iwivKOwov rav ^vxuy
vfiur. 1 Pet. II. 26.
Digitized by
Google
1756
JOHN, GOSPEL OP
noiparar* to cf vfiir
woinrioy tov fttav • . . .
-rvvot ytcojurot tov wogi-
riov. 1 Pet. y. J, 3.
*Oti «wp«jcac jie vtirt- *Ov ova tooVm ay*ir£r«,
trrtvmat • Maxaptot oc pi| f if or apri /*»j bfimmt wxa-
l&irrtt icol irtOTVvoarr*?. HO OT ret Si ■ • • .
John xx. 2». 1 Pet 1. 8.
(J) If a like process of comparison is applied
to the Fourth Gospel and the Epistle of James,
it furnishes results which, when the ethicai
nature of the Epistle is borne in mind, are
scarcely less striking : —
Cp. James i. 18 with John iii. 3 and 13;
James iv. 5 with John iii. 5 ; James ii. 12 and
i. 25 with John viii. 31 ; James ii. 1 with
John v. 44 ; James v. 14 with John xv. 16, xvi.
23; James v. 19 with John v. 24: and see
especially the examination of these passages in
Dr. Paul Ewald's Dot Hauptprobtem der Evan-
gelienfrage (1890). Cp. also Zeller on the
literary dependence of St. James upon the Apo-
calypse in the Zeitschrift mss. Theol., 1863,
pp. 93-96 ; Hilgenfeld, JSinltitung, 1875, p. 540;
and Holtzmann, Emleitung, 188$, p. 510.
(<) It seems further to be clear from a study
of the thoughts and words of the Gospel, that
it is closely connected with the circles of
thought which had Asia Minor, and especially
Ephesus, for a centre. We hare seen above its
connexion with the Asiatic Epistles of St. Paul ;
and if we regard not so much individual ex-
pressions as the tone of the whole, we should
say that the Gospel was more like the Epistle
to the Hebrews than any other writing in the
New Testament. Tobler (cp. supra, p. 1746) has
founded upon this general tone of the Gospel an
ingenious argument that it was the work of
Apollos, and the general position of critics who
do not accept the Johannine authorship is that
there are so many traces of the language and
thought which is associated with Philo and
Alexandria, that it is impossible to believe that
the author was not a pupil of the Alexandrian
school. Nor is it any matter of surprise that
men who have directed their attention chiefly
to this one aspect of the question should have
come to this conclusion. The matter of surprise
is that the influence of Philo shonld have been
denied. The natural impression on reading of
A0701, &PX" y > Itonytvris, TptrrAroKOt, foWj,
b\il8tta, $&>, TopfxAirros, rK^pttfta, is that we
are in contact with the rtpl x*pov$l/i and -rtpl
Koffiorotas. The error here, as so often, is to
press part of the truth until it becomes entire
error ; but it is also entire error to deny part of
the truth. Both extremes are false. The truth
remains as one, but as only one, of the factors of
our problem, that the authorship of the Fourth
Gospel is to be sought upon Ephesian ground.
We hare now surveyed, very cursorily indeed,
but with such fulness as our present scope and
space permit, the conditions of authorship
which are required by the writing before us.
A more complete statement of them may be
sought iu the chief works upon the Gospel to
which reference is made in this article. But
taking only the main points as they here pre-
sent themselves, we hare a problem which is
sufficiently complex. The writer must have
been a disciple of John Baptist ; an eye-witness
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
or in contact with those who were ; one of the
inner group of the disciples of Jesus ; a Jew by
birth and training: a Greek by culture aid
surroundings at the time he wrote ; a Jew with
a foot on each side of the great chasm which
was caused by the destruction of Jerusalem ; t
Palestinian; an Ephesian; in contact with St.
Peter and St. James, the brother of our Lord ; a
follower of St. Paul. These are some of the
wards of the lock which we are asked to tun.
History gives its key in the person of John, the
son of Zebedee (cp. article Johs, the Apostle),
whose life fulfils every condition, and turns the
lock. Theory has tried in vain to prove that
this is not the key, and has tried in rain to find
another.
n. Date of the Gospel
If the Gospel was written by John, the son of
Zebedee, the question of its date is reduced t»
comparatively narrow limits. Irenaens tells us
(Adv. Haer. ii. ch. xxii. 5 ; iii. ch. iii. 4) that St.
John lived to the " time of Trajan " (a.d. 98-1 17.
Cp. article John, the Apostle). This mean
that his death is to be placed early in the reign
of Trajan, and that the close of the first century
is a terminus ad quern. To fix, on the other
hand, a terminus a quo, is a more difficult task.
If the last chapter is regarded as an appendix,
and there seems to be every reason for suppos-
ing that it is so, though an appendix which was
absent from no published copy of the Gospel,
and is to be traced to the same source (rp. 24
and 25 are to be regarded from another point of
view), it follows that the Gospel is to be placed
at an interval of perhaps some years before the
close of the Apostle's life. The general opinioe
of the early Church pointed to a.d. 83 or 86.
Without fixing limits so narrow, it may be said
with great probability that the date is sab-
sequent to A.D. 80, and not much if any earlier
than A.D. 90.
Irenaeus asserts that " he put forth his Gospel
while he abode in Ephesus in Asia " (Adv. Beer.
iii. 1 ; Euseb. Hist. Eccles. v. 8), and there is do
sufficient reason to question this statement (cp.
Ellicott's New Test. Commentary, i. pp. 37o-7
and 551).
III. Matter add Chabactebjsticb.
A. Purpose and Scheme. — The earliest external
statement of the origin of this Gospel which is
now known is probably that of the Muratoriaa
Fragment. It represents the author as being
entreated by his fellow-disciples and bishops,
and consenting, after fasting and a revelation to
Andrew that John should relate all things with
the recognition of them all (cp. Tregellea, Qmom
Muratorianus, 1867, pp. 1-21 and 32-35). The
statement of Irenaeus that the purpose was to
meet the error of Cerinthus and the Nicolaitans
(Adv. Haer. iii. ch. xi.) is not inconsistent with
the statement of the Fragment, and is of special
interest from the writer's immediate connexion
with the school of St. John. It meets us again
(but with the Ebionites substituted for the
Nicolaitans) in Tertullian (De Praete. adv.
Haer. xxxiii.), Epiphanius (Haer. It 12), and
Jerome (De Fir. III. ix.). Eusebius represents
Clement of Alexandria as stating that John
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPEL OF JOHN, GOSPEL OF 1757
perceived that what had reference to the body
was sufficiently told, and that, encouraged by
hU friends and urged by the Spirit, he wrote a
spiritual Gospel {Hist. Eoetea. vi. 15); and he
himself expands this statement into a more
definite expression of the complementary nature
of the work (pp. cit. iii. 24). From the first,
then, the distinct but not opposed elements of
dogmatic teaching, polemical removal of error,
and historical addition to previously existing
records, are recognized in the purpose of the
Gospel. Modern writers have too frequently
terms in which the object is declared by the
author, and in which his method of selection is
declared both by himself and his amanuensis or
editor. Some only of the many signs which
Jesus did are written in this book — " if all the
things which He did should be written, the
world itself would not contain the books "—and
these are written to establish faith in the
Messiahship, to prove that " Jesus is the Christ,
the Son of God " (chs. xx. 30, 31, and xxi. 25).
The work then is a series of chronicles rather
than a history, and the related events and dis-
pressed one of these elements to the exclusion | courses are chosen with an express dogmatic
of others, and have sometimes with little reason | purpose which is throughout the ruling idea.
found more limited objects, as the answer to the
errors of Docetism (see esp. Schneckenburger,
lieitrage zur EinleiUmq in N. T., 1832, pp. 60
sqq.), or to the disciples of John Baptist (cp.
art. Johannesjunger, Schenkel's Bibel- Lexicon,
vol. iii. pp. 324 sqq.).
The traditional view of the purpose is not
opposed to that which is expressed in the
writing itself, but it is singular that attention
The life of Jesus is a revelation, accepted and
understood by faith, denied and rejected by un-
belief. The great facts of this revelation, and
the conflict of these opposing principles, are the
subjects of the writing ; Ephesus, its theology,
philosophy, language, form necessarily the
framework in which thesel subjects are set (cp.
Bampton Lectures, 1890, pp. 427 sqq.).
The following outline will serve to show the
has been so seldom directed to the definite ! progress of thought : —
i. PROLOGUE : Man sod the eternity of the past (oh. L 1-18).
Thi Word
(1) was God (eo. 1-5) ;
(2) became man (pp. 6-13) ;
(3) revealed Ms Father (en. 14-18).
ti. MANIFESTATION OF JESUS (chs. 1. 18-lv. M).
1. Witness or thi Baptist (ch. i. 19-40).
3. Manifestation to individuals (chs. L 41-U. 11):
(1) to first disciples— witness a/man (ch. i. 41-51) ;
(3) at Carta of Galilee — witness of nature (ch. U. 1-11).
3. Manifestation ih public (chs. U. 12-lv. 54):
(1) in Jerusalem— the Temple (ch. li. 11-33);
(3) in Jerusalem— the city ; Nicodemus (chs. U. 33-ili. 31);
(3) in Judaea— the BaptUt (ch. ill. 32-3S) ;
(4) in Samaria— the woman ; the people (ch. iv. 1-43) ;
(5) in Galilee -the people; the courtier (cb. tv. 43-54).
ill. THE FULLER REVELATION : GROWTH OF UNBELIEF AMONG THE JEWS (ch. v. 1-xli. 50).
1. Lira (chs. v.-vi. 71).
(1) This bated upon the unity of the Son with the father (ch. v.).
(3) The Incarnation life for mankind (ch. vi.).
Result : On one hand, defection ; on the other, fuller confession (ch. vi. 53-7 1).
3. Truth; Lioht; Love (chs. vU. 1-x. 43>
(I) Truth (ch. vli.).
Result : Division among the people and in the Sanhedrln (vs. 40-53).
(3) Lioht ; the man born blind (chs. vtll. 12-ix. 41).
Result : Objections of the Pharisees; spiritual light and darkness (ch. lx. 36-41).
(3) Love ; the Good Shepherd ; the feast of Dedication (cb. x. 1-42).
Result : Charge of blasphemy ; escape beyond Jordan ; many believed there (ye. 31-43).
3. Fuller Revelation or Life, Troth, Lioht, Love; more hostile unbelief or the Jews
(chs. xl.-xll. 60).
Lazarus raised ; tbe Ssnhcdrin ; the supper at Bethany ; the entry into Jerusalem ; the wider
kingdom ; the Greeks.
Result : Conflict throughout this section issuing In rejection by the Jews of light (ch. xlL 45),
love (47), truth (43), Ufe (50).
Iv. THE FULLER REVELATION: GROWTH OF FAITH AMONG THE DISCIPLES (chs. xlll. 1-
rvlL.36).
1. LOVB IK HOHILIATION (ch. Xlli. 1-34).
The feet-washing ; the interpretation of it ; the betrayal.
3. Last words or love to the Faithful (chs. xitl. 31-xvi. 33).
The father's House ; the Paraclete ; the True Vine ; their relation to Himself and to the world,
3. Love in the Intebcessobt Prates (cb. xvli. 1-34).
v. CLIMAX OF UNBELIEF: SURRENDER AND CRUCIFIXION (chs. xvili. 1-xlx. 43).
1. Beieatal and Apprehension (ch. xvtii. 1-11).
a. Trials setose Jewish Tribunals (vs. 13-37).
Denial by St. Peter (pp. 17, 35, 37).
3. Trials before the Roman Proconsul (chs. xvili. 38-xlx. 1*).
4. Submission to Death (ch. xlx. 17-43).
vi. CLIMAX OF FAITH: RESURRECTION AND PROOFS (cb. xx.).
1. SS. Peter and John at the Sepulchre (pp. 1-10).
3. Mart Maodalene at the Sepulchre (re. 11-18).
Digitized by
Google
1758
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
X Fibst ArrKioAscr. to the Tor (tm. 19-23).
4. ArrBABAV.r. to the Eucths (rr. xi-39).
... to Tbomu : " Mr Lord end my God."
5. E»d or Wamxo waax nns Cuuax u nucmcD ; tbb
(rr. 30-3 I).
tU. EPILOGUE : THE FUTURE (ch. xxi.).
1. The Draught or Kisses (rr. 1-8).
2. The Beuktast ; the Third Ma^ifestatioh to the Ducirua (re. t-14).
3. Tax Test and tbi Commission (rr. 15-23).
a. Peter"! Lore and PUitM.
4. Attestatiox or tbx Tscth or the Gosra. (m. 14, 25).
(1) t,)/cUow~ducipl4u(r. 24),
(2) by ttc (WKliiMnuu (r. 25).
(For details of this analysis, cp. Ellicott's
Xeio Test. Commentary, vol. i. St. John, or
better Luthardt's Das Johanneitche Ecangetiitm,
ed. 2, 1875, upon which it is based: and for a
full description of the principles of arrangement,
cp. Httnig, Die Construction d. 4ten En. in Zeit-
schrift f. wits. Theol. 1871, pp. 535 sqq.;
Reitr&ie x. d. iten Ac, ibid. 1883, pp. 216 sqq.,
and 1884, pp. 85 sqq. ; and also H. Holtzmann,
Veber die Disposition d. Attn A'r., ibid. 1881,
pp. 257 Sqq.)
B. Relation to the Apocalypse. (Cp. art.
Revelation.) — The relation of the Fourth
Gospel to the Apocalypse presents a problem of
greater difficulty. The difference in style ; the
Hebraic cast of thought and phrase ; the halting
Greek ; the absence or infrequent use of charac-
teristic Johannine words, such as (pis, trKorta,
koVuot, (uii alamos, and of favourite Johannine
particles, as koBvs, fi4r, fuvroi, xdVrorf, x«*-
Bort ; the presence of expressions such as o'ueov-
lUrn, 6wo/Mrfi, Kparur to oVo/io, TcayroKpdretp,
aprlor; the changed use or form of the same
word (as o4V, illative only ; ifii)y, not doubled ;
ISoi, not IJ« ; 'ltpowraX-fiu, never 'ltpo<r6\vfui),
at once strike the thoughtful reader, and have
formed one of the commonplaces of criticism
from the days of Dionysius of Alexandria down-
wards. Dionysius was not indeed wholly free
from interest in seeing the differences between
the two writings, and in excluding the Apoca-
lypse from the circle of Johannine writings,
because it differed so widely from the Fourth
Gospel and the Epistle, inasmuch as it also
differed from his own position in the Chiliastic
controversy (Euseb. Hist. Etxles. vii. 24, 25).
The writings are different; the Fourth Gospel
and the Epistle are by John, the son of Zebedee ;
therefore the Apocalypse, though it is the work
of some holy and inspired man, is not by John.
Such is the argument of the third century.
The writings are different; no conclusion of
modern criticism is more certain than this;
John cannot be the author of Gospel and Epistle
on the one hand, and of the Apocalypse on the
other; the Apocalypse is the best attested
writing of the New Testament ; therefore the
Fourth Gospel and the Epistle are not by John.
Such has sometimes been the argument of the
nineteenth century. As a matter of fact, though
the evidence for the authorship of the Apoca-
lypse is strong, it cannot be compared with that
which exists for the Gospel, and is not equal to
that which exists for the Epistle ; much less is it
equal to that which results from the combined
and mutually supporting testimony which exists
for the Fourth Gospel and the Epistle considered
in their established unity. If we are placed iu
this dilemma, there can be no question as to
which alternative we must choose. We must
accept the criticism of the third century, aad
not that of the nineteenth.
But does the dilemma really exist ? Granted
what we may, for the sake of brevity, call the
distinctly Hebraic colouring of the Apocalypse
and the distinctly Greek colouring of the
Gospel, is it not possible that these colours
might have been, and as a matter of tact were,
blended in the life of one man ? We have sees
above (p. 1750) that the Fourth Gospel itself
necessarily requires as a condition of authorship
a Hebrew of Hebrews, though it requires also
that this Hebraism should hare been in the far
past, and that Judaism should, in the author's
conception of the Christ, have developed into a
religion of humanity. The probable chronology
of the life and writings of the Apostle Joan
would place the Apocalypse some thirty yean
earlier than the Gospel, the one at the close of
the Hebrew, the other at the close of the Greek,
period of his life : the one when his thoughts
were wholly Hebrew, though for Greek readers
he endeavoured to express them in Greek ; the
other when his thoughts and language had been
for a generation Greek, though he can never lose
the Shibboleths of his earlier life.
A theory of the composition of the Apocalypse
which has lately attracted a good deal of atten-
tion, chiefly perhaps because it has won the
adhesion of Dr. Adolf Harnack, u based upon
the view that the author has worked over aa
earlier Hebrew Apocalypse. Without entering
here upon a discussion which does not rail
within our present subject, it may be useful U
refer to Harnack and Von Gebhardt's Texte sad
Untersuchungen zur OeschichU der aitchrist-
lichen Literatur, Bd. ii.. Heft 3; Die Ofen-
barung Johannis, tine JSdische Apokalypae ta
christlicher Bearbeitung von E. Viscker, nut
einem Ifachwort ton Adoiph Harnack, 1886, and
to the criticism of Schoen in his Origin* oV
V Apocalypse, 1887, which also contains a useful
account of the literature of the subject. The
theological reviews have naturally discussed this
question from both sides, and articles of special
interest by MM. Menegoz, Boron, and Bruston
hare appeared in the lievtie de Tkeoloqie dt
Lausanne, 1888.
Without regarding Vischer s theory as es-
tablished, the existence of a wide field of
Hebrew Apocalyptic literature, which cannot be
questioned, may more than explain, if any ex-
planation is needed, the strong Jewish colouring
of the New Testament Apocalypse. But, as a
matter of fact, the diversity of style between
the Fourth Gospel and the Apocalypse has by
many critics been made unduly prominent, and
the similarity of style and matter has been
unduly kept in the background. Here, again,
the eye has seen that which it looked for. Let
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
it look at the Apocalypse with the view of
noting the resemblance between it and the
Gospel : —
(1 ) It will be found, on careful examination,
that the composition of the works as a whole is,
with all their many differences, on the same
general plan. It has often been nrged that the
Apocalypse is arranged on a careful plan, in
which the numbers ten, seven, three recur, and
the Gospel is an even unarranged flow of narra-
tive. We have seen, in the analysis of the
Gospel (p. 1757), that it is also constructed on
an elaborate plan, which in its leading features
closely resembles that of the Apocalypse. It
has been often argued, indeed, that the Gospel
cannot be strictly historical, just because its
materials take the shape of an ideal composition.
(2.) The doctrinal positions are at root the
same, though from the very different nature of
the two writings this is not always apparent
upon the surface. This is an axiom even of the
Tubingen School, for it is necessary to the
position that the writer of the Gospel sought to
use the authority of John, the author of the
Apocalypse, and therefore placed himself in the
position of the seer (cp. Baur, Christenthwn der
drei ersten Jahrhundcrte, p. 132 ; Die kanon-
ischen Evangclien, p. 380 0- And it has been
abundantly established by more than one of the
writers on the Theology of St. John to whom
reference has been already made. The question
is one which can be dealt with only in a
treatise. It will be sufficient to quote here the
results of a full examination which has been
made by Von Gebhardt in his Doctrine of the
Apocalypse. He deduces from a lengthy inves-
tigation the following result: — "If, therefore,
the relation discovered by us to exist between
the doctrine of the two is not to remain an in-
soluble enigma, we must acknowledge that the
author of the Apocalypse is also the author of
the Gospel and the Epistles; and indeed, since
the origin of the former with the Apostle
John is not inconsistent, either with external
or internal evidence, ... that the author is
the Apostle John; a result which agrees with
tradition, and is confirmed by it, as also on its
own side it confirms the tradition" (Eng. Tr.
p. 413).
(3.) The lexical and grammatical forms, in the
midst of variety which has been in part exag-
gerated and in part admits of natural explana-
tion, present a substantial agreement which at
least suggests common authorship. Dr. Weiss
(Einleitung, 2nd ed., 1889, pp. 466-7) gives
the following list of terms, apart from merely
insignificant words, which are common to the
Apocalypse and the Gospel : —
il tuwt\ot, avffios p-4yas, Itpyloy, Scu/ioVtor
(not tal/iav), tr)ydptov, Jfi(a (J. t. 9tov, I6(ay
SiSoVoi), i£ovata (c. inf. «"{. cxw), fi (pvfos, tj
iiy-ipa (Jittlyij), 0tptau6t, 8\?<fits (9\. lx*'*)t fy't
(r/>i'x<>), 9ipa (metaph.), niAapot, Kara$o\i)
JOHN, GOSPEL OP
1759
' •• So diss die Krltlk sicb hier In dem elgenen r'alle
beflndet, zwel schetnbar ganz wlder<prechende Beh&apt-
ungen safstellea zu muHsen, d«ss der Kvsngellsl uu-
mugllch der Apokalyptlker seyn ksnn, und dass der
Evangelist selbet nlcbts indero seyn will als der
Apokalvptlker . . . zwiscben dem EvangeUum und der
Apokalrpse such wieder eine gewisse Analogue und
Verwandtichau suttnadet . . . ."
k6ouov, Kk4*ri)t (figuratively), KotKla, koVos,
Kpifux, Kvptt (in address), Kan-r&s, Kixvas, fidvm,
p.4pos (l?x« u ')> V-bpoy, pipov, yinfn and rvfuplot,
it6s, c. gen., ttpts, tifits, mryl) (8!otoj) and
roraftol (Star. (.), -rfjxvs, -r\6ioy, rrorfiptoy,
xp6fiara, traravas, crr)ut7oy, ctitos, actios, arci\-
Aaioy, aril i os, ar4(payos, Star a, vlbs r.
av8p., <po7yt£, (ppiap, <pv\aicfi, Sia rby <f>60ov,
tpoiyr, (ptydkn (p., cutoitty rrjr a).), x^ 10 ?* '*
xipros, i^evSor, x}A0<r 7) Spa (4 k tin) i) lip.),
SirioToj, $atis, yv/ivis, ItKola xplois, ttvpo
(ttvrt), iyrtiSty and ixtWty, ifipalorl, iyyis
(of time), tavuaaris, Xaos, iv \tvKo7s, \l9tros,
/itoov, fiiKas, pal, taos and roaovros, xop<bv-
po is, nrvxis, Tax^, tpirpooDty, bwlau, 4-wdyu,
broKdru, ctyid(tty, ayopd(ttv, atptiv \(9ov, itya-
ftalrHv (to heaven), kvolytty, airipxtoQai *p6s,
aprd&ty, $dwrtty, 0aard{tty, ytpl(tty Tt
f* rty., S4tty (StStn4vos), iityav, 8o(d(tty (r.
Syoua), ixfidWtiy f{«, 4xKtyrt7y, 4icroptit-
trSat, 4xx4ttv, i\*yx*"'i iftri94yat, ttonKa, iptv-
y&y, t ipxiatyos (tpxou Kal ttt), irotpA(tty.
tixapiartiy, 9avfti(tty Sid, Btpartitty, 9tpl(tty,
Itrrdyat (Jar-qua, tends, tarny), Urxitty, Katri-
o9ai and Katl(tty, xalttrSai, xarafialytty iter, oip.,
xaratpayt7v, xaxnyopt7v, xKaltty, Kosrtay,
Kpd(tty, xpartty, xpHrrtty Axd, kvkAoSv, Ao-
\*ty utri (\4yuy), \ap.$dytty ix, Koitty, fif-
6ucrVi)yai, /ueAAciy, firrja-Sfircu, nvTiiwvtieiv,
tnpalytty, dSiiytTy, staltiy, seaptiyai, rtiyay,
*tip&(tty, rinTfui, xtpi&AXhtiV, sttd(fty,
xly*iy, Tbrrtw (rpbs r. iritas), witty, irot-
fialvtty, TtpoaKwely, tpotrtirtvety, mt\*7y, ffriu-
alyttv, <TK7\yovy, avufiovKtitty, ovvd-
y*tv, vvyrpl&tty, aipay, atpdrrtty, ae>payl-
(tty, reAeiv, Tnptty 4k, rUcrtut, rpixtty, tpaytty
4k, tpiptty (oXattv), (ptiytty ((ptii^eirSat) Itwi,
<pt\c7v ; <po$(t(r$ai (jii) ipofictffii), (partly, (purl-
(tty, xoprd(i<r9at.
The following words are found alike in the
Apocalypse and the Epistle : —
efovAa, crfcdVSaAoi', tytvSoirpoip'frrTis, Urxvp6s,
^tittaiat, rtottiy r. ttKatoainrny.
The following words are common to all the
Johannine writings : —
' Std$o\os, StSaxti, (VroAaf, Kplats, uaprvpla
and uaprvptty, fuaOAs, fyo/ia (8io r. Sr.),
axipuct, XP*^"' Ix*'"' fya> a\ti9ai6s, &prt,
taxaros (of time), l\os, Suotos (with dat.), raj
(never Stoj) with a following articled Participle
and with a following negative, tray, Iva pt4i t
iy&ytov, atpcty, a-woffriWity, apvtitrBat, olta irov
(wdOty), da- and 4$4px*o9at, Vikhv, Btaipuv,
9avpd(fty, Ktta8at, K\tUty, Kitty, niytty, purity,
ytK&v, ipj>\oyiiy, StfitaBat, wtptstartty, xAo-
yay, -r\7)povy (rtwAripo>fi.4vos), Trip tty (t. iyr.,
T. A07.), budytty, <paivitv, tpaytpovy,
Xalptty.
Cp. especially Character of the Greek of the
Apocalypse, Randell, Pulpit Comm. : Revelation,
pp. xxii. sqq.
C. Relation to the Johannine Epistles. — The
general questions connected with these Epistles
are dealt with in separate articles [John,
Epistles of; Jobs, First Epistle General
Of], in which good reason is shown for believing
that all of them, and very strong reason is
shown for believing that the First Epistle in
particular, are to be traced to St. John.
But this seems to be the right place to
inquire what relation exists between the Gospel
and the Epistles, especially the First.
Digitized by
Google
1760 JOHN, GOSPEL OP
It can hardly be maintained seriously, thongb
effort* hare been made to do to in the intereeU
of the negstire criticiim of the Gospel, that this
writing does not bear unmistakable marks of
unity of authorship with the Fourth Gospel.
Moat of the Commentaries and Introductions
contain lists of words and phrases which, if they
are treated not as lists but compared with the
parallel passages and context, leave no room for
doubt. One of the best ia that in De Wette's
Emleitung (§ 177 a), which is itself based upon
the earlier lists of Eichhorn and Schultze.
Whatever, then, is the relation of time or
interdependence of these writings ; whether the
Epistle is to be regarded as a pastoral letter, or
as being prior to, or as a postscript to the
Gospel — and this question, perhaps, does not
admit of decision, because the matter of the
Gospel must hare been largely in oral circula-
tion before it was reduced to its present written
form — the two writings come from the same
hand. For our present purpose the importance
of this lies in the fact that the external evidence
for the First Epistle, especially the decisive
evidence of Papias and Polycarp (cp. p. 1743),
becomes evidence for the Fourth Gospel also.
The Second and Third Epistles (cp. p. 1766)
have not been universally received into the
Canon, but their character will account for this,
and there is no sufficient reason to doubt that
they are also writings of the Apostle. They do
not, however, contribute important additional
evidence, as the First does, in the questions
which concern the Gospel, and they need not
therefore be further dealt with here.
D. Relation to the Synoptic Gospels. — The
problems connected with the origin and sources
of the Gospels are treated as a whole in an
earlier article [Gospels] ; but it belongs to this
place to deal with some details which specially
concern the Fourth Gospel. The reader is at
once conscious as he passes from the common
record which is supplied by the earlier Gospels
to that which bears the name of St. John, that
he enters upon a region which in part at least
is new. The scene, the time, the thoughts, the.
expressions, the persons are to a considerable
extent different. The divergence, when he
comes to examine it carefully, is not indeed quite
so great as appears at first sight, nor is the
harmony of the three quite so complete: but
when it is remembered, for instance, that in the
Fourth Gospel there is no mention of scribes or
publicans, of lepers or demoniacs, and that there
is no mention in the Synoptics of Nathanael
or Nieodemus or Lazarus, and only a bare
mention of Andrew, Philip, Thomas, and Judas
(not Iscariot) ; or how the earlier narratives all
circle round the Sea of Galilee, while the Inter
has its centre in Jerusalem ; or how frequently
the discourses in the Synoptics take the form of
parables, while St. John gives no clear instance
of this form of teaching, we are justified in
thinking of the three earlier Gospels as pre-
senting together one picture of the life of Jesus
Christ, and of the Fourth Gospel as presenting
a second — a distinct if not a different — picture,
which is to be compared with it.
If the Gospel belongs in time to the close of
the first century and in place to Ephesus (cp.
supra, p. 1756), and if its purpose and scheme
is that which has been traced labove {ibid.}, this
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
general difference of thought, language, aid
tone is at once natural and necessary. (Cp.
Hampton Lectures, 1890, Lecture viii.) Tail
general difference is moreover, so far from
being an argument against the authenticity,
strong evidence in its favour. A forger would
not have dared to publish a work of such strik-
ing independence. The limits of the present
article necessarily exclude any full discussion of
the general differences or of particular dis-
crepancies, real or imaginary. Both are ex-
amined in detail in the best modern Commen-
taries and Introductions. The following points
about which special difficulty has not in-
frequently been felt, demand however brief
notice : —
(1.) The duration of our Lord's ministry.— The
alleged discrepancy is based upon the assumption,
for which there is no foundation in fact, that
the Synoptists represent the ministry of oat
Lord as extending over one year only, while
St. John names at least three Passovers (chs. ii-
13 ; vi. 4 ; xi. 55). A careful study of tit
chronological limits furnished by the Synoptist<
will show that the only necessary terminus a qm
is a.d. 28, " the fifteenth year of the reign of
Tiberius Caesar" (Luke iii. 1), and the only
necessary terminus ad quern is the recall of
Pontius Pilate in A.D. 37. Any chronology oi
the Life of Jesus which does not extend the minis-
terial activity beyond the decennium A.D. 28-37
is therefore permitted by the Synoptists, but it
is significant that they give no assistance in
forming one. The three Passovers of the Fourth
Gospel imply that the ministry extended ore:
more than two years, but without any bint is
to how much more. Biographical details wen
not within the scope of the Evangelists, net
consistent with the method by which uV
Gospels were committed to writing.
It is not easy, however, to resist the impres-
sion that the events and teaching recorded by
the Evangelists imply a period not less thin-
perhaps much more than, the minimum indicated
in the Fourth Gospel ; and attention has been
too seldom directed to the statement of Irenieus
that our Lord's work as a Teacher extended over
his fortieth year — a statement which he trues
through the witness of all the elders who were
connected with John, the disciple of the Lord, is
Asia to John himself (Adv. Saer. ii. ch. xiii. i
ed. Harvey, i. 330-332). This would nuke the
period of the ministry extend over ten years
(Luke ill. 23).
The not uncommon patristic opinion, based
upon an unwarranted interpretation of Issoh
Ivi. 2, was that the ministry extended for on);
one year (Euseb. H. E. iii. 24 ; Clem. Alex. Stnm-
i. ; Origen, Princ. 4, 5). But cp. article Jan
Christ, supra, p. 1675 ; Farrar, Life of GSnit,
vol. ii. Excursus viii. ; and Browne, Ordo &v-
clorum, 1844, pp. 53-94.
(2.) The scene of our Lord's ministerial «w£—
The work and teaching of our Lord as recorded
by the Synoptists has its centre in Galilee, while
St. John places it in Jerusalem. This eu
create a difficulty only in the minds of those
who do not realize the fact that Jerusalem w»
the centre of the life of John himself for s
considerable period (cp. supra, p. 1732 so,.), and
do not realize the fragmentary nature of all the
evangelic records. As the difficulty is conunonlr
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPEL OP
stated, two series of facts are moreover for-
gotten :
(a) The Synoptic Gospels record and imply a
ministry in Judaea before the final Passover :
cp. Luke iv. 44, fit rat trvvayteyhs rrjs 'lovSatar ;
Luke x. 38-41 (Martha and Mary); Matt, xxiii.
37, "0 Jerusalem, Jerusalem .... how often
would I have gathered thy children together "
(cp. Luke xiii. 31-34) ; Matt. xxi. 2 and xxvi.
18, both as involving previous minute acquaint-
ance with individuals and localities.
(6) The Fourth Gospel records and implies a
ministry in Galilee : cp. chs. i. 43 ; iv. 3 (noting
xdAw, which is omitted by good authorities, but
is with strong probability to be regarded as
part of the text); iv. 43-54; v. 1 ("Jesus
went up to Jerusalem ") ; vi. (esp. v. 4, in-
dicating a passover which Jesus spent in
Galilee); vii. 1-13 (esp. o. 1, "Jesus walked in
Galilee; for He would not walk in Jewry,
because the Jews sought to kill Him " ; x. 22
(implying a return to Jerusalem) ; x. 40 (" be-
yond Jordan into the place where John at first
baptized," t".«. probably to Teltanihje, to the N.
of the Sea of Galilee on the E. of Jordan) ; xi.
7, 8 ; xxi.
A stndy of the Gospels as a combined narra-
tive (cp. e.g. the arrangement in Tischendorfs
Synopsis Evangelica, or Wieseler's Ckronologische
Synapse) shows, with even our present imperfect
knowledge of these fragments, that they are
parts of a great whole. We lack the materials
tor a complete restoration ; there is sufficient
to show that the materials which we have are
the complements of each other.
(3.) The Discourses of our Lord. — " Si Jesus
parlait comme le veut Matthieu, il n'a pu
parler comme le veut Jean." In these words
M. Re can ( Vie de Jesus, 1863, p. xxix.) gives a
concise statement of a difficulty which has been
often expressed and has been felt to be a very
real one. The student who reads the Sermon
on the Mount side by side with the Capernaum
sermon of the sixth chapter of St. John, or
compares the parables of the Synoptists with
the farewell of the sixteenth and seventeenth
chapters of the Fourth Gospel, naturally feels
that there is a wide difference, and that some
explanation of this difference is needed. The
difficulty is apparently increased also by the
further fact that the style of our Lord's dis-
courses in the Fourth Gospel, while it differs
from the style of the teaching in the Synoptists,
agrees largely with that of the narratives by
St. John, that of other speakers in the Gospel,
and that of the Johannine Epistles. But the
student who will carefully examine the facts
will find that the difficulty has been too
strongly stated, and that in even the small
portion of our Lord's teaching which we possess
there is much which is common to the Synoptists
and the Fourth Gospel.
Full lists of parallel passages are given by
Godet, Commentaire tor I'Ecangile de S. Jean,
ed. 3, vol. i. pp. 197 sqq., and Luthardt, Das
johanneische Bvangelium, 1875, pt. i. pp. 243 sqq.
Some of these passages taken singly may not
prove muctvimt as a whole they go far to
remove the difficulty. Three of the passages in
the Synoptists. present the striking character-
istics of the Johannine discourses : —
"At that time Jesus answered and said, I
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I,
JOHN, GOSPEL OP 1761
thank Thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth,
because Thou hast hid these things from the
wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto
babes. Even so, Father ; for so it seemed good
in Thy sight. All things are delivered unto Me
of My Father; and no man knoweth the Son,
but the Father; neither knoweth any man the
Father save the Son, and he to whomsoever the
Son will reveal Him " (Matt. xi. 25-27 ; cp.
John iii. 35 and vi. 46).
" Every plant, which My heavenly Father
hath not planted, shall be rooted np " (Matt. xv.
13 ; cp. John xv. 2).
" All things are delivered to Me of My
Father; and no man knoweth who the Son is,
but the Father; and who the Father is but the
Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal Him "
(Luke x. 22).
It will be found also that a very considerable
proportion of the words used in the discourses
of our Lord, as recorded by St. John, is not found
in the other portions of the Johannine writings.
The Commentary by Dr. Reynolds, to which
reference has been more than once made in this
article, contains a fresh investigation of this
subject made for the author by the Rev. W. H.
Beckett, from which it appears, among other
important results, that " more than a hundred
and forty-five words are put by the Evangelist
into the lips of our Lord, bnt never used by
himself; of which thirty-eight are found in the
Synoptic records of our Lord's words, and of
which fourteen are peculiar to the Johannine
writings," and that there are "nearly five
hundred words (a not inconsiderable vocabulary)
which are used by the writer when pursuing
his narrative or recording the words of others,
not our Lord's, or developing in hortatory form
his own personal conceptions of doctrine or
duty " (pp. cit. p. cxxiii).
But when all overstatements of the case are
cancelled, and the residuum of facts according
to our present knowledge is alone left, there
remains a large element in the Johannine pre-
sentation of the discourses which U widely
different from that of the Synoptists. The
following facts seem sufficient to explain it: —
(i.) The presentation in each case is a lin-
guistic translation. That our Lord spoke in
Aramaic is in a very high degree probable ; that
there was an original Aramaic written record
is far from improbable (cp. Expositor, 1891,
January, et sqq.).
(ii.) The Johannine presentation is a linguistic
translation into the Ephesian Greek of the last
decade of the first century. It is therefore
necessarily different (cp. Bampton Lectures, 1890,
Lecture viii.).
(iii.) The Johannine presentation is of dis-
courses spoken in Jerusalem or in the presence
of Jews of the educated classes. (The discourse
of ch. vi. is not an exception. Cp. v. 47.)
(iv.) The whole of the discourses of our Lord,
as now preserved, can form but a small portion
of His teaching. They are selections from the
treasures of the apostolic Church. They bear
necessarily the impress of the individual Church
and the individual writer, the divinely ordered
channels through which they have been handed
down.
(v.) St. John stood in a closeness of relation
to our Lord — spiritual as well as natural — after
5 U
Digitized by
Google
1762
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
the completion of the ministry (eh. xix. 27), as
well as before its commencement, which no
other Evangelist shared.
(vi.) St. John himself records the promise of
the Paraclete "to teach all things, and to bring
all things to remembrance whatsoever I have said
unto you," and " to guide into all the truth " (cp.
Excursus D in Ellicott's New Testament Com-
mentary, i. 557).
(4.) The Day of our Lord's Death. — The dis-
cussion of this question belongs to the article
Passover (q. e.). In so far as it relates to a
comparison of the Fourth Gospel with the
Synoptists, it is sufficient to remark here :
(a) That in the opinion of many scholars of
candour and eminence who have devoted special
attention to the question, there is no dis-
crepancy. To take one example : C. E. Caspari,
after a careful examination of the statements in
each Gospel, and of the Jewish and Christian
tradition, asserts, "The earliest Christian tra-
dition consequently taught that Jesus held the
supper on the 14th Nisan on the night of the
Thursday ; that on the same Jewish night-day
(bat, according to Western reckoning, on the
Friday), at the time of slaying the Paschal lamb,
He was crucified ; and that on the following day
(Saturday) was the great Paschal festival. The
Christian tradition, rightly understood, teaches
thus — as all the Gospels, and as Jewish tra-
dition — that Jesus was crucified on the 14th
Nisan, a Friday. If afterwards, in the angry
Paschal controversy which ensued, another
opinion prevailed, this does not concern us"
(Chronological and Geographical Introduction to
the Life of Christ, pp. 216, 217). It is im-
possible to urge, in the presence of the solutions
which have been arrived at, that the question
is insoluble.
(6) That our present knowledge of the Pass-
over ritual, and of the exceptions to it at the
time of this Passover, is too uncertain to warrant
any such deduction as that the Fourth Gospel is
in this respect opposed to the Synoptists.
(c) That if it were necessary to hold the
position that the statements are opposed, it
would be on every ground necessary also to
accept the Johannine statement. It is more-
over supported by St. Paul (1 Cor. v. 7 and
si. 23).
(ci) That if it were necessary to hold the
position that the statements were opposed, the
fact of a conflicting statement would of itself
furnish a strong argument in favour of apostolic
authorship. Who but an eye-witness would
venture upon such a point to correct the
current tradition?
(Cp. in addition to the Commentaries and In-
troductions, Caspari ut supra, Eng. tr., pp. 192-
217; Andrews, Life of our Lord upon the Earth,
1863, pp. 367-397 ; button, Theological Essays,
ed. 3, 1888, pp. 215 sqq. ; Farrar, Life of Christ,
Excursus x. ; Edersheim, Life and Times of
Jesus, ii. 479 sqq.'; Schiirer, De Controversiis
paschalibus, secundo p. Chr. nat. saecuh exortis,
1869 ; Die Passahstreitigkeiten des 2. Jahr-
hunderts in Zcitschrift fUr die historisehe Theo-
logic, 1870, pp. 182-284. A resume of Dr.
« It may be allowable to remark ben that the view
■scribed to " Archdeacon Watklns" on p. 482 of this
work Is not bis.
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
Schurer's arguments is given in Luthardt, St.
John the Author of the Fourth Gospel, Eng. tr.,
1875, pp. 154-165.)
fJIV. The Text.
Generally speaking, it may be said that the
same authorities are available for the text of
the Fourth Gospel as for that of the other
Gospels. At their head stand the great codices :
Sinaiticus (tt> saec. iv.) ; Alexandria*! (A,
saec. v.), wanting vi. 50-viii. 52 ; Vatican** (B,
saec. iv.); Ephraemi (C, saec. v.), important
fragments; Bezae (D, saec vi.), the whole
except i. 16-iii. 26, a later hand supplying
(perhaps from the original text) xviiL 13-xx.
13. The Gospel is also contained in another
leading MS., Cod. Begins Porisiensis (L, saec
viii.). The Fourth Gospel is one of two pre-
served in Tischendorfs MS. now in the Bodleias
(A, saec. ix.); but no portion of it is contained
in the recently discovered Codd. purpurei, Ros-
sanensis (X, saec vi.) and Beratmns (♦, saec
vi.), or in the valuable fragments designated
RZB. The Gospel is complete in EKMSUr*
and n (two Atbos MSS. not yet collated, both
ascribed to saec viii.-ii.), and nearly complete
in KG H AIT.
The following fragmentary MSS. contain por-
tions of St. John's Gospel only : I 1 and I* (both
saec. v.), O (saec ix), T* (a Graecc-Thebaic MS.
attributed very doubtfully to saec v.), W*
(saec. ix.). Fragments of this as well as of
other Gospels are found in F* (saec vii. in.), X
(saec. vi. ex.), P (saec vi.), Q (saec v.), P
(attributed to saec vi.), and T* (attributed to
saec. vii.); also in T wo ', which is similar to, though
not, as was at one time thought, a part of the
snnie MS. as T*, X (saec ix. ex.), Y (saec. viii.).
Of these the most important are those which
come under the designations 1 P Q T X T, espe-
cially T, and in a lower measure X, which is
extant on a larger scale and in this Gospel doc
(infrequently sides with the better authorities.
Minuscule, or as they are commonly called,
cursive MSS., contain as a rule the full Tetro-
etangelium, and maintain the same character
throughout. The writer of this is not aware
of a case in which the text of St. John's Gospel
stands out so distinctly as that of St. Mark in
the cursive which is variously numbered 2** by
Muralt, its collator, 81 by Westcott and Hon,
473 by Scrivener, and 565 by Gregory (compare
the equally distinctive text of A in the same
Gospel). It is a peculiarity of the group 13-
69-124-346-788-826 (possibly also of the allied
MS. 543,* though this is not expressly stated :
see Gregory, Prolegomena on the MSS. in ques-
tion) to place the section "of the Adulteress"
immediately after Luke xxi. 38. Most, if not
all, of these MSS. appear to have been written
in Calabria. Other MSS., such as I s * 135, 237,
259, 301, 565, but at a more recent date and with
an evident consciousness of its questionable cha-
racter, place the section at the end of the Gospel.
For the Ante-Hieronymian or Old-Latin Ver-
sion the leading MSS. (abdef) are extant,
though with lacunae. In the second line would
come the MSS. designated m (extracts contained
in the so-called Speculum Augustini, the text of
' 543=8crlvener'e CM ; 826=Scriraner's 624
not In Scrivener's list.
TBS IS
Digitized by
Google
JOHX, Gosr— —
which has been identified ith
that used by the Spanis' ian,
+385 A.D. : see Classical Re\ • q.),
qr and the fragment p inly
John xi. 14-44. To the aa. long
the larger fragments fro j), of
which specimens only wen .melli
in 1872. The MSS. cff t l funda-
mentally Vulgate MSS., aining
numerous Old-Latin readin should
apparently be said of Cod. is (j 1 ),
on the testimony of Prof. Bulletin
Critique, 1891, p. 302). C e is the
nearest representative of t. form of
the text current in Africa elong to
the type which is commoi ,alian; r
and the fragment p are dist ish ; but
there seems to be more id inter-
mixture of types than in th pels.
MSS. of Jerome's Vei in great
numbers. Special raentio jrhaps, be
made only of the beautif tonyhurst
MS. (=8 in Bishop Wc i edition).
This MS. contains only St Gospel, and
was found in the coffin of S 3rt, who died
A.D. 687 (fiics. in Pal. Soc. I. 17 ; West-
wood, Pal. Sacr. Pict. pi. 11"
Of the Egyptian Versi .he Memphitic
(Bahiric) is complete; th icbaic (Sahidic)
has as yet been published y in fragments,
but materials sufficient to ..e up a complete
text are already known t> ,-xist in European
libraries (especially at Paris), and their publica-
tion is but a question of time. The third
Egyptian Version, called Baahmuric, is only a
dialectical variation of the Thebaic : as yet St.
John iv. 28-53 is all that has been published of
the Gospels.
Of the Syriac Versions, the critic has access to
the Peshitto and Harclean, the latter revised
from the older Philoxenian (508 A.D.) by
Thomas of Harkel in 616 a.d. For nearly the
whole of the N. T. the Philoxenian has been lost,
but Bernstein thought that he had come across
the traces of it in a single MS. at Rome, collations
of which for a few chapters of St. John are
given in his work De Charklensi N. T. transl.
Syriac. Comment. (Bresjau, 1837). The Cure-
tonian Syriac, which is considered by many
scholars to represent the oldest form of the
Syriac Version, is extant for St. John i. 1-43 ;
iii. 5-viii. 19 (omitting vii. 53-riii. 11); xiv.
10-12, 16-19, 21-29. These portions have
been turned back into Greek in a trustworthy
maimer by Baethgen, Exxmgelienfragmente
(Leipzig, 1885), pp. 39-53.
The Aethiopic and Armenian Versions of St.
John's Gospel are complete, but the printed
texts need revision from a wider collation of
MSS. The Gothic is extant for St. John i. 29 ;
iii. 3-32; v. 21-23; 35-38; 45-xii. 49; xiii.
11-xix. 13.
The patristic evidence supplies not only
numerous quotations, but considerable com-
mentaries. Earliest of these is the Commentary
of the Gnostic Ueracleon, the fragments of
which have been carefully re-edited by Mr.
A. E. Brooke in the Cambridge Texts and
Studies (1891). These fragments are preserved
in Origen's great work on St. John, of which
large remains have come down to us. For an
nccount of this Commentary, which was written
JOHX, GOSPEL OF 1763
in part at least at Alexandria, and before the
year 228 A.D., see especially Diet, of Chr. Biog.
iv. 113 sq. The Commentary of Cyril of Alex-
andria (f 444 A.D.) is almost complete, and has
been edited as critically as the scanty MS.
materials admit by the late P. E. Pusey (Oxford,
1872). From the Antiochene school we have a
series of Homilies by St. Chrysostom, written
before 398, and also considerable fragments of a
Commentary by Theodore of Mopsuestia (f 428
A.D.). The Latin Church contributes the
Homilies of St. Augustine (c. 416 a.d.). Other
works are too late to be of much importance for
textual criticism, unless it is perhaps the
Catenae edited by Corderius (Antwerp, 1628)
and Cramer (Oxford, 1844).
The most conspicuous feature in the earlier
textual history of St. John's Gospel is the group
of readings belonging to what is commonly
known as the "Western Text." The authorities
for these readings are frequently headed by KD,
and include MSS. of the Old-Latin and the
Curetonian Syriac, where it is extant. The
Western element in K is more marked in this
Gospel than elsewhere. Characteristic readings
of the broader Western type would be e.g. St.
John i. 4 ivrly, ii. 3 olvor ovk tXxov, Sri trme-
Tt\4tr9ri t olvos tov yd/tov, iii. 25 'lovSalwv, 31
om. ixiva vdWvr larlv, iv. 9 om. oi yip
ovyxpZrrcu 'lovtaioi la^aptiratt. Sometimes
the Western group of authorities is broken up,
and a reading is found in one section of it but
not in another. Thns the famous pericope
adulterae (St. John vii. 53-viii. 11) is found in
D e, and it was originally contained in b, but it
is wanting in a Syr.-Cur. It seems not unlikely
that this section was transferred to the Canon-
ical Gospel from the Gospel according to the
Hebrews (Eus. H. E. iii. 39. 16). In like
manner the (interpolation in v. 3 (iKttxonivuv
tV tov itaros Klvnatv) was introduced before
the larger interpolation in the next verse
(fryyeAos yap . . . vatrf\iMTi). The addition at
the end of iii. 6 was also introduced at two stages,
quia (quoniam) deus spiritus est (1) et ex (de)
deo natus est (2). Some of these readings
which were originally Western found their way
into the later ecclesiastical text, and thence into
the copies which possessed the field after the
invention of printing : so the two larger inter-
polations just mentioned, and the reading (o)
ftovoytviis vlbs in i. 18, which there can be little
doubt should, in spite of its great antiquity,
yield to poyoytviis Beit. (On this reading see
especially Dr. Hort, Two Dissertations, Camb.
and Lond. 1876, with which may be compared
on the other side Dr. Ezra Abbot, Critical
Essays, Boston, 1888, pp. 241-285. On the
text of St. John generally, besides the critical
editions, Dr. Westcott's Commentary deserves to
be specially consulted, also the critical notes by
Weiss in the sixth or later editions of Meyer's
Commentary. Meyer himself and Godet are not
trustworthy guides in textual criticism. In
respect to the materials of criticism, the best
authorities are Scrivener, Introd'Ktion, ed. 8,
Cambridge, 1883, and Gregory, Prolegomena to
Tischendorf, part i. 1884, part ii. 1890. Dr.
Gregory's notation, which unfortunately diners
somewhat from Scrivener's, for the more re-
cently added cursives, has been followed in this
article.) [W. S— y.JJ
5 2
Digitized by
Google
1764 JOHN, GOSPEL OF
V. LiTEBATURE.
The full Teferencei which have been given in
the course of this article make it unnecessary
to refer at any length to the literature of the
subject. To do so would indeed be in any case
to travel over beaten paths, for the Literature of
the fourth Gospel has been exhaustively treated
by experts. Lampe (Commentarius analytico-
exegeticus, 3 vols. 4*, Basiliae, 1725-27) gives a
full account of the works down to his own
time. Liicke (cp. p. 1748) adds a short but
valuable literary sketch of the discussions on
the authenticity (ed. 3, 1840, pp. 89 sqq.). Dr.
C. R. Gregory, the translator of Luthardt's St.
John the Author of the Fourth Gospel, 1875, has
enriched that work by an enlarged and almost
complete conspectus of Literature from 1792-
1875. Dr. Exra Abbot (fl884) contributed not
only to the early literature of the subject in
his Authorship of the Fourth Gospel (1880), but
also contributed from his minute knowledge of
the subject to Dr. Gregory's list which has
just been mentioned, and to the American
edition of this Dictionary.
The most recent literature is very fully given
in the Introductions, and specially in Bleek-
Mangold, Einleitung in das Jfeue Test., ed. 2,
1886 ; Weiss (Bernhard), Lehrbuch der Einleit-
ung in das Jfeue Test., ed. 2, 1889 (Eng. tr. of
ed. 1, 1887-8); Holtxmann (H. J.), Lehrbuch
d. Hist. krit. Einleilung in das Neue Test., ed. 2,
1886; cp. also Hand-Commentar zwn Seven
Test. vol. iv. 1890, p. 20.
On the present position of the "Johannine
Question," reference should be made to a paper
by Dr. Schtirer (Ueber den gegentcSrtigen Stand
d. Johmneischen Frage, Giessen, 1889), and
especially to a series of articles by Dr. Sanday
in the Expositor, 1891, Nov., Dec. ; 1892, Jan.,
March, April, and May.
Of special Commentaries, Luthardt's (ed. 2,
1875-76), Godet's (ed. 3, 1881-85), and West-
cott's reprinted from The Speaker's Commentary
in 1881, have obtained an acknowledged and
well-known position. Of the smaller Com-
mentaries, that by Holtxmann referred to above
and that by Dr. Plummer in the Cambridge
Greek Testament for Schools may be specially
named, thongh written from different points of
view. A recent work which forms part of The
Pulpit Commentary — The Gospel of St. John,
Introduction and Exposition, by Dr. Reynolds,
1888 — is the result of much independent thought
and work, as well as of full knowledge of the
work of others. It is a very valuable contribu-
tion to the study of St. John's Gospel and the
many connected questions, and it is much to be
desired that the introduction and critical notes
should be re-edited and published in a more con-
venient form.
To these and many other works the writer of
the present article has been under constant obli-
gation. One special obligation he must not
leave unnoticed. When his task was completed,
the space occupied, which seemed but too small
for the extent of the subject, was larger than
could be afforded for a single article. Dr. Sanday
generously undertook the tedious task of com-
pression. The reader will not need to be as-
sured that compression is far from being the
only gain which is derived from Dr. Sanday's
JOHN, FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF
care and knowledge. He has also written the
section on the text in substitution for a longer
one. [H. W. W.]
JOHN, ST.. THE FTK8T EPISTLE
GENERAL OK. I. Title.— In the Alexandrine
and Vatican MSS. the heading of the Epistle is
only 'lairrov (or 'IvdVov) a, that is, " John's
First ; " in the Sinaitic MS. the word trurriXv
is added, •' John's First Epistle." In later MSS.
the epithet KaBoKudi is prefixed to «Vt»rdAij.
and the designation of rov iryiou iarocr&Kov or
rov ei/ayyiKurrov aol arotrrAkov precedes oi
follows 'Utasvov, making the full title to be
"The Catholic Epistle of John the holy Apostle,"
or " of John the Evangelist and Apostle." For
the force of the word "Catholic" in this con-
nexion, see James, Epistle of, p. 1520. Origen
is the first writer who applies the term Catholic
to St. John's First Epistle. Whether it is as
Epistle in the proper sense of the word, has been
questioned. It does not begin or end in the
epistolary style. It may best be regarded as s
Pastoral Letter. In one late Latin MS. the title
is Epistoia ad Sparthos, which has been regarded
as a misreading either for Epistoia ad Sparsos.
meaning the Diaspora or Dispersion, or Epistoia
ad Parthos. St. Augustine (Qvaestionum Eva*-
geliorum, ii. 39) quotes 1 John iii. 2 as " dictum
a Joanne in Epistoia ad Parthos ; " and bis
treatises on the Epistle are headed " in Epistolaia
Joannis ad Parthos" (torn. iii. p. 1976, ed. Migne>
It is probable that this title came from a mis-
understanding of the title of some Greek MS-
'EiriirTo'A.ij 'ladrrov rov wooAeVov, the name
■wipBtros being sometimes given to St. John.
And yet this explanation cannot be the right
one, if it be true, as Bede reports (Pro/, super
xm. Canon. Epist.), that Athanasius regarded it
as addressed to the Parthians. But of this we
have no evidence beyond Bede's statement.
II. Author and authenticity. — The external
evidence is of the most satisfactory nature.
Eusebius places it in the list of ifm\oyo6fu»u or
" acknowledged " books (Hist. Ecd. iii. 25), and
we have ample proof that it was received as the
production of the Apostle John in the writings
of Polycarp (Ep. ad Philipp. c vii.); Papias, as
quoted by Eusebius 'Hist. Ecd. iii. 39) ; Irenaew
{adv. Haer. iii. 18) ; Origen (apud Eases. Hist
Eccl. vi. 25); Clement of Alexandria (Strom.
lib. ii.) ; Tertullian (adv. Prax. c x v.) ; Cyprian
(Ep. xxviii.) : and there is no voice in antiquity
raised to the contrary. The Muratonian Canes
speaks only of two Epistles of John, but this
probably means our Epistle, and the Second and
Third Epistles reckoned together as one. The
Peshitto Version contains the First Epistle.
On the ground of internal evidence the
authenticity of the Epistle has been questioned
by Lange (Die Schriften des Johann. ubersetxt ttsd
erklart, vol. iii.); Bretschneider (ProbabHia dt
Erang. et Epist. Joan. Ap. indole et origint):
Zeller (Theologische Jahrbucher for 1843). Toe
objections made by these critics are too slight
to be worth mentioning. On the other hand,
the internal evidence for its being the work of
St. John from its similarity in style, language,
and doctrine to the Gospel, is overwhelming.
Macknight (Preface to First Epistle of John) has
drawn out a list of nineteen passages in the
Epistle which are so similar to an equal number
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF
1765
of passages in the Gospel that we cannot but
conclude that the two writings emanated from
the same mind, or that one author was a strangely
successful copyist both of the words and of the
sentiments of the other. Westcott, in like man-
ner, has made a list of twenty characteristic
words found both in the Gospel and in the Epistle,
and nineteen sentences in which verbal coin-
cidences occur. The hypothesis of conscious
imitation by a copyist is, in Dr. Westcott's judg-
ment, excluded by the subtlety of the coinci-
dences, joined with differences discoverable in the
parallel passages of the Gospel and the Epistle,
the similarity of which consists not only in
their diction but in their thoughts {Intro-
duction to the First Epistle of St. John). Sin-
clair presents us with twenty-three parallel
passages (Ellicott's Commentary, iii. 468). Ewald
says that " no one can fail to perceive that the
self-same author and Apostle must have com-
posed both writings " (Die Johann. Schriften,
i. 431). The allusion of the writer to himself
is such as would suit St. John the Apostle, and
very few but St. John (1 Ep. i. 1).
Thus we see that the high probability of the
authorship is established both by the internal
evidence and by the external evidence taken
apart. Unite them, and this probability rises
to a moral certainty.
III. Date and place. — There is considerable
diversity of opinion as to the time at which the
Kpistle was written. Grotius, Hammond,Whitby,
Benson, Macknight, fix a date previous to the
destruction of Jerusalem, understanding (but
probably not correctly) the expression " It is the
last time " (ii. 18) to refer to the Jewish Church
and nation. Lardner, Whiston, Lampe, Mill,
Le Clerc, Basnage, Beausobre, Dupin, Davidson,
Sinclair, Westcott, assign it to the close of the
first century. This is the more probable date.
There are several indications of the Epistle being
posterior to the Gospel. "The Epistles," says
Westcott, " give later growths of common and
characteristic ideas " (Introduction). Like the
Gospel, it was probably written from Ephesus.
Grotius fixes Patmos as the place at which it
was written ; Macknight, Judaea. But a late
date would involve the conclusion that it was
Ephesus. And this conclusion is strengthened
by iv. 3, which condemns the heresy of Cerin-
thus, whose headquarters were Asia Minor.
IV. The persons addressed. — However the
error as to the Parthians, above related, arose,
we may take it as certain that the Epistle was
not addressed to them. There is however a
somewhat widely spread Latin tradition to that
effect, resting on the authority of St. Augustine,
Vigilius of Thapsus, Cassiodorus, and Bede ; and
it is defended by Estius. The Greek Church
knew no such report. Lardner is clearly right
when he says that the Epistle was primarily
meant for the Churches of Asia under St. John's
inspection, to whom he had already orally de-
livered his doctrine (i. 3, ii. 7).
V. Contents and character. — It is a mistake to
regard the Kpistle as primarily controversial.
Its main object was not to oppose the errors of
the Docetae (Schmidt, Bertholdt, Niemeyer), nor
of the Gnostics (h'leuker), nor of the Nicolaitans
(Macknight), nor of the Cerinthians (Michaelis),
nor of all of them together (Townsend), nor of
the Sabians (Barker, Storr, Keil),norof Judaizers
(Loeffier, Semler), nor of apostates to Judrism
(Lange, Eichhorn, Hamlein): the leading pur-
pose of the Apostle appears to be rather con-
structive than polemical. St. John is remark-
able both in his history and in his writings for
his abhorrence of false doctrine, but he does not
attack error as a controversialist. He states the
deep truth and lays down the deep moral teach-
ing of Christianity, and in this way rather than
directly condemns heresy. In the introduction
(i. 1-1) the Apostle states the purpose of his
Epistle. It is to declare the Word of life to
those whom he is addressing, in order that he
and they might be united in true communion
with each other, aud with God the Father, and
His Son Jesus Christ. He at once begins to
explain the nature and conditions of communion
with God, and, being led on from this point into
other topics, he twice brings himself back to the
same subject. The first part of the Epistle may
be considered to end at ii. 28. The Apostle
begins afresh with the doctrine of sonship or
communion at ii. 29, and returns to the same
theme at iv. 7. His lesson throughout is, that
the means of union with God are, on the part of
Christ, His atoning Blood (i. 7, ii. 2, iii. 5, iv.
10, 14, v. 6) and advocacy (ii. 1)— on the part
of man, holiness (i. 6), obedience (ii. 3), purity
(iii. 3), faith (iii. 23, iv. 3, v. 5), and above all
love (ii. 7, iii. 14, iv. 7, v. 1). St. John is
designated the Apostle of Love, and rightly;
but it should be ever remembered that his
doctrine of " Love " does not exclude or ignore,
but embraces both faith and obedience as con-
stituent parts of love. Indeed, St. Paul's
" Faith that worketh by Love," and St. James's
" Works that are the fruit of Faith," and St.
John's " Love which springs from Faith and
produces Obedience," are all one and the same
state of mind described according to the first,
third, or second stage, into which we are able
to analyse the complex whole.
There are two doubtful passages in this
Epistle : ii. 23, "but he that acknowledgeth the
Son hath the Father also ; " and v. 7, " For there
are three that bear record in heaven, the
Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and
these three are one." The question of their
authenticity is argued at length by Mill (note
at the end of 1 John v.) and Home (Introduc-
tion to H. 3. iv. p. 448, Lond. 1834). The first
of these passages is genuine. It is found in all
the better MSS. and was omitted by a not
uncommon error, the scribe's eye passing on
from the first clause to the second, and con-
founding them together, owing to their endinf
with the same three words, toy mrripa fx f '
The second is spurious. It is contained in foui
only of the 180 MSS. of the Epistle : the Code:
Guelpherbytanus of the seventeenth century
the Codex Ravianus of the sixteenth century,
both of which are merely copies from the
printed text, and therefore no authorities at all ;
the Codex Britannicus or Monfortianus of the
fifteenth or sixteenth century ; and the Codex
Ottobonianus of the fifteenth century. It is not
found, except by modern insertion, in the
Syriac Versions, in the Coptic, the Sahidic, the
Ethiopia, the Armenian, the Arabic, the
Sclavonic, nor in any ancient Version except
the Latin; and the best editions of even the
Latin Versions omit it. It was not quoted by on*
Digitized by
Google
1766
JOHN, THE SECOND AND THIRD EPISTLES OF
Greek Father or writer previous to the fourteenth
century. It was not inserted in Erasmus's
editions of the Greek Testament, published in
151b' and 1519, nor in that of Aldus, 1518 ; nor
in that of Gerbelius, 1521 ; nor of Cephalaeus,
1524; nor of Oolinaeus, 1534; nor in Luther's
version of 1546. It originated as a gloss or
mystical interpretation of the meaning of the
"three that bear witness," — "the Spirit "being
supposed to represent the Father, " the water "
the Holy Ghost, and "the blood" the Son.
Cyprian (De Unitate Ecclesiae, v.), Facundus
(Pro def. tr. Cap. i. 3), Augustine (cent. Max.
ii. 22 ; L>e Civ. Dei, v. 11) seem to have known
and accepted this interpretation. The first
person who represents the gloss aa making part
of the text is Vigilius of Thapsus, who lived at
the end of the fifth century. In the sixth
century it is quoted by Fulgentius as belonging
to the text, and its position there is defended by
a prologue falsely attributed to St. Jerome.
Hence in the seventh century it was introduced
by a scribe into a copy of the Old Latin text
that he was making, and in the ninth century
it found its way in like manner into the text of
two Codices of the Vulgate. Next it was
translated into Greek, first apparently in 1215,
as making part of the Greek version of the
Acts of the Council of the Lateran, and at
length for the first time it found its place, as
stated above, in the fifteenth century, in a
Greek Codex — the Ottobonianus, which however
is as much Latin as Greek, having both the
Latin and the Greek text in parallel columns.
It never made good its entrance into more thau
one other Greek Codex, the Hontfortianus,
which is not above suspicion. Erasmus, attacked
by Stunica for omitting the passage in the
first two editions of his Greek Testament,
promised to introduce it, if one Greek MS. con-
taining it could be shown him. A "Codex
Britannicus," which has been identified with
the Codex Montfortianus, was brought to his
notice ; and in accordance with his promise he in-
serted the words in his edition of 1522, but with-
out any belief in their being genuine. Against
such an amount of external testimony no internal
evidence, however weighty, could be of avail.
For the exposition of the passage aa con-
taining the words in question, see (as quoted by
Home) Bp. Horsley's Sermons (i. p. 193). For
the same passage interpreted without the dis-
puted words, see Sir Isaac Newton's Hist, of
T«o Texts (Works, v. p. 528, Lond. 1779).
See also Emlyn's Enquiry, Sic, Lond. 1717.
See further, Travis (Letters to Gibbon, Lond.
1785) ; Porson (Letters to Travis, Lond. 1790) ;
Bishop Harsh (Letters to Travis, Lond. 1795);
Michaelis (Introd. to New Test. iv. p. 412, Lond.
1802) ; Griesbach (Diatribe appended to vol. ii.
of Greek Test. Halae, 1806); Butler (Borae
BiUicae, ii. p. 245, Lond. 1807); Clarke (Succes-
sion, &c, i. p. 71, Lond. 1807); Bishop Burgess
(Vindication of 1 John v. 7, Lond. 1822 and
1823; Adnotationes Millii, &c, 1822; Letter to
the Clergy of St. David's, 1825 ; Too Letters to
Mrs. Joanna Baillie, 1831, 1835), to which may
be added a dissertation in the .Life of Bp.
Burgess, p. 398, Lond. 1840 ; Scrivener {Six
Lectures on the Text of the New Test. p. 201,
Loud. 1875); Westcott (The Epistles of St.
John, p. 193, Lond. 1883). [K. M.]
JOHN, ST.. THE SECOND AND THIBD
EPISTLES OF. I. Title.— One late cursive
MS. (62) entitles the Second Epistle Iwim
$ vpos ViipSous, and the Adumbrationes of
Clement of Alexandria describe it aa " script*
ad virgines," in continuation of the mistake
already pointed out. Their proper title i»
simply 'lunrvov B, 'Xwivvav V.
II. Author and authenticity. — The two Epistles
are placed by Eusebius in the class of arrtXt-
y6ptva, and he appears himself to be doubtful
whether they were written by the Evangelist,
or by some other John (Mist. Ecci. iu. 25).
The evidence of antiquity in .their favour b not
very strong, but yet it is considerable. Ireoaeus
quotes from the Second Epistle and attributes it
to "John, the Lord's disciple" (Adv. Haer. L
16). Clement of Alexandria speaks of the First
Epistle as the larger (Strom, lib. ii.) ; and if the
Adumbrationes be his, he be*rs direct testimony
to the Second Epistle (Adnmbr. p. 1011, ei
Potter). Origen appears to hare had the same
doubts as Eusebius (apud Euseb. Hist. Ecd. vi.
25). Dionysius (apud Euseb. Hist. Ecd. vii. 25)
attributes them to St. John, but not without
hesitation. Aurelius quoted them in tbr
Council of Carthage, A.D. 256, as St. John's
writing (Cyprian, Op. ii. p. 120, ed. Oberthur).
Alexander of Alexandria (apud Socr. Hist. Ecd.
i. 6), A.D. 321, attributes the Second Epistle t»
•' the Blessed John." Ephrem Syrus recognises
them as canonical in the fourth century, though
they are not in the Peshitto Syrinc Version, la
the fifth century they are almost universally
received. A homily, wrongly attributed to St.
Chrysostom, declares them uncanonical.
If the external testimony is not perfectly
decisive, the internal evidence is peculiarly
strong. Mill has pointed out that of the 13
verses which compose the Second Epistle, 8 are
to be found in the First Epistle. Either then
the Second Epistle proceeded from the same
author as the First, or from a conscious
fabricator who desired to pass off something of
his own as the production of the Apostle. Bat
if the latter alternative had been true, the
fabricator in question would assuredly hare
assumed the title of John the Apostle, instead
of merely designating himself as John the elder,
and he would bare introduced some doctrine
which it would have been his object to make
popular. The title and contents of the Epistle
are strong arguments against a fabricator,
whereas they would account for its non-universal
reception in early times. And if not the work
of a fabricator, it must from style, diction, and
tone of thought, be the work of the author
of the First Epistle, and, we may add, of the
GospeL
The reason why St. John designates himself
as *-0f ovSvTfpor rather than foroWoAes (3 Ep. 1 ;
3 Ep. 1), is no doubt the same as that which
made St. Peter designate himself by the same
title (1 Pet. v. 1), and which caused St. James
and St. Jude to give themselves no other title
than " the servant of God and of the Lord Jesus
Christ" (James i. 1); "the servant of Jesus
Christ and brother of James " (Jude 1). St.
Paul had a special object in declaring himself
an Apostle. Those who belonged to the original
Twelve had no such necessity imposed upon
them. With them it was a matter of in-
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, THE SECOND AND THIRD EPISTLES OB!
1767
difference whether they employed the name of
Apostle like St. Peter (1 Pet. i. 1 ; 2 Pet. i. 1),
or adopted an appellation which they shared
with others, like St. John and St. James and
St. Jude. Westcott supposes the title to
describe an official position in the Church of
Asia Minor.
III. Date and place. — The two shorter Epistles
were probably written about the same time and
from the same place as the First Epistle, that
is, from Ephesus, near the end of the first
century.
IV. Persons addressed. — The Second Epistle is
addressed IkAiktjj xvpiq. This expression cannot
mean the Church (Jerome ; Salmon), nor a parti-
cular Church (Cassiodorus), nor the elect Church
which comes together on Sundays (Michaelis),
nor the Church of Philadelphia (Whiston), nor
the Church of Jerusalem (Whitby). An in-
dividual woman who had children and a sister
and nieces, is clearly indicated. Whether her
name is given, and if so, what it is, has been
doubted. According to one interpretation, she
is "the Lady Electa; "to another, "the elect
Kyria ; " to a third, " the elect Lady." The first
interpretation is that of Clement of Alexandria
(see Vict, of Christ. Siog. i. 564), Wetsteiu,
Grotius, Middleton. The second is that of
Benson, Carpzov, Schleusner, Ueumann, Bengel,
Rosenmiiller, De Wette, Liicke, Neander, David-
son. The third is the rendering of the A. and
K. VV., Mill, Wall, Wolf, LeClerc, Lardner, Beza,
Eichhorn, Newcome, Wakefield, Macknight. For
the rendering " the Lady Electa " to be right, the
word Kupla must have preceded (as in modern
Greek) the word ixKaerp, not followed it ; and
further, the last verse of the Epistle in which her
sister is also spoken of as cVcAnrrj) is fatal to the
hypothesis. The rendering " the elect Kyria "
is probably wrong, because there is no article
before the adjective iKkfKTfj. It remains that
the rendering of the A. and R. VV. is probably
right, though here too we should have expected
the article. Westcott considers the problem
of the address insoluble with our present
knowledge.
The Third Epistle is addressed to Gaius or
Caius. We have no reason for identifying him
with Caius of Macedonia (Acts xix. 29), or with
Caius of Derbe (Acts xx. 4), or with Caius of
Corinth (Rom. xvi. 23 ; 1 Cor. i. 14), or with
Caius bishop of Ephesus, or with Caius bishop
of Thessalonica, or with Caius bishop of Perga-
mos. He was probably a convert of St. John
(3 Ep. t>. 4), and a layman of wealth and dis-
tinction (3 Ep. v. 5) in some city near Ephesus.
V. Contents and character. — The object of St.
John in writing the Second Epistle was to warn
the lady, to whom he wrote, against abetting
the teaching known as that of Basilides and his
followers, by perhaps an undue kindness dis-
played by her towards the preachers of the
false doctrine. After the introductory saluta-
tion, the Apostle at once urges on his corre-
spondent the great principle of Love, which with
him (as we have before seen) means right
affection springing from right faith and issuing
in right conduct. The immediate consequence
of the possession of this Love is the abhorrence
of heretical misbelief, because the latter, being
incompatible with right faith, is destructive of
the producing cause of Lore, and therefore of
Love itself. This is the secret of St. John's
strong denunciation of the " deceiver " whom
he designates as "anti-Christ." Love is with
him the essence of Christianity ; but Love can
spring only from right faith. Wrong belief
therefore destroys Love and with it Christianity.
Therefore says he, " If there come any unto you
and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into
your house, neither bid him God speed, for he
that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his
evil deeds" (2 Ep. 10,11).
The Third Epistle was written for the purpcse
of commending to the kindness and hospitality
of Caius some Christians who were strangers in
the place where he lived. It is probable that
these Christians carried this letter with them
to Caius as their introduction. It would
appear that the object of the travellers was to
preach the Gospel to the Gentiles without
money and without price (3 Ep. v. 7). St.
John had already written to the ecclesiastical
authorities of the place (fypwf/a, v. 9, not
"scripsissera," Vulij.); but they, at the instiga-
tion of Diotrephes, had refused to receive the
missionary brethren, and therefore the Apostle
now commends them to the care of a layman.
It is probable that Diotrephes was a leading
presbyter who held Judaizing views, and would
not give assistance to men who were going
about with the purpose of preaching solely
to the Gentiles. Whether Demetrius (v. 12)
was a tolerant presbyter of the same com-
munity, whose example St. John holds up as
worthy of commendation in contradistinction to
that of Diotrephes, or whether he was one of
the strangers who bore the letter, we are now
unable to determine. The latter supposition is
the more probable.
The contents of this Epistle have light
thrown upon them in a singularly interesting
manner by The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles,
published by Bryennius at Constantinople in
1883. In substance this document is little
later than St. John's Epistle, and we see in it a
system already working, according to which
" apostles and prophets " were in the habit of
moving from place to place, staying one or two
days, during which they were supported by the
charity of the brethren, and then moving on.
The following passages illustrate the condition
of the Church at the time of St. John's Epistle
with surprising vividness : — " Whoever then
shall come and teach yon all the foregoing,
receive him ; but if the teacher turn and
teach you another doctrine, so as to overthrow
this, you must not listen to him ; but if his
object is to teach righteousness and knowledge
of the Lord, receive him as the Lord.... Let
every apostle who comes to you be received as
the Lord ; but he shall not abide more than
one day, and if need be, one more ; but if he
remain three days, he is a false prophet. Let
the apostle who comes ont receive nothing but
bread to last him until he reach his destination ;
but if he asks for money, he is a false prophet.
... If he who comes is a wayfarer, help him as
much as you can, but he shall not remain with
you more than three or fonr days, if need
require ; and if he wishes to settle with you, if
he is a workman let him labour, and so let him
eat. . . . But every true prophet who wishes to
remain with yoti is worthy of his meat : so too
Digitized by
Google
1768
J01ADA
a true teacher, like the labourer, is also worthy
of his meat" (chaps, xi. xii. xiii.). It seems
evident that the "brethren and strangers
withal " in whose behalf St. John writes, were
"apostles or prophets," or as we should now
say evangelists, and we may conjecture that
Diotrephes excused his haughty rejection of
them on the ground that they were unworthy
or " false prophets."
Both these Epistles apply to individual cases
of conduct the principles which had been laid
down in their fulness in the First Epistle. The
title Catholic does not properly belong to them.
It became attached to them, although addressed
to individuals, because they were of too little
importance to be classed by themselves, and, so
far as doctrine went, were regarded as appendices
to the First Epistle.
VI. Bibliographi — The best English edition
of the Three Epistles is Westcott's Epistles of
St. John, the Greek text with notes and essavs
(l.ond. 1883). This volume, supplemented by the
Greek Testaments of Alford, Wordsworth, and
Ellicott, will give the English reader all that
he can require for the elucidation of the text.
In T. & T. Clark's series will be found transla-
tions of Lucke's Commentar sher die Briefe dcs
Evangelisten Johannis (Edinb. 1837) ; Ebrard's
Die Briefe Johannes (Edinb. 1860); Braune's
Commentary in Lange's series, and Huther's in
Mayer's. See also F. D. Maurice's The Epistles of
John: Lectures on Christian Ethics, Lond. 1867 ;
Salmon, Introd to N. T.* pp. 290-295. [F. M.]
JOI'ADA (in^' = in»i.T = Jehovah hath
tnoan ; B. "laaJd, A. 'ImaSi ; Joiada), high-
priest after his father Eliashib, but whether in
the lifetime of Nehemiah is not clear, as it is
doubtful whether the title in Neh. xiii. 28
applies to him or his father. One of his sons
married a daughter of Sanballat the Horonite.
He was suoceeded in the high-priesthood by his
son Jonathan, or Johanan (Neh. xii. 11, 22).
Josephus calls this Jehoiada, Judas. [A. C. H.]
JOI'AKIM (D'jVi' = D'jHT; BA. 'w
Kil/i ; Joacim), a high-priest, son of the renowned
Jeshua, who was joint leader with Zerubbabel
of the first return from Babylon. His son and
successor was Eliashib (Neh. xii. 10). In Neh.
xii. 12-26 is preserved a catalogue of the heads of
the various families of priests and Lerites during
the high-priesthood of Joiakim.
The name is a contracted form of Jehoiakim.
JOI'ABIB (3n^ = 3V|*in»; A. 'I««p,( M;
Joarib). 1. (*I<Mf>U B. 'Apifi, A. 'luapttp;
Joiarib.) A layman who returned from Babylon
with Exra (Ezra viii. 16).
2. (Neh. xi. 10, 'luapW, B. 'Iwpefft A.
'loptfi, K. 'luptifi; in xii. 6, IP, B. omits,
KA. 'Itiiapifi ; Jwrib, Joiarib.) The founder of
one of the courses of priests, elsewhere called in
full Jehoiarib. His descendants after the
Captivity are given in Neh. xii. 6, 19, and also in
xi. 10 ; though it is possible that in this passage
another person is intended.
*• ("'awpWi &.'l*ptl$, A. '\mapifi; Joiarib.)
A Shilonite — i'.e. probably a descendant of
Shelah the son of Judah— named in the gene-
alogy of Maaseiah, the then head of the family
(Ach. xi. 5). '
JOKNEAM
JOK'DE-AM (Om? r = frebrand cf Ik
people (?); 'ApiKOfi, B.' ^aptuciit, A. ImSssV:
Jacadaam), a city of Judah, in the momnahs
(Josh. xv. 56), named in the same group vttk
Maon, Carmel, and Ziph, and therefore ipp»-
rently to be looked for south of Hebron, wken
they are situated. It has not, however, bea
yet met with, nor was it known to Ensebim
and Jerome. [G.] [W.]
JO'Km(pW=Jehovahestablishes; Wis.
BA. 'laoKtlfx ; qui stare-fecit solem), one of tb
sons of Shelah (the third according to Burriog-
ton) the son of Judah (1 Ch. iv. 22), of when
nothing further is known. It would be difficult
to say what gave rise to the rendering of tk
Vulgate or the Targura on the verse. The Una
translates, «' and the prophets and scribes whs
came forth from the seed of Joshua." Tit
reading which they had was evidently OV,
which some Rabbinical tradition applied u
Joshua, and at the same time identified Joai
and Saraph, mentioned in the same verse, *iti
Mahlon and Chilion. Jerome quotes a Hebrw
legend that Jokim was Elimelech the husoifi
of Naomi, in whose days the sun stood still c«
account of the transgressor of the Law (Qmeit.
Beb. in Parol.).
JOK'ME-AM(D^pJ=maj, thepeopleriteQ):
in 1 K., B. AovkAh ; A., united with precedmf.
word, Mc/t/SpoSel in ModV; in 1 Ch. r, 'l«t*«s>.
B. 'la-oat/i : Jecmaan, Jecmaam), a city d
Ephraim, given with its suburbs to the Kohathitt
Levites (1 Ch. vi. 68). The catalogue of ti«
towns of Ephraim in the Book of Joshua b
unfortunately very imperfect (see xvi.), bat ii
the parallel list of Levitical cities in Josh. ui
Kibzaim occupies the place of Jokmeam (a 2).
The situation of Jokmeam is to a certain eitesi
indicated in 1 K. iv. 12, where it is named witi
places which we know to have been in tfe
Jordan valley at the extreme east boundary «f
the tribe. (Here the A. V. has, probably by i
printer's error, Jokneam.) This position i>
further supported by that of the other Levitiol
cities of this tribe — Shechem in the north, Betb-
horon in the south, and Gezer in the eitreiw
west, leaving Jokmeam to take the opposite
place in the east (see, however, the contrary
opinion of Robinson, iii. 115, note). With regard
to the substitution of Kibzaim — which is x*
found again — for Jokmeam, we would only dr«*
attention to the fact of the similarity in appear-
ance of the two names, DITDjV and OW-
Conder, adopting the view that Jokmeam if
Kibzaim, identifies it with Tell el-Kabii, near
Bethel (Z?M. p. 417). [G.] [W.]
JOK'NE-AM (DW|T [cp. Olshausen, jB»U
§ 277, *, 3]: 'Im/ja'^'ItavKtr, r, ModV; A.
'UKoydu, 'Ieavctp, ^ 'Ejcra)i : Jachanan, Jeconm,
Jecnam), a city of the tribe of Zebulun, allotted
with its suburbs to the Merarite Levites (Josb.
xxi. 34), but entirely omitted in the cata-
logue of 1 Ch. vi. (cp. v. 77). It is doubtless
the same place as that which is incidentally
named in connexion with the boundaries of the
tribe — "the torrent which faces Jokneam " (iii.
11), and as the Canaanite town, whose king *at
killed by Joshua— " Jokneam of Carnx-l" (sii.
Digitized by
Google
JOKSHAN
■22). The requirements of these passages are
sufficiently met by the modern site Tell Keimun,
an eminence which stands just below the eastern
termination of Carmel, with the Kishon at its
feet about a mile off. Dr. Robinson has shown
<2?. S. iii. 115, note) that the modern name is
legitimately descended from the ancient: the
Cyamon* of Judith vii. 3 being a step in the
pedigree (see also Van de Velde, i. 331, and
Memoir, p. 326 ; Guerin, Samarie, ii. 241 sq. ;
Sepp, Heil. Land, ii. 551). Jokneam is found
in the A. V. of 1 K. iv. 12, but this is un-
warranted by either Hebrew text, LXX. A. or
Vulgate (both of which have the reading Jok-
meam; the LXX. B. is quite corrupt), and
also by the requirements of the passage, as
stated under Jokmeam. [G.] [W.]
JOK-SHAN (J$£, trapper; 'Ufa; Jec-
san), a son of Abraham by Keturah (Gen.
xxv. 2, 3, J ; 1 Ch. i. 32), and Father of the
bene Yokshan, whose main stocks were Sheba
and Dedan ; that is, the more northern branches
of these two great Arabian peoples. Although
Keturitc Arabs find no place in the lists of the
Inter Arab genealogists, yet mention is made of
a tribe Katura (\ ..iaSX which lived along
with the kindred tribe of G'urhum [Joktan],
in the neighbourhood of Mecca {Dm Coteiba,
ed. Wustenfeld, 14; Bitter, xii. 19; Knobel).
The reason why some of the tribes which
traced their descent from Keturah can no
longer be verified, is doubtless, as Dillmann
suggests, that they early became extinct, or
were absorbed into other tribal combinations.
So far as their names have been identified, they
appear to hare dwelt on the western side of the
Arabian peninsula [Zimran ; Mkdas ; Midian ;
Sheba ; Dedan]. Jokshan, which looks like a
dialectical variant of Joktan," is connected by
the Arab genealogists with the tribe of Yakish
< *5b) in Yemen {ZDMQ. x. 31), perhaps on
account of his relation to Sheba (see Dillm. Die
Genesis, x. 7, xxv. 1-4). [E. S. P.] [C. J. B.]
JOK-TANflOp^, Yotctan, incola; cp. ( ^a» t
incoluit : 'Uierir : Jectan ; 'loiierat, Jos. Ant. i.
6, § 4), son of Eber, and" " Father " of thirteen •
• For the legend connecting Cyamon, Tell Kcimiin,
with Cain, see PEF. Mem. 1L 48, sua Sepp, U. Ml.
b The change of letters In Yoktton and rojr(dn re-
minds one of Sha'el and foist {i.e. Saul).
« The LXX., however, reduces them to the normal
number of twelve (cp. Israel, Ishniael, Edoin), In Gen.
{. c. by omitting Obal, In Chron. by reading Kiiovpav
for Jeracb-Hadoram.
The sens of Kahtan were fourteen, according to a
tradition preserved" by Hlsham lbn Mujjammad 'al-
KalbL The same wrlUr traces J* .yj ^jUa*
fahtdn Om 'Abir, that is, Joktan ben 'Eber, back to
Nosh, through Sbelah, Arphaxad, and Shem, after
Gen. x. 21-16. This Is followed by a list of tribal
names, of which only Saba (Sheba) can be recognised
in the Biblical catalogue of the Bene Joktan. Tbe
glosses appended to some of the names— eg. \Xti»
'Saba; and be is 'Amir,"— show that
JOKTAN
1769
peoples, whose seats lav in the south-west and
south of Arabia (Gen! x. 25; 1 Ch. i. 19).
Saadiah's Arabic Version of the 0. T. gives
G M
Kahtan ( \V»^ 1 for Joktan ; and the Arab
genealogists, partly, no doubt, on the ground
of the Biblical data, reckon Kahtan-Joktan as
the tribal ancestor of the pure Arabian stocks,
as distinguished from the Ishmaelite peoples of
the north (Gen. xxv. 12-16), and the extinct
aboriginal tribes of 'Ad, Thamud, aud the rest.
The name survives as that of a small district
north of Nag'ran, and as a tribal designation.
Niebuhr mentions also Kohfan, a town in
Hadhramaut. In antiquity, doubtless, it had a
much wider scope.
The bene Yoktdn are enumerated in Gen. I. c.
as follows: Aimodad, Sheleph, Hazarmaveth,
Jerah, Badoram, Uzal, Diklah, Obal, Abimael,
Sheba, Ophir, Havilah, Jobab. The first, which
has the Arabic article 'at prefixed, has been com-
pared with Amdnda or Madudi, a township of
Hadhramaut (Wellsted ; K. Niebuhr). Dillmann
mentions also a personal name Mawaddad, occur-
ring in the Himyarite inscriptions (ZDMG. xix.
n. 20, 4). In Jlkut's Mu'g'am iii. 119, we find
the important statement that j^j*^)^ C a '-
Maudad) and i_jt)L» (Salif) were two sons of
Yuktan, who were both included under the
designation of ,_ f>\ rt (Sulaf or Salif). As-
j** *y
the same tribes were known by different designations
(Hlstaim lbn Muhammad 'al-Kalbt,. ffamharat uJ-
naiab, B.M. MSS. add. 22376).
Another account assigned only two sons to Kahtan,
vis. Ta'rub and G'urhum. From Ya'rub's grandson
Saba, i.e. Sheba, sprang the tribes of Yaman ; horn
G'urhum, those of the Hlg'ai : see the references, op.
Geaenina, Thet. p. 1212. According to Ahmad ibn "Abd-
'Allah 'al-Kalkashandl, again, rfahtSn had four sons,
G'urhum, 'as-Sulaf, Ya'rub, and Qsdhramaut.
Ibn Kbaldan writes as follows (with express reference
to the Biblical account) : "In the Torah it is stated that
Eber begat two children, Peleg and Joktan. And, ac-
cording to tbe most trustworthy of the genealogists,
Joktan la Kahtan, the Arabs arabising him thus. And
from Peleg are descended Abraham and his branches.
. . . And from Joktan an derived many branches. In
the Torah thirteen of his children are mentioned, viz.
Aimodad (the arahtntlon of which is tja\ta*, who
Is G'urhum ; and Iram, who Is .yOP- Dike Hadoram] ;
and Sheleph, who is the people of ss-SIlfan ; and Saba,
who is the people of Yemen of Hlmyar, the Tnbba's
and Kahlan ; and Hatarmaveth, who la Hadhramaut.
These are five. And there are eight others, whose
names we will give. These, howevtr, being Hebrew,
we have not stopped to give any Interpretation of them j
nor Is It known from what stocks they are. They are
Jerah, Usal, Diklah, Obal, Abimael, Ophir, Havilah,
and Jobab. And according to the genealogists G'urhum
Is of the children of Joktan, but I know not from which
of them. And Hlsbam al-Kalbt says, al-Hind and al-
Slnd [India] are of Ophir, the son of Joktan. But God
knows best." (7urp'«man at-'ibar, Bulak ed. II. 1,
pp. 1, 8. Communicated by A. G. Ellis.) Upon the
whole, two things are clear : (1) that there Is no uni-
form and independent Arab tradition about the original
Arabian stocks ; (2) that the Biblical account supplies
a credible relation of the names and situation of the
principal Arabian peoples contemporaneous with the
writer.
Digitized by
Google
1770
JOKTAN
Salif or at-Sulaf is the name of * tribe in
Yaman (ZDMG. ii. 153 »qq.) : cp. also Satfiyah
(<jiL»)> * district S.W. of Sanaa (Ui«e • K -
Niebuhr, Knobel). Hazarmareth ia Hadhramaut,
the southern coaatlaod, E. of Yaman ; Terah haa
not been identified. Hadoram ' we would equate
O
with the C'urAum ( J>j».) of the Arab genea-
(fjr
logiea. G'urhum may represent an original
Joram (DTI' = 0"l*flrl, 2 Sam. viii.' 10; 1 Ch.
x viii. 10) ; and the phonetic changes involved in
the transition from Joram to G'urhum may be
paralleled by Jetur — (/'fitter, and Abram — Abra-
ham. The tribes of Hadoram would thus belong
to the Hig'ax, and their seats would be in the
neighbourhood of Mecca, about the middle of
the W. coast of Arabia.
Uzal was long since recognised in 'Atal, the
old name of Sanaa, the capital of Yaman (Ges.
Then. ; Assemani, BO. i. 3(i0). Diklah means
" palm," Arab. JiS,) i Rn< l, as a tribal designa-
tion, may be compared with Banu dhi nakhlat,
" Sons of the owner of palm-trees," the name of
a tribe derived from Saba (Sheba), but of un-
certain filiation ('al-Kalkashandi). Obal, who
is called Ebal (!?3'1>) in Ch., and in Sam. Vulg.
of Gen., and by Josepbus, appears as Ttiuif in
LXX. of Ch., i.e. possibly ['DJ?. He may be
the same as 'Amilah («X*\p), a son of Saba,
in 'al-Kalkashandi's genealogy.' Abimael, or aa
it may have been originally written Abumael,
U. 'Abu-Ma'il, " father of Ma'il," a thoroughly
Arabic appellation, may be the original of the
Wa'il
( J^
X son of Himyar, son of Saba, in
the same list. In a genealogy of Hadhramaut
we find also Wa'il ibn Katan, where Katan is
clearly a double of Joktan. Sheba is, of course,
the well-known district of Saba in Yaman.
Ophir has perhaps been the subject of more
dispute than any other name in the entire
list. Yet, like his brethren, Ophir must cer-
tainly represent a people of southern, and
probably south-eastern, Arabia (so Dillmann).
With the name of Ophir we would compare
that of Wa'tfs (Abi-mael's) brother 'Abir (yj\ ;
'abir ?), son of Himyar, son of Saba, in 'al-Kalka-
shandl's genealogy of Kahtan. The names* diner
but slightly ; and 'Abir descends from Saba in
the Arabic list, as 'Ophir (old 'Afir, and possibly
'Abir) follows Shtba in the Biblical one. This
identification shows that the Arabian genea-
logists knew at least that Ophir-" Abir, like the
other sons of Jok tan- Kah tan, must be sought in
Arabia itself, and not in Africa QSofalah), much
less India (Abhiid). As to Havilau, Dillmann
* Micbaelis and Geseniua thought that the Sam.
DinX Indicated the 'A{pa«i~T<u (Ptol. vi. T) or Atra-
mltae (Plln. vi. 28), but these names belong to Hazar-
mareth (see Dillmann, Diet. Gen. ad loc.).
• The LXX. form of the name resembles ,' t C -
■ Oman, the district E. of Qndhramaut, on the Persian
Gnlf.
JOKTAN
has observed that, while there must have been
a place so named in X. Arabia on the Persian
Gulf (Gen. xxr. 18 ; 1 Sam. xr. 7 ; cp. Gen. ii.
11), which might answer to Strabo's XouAotiuk
(xvi. 4. 2), and Niebuhr's Huwailah in Bahrein :
this wide-spread stock may also have left trace
in the Haulaa of Yaman (Niebahr ; Sprenger) :
cp. Ptolemy's "tai\a (vi. 7,41) in South Yamas
(Bochart). Lastly, Jobab is a doubtful name,
aa is indicated by the fluctuation of the LXX.
between Jobab, Jobad, and Oram. We may, how-
ever, be assured that his settlements were not
remote from those of his brother-tribes.'
Having thus gained an approximate idea ol
the locality of the Joktanite peoples, we proceed
to consider the obscure statement of their
bouuds, Gen. x. 30: "And their seat waa from
Miaha to Slphar, (and ?) the hill-country of the
East." A Hebrew writer would natorally
state the limit* from the better known west
to the less known east; and this order tin-
language itself clearly implies. Mesha most
therefore, have been some well-known place in
the western coast-land ; possibly Bithuh a
Baithah in Northern Yaman, which EdrisI caflL-
Baithat Yaktan (so Knobel; Sprenger), hardly
Husa (Ptol. vi. 8) or Muza (Arrian, Pliny).
that is, c *yo Jf5*o*, or r-rr sj-i t -Ha**/.
which lie too far south. Sephar, the eastern
limit, may perhaps be Zafar ( Aife), on the
east coast of Hadhramaut, although there is a
difficulty about the letters of the Arabic name,
which would imply a Hebrew 1SV, while the
Heb. TBD would rather imply \ a *. . Geaenio^
and others make " the hill-country of the East "
to be the highlands of Nag'd in Central Ambta.
But even if the bounds of Jok tan were stated
from east to west, as they assume, a line drawn
from SfaitSn ( l...i r . V. at the head of the
Persian Gulf, to Nag'd, does not seem a very
precise demarcation of tribes that inhabited the
western and southern coastlands of Arabia.
The region of the "Frankincense Mountains,' 7
between Hadhramaut add Mahrah (Bitter, xii.
264), suits better, as Knobel and others have
suggested. [C. J. B.]
The settlements of tho sons of Joktan are
specially examined in the separate articles
bearing their names, and generally in Arabia.
They colonised the whole of the south of the
peninsula, the old "Arabia Felix," or the
Yemen (for this appellation had a very wide
significance in early times), stretching, ac-
cording to the Arabs (and there is in this case
no ground for doubting their general correct-
ness), to Mecca, on the north-west, and along
nearly the whole of the southern coast east-
wards, and far inland. At Mecca, tradition
connects the two great races of Joktan and
Ishmael, by the marriage of a daughter of
G'urhum the Joktanite with Ishmael. It is
'Possibly 3T1P. the Ta'rub (i_ J JO) of the
Arabian genealogists, lies concealed under the com|-
tiorw of this name.
Digitized by
Google
JOKTAN
necessary in mentioning this G'urhura, who is
exiled a "son" of Joktan (Kahtan), to observe
that "son " in these cases must be regarded
as signifying " descendant " (cp. Chronology),
and that many generations (though how many,
or in what order, is not known) are missing
from the existing list, between Kahtan (em-
bracing the most important time of the Jok-
tanites) and the establishment of the compara-
tively-modern Himyarite kingdom. From this
latter date, stated by Caussin, Essai, i. 63, at
B.C. cir. 100, the succession of the Tobba's is
apparently preserved to us.* At Mecca, the
tribe of O'nrhum long held the office of
guardians of the Cnaba, or temple, and the
sacred enclosure, until they were expelled by
the Ishmaelites (Kutb'ad-Din, Hist, of Mecca,
ed. Wiistenfeld, pp. 35 and 39 seqq. ; and
Caussin, Essai, i. 194). But it was at Saba,
the Biblical Sheba, that the kingdom of Joktan
attained its greatness. In the south-western
angle of the peninsula, San 'a (Uznl), Saba
(Sheba), and Hadhramaut (Hazarmaveth), all
closely neighbouring, formed together the prin-
cipal known settlements of the Joktanites.
Here arose the kingdom of Sheba. The domi-
nant tribe from remote ages was that of Saba
(the Sabaei of the Greeks): while the family of
Himyar (llomeritae) held the first place in the
tribe. The kingdom called that of Himyar we
believe to hare been merely a late phase of the
old Sheba, dating, both in its rise and its name,
only shortly before our era.
Next in importance to the tribe of Saba was
that of Hadhramaut, which, till the fall of the
Himyarite power, maintained a position of
independence and a direct line of rulers from
Kahtan (Caussin, i. 135-6). Joktanite tribes
also passed northwards, to Hirah, in El-'Irak,
and to the Hauran, near Damascus. The emigra-
tion of these and other tribes took place on the
occasion of the rupture of a great dyke (the
Dyke of El-'Arim), above the metropolis of
Saba; a catastrophe that appears, from the
concurrent testimony of Arab writers, to have
devastated a great extent of country, and de-
stroyed the city Ma'rib, the Maryab of the
inscriptions, or Saba. This event forms the
commencement of an era, the dales of which
exist in the inscriptions on the Dyke and else-
where. (See the extracts from El-Mas'udt and
other authorities, edited by Schulteus ; Caussin,
i. 84 seqq.; D. H. Mul'ler, Burgen, ii. 981;
ZDMQ. xxxi. 61 sqq. ; and Arabia.)
The position which the Joktanites hold (in
native traditions) among the successive races
who are said to have inhabited the peninsula
has been fully stated in art. Arabia ; to which
the reader is referred for a sketch of the in-
habitants generally, their descent, history,
religion, and language. There are some ex-
isting places named after Joktan and Kahtan
('Al-Idrisi, ed. Jaubert; Niebuhr, Dtscr.' 238);
bnt there seems to be no safe ground for
attaching to them any special importance, or
JONADAB
1771
• It Is curious that the Greeks first uieuiiuu the Hlm-
yarites in the expedition of Aelius Gallus, towards the
close of the 1st century B.C., although Himyar himself
lived long before; agreeing with our belief that hie
family was Important before the establishment of the
so-called kingdom. See Caussin, I. c.
for supposing that the name is always ancient
when we remember that the whole country is
full of the traditions of Joktan.
[E. S. P.] [C. J. B.]
JOK'THE-EL tf>Kn|V). L Ci« x<v d(i., B.
'\aKapff}\, A. 'Ux9a4\K ; Jecthel), a city in the
low conntry of Judah (Josh. xv. 38), named
next to Lachish — now Tell el-Hesy, on the road
between Beit JibrSn and Gaza. The name does
not appear to have been yet discovered.
2. ('1(M\, B. YLaiofiK, A. *I«*-0o4A; Jecte-
hel.) "God-subdued," the title given by Amaziah
to the cliff (tf!>Bn, A. V. Selah)— the stronghold
of the Edomites — after he had captured it from
them (2 K. xiv. 7). The parallel narrative of
2 Ch. xxv. 11-13 supplies fuller details. From
it we learn that, having beaten the Edomite
army with a great slaughter in the " Valley of
Salt," Amaziah took those who were not slain
to the cliff, and threw them headlong over it.
This cliff is asserted by Eusebius (s. v. itiraa,
OS.* p. 279, 7 1) to be " a city of Edom, also called
by the Assyrians (Syrians) Rekem," by which
there is no doubt that he intends Petra {US.*
p. 280, 94, t. v. 'P«K«/i, and the quotations in
Stanley's 8. $ P. p. 94, note). The title thus
bestowed is said to have continued "unto this
day." This, Keil remarks, is a proof that the
history was nearly contemporary with the event,
because Amaziah's conquest was lost again by
Ahaz less than a century afterwards (2 Ch.
xxviii. 17). [G.] [W.]
JO'NA Qlmivrit [Westcott and Hort];
Jona), the father of the Apostle St. Peter
(John i. 42), who is hence addressed as Simon
Bar-jona in Matt. xvi. 17. In the A. V. of
John xxi. 15-17 he is called Jonas, though
the Greek is 'IwaVrji, and the Vulg. Johannes
throughout. (The R. V. rendering is "son of
John. ) The name in either form would be
the equivalent of the Hebrew Johanan.
JON'ADAB. 1. (3-)J'V, and once 3lA"P»
i.e. Jehonadab = Jehovah hath impelled; 'Imr-
aSdfi ; Jonadab), son of Shimeah and nephew of
David. He is described as " very subtil "
(o-o$ot a<p6Spa ; the word is that usually trans-
lated " wise," as in the case of Solomon, 2 Sam.
xiii. 3). He seems to have been one of those
characters who, in the midst of great or royal
families, pride themselves, and are renowned,
for being acquainted with the secrets of the
whole circle in which they move. His age
naturally made him the friend of his cousin
Amnon, heir to the throne (2 Sam. xiii. 3). He
perceived from the prince's altered appearance
that there was some unknown grief — " Why art
thou, the king's son, so lean ? " — and, when he
had wormed it out, he gave him the fatal advice
for ensnaring his sister Tamar (ro. 5, 6).
Again, when, in a later stage of the same
tragedy, Amnon was murdered by Absalom, and
the exaggerated report reached David that all
the princes were slaughtered, Jonadab was
already aware of the real state of the case. He
was with the king, and was able at once to re-
assure him (2 Sam. xiii. 32, 33).
2. Jer. xxxv. 6,8, 10, 14, 16, 18, 19, in which
Digitized by
Google
1772 JONAH, BOOK OF
it represent* sometimes the long, sometimes the
short Ueb. form of the uame. QJehohadab.]
[A. P. S.]
JONAH, BOOK OF. This small book pre-
sents no special difficulties in respect of its
vocabulary or grammar ; as regards its contents,
it differs from other Books in the collection of
the twelve Minor Prophets, in being a narrative
of event* connected with the delivery of a
prophecy, the substance of which is given briefly
and in general terms. The conteuts of the Book
are too well known to require recapitulation.
As to its character, and the object with which
it was written, very great diversity of opinion
exists. The bibliographical notice at the end
of this article shows the extent of the literature
connected with the subject, and will enable the
reader to trace this diversity of opinion in
detail.
According to the traditional view, held with
very few exceptions by all writers until the
beginning of last century, the Book is regarded
as historical, and composed either (1) by the
Prophet himself or (2) a later author.
Neither the name of the work, nor the use of
the third person with reference to Jonah, affords
evidence as between (1) and (2). The portraiture
•of Jonah, who appears in an unfavourable light,
seems best explained by supposing that the
Prophet relates his own shortcomings, thereby
testifying his repentance. The nobler side of a
mixed character is thus exhibited.
The chief considerations urged in support of
the historical character of the Book are: —
.1. There is no indication that the Book should
■be regarded in any other light. It contains a
circumstantial narrative, mentioning known
persons and places.
b. The relations of Israel to the surrounding
nations before and during the time of the
Prophet. Ruth the Moabitess; the sojourn of
David's parents in Moab ; his friendly relations
with foreigners, — Achish, Ittai, Hiram ; similar
examples in the case of Solomon and later kings ;
the connexion of Elijah and Elisha with Syria ;
the residence of the latter in Damascus; the
utterances of Amos against foreign nations, are
evidences not only of friendly intercourse with,
but also of religious influence exerted by the
prophetic order on their heathen neighbours.
Such friendly relations belong to the earlier
history of the nation, before the days of As-
syrian supremacy and oppression; and subse-
quent misfortunes developed a feeling of mis-
trust and illwill towards foreigners which made
such relations no longer possible. Although the
mission of Jonah and its results are without
exact parallel in the 0. T. Scriptures, the facts
noted above, and the consideration that their
occurrence is limited to a period which closes
not long after the time of Jonah, may be urged
in favour of its probability.
c. The mission was fitted to enforce on
Israel the teaching found in the prophets of
Jeroboam's reign. They set forth God as the
righteous Judge of all nations, Who would make
use of the heathen for the discipline of Israel,
that Israel's iniquity was great, and the punish-
ment thereof was impending. What more
appropriate enforcement of these truths than to
-exhibit, as a model of repentance, a heathen
JONAH, BOOK OF
nation which was their counterpart in iniquity?
The men of Nineveh would give form to tat
warnings which the Prophets had expressed ii
words. They would rescue or rise in judgmeci
against that generation, as against a later one,
d. The typical character of the narrative
This must be considered in estimating iu
probability. If under the Old Dispensation the
words and deeds of God's servants point out tie
Christ of the Gospels, we should expect to fi&J
some indication of the central truth of li*
Resurrection, and it is difficult to conceiw
how such indication could be made, except by
introducing events of a most unusual and start-
ling character. In the N. T., the events gt
Jonah's life are treated as having more than >
mere historical interest, and the most remarkabli
incident in it as foreshadowing that death sad
resurrection which is the foundation of tk
Christian faith (St. Matt. xii. 39-41 ; St. Luxe
xi. 29, 30, 32). For discussion of these passage.
cf. Speaker's Commentary, vol. vi. pp. 577-a,
Introd. to Jonah ; Wordsworth on St- Matt, xii
40 ; Meyer, Comment, u. d. N. T. (1864), l L
p. 296 sq.
We proceed to notice some of the objectkitf
raised against the historical character of th«
Book.
(a.) The lack of detail in the narrative,— <^.
the place where Jonah was cast up, his journey
to Nineveh, return, the name of the king ; whiir
minute details are added where they seem t,
point the moral of the story, — e.g. the conduct o!
the sailors and of the Ninevites contrasted with
the behaviour of the Prophet.
(6.) The improbability of such a mission with
such results. The Assyrians, from their otro
records as from Scripture, appear as idolaters,
trusting in their own gods, and despising those
of other nations. Their reception of the Prophet
is scarcely in harmony with their character.
(c.) Of this movement, so unusual in its
character and affecting all classes, no trace
appears either in the 0. T. or other history.
No prophet enforces on Israel the lesson whieb
repentant Nineveh is designed to teach, sai
those who denounce the incurable wound of the
bloody city pass over in silence what vouU
increase the certainty of vengeance, that though
a prophet had been among them, they has
turned back to their evil way.
(d.) The prominence of the miraculous element,
and especially the deliverance of the Prophet by
help of the great fish.
The reader will note that the paragraphs a, 6,
c, d, and (a), (6), (c), (d), are in great measure
opposiug opinions on the points at issue.
Aim and object of the irori. — All commentators
admit the didactic aim of the writer, and many
consider that the actions described have s
symbolical meaning. The questions — what does
the Book teach ? what does it symbolise ? — are to
a great extent independent of the controversy as
to its historical character.
The concluding verses iv. 10, 11, point out the
greatness of the city, the ignorance and helpless-
ness of those within it, as reasons for the mercy
shown, as recorded in iii. 10. The Prophet
himself acknowledges that the Divine action u
in accordance with His revelation of Himself,
and that it had prompted him to disobedience at
the first (iv. 2). God, slow to anger and of great
Digitized by
Google
JONAH, BOOK OF
kindness, and repenting of the evil if man will
turn from his wickedness, is the lesson set forth
in the Book itself. The Prophets, especially
Jeremiah and Ezekiel, speak in a similar strain
(cp. Jer. xviii. 7, 8 ; xxvi. 3 ; Exek. iviii. and
xxxiii.), and present such close parallels of
thought and diction that some assign the Book
tn this period, and its authorship to one of these
prophets or a contemporary.
Further, the Book shows that God's mercy is
not confined to His own people, — a lesson which
the Jews were slow to learn, and which required
enforcement by means of vision, even under the
Christian dispensation.
In the Gospels (see passages quoted above),
the heathen nation repenting at the preaching
of Jonas is held up as a warning to non-repentant
Israel. A contrast is implied which is not
pointed out in the Book, and in respect of one
special sin, that of impenitence. A double
contrast may be noted (is it too much to say
that it is implied?) between the conduct of
Jonah and (1) the sailors, (2) the Ninevites.
Are we warranted in expanding the contrast
in detail, and considering the conduct of the
Prophet as an illustration of the failings of
Israel ? Disobedient at Brat, angry afterwards,
at the mercy extended to the repentant city,
the Prophet is regarded by many as the repre-
sentative of the Hebrew people, at one time
evading compliance with the Divine commands,
at another jealous and displeased because of
favour showed to other nations.
And since the Prophet, in respect of the most
remarkable circumstance recorded of him, is
regarded as a type of Christ, may not other
details of the narrative be viewed in the same
light ? The various attempts to interpret the
Book typically and allegorically suggest how
this portion of Scripture may be "profitable
for instruction," if we cannot say that it was
designed to teach all that commentators have
put forward. Here we can only give a brief
sketch of each method.
J. Tarnovius (in Prophetam Jonam Com-
mentarias, 1622) pursues the typical treatment
of the narrative into the fullest detail : Jonah, in
his name and that of his father, in being sent to
the heathen as well as being a Prophet of Israel,
in giving himself up to secure the safety of his
fellow-voyagers, 4c, may serve to remind us of
One greater than Jonah (cp. among moderns
Kaulen, Librum J. Proph. cxposuit, Mogunt.
1862).
The allegorical treatment of the narrative
may be illustrated by Kleinert's view. He sees
in Jonah the nation with a prophetic call, in
whom all families of the earth shall be blessed.
Nineveh represents the heathen world in its
greatness and ignorance, the object of Divine
compassion. Israel seeks to evade it* mission,
and devotes itself to worldly pursuits (Jonah
fleet to Tarshish) ; but God punishes the nation
by adversity (the storm) and by a captivity
which threatens its very existence (Jonah
swallowed up by the great fish). When they
cry unto the Lord, He delivers them (Jonah's
prayer and rescue), but their mission, still
unaccomplished, remains the same. Repentant
Nineveh shows how the Lord is found of them
that sought Him not, while He stretches out
His hands to a rebellious people.
JONAH, BOOK OF
177$
The symbolical use of expressions similar
to those in the Book of Jonah, by other
writers of the 0. T., may be noted, in support of
this method of interpretation. Action closely
resembling that of the Prophet is described is
Ps. lv. 6-8, "Oh that I had wings like a
dove ! " (the name Jonah signifies " dove ") ; cp.
Ps. cxxxix. 7-10. The word "dove" is also
applied to Ephraim (Hos. vii. 11, xi. 11). The
storm and overflowing waters are common
symbols of God's visitations, in the midst of
which He pours out upon His people the spirit
of deep sleep (Is. xxix. 10 ; the same root being
used as in Jonah i. 5, " was fast asleep "). The
monsters of the deep— leviathan the swift ser-
pent, leviathan the crooked serpent, the dragon
that is in the sea (Is. xxvii. 1 ; Ps. lxxiv. 13) —
are the great powers that oppress Israel.* Their
action is described as " devouring " (Jer. 1. 17) ;
and in the expressions " he hath swallowed * me
up like a dragon " (Jer. li. 34), " I will bring
forth out of bis mouth that which he hath
swallowed • up " (ft. 44), words used with refer-
ence to the most remarkable incidents recorded
of Jonah, are used symbolically with reference
to Babylon.
If this allegorical treatment of the first part
of the Book be accepted, it follows that the latter
part must also be interpreted with reference to
the Babylonian kingdom. The greatness of
Nineveh, on which emphasis is laid (i. 2; iii.
2, 3 ; iv. 11), must then be taken as indicating
that city which was the scene of the Captivity
— the great Babylon (Dan. iv. 27). Its fall had
been predicted : but the returned exiles wondered
when she would be made to drink the cup of
God's fury; in their day of small things they
longed for the day of vengeance upon the great
nations. The Prophets encouraged them in their
hopes (Hag. ii. 7, 22 ; Zech. i. 15, 21), but it
was necessary to point out the conditional cha-
racter of all prophecy, —how man may make
even God's Prophet seem a deceiver if he will
take hold of the promises held out to the peni-
tent. This is the situation described in the
latter part of the Book. But here the incident
of the gourd corresponds in some degree to the
deliverance of the Prophet in the earlier section.
Is this also to receive an allegorical interpreta-
tion ? Dr. Wright (the second of whose Biblical
Essays is an exegetical study of the Book ef
Jonah) suggests that the Prophet, exceeding
glad of the gourd (iv. 6), represents the spirit
in which the returned Jews welcomed the
restoration of the Davidic house in the person of
Zerobbabel. The figure had been applied to his
predecessor — "under his shadow we shall live
among the heathen " (Lam. iv. 20). But David's
throne awaited David's Lord, — the prince of the
royal line soon passed away — the gourd withered
as in a night. This additional exposition subjects
the whole narrative to a uniform treatment, by
filling up a gap left by former interpreters of
this school.
Zanguage.— Certain words which occur only
in later Books are found in this Book : —
itypD (air. Kty.), a " decked " vessel. The
common word i"l']K, " ship," is also used.
• See, however, the notes in Cheyne's Itaiah, vol. i.
p. 161.
» The same Heb. verb as In Jonah L 17 (U. 1, neb.).
Digitized by
Google
1774 JONAH, BOOK OF
rffO, "sailor," and in Ezek. xxvii. 9, 27, 29
only! The late Prof. Wright (Comp. Or. of
Semitic Language!, p. 50) says that this word
has nothing to do with fOp, " salt."
^jnn 3T, "chief of the sailors;" hin in
plnral in Ezek. xxvii. 8, 27, 26, 29 only.
These are all nautical terms, and the Hebrew
vocabulary is not rich in these, nor is there
much, if any, opportunity for their use in
earlier Books.
n|P»JV. The root occurs Jer. v. 28 (verb) ;
Cant. v. '14; Ezek. xxvii. 19; Job xii. 5; Ps.
cxlvi. 4 ; and in one form of the numeral xi.
(.rnC'r) yffl 'JWT?. For its meanings, see
Lex. i. c.
tan, Hos. viii. 12 (3TD) and later books,
and Chald.
DJK3, " decree." DJTtp, Ezra and Daniel ; also
the usage of i"l}0 (appoint), (Op (cry or preach),
and the form E> compounded with other words,
for the relative.
With our slight knowledge of the historical
development of the Hebrew language and of its
dialectic variations, it is difficult to draw any
inferences from these slender data. For a fuller
discussion, cf. Pusey'e Introd. pp. 249-251, and
(on the other side) Friedrichsen's Excursus,
p. 179 sq.
The hymn (ch. ii.) contains many expressions
similar to those in the Psalms, e.g. Ps. xviii.
4-6, xxxi. 6, 7, 22, cxlii. 3, xlii. 7, cxx. 1 ; Lam.
iii. 54. If we consider all these to be borrowed,
a late date must be assigned to it, but many
(and among them critics who reject the historical
view) consider it to be an old hymn, " a genuine
hymn of the Prophet Jonah." We have here no
sure ground for drawing inferences as to date.
For fuller discussion, cp. Friedrichsen's Excursus,
and Introd. to Jonah in Speaker's Comm.
Between this Book and the account of the
prophet Elijah contained in 1 K. xvii.-xix.,
many points of resemblance have been noted.
In both a prophet is impatient, and God's
power over His creation is employed to instruct
him. The verbal coincidences are also close ;
the expression TYla? 1CDJ J1K ?KB*1 is com-
mon to both. Cp. 1 K. xvii. 4, 9, xix. 6, 11,
with Jonah i. 4, 17, ii. 10, iv. 6, 7, 8 ; and 1 K.
xix. 4, with Jonah iii. 4, iv. 3, 5, 8 ; IK. xix. 5,
7, 8, with Jonah i. 2, 3, iii. 2, 3.
Jonah, like Elijah, was a Prophet of the
northern kingdom. Are these sufficient grounds
for suggesting a community of origin ?
Commentators of all shades of opinion have,
with such few exceptions, pronounced in favour
of the unity of the Book, that it seems hardly
necessary to addnce any evidence under this
head. The following passages may be compared —
i. 2 and iii. 2 ; i. 3 and iii. 3 ; i. 10, 16, and
iv. 1 ; i. 2 and iv. 2 — as showing similarity of
expression. We leave it to the reader to note
references in chs. iii. iv. to ch. i., and to draw
an inference from comparing i. 10, 16, with
iv. 5.
For a general view of the literature connected
with this Book, the reader may consult: — A
series of articles in The 0. T. Student, Chicago,
1883-4, "Is the Book of Jonah historical?"
JONAH, BOOK OF
which contain references to the principal authors.
Kalisch, Bible Studies, pt. ii., with alphabetical
and chronological lists of authors referred to.
P. Friedrichsen, Kritische Uebersicht der wi-
schiedenen Ansichten von dan Buche Jonas, Sft.
Leipzig, 1841 (2nd ed.). The first defends, the
other two reject, the historical view. Prof.
Driver's Introd. to the 0. T. should also be
consulted.
An interesting list of works is contained in
Jonae propheticus liber expos, lit. et Exeg. Ulustr.
a ./. Bircherodio, Hafniae, 1686 ; and a list in
Rosenmuller, Seh. m V. T. (carried up to 1826>
The following list is arranged according to
the standpoint of the different authors.
I. Supporters of the historical view : —
1. As regards the whole Book. J. Hooper
(Bp.), Sermons upon the Prophet Jonas, London,
1550 ; P. Baronis Praelec. 39 in Jonam, Load.
1579 ; Lectures on Jonah, by J. King, Load.
1594-1618; G. Abbott (Arch, of Cant.), Com-
mentary upon Jonah, Lond. 1600, reprinted
Lond. 1845 (Homiletical) ; Rob. Abbott (Bp. of
Salisbury) on Jonah, 1609; Newcome, 1785;
Beard (People's Did. of B.) ; Drake, X'otrs <m
Jonah and Hosea, 1853 ; Pusey, Minor Prophets :
Huxtable (Speaker's Comm.); Havernick, Eadei-
tung i. d. A. 'J'.; Joh. Tamorii in proph. J.
Comm., Rostoch. 1622 (the typical character of
the Book drawn out); Delitzsch, Banmgarten,
Kiiper, Niebuhr; Redford, Studies m the Book
of Jonah, 1883.
2. With modifications, (i.) Less, GQttingen,
1782 (a vessel bearing the name or sign of a fish
rescued Jonah); Anton in Paulus, Reptrt m fi n,
Jena, 1791 (a fish approached Jonah, by help of
which he was brought to land), (ii.) The
miraculous portion an addition to the original
story : Amnion, Erlangen, 1794; Thaddaus, Bonn,
1786. (iii.) A vision or dream is described :
Grimm, Dusseldorf, 1789 ; Sonnenmayer, in
Augusti's Theol. Monatschrift, 1802.
The above are attempts to remove the mira-
culous element. They either deal arbitrarily
with the narrative, or assign unusual mean-
ings to certain Hebrew words. For discussion
of these views, cp. Friedrichsen, pp. 27-35,
60-68.
A modification of iii. is suggested in an article
in the Journal of Sacred Lit., vol. viii. 1866,
p. llOsqq. The events related in i. 6— ii. 10 were
seen by Jonah in a dream. Being brought to
land in an unconscious state, he considered them
as a reality experienced by him, and so related
them. The same article contains a careful dis-
cussion as to how far the references to the nar-
rative in the N. T. necessarily imply its historical
reality.
II. Those who reject the historical view
(those who allow a small residuum of fact not
recoverable with certainty are here included)
maintain that the Book is —
1. A didactic narrative, containing a moral
lesson.
2. An allegory, in which the events are sym-
bolical, signifying a connected series of truths.
3. Based on a foreign myth.
1. (i.) Miiller, Jona eine mornlische ErzUhmg
(in Paulus, Memorabilien, Leipzig, 1794): mercy
shown to the penitent. So Kalisch, Bible
Studies ; Bergmann, Jonah (e. alt. test. Parabef)
ebcrs. u. erkl. Strassburg, 1885.
Digitized by
Google
JONAH, BOOK OF
(ii.) Relations of Jew and Gentile: Seraler
("deum etiam aliis gentibus prospicere adju-
raenta melioria et ulubris cognitionis non tantum
Judaeoa curare ")■ Similarly Pareau, ascribing
the Book to Jonah, a parable based on real events
{might be classed with I. 2). Eichhorn ; Mi-
chaelis (against Jewish pride and contempt of
other nations). Similarly Btfhme, Bruno Bauer.
Nachtigal divides the Book into three, drawing
.a lesson compounded of the two preceding views.
Bleek (Introd. 0. T.) considers its aim similar
to i. and ii.
(iii.) Special reference to the prophetic office.
Herder (the Prophets and their failings) : so
KSster and (partly) Niemeyer, who giving as the
moral, God's thoughts higher than man's
thoughts, thinks the chief reference is to the
Prophets. Hezel (a warning to Prophets, but
with other subsidiary teaching). Hitzig (apo-
logetic with reference to unfulfilled prophecy).
Paulus, Mem., 1794 (similar, combined with L).
Jager ( Ueber den. . . Endziceck des Buck's Jonah,
Tub. 1840, reprinted from 7B6. Zeitsch.), with
reference to Babylon.
2. (i.) Jonah a symbol of Jewish nation.
Meyer (with much similarity to Miiller, drawing
same lesson). Staudlin (the Prophet's actions
symbolical, as in Jer. xiii. 1-11, with the lesson
of 1 i.).
(ii.) The whole narrative treated as an
allegory. Keil; Kleinert in Lange's Bibelicerk,
trans, (with additions), in T. and T. Clark's
Commentary, without rejecting the historical
character (see above for detail) ; J. S. Bloch,
Stud. z. Geschichte der Samml. d. alt. heb.
Literatur, Leipzig, 1875; Jonah, A Study in
Jeaish Folklore and Religion, by T. K. ; (Prof.)
■Cheyne in Thiol. Rev. vol. xiv. 1877, p. 211;
Biblical Essays, by C. H. H. Wright, D.D.,
T. and T. Clark, 1886.
(iii.) The characters are intended to represent
the contemporaries of the author. H. v. der
Hardt, a picture of the times in which Jonah
lived, and the coming downfall of the northern
kingdom ; but in a later work he considers the
times of Manasseh and Josiah are described
(1719-23). Krahmer : the condnct of the Jews
towards the Samaritans after the return from
captivity is reproved by this Book. A moral
lesson, like 1 i. and ii., and some of the details
borrowed from myth.
3. The influence of myth is urged by Rosen-
niiiller ; Gesenius, Hallische Literature, 1813;
Bertholdt, Krahmer, Forbiger, and Friedrichsen,
who refer to the legends of Hesione and An-
dromeda ; and by F. C. Bauer, Der Proph. Jonas,
cin Assyr. Btibyl. Symbol, in Ilgen's Zeitsch.,
1837, the Babylonian myth of Oannes and
ceremonies connected with the cult of Adonis
are appealed to. Some account of these and
similar myths may be found in Tylor, Primitive
Culture, i. 306, and Early History of Mankind,
p. 337, who points out the similarity of parts of
these myths to the rescue of Jonah by the fish.
But the common element seems limited to a sea-
monster and the neighbourhood of Joppa ; and
for some details the myths may be indebted to
the Hebrew.
In addition to these works, we may note
Jonas Ittustratus, by J. Leusden, Trajecti ad
Rhenam, 1656, which contains the commentaries
of Rashi, Aben Ezra, and Kimchi, with trans-
JONAS
1775
lations and notes ; a useful help towards acquir-
ing some knowledge of Rabbinic Hebrew.
[A. T. C]
JONAH (HJ^; ImnS, LXX. and Matt. iii.
39), a [prophet, son of Amittai, of Gath-hepher.
His name is associated (2 K. xiv. 25) with that
of Jeroboam, and it is probable, though not
certain, that he lived during the reign of that
king.
The passages in 2 K. x. 32, 33 ; xiii. 3-7, 22-
25; xiv. 25-27, with a few references in the
prophetical writings, contain all the information
afforded in Scripture concerning the relations of
the kingdom of Israel with their eastern neigh-
bours during the century of the house of Jehu.
From these brief notices we learn that the
Syrians (and the Ammonites) had in Jehu's
reign ravaged the eastern frontier of the Israelite
kingdom with merciless severity (2 K. x. 32 ;
Amos i. 3, 13). Under his successor Jehoahaz
the kingdom continued in subjection. The next
king (Joash), encouraged and at the same time
admonished by the prophet Elisha (2 K. xiii.
14-19), recovered some of the cities which had
fallen into the enemy's hand (t>. 25), but the
complete restoration of the kingdom was effected
during the brilliant reign of Jeroboam II., who
" restored the coast of Israel from the entering
of Hamath unto the sea of the plain, according
to the word of the Lord God of Israel, which He
spake by the hand of His servant Jonah."
The promise of returning prosperity may have
been delivered by Jonah at any time between
the defeat of Jehu and the victories of Jeroboam,
and the writer of the narrative in 2 E. xiv.
25-27 may combine a prophecy of an earlier
period with the record of its fulfilment.
A modern critic* is of opinion that a further
portion of Jonah's message is preserved in " the
burden of Moab (Is. xv. xvi.), which embodies
the substance of an earlier prophecy." ° For the
discussion of the hypothesis, cp. Hitzig, Der
Proph. J. Orakel u. Moab, Heidelb. 1831 ; Der
Proph. Jesaja, 1833 ; and Cheyne's Isaiah.
[A. T. C]
JO*NAN Cl<*»&» ; Jona), son of Eliakim, in
the genealogy of Christ, in the 7th generation
after David, i.e. about the time of king Jehoram
(Lnke iii. 30). The name is probably only another
form of Johanan, which occurs so frequently in
this genealogy. The sequence of names, Jonan,
Joseph, Juda, Simeon, Levi, Mattbat, is singu-
larly like that in vv. 26, 27, Joanna, Judah,
Joseph, Semei, Mattathias. [A. C. H.]
JO'NAS. 1. (B. 'luayas, A. 'lmras ; Elionas.)
This name occupies the same position in 1 Esd. ix.
23 as Eliezer in the corresponding list in
Ezra x. 23. Perhaps the corruption originated
in reading *J*1P?K for TtlTvN, as appears to
have been the case in 1 Esd. ix. 32 (cp. Ezra x.
31). The former would hare caught the com-
piler's eye from Ezra x. 22, and the original
form Elionas, as it appears in the Vulg., could
easily have become Jonas.
• Hitsig.
» xvl. 13 : «' This Is the word which the Lord bath
spoken concerning Moab since that time." The II. V.
has " in time past."
Digitized by
Google
1776
JONATHAN
2. ('Was; Jonas.) The prophet Jonah
(2 Esd. i. 39; Tob. xiv. 4, 8; Matt. xii. 39,
40, 41 ; xvi. 4>
8. ('IwttVwji ; Johannes), John xxL 15-17.
[Jona.]
JON'ATHAN (jrUiiT, i.e. Jehonathan,
and }fUr; the two forms are used almost
alternately : 'IsmIoVv, Jos. 'IwwfSijs : Jonathan).
1. The eldest son of king Saul. The name (the
gift of Jehovah, corresponding to Theodora* in
Greek) seems to have been common at that
period ; possibly from the example of Saul's son
(see Jonathan, the nephew of David, Jonathan,
the son of AMathar, Jonathan, the son of
Shage, and Nathan the prophet).
He first appears some time after his father's
accession (1 Sam. xiii. 2). If his younger
brother Ishbosheth was 40 at the time of Saul's
death (2 Sam. ii. 8), Jonathan mnst hare been
at least 30 when he is first mentioned. Of his
own family we know nothing, except the birth
of one son, five years before hit death (2 Sam.
iv. 4). He was regarded in his father's lifetime
as heir to the throne. Like Saul, he was a man
of great strength and activity (2 Sam. i. 23),
of which the exploit at Michmash was a proof.
He was also famous for the peculiar martial
exercises in which his tribe excelled — archery
and slinging (1 Ch. xii. 2). His bow was to
him what the spear was to his father : " the
bow of Jonathan turned not back " (2 Sam.
i. 22). It was always with bim (1 Sam. xviii. 4 ;
xx. 35). It is through his relation with David
that he is chiefly known to us, probably as
related by his descendants at David's court.
But there is a background, not so clearly given,
of his relation with his father. From the time
that he first appears he is Saul's constant
companion. He was always present at his
father's meals. As Abner and David seem to
have occupied the places afterwards called the
captaincies of " the host " and " of the guard ; "
so he seems to have been (as Hushai afterwards)
"the friend" (cp. 1 Sam. xx. 25; 2 Sam.
xv. 37). The whole story implies, without
expressing, the deep attachment of the father
and son. Jonathan can only go on his dangerous
expedition (1 Sam. xiv. 1) by concealing it from
Saul. Saul's vow is confirmed, and its tragic
effect deepened, by his feeling for his son,
" though it be Jonathan my son " (Jb. xiv. 39).
" Tell me what thou hast done " (ib. xir. 43).
Jonathan cannot bear to believe his father's
enmity to David, "My father will do nothing
great or small, but that he will show it to me :
and why should my father hide this thing from
me ? it is not so (1 Sam. xx. 2). To him, if
to any one, the wild frenzy of the king was
amenable — "Saul hearkened unto the voice of
Jonathan " (1 Sam. xix. 6). Their mutual
affection was indeed interrupted by the growth
of Saul's insanity. Twice the father would
have sacrificed the son : once in consequence of
his vow (1 Sam. xiv.); the second time, more
deliberately, on the discovery of David's flight :
and on this last occasion a momentary glimpse
is given of some darker history. Were the
phrases "son of a perverse rebellious woman,"
" shame on thy mother's nakedness " (1 Sam.
xx. 30, 31), mere frantic invectives? or was
there something in the story of Ahinoam or
JONATHAN
Rizpah which we do not know? "In fierce
anger " Jonathan left the royal presence ($>. 34).
But he cast bis lot with his father's decline, em
with his friend's rise, and " in death thev wer>-
not divided" (2 Sam. i. 23; 1 Sam. xxiii."l6).
His life may be divided into two main parts.
1. The war with the Philistines ; commonlr
called, from its locality, " the war of Michmash "
(1 Sam. xiii. 22, LXX.), as the last yean of
the Peloponnesian war were called for a similar
reason "the war of Decelea." In the previous
war with the Ammonites (1 Sam. xi. 4-13)
there is no mention of him ; and his abrupt
appearance, without explanation, in xiii. 3, ma\
seem to imply that some part of the oar rati v
has been lost.
He is already of great importance in the state.
Of the 3000 men of whom Saul's standing ami
was formed (xiii. 2 ; xxiv. 2 ; xxvi. 1, 2), I00>>
were under the command of Jonathan at Gibeah
The Philistines were still in the general com-
mand of the country ; an officer was stationed
at Geba, either the same as Jonathan's positka
or close to it. In a sudden act of youthft;
daring, as when Tell rose against Gesler, or
as in sacred history Moses rose against the
Egyptian, Jonathan slew this officer,* and thes
gave the signal for a general revolt. Saul tot*
advantage of it, and the whole population rose.
But it was a premature attempt. The Philis-
tines poured in from the plain, and the tyranBf
became more deeply rooted than ever. [Sacu]
Saul and Jonathan (with their immediate at-
tendants) alone had arms, amidst the general
weakness and disarming of the people (1 San.
xiii. 22). They were encamped at Gibeah, wita
a small body of 600 men ; and aa they looked
down from that height on the misfortunes
of their country, and of their native tribe
especially, they wept aloud (fcAwov, LXX.;
1 Sam. xiii. 16).
From this oppression, as Jonathan by his
former act had been the first to provoke it, so
now he was the first to deliver his people. 0a
the former occasion Saul had been equally with
himself involved in the responsibility of the
deed. Saul "blew the trumpet;" Saul had
" smitten the officer of the Philistines " (xiii. 3,
4). But now it would seem that Jonathan was
resolved to undertake the whole risk himselt.
"The day," the day fixed by him {yirrrtu i
ynipa, LXX. ; 1 Sam. xiv. 1% approached ; and
without communicating his project to any one,
except the young man whom, like all the chiefs
of that age, he retained as his armour-bearer,
he sallied forth from Gibeah to attack the
garrison of the Philistines stationed on the
other side of the steep defile of Michmash
(xix. 1). His words are short, but they breathe
exactly the ancient and peculiar spirit of the
Israelite warrior. "Come, and let us go over
unto the garrison of these untircumewed ; it
may be that Jehovah will work for us: fa-
there is no restraint to Jehovah to save by
many or by few." The answer is no less
• (A. V. and E. T. "garrison") rir N**«& LIX;
1 Sam. xiii. 3, 1. See Ewald, ii. it «. Vecsiooa sad
commentators are divided aa to the meaning to W
assigned to 3»V3- See Driver, Notes m tat Beb. l*st
of the BB. of Samuel, on 1 Sam. x. &£.He prefcre **»>
Kloetennan the sense of pillar.
Digitized by
Google
JONATHAN
characteristic of the close friendship of the two
young men: already like to that which after-
wards sprang op between Jonathan and David.
" Do all that is in thine heart ; . . . behold, /
am with thee : as thy heart is my heart " (LXX. ;
1 Sam. xir. 7). After the manner of the time
(and the more, probably, from having taken no
counsel of the high-priest or any prophet before
his departure), Jonathan proposed to draw an
omen for their coarse from the conduct of
the enemy. If the garrison, on seeing them,
gave intimations of descending upon them, they
would remain in the valley : if, on the other
hand, they raised a challenge to advance, they
were to accept it. The latter turned out to be
the case. The first appearance of the two
warriors from behind the rocks was taken by
the Philistines as a furtive apparition of " the
Hebrews coming forth out of the holes where
they had hid themselves;" and they were
welcomed with a scoffing invitation (such as the
Jebusites afterwards offered to David), "Come
up, and we will show yon a thing" (xiv. 4-12).
Jonathan immediately took them at their word.
Strong and active as he was, " strong as a lion,
and swift as an eagle " (2 Sain. i. 23), he was
fully equal to the adventure of climbing on his
hands and feet up the face of the cliff. When
he came directly in view of them, with his
armour-bearer behind him, they both, after the
manner of their tribe (1 Ch. xii. 2), discharged a
flight of arrows, stones, and pebbles * from their
bows, crossbows, and slings, with such effect
that twenty men fell at the first onset [Aiuo,
pp. 239, 2401. A panic seized the garrison,
thence spread to the camp, and thence to the
surrounding hordes of marauders ; an earthquake
combined with the terror of the moment ; the
confusion increased ; the Israelites who hod been
taken slaves by the Philistines during the last
three days (LXX.) rose in mutiny : the Israelites
who lay hid in the numerous caverns and deep
holes in which the rocks of the neighbour-
hood abound, sprang out of their subterranean
dwellings. Saul and his little band had watched
in astonishment the wild retreat from the
heights of Gibeah — he now joined in the pursuit,
which led him headlong after the fugitives,
over the ragged plateau of Bethel, and down *
the pass of Beth-horon to Ajalon (xiv. 15-31).
[Gibeah.] The father and son had not met on
that day. Sanl only conjectured his son's
absence from not finding him when he numbered
the people. Jonathan had not heard of the
rash corse (xiv. 24) which Saul invoked on any
one who ate before the evening. In the dizzi-
ness and darkness (Hebrew, 1 Sam. xiv. 27)
that came on after his desperate exertions, he
JONATHAN
1777
» We have taken the LXX. version of xiv. 13, 14,
iviflK*'liay.KaT(L xp6<ntirov 'ItavaBav, cat eiraraft v avrovc
. . • . iv p6kun [k*L hf irtrpo66Aotc, om. In BX A.] koX
<cox*afu' toO <r«Siov, for "they fell before Jonathan
.... within as it were a half acre of ground, which a
yoke of oxen might plough." The alteration of the
Hebrew necesssary to produce this reading of the LXX.,
is given by Kennlcott (Diucrt. on 1 Chron. xi. p. 453 ;
cp. Driver, in loco, who questions the rendering
"pebbles"). Ewald (il. 480) makes this last to be,
"Jonathan and bis friend were as a yoke of oxen
ploughing, and resisting the sharp ploughshares."
• In xiv. 33, 31, the LXX. reads •' Bamotb. " for
•• Beth-even," and omits "ajalon."
nmr.v: mer. — vol.. i.
put forth the staff which apparently had (with
his sling and bow) been his chief weapon, and
tasted the honey which lay on the ground as
they passed through the forest. The pursuers
in general were restrained even from this slight
indulgence by fear of the royal curse ; but the
moment that the day, with its enforced fast,
was over, they flew, like Muslims at sunset
daring the fast of Kamadan, on the captured
cattle ; and devoured them, even to the brutal
neglect of the Law which forbade the dis-
memberment of the fresh carcases with the
blood. This violation of the Law Saul en-
deavoured to prevent and to expiate by erecting
a large stone, which served both as a rude table
and as an altar ; the first altar that was raised
under the monarchy. It was in the dead of
night after this wild revel was over that he
proposed that the pursuit should be continued
till dawn; and then, when the silence of the
oracle of the high-priest indicated that some-
thing had occurred to intercept the Divine
favour, the lot was tried, and Jonathan ap-
peared as the culprit. Jephthah's dreadful
sacrifice would have been repeated ; but the
people interposed in behalf of the hero of that
great day ; and Jonathan was saved * (xiv. 24-
46).
2. This is the only great exploit of Jonathan's
life. But the chief interest of his career is
derived from the friendship with David, which
began on the day of David's return from the
victory over the champion of Gath, and con-
tinned till his death. It is the first Biblical
instance of a romantic friendship, such as was
common afterwards in Greece, and has been
since in Christendom ; and is remarkable both
as giving its sanction to these, and as filled witli
a pathos of its own, which has been imitated,
but never surpassed, in modern works of fiction.
"The soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of
David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul "
— " Thy love to me was wonderful, passing the
love of women " (1 Sam. xviii. 1 ; 2 Sam. i. 26).
Each found in each the affection that he found
not in his own family : no jealousy of rivalry
between the two, as claimants for the same
throne, ever interposed: "Thou shalt be king
in Israel, and I shall be next onto thee "
(1 Sam. xxiii. 17). The friendship was con-
firmed, after the manner of the time, by a
solemn compact often repeated. The first
was immediately on their first acquaintance.
Jonathan gave David as a pledge his royal
mantle, his sword, his girdle, and his famous
bow (xviii. 4). His fidelity was soon called
into action by the insane rage of his father
against David. He interceded for his life, nt
first with success (1 Sam. xix. 1-7). Then the
madness returned and David fled. It was in a
secret interview during this flight, by the stone
of Ezel, that the second covenant was made
between the two friends, of a still more binding
kind, extending to their mutual posterity —
Jonathan laying such emphasis on this portion
of the compact, as almost to suggest the belief
* Joeephus (Ant. vi. 6, $ i) puts into Jonathan's
mouth a speech of patriotic self-devotion, after the
manner of a Greek or Roman. Ewald (11. 4S3) supposes
that a substitute was killed In his place. There is no
trace of either or these in the sacred narrative.
5 X
Digitized by
Google
778
JONATHAN
of a alight misgiving on his part of David'*
future conduct in this respect. It is this inter-
view which brings out the character of Jonathan
in the liveliest colours — his little artifices — his
love for both his father and his friend — his
bitter disappointment at his father's unmanage-
able fury — his familiar sport of archery. With
passionate embraces and tears the two friends
parted, to meet only once more (1 Sam. zx.).
That one more meeting was far away in the
forest of Ziph, during Saul's pursuit of David.
Jonathan's alarm for his friend's life is now
changed into a confidence that he will escape :
" He strengthened his hand in God." Finally,
and for the third time, they renewed the cove-
nant, and then parted for ever (1 Sam. xxiii.
16-18).
From this time forth we hear no more till the
battle of Gilboa. In that battle he fell, with
his two brothers and his father, and his corpse
shared their fate (1 Sam. xxzt 2, 6). [Saul.]
His ashes were buried first at Jabeah-Gilead
(do. v. 13), but afterwards removed with those of
his father to Zelah in Benjamin (2 Sam. xxi. 12).
The news of his death occasioned the celebrated
elegy of David, in which he, as the friend,
naturally occupies the chief place (2 Sam. i. 22,
23, 25, 26), and which seems to have been
sung in the education of the archers of Judah,
in commemoration of the one great archer,
Jonathan: "He bade them teach the children
of Judah the use of the bow " (2 Sam. i. 17, 18.
See Driver, Notes, *c, in loco).
He left one son, aged five years old at the
time of his death (2 Sam. iv. 4), to whom he
had probably given his original name of Merib-
baal, afterwards changed for Hephibosheth
(cp. 1 Ch. riii. 34, ix. 40). [Mephibosheth.]
Through him the line of descendants was con-
tinned down to the time of Ezra (1 Cb. ix. 40),
and even then their great ancestor's archery was
practised amongst them. [Saul.]
2. (jnrinV) Son of Shimeah, brother of
Jonadab, and nephew of David (2 Sam. xxi. 21 ;
1 Ch. xx. 7). He inherited the union of civil
and military gifts so conspicuous in his uncle.
Like David, he engaged in a single combat and
slew a gigantic Philistine of Oath, who was
remarkable for an additional finger and toe on
each hand and foot (2 Sam. xxi. 21). If we may
identify the Jonathan of 1 Ch. xxvii. 32 with
the Jonathan of this passage, where the word
translated " uncle " may be " nephew," he was
(like his brother Jonadab) " wise — and, as such,
was David's counsellor and secretary. Jerome
(Quaest. Heb. on 1 Sam. xvii. 12) conjectures
that this was Nathan the prophet, thus making
up the eighth son, not named in 1 Ch. ii. 13-15.
But this is not probable.
3. The son of Abiathar, the high-priest. He
is the last descendant of Eli, of whom we hear
anything. He appears on two occasions. 1. On
the day of David's flight from Absalom, having
first accompanied his father Abiathar as far as
Olivet (2 Sam. xv. 36), he returned with him
to Jerusalem, and was there, with Ahimaaz the
son of Zadok, employed as a messenger to carry
back the news of Hushai's plans to David (xvii.
15-21). 2. On the day of Solomon's inaugura-
tion, he suddenly broke in upon the banquet of
Adonijah, to announce the success of the rival
prince (1 K. i. 42, 43). It may be inferred from
JONATHAN
Adonijah's expression (" Thou art a valiant man,
and bringest good tidings"), that he had
followed the policy of his father Abiathar i>
Adonijah's support.
On both occasions, it may be remarked that
he appears as the swift and trusty messenger.
4. The son of Shammah the Hararito (1 Ch.
xi. 34 ; 2 Sam. xxiii. 32 ; see Driver, A"b*«» ea
Heb. Text of BB. of 8am. in loco). He was one
of David's heroes (gibborim). The LXX. makes
bis father's name 8ola (Xm\i), and applies the
epithet " Ararite" (4 'Apapl) to Jonathan him-
self. "Harar" is not mentioned elsewhere as
a place ; but it is a poetical word for u Bar "
(mountain), and, as such, may possibly signify
in this passage " the mountaineer." Another
officer (Ahiam) is mentioned with Jonathan, as
bearing the same designation (1 Ch. xi. 35).
[A. P. S.]
5. (jnjiiT.) The son, or descendant, of Ger-
shom the son of Moses, whose name in the
Masoretic copies is 'changed to Hanasseh, ia
order to screen the memory of the great law-
giver from the disgrace which attached to the
apostasy of one so closely, connected with hiss
(Judg. xviii. 30). While wandering through
the country in search of a home, the young
Levite of Bethlehem-Judah came to the house
of Micah, the rich Ephraimite, and waa by his
appointed to be a kind of private chaplain, aid
to minister in the house of gods, or sanctuary,
which Micah had made in imitation of that at
Shiloh. He was recognised by the five Danhe
spies appointed by their tribe to search the land
for an inheritance, and who lodged in the noose
of Micah on their way northwards. The favour-
able answer which he gave when consulted with
regard to the. issue of their expedition probably
induced them, on their march to Laish with the
warriors of their tribe, to turn aside again t»
the house of Micah, and carry off the ephod
and teraphim, superstitiously hoping thus to
make success certain. Jonathan, to whose ambi-
tion they appealed, accompanied them, in spite
of the remonstrances of his patron ; he was
present at the massacre of the defenceless in-
habitants of Laish, and in the new city which
rose from its ashes he was constituted priest ef
the graven image, an office which became here-
ditary in his family till the Captivity. The
Targnm of R. Joseph, on 1 Ch. xxiii. 16, identi-
fies him with Shebuel^the son of Gerahom, who
is there said to have repented (KDnjjt 13V) in
his old age, and to have been appointed by
David as chief over his treasures. All this arises
from a play upon the name Shebuel, from which
this meaning is extracted in accordance with a
favourite practice of the Targumist.
6. (jroV.) One of the sons of Adin (Ezra
viii. 6), whose representative Ebed returned with
Ezra at the head of fifty males, a number which
is increased to two hundred and fifty in 1 Esd.
viii. 32, where Jonathan is written 'Im^fci.
7. A priest, the son of Asahel, one of the four
who assisted Ezra in investigating the marriates
with foreign women, which had been contracted
by the people who returned from Babylon (Ezra
v. 15 ; 1 Esd. iz. 14).
& A priest, and one of the chiefs of the
fathers in the days of Joiakim, son of Jeshna.
He was the representative of the familv of
Melicu (Neh. xii. 14).
Digitized by
Google
JONATHAN
9. One of the sons of Kareah, and brother of
Johanan (Jer. xl. 8). The LXX. in this passage
omits his name altogether, and in this they are
supported by two of Kennicott's MSS., and the
parallel passage of 2 K. xxv. 23. In three others
of Kennicott's it was erased, and was originally
omitted in three of De Rossi's. He was one of
the captains of the army who had escaped from
Jerusalem in the final assault by the Chaldeans,
and, after the capture of Zedekiah at Jericho,
had crossed the Jordan, and remained in the
open country of the Ammonites till the victorious
army had retired with their spoils and captives.
He accompanied his brother Johanan and the
other captains, who resorted to Gedaliah at
Mixpah, and from that time we hear nothing
more of him. Hitzig decides against the LXX.
and the MSS. which omit the name (Der Proph.
Jeremiai), on the ground that the very similarity
between Jonathan and Johanan favours the
belief that they were brothers. [W. A. W.]
10. QKS" 1 ; 'Ioir&ar.) Son of Joiada, and
his successor in the high-priesthood. The only
fact connected with his pontificate recorded in
Scripture, is that the genealogical records of
the priests and Levites were kept in his day
(Neh. xii. 11, 22), and that the chronicles of
the state were continued to his time (ib. 23).
Jonathan (or, as he is called in Neh. xii. 22, 23,
John) lived, of course, long after the death of
Nehemiah, and in the reign of Artaxerxes Hne-
inon. Josephus, who also calls him John, as do
Eusebius* and Nicephorns likewise, relates that
he murdered his own brother Jesus in the
Temple, because Jesus was endeavouring to get
the high-priesthood from him through the in-
fluence of Bagoses the Persian general. Be adds
that John by this misdeed brought two great
judgments upon the Jews : the one, that Ba-
goses entered into the Temple and polluted it ;
the other, that he imposed a heavy tax of fifty
shekels upon every lamb offered in sacrifice, to
punish them for this horrible crime (A. J. xi.
vii. § 1). Jonathan, or John, was high-priest
for thirty-two years, according to Eusebius and
the Alexandr. Chron. (Sedd. de Success, in P. E.
cap. vi. vii.). Milman speaks of the murder of
Jesus as "the only memorable transaction in
the annals of Judaea from the death of Nehe-
miah to the time of Alexander the Great " (Hist.
of Jews, ii. 29).
11. Father of Zechariah, a priest who blew
the trumpet at the dedication of the wall (Neh.
xii. 35). He seems to have been of the coarse
of Shemaiah. The words " son of " seem to be
improperly inserted before the following name,
Mattaniah, as appears by comparing xi. 17.
[A. C. H.]
12. ClvviBas.) 1 Ksd. viii. 32. [See No. 6.]
13. A son of Matta thins, and leader of the
Jews in their war of Independence after the
death of his brother Judas Maccabaeus, B.C. 161
(1 Mace ix. 19 sq.). [Maccabees.]
14. A son of Absalom (1 Mace xiii. 11), sent
by Simon with a force to occupy Joppa, which
was already in the hands of the Jews (1 Mace.
xii. 33), though probably held only by a weak
garrison. Jonathan expelled the inhabitants
• Citron. Can. lib. poster, p. 340. But In the Dt-
montt. Xvang. lib. vUk, Jonathan.
JONATH ELEM BEOHOKIM 1779
(tovs oWot ir aArp ; cp. Jos. Ant. xiii. 6, § 3)
and secured the city. Jonathan was probably a
brother of Mattathiaa (2) (1 Mace xi. 70).
15. A priest who is said, to have offered up a
solemn prayer on the occasion of the sacrifice
made by Nehemiah after the recovery of the
sacred fire (2 Mace. i. 23 sq. : cp. Ewald, Oesch.
d. V. Isr. iv. 1 84 sq.). The narrative is interest-
ing, as it presents a singular example of the
combination of public prayer with sacrifice
(Grimm, ad 2 Mace. 1. c> [B. F. W.]
JON'ATHAS (BA. 'IoAiV, K. NaddV [t>. 141;
Vulg. om., Old Lat. Jonathus, al. Nat/tan), the
Latin form of the common name Jonathan, which
is preserved in the E. V. of Tobit v. 13.
[B. F. W.]
JONATH ELEM BECHOKIM, or, more
correctly, Yonath Elem Bechoqim, occurs only
once in the Bible, where it forms in Bebrew
part of the first, or introductory, verse of
Ps. Ivi. It would be impossible to collect more
nonsense written on three whole Psalms than
what has been written on these three words alone.
The Septnagint and Targumist agree on the
whole, and apply these three words to Israel
absent from the Temple and the Holy Land.
The incorrectness of this explanation is, how-
ever, proved not merely from the contents of
the Psalm, which is evidently an expression of
David as an individual, but also from the other
half of the very superscription itself. Bashi,
who rightly! applies this Psalm to David,
explains Yonath Elem Bechoqim as a dumb
dove far away from its country. This explana-
tion, though not exactly ungrammatical, is
inelegant, if not awkward. Ibn 'Ezra, as usual,
takes these three words to be " the commence-
ment of a poem which along with its tune was,
in ancient times, well known." Be does not,
however, explain these three difficult words
themselves. His theory has been shown in the
articles Aijelkth Shahab, Alamoth, Al-
Tasohith, &C, to be both anachronistic and
otherwise illogical. Qimchi half agrees with the
Septuagint and Targum and half with Rashi,
without, however, giving a satisfactory gram-
matical account of the three words in question.
The truth is, Ydnath Elem Recheqim represented
the music-band which played on the most
loudly-sounding instruments, both of wind and
percussion, then in existence: trumpets, cym-
bals, castanets, kettle-drums, &c. The players
on these powerful instruments were then, as now
and ever, for harmony's sake, placed at some
distance from the other players. Now, Ydnath
(root 113% " to press hard ") is the feminine
active participle in the construct state, whilst
Elem (D^M, "power"), the genitive of that
construct state, is, as usual, used adjectively.
These words, together with Bechoqim (" distant
places ; " cf. Ps. lxv. 6 [5]), give us the construc-
tion of this peculiar, but by no means incorrect
or even inelegant, superscription. The whole of
the first five words in Bebrew signifies "To the
director of the band which produces the most
powerfully sounding mnsic from distant places."
We may remark that the nature of the music
played by that band fully harmonises with the
contents of the Psalm which it was to accompany.
As in that kind of music sounds overpower
5X2
Digitized by VjOOQIC
1780
JOPPA
sounds, but yet those apparently destructive
notes produce the right harmony, to in this
Psalm sentiments (vt>. 4, 5, 8-12 ; E.V. 3, 4, 7-
11) orerpower sentiments (m. 2, 3, 6, 7 ; E.V.
1, 9, S, 6), not to destroy, but to make the
whole into a more perfect harmony.
[S. M. S.-S.]
JOPTA (to, i.«. ra/6, "beauty;" the
A. V. follows the Greek form, except once,
JaPHO: 'Iowrn, LXX., N. T. ; Vulg. Joppt;
"loVit, Joseph. — at least in the most recent
editions — Strabo, and others: now Ydfa or
Jaffa), a town on the S.W. coast of Palestine,
the port of Jerusalem in the days of Solomon,
as it has been ever since. Its etymology is
variously explained ; some deriving it from
"Japhet," others from "Iopa," daughter of
Aeolus and wife of Cepheui, Andromeda's father,
its reputed founder ; others interpreting it " the
watch-tower of joy," or " beauty," and so forth
(Reland, Palest, p. 864). The fact is, that from
its being a seaport, it had a profane as well as
a sacred history. Pliny, following Mela (De situ
Orb. i. 12), says that it was of antediluvian
antiquity (N. B. v. 14); and even Sir John
Maandeville, in the 14th century, bears witness
— though it must be confessed a clumsy one— to
that tradition {E. T. p. 142). According to
Joseph us, it originally belonged to the Phoeni-
cians (Ant. xiii. 15, § 4). Here, writes Strabo,
some say Andromeda was exposed to the whale
(Otog. xvi. p. 759; cp. M filler's Hist. Qraec.
Frugm. vol. iv. p. 325, and his Oeog. Orate.
Mm. vol. i. p. 79), and he appeals to its elevated
position in behalf of those who laid the scene
there ; though, in order to do so consistently, he
had already shown that it wonld be necessary to
transport Aethiopia into Phoenicia (Strab. i.
p. 43). However, in Pliny's age — and Josephus
had just before affirmed the same (B. J. iii. 9,
§3)— -they still showed the chains by which
Andromeda was bound; and not only so, but
M. Seaurus the younger, the same that was so
much employed in Judaea by Ponipey (J9. J. i. 6,
§ 2 et seq.), had the bones of the monster trans-
ported to Rome from Joppa — where till then
they had been exhibited (Mela, ibid.) — and dis-
played them there, during his aedileship, to the
public amongst other prodigies. Nor would
they have been uninteresting to the modern
geologist, if his report be correct. For they
measured forty feet in length ; the span of the
ribs exceeding that of the Indian elephant ; and
the thickness of the spine or vertebra being one
foot and a half (" sesquipedalis," ue. in circum-
ference — when Solinus says " semipedalis," he
means in diameter ; see Plin. N. B. ix. 5 and the
note, Delphin ed.). Reland would trace the
adventures of Jonah in this legendary guise (see
above); but it is far more probable that it
symbolises the first interchange of commerce
between the Greeks, personified in their errant
hero Perseus, and the Phoenicians, whose lovely
— but till then unexplored — clime may be well
shadowed forth in the fair virgin Andromeda.
Perseus, in the tale, is said to have plunged tie
dagger into the right shoulder of the monster.
Possibly he may have discovered or improved
the harbour, the roar from whose foaming reefs
on the north could scarcely have been surpassed
by the barkings of Scylla or Charybdis. Even
JOPPA
the chains shown there may have bees tits* kj
which his ship was attached to the there. Bap
used by the Romans for mooring their ra*k
are still to be seen near Terracing, in the S. stc*
of the ancient port.
Returning to the province of history, we tisi
that Japho or Joppa was situated in the psrtie
of Das (Joan. xix. 46) on the coast towsnbt*-.
south; and on a hill so high, says Stnk,
that people affirmed (but incorrectly) ttc
Jerusalem was visible from its summit H»™§
a harbour attached to it — though slwsrs, »
still, a dangerous one — it became the port 4
Jerusalem, when Jerusalem became the nrirs-
polis of the kingdom of the house of David, oi
certainly never did port and metropolis asa
strikingly resemble each other in difficult; i
approach both by sea and land. Heace, oaf
in journeys to and from Jerusalem, it w*> *
much used. In St. Paul's travels, for iastm
the starting points by water are, Antioci (1*
xv. 39, via Seleucia, it is presumed — rtii. —
23, was probably a land journey througbotf.
Caesarea (ix. 30, and xxvii. 2), and once Selnm
(xiii. 4, namely that at the month of *
Orontes). Also once Antioch (xiv. 25) sad cs»
Tyre, as a landing place (xxi. 3). Thesis
preference for the more northern ports is ebon-
able in the early pilgrims, beginning wits ti
of Bordeaux.
But Joppa was the place fixed upas for fr
cedar and pine wood, from Mount Lebewo, !
be landed by the servants of Hiram k»5 ,:
Tyre; thence to be conveyed to JeronleaA'
the servants of Solomon — for the erecnea a
the first " house of habitation " ever nude «iu
hands for the invisible Jehovah. It was bf •':
of Joppa similarly that like materials w
conveyed from the same locality, by penMew
of Cyrus, for the rebuilding of the second Tesfk
under Zerubbabel (1 K. v. 9 ; 2 Ch. ii. 16; Em
iii. 7; 1 Ead. v. 55). Here Jonah, whs*";
and wherever he may have lived (2 K. ii»- ■'
certainly does not clear up the first of tsw
points), " took ship to flee from the Preene a
his Maker," and accomplished that ssngol*
history, which our Lord has appropriated « '
type of one of the principal scenes in the gr*
Drama of His own (Jon. i. 3 ; Matt iii. *'■
Here, lastly, on the house-top of Simon *
tanner, " by the sea-side " (Acts x. 5, 6, t,&
xi. 13)— with the view therefore circuawoii''
on the E. by the high ground on which the ton
stood, but commanding a boundless prosp" 5
over the western waters — St. Peter hid *"
" vision of tolerance " (Acts x., xL), as it to
been happily designated, and went forth lib '
second Perseus, but from the East, to emanop*-
from still worse thraldom, the virgin daef^"
of the West. The Christian poet Arator hts *■
failed to discover a mystical connexion hetrta
the raising to life of the aged Tahiti*-*"
occasion of St. Peter's visit to Joppa (Acts o.
36-43)— and the baptism of the first G* 1 "
household (De Act. Apott. 1. 840, op. slij*
Patrol. Cun. CompL lxvui. 164).
These are the great Biblical events of ws*s
Joppa has been the scene. In the interval tat
elapsed between the Old and New Dispens«tf»
it experienced many vicissitudes. It was vis**
by Antiochus Epiphanes (2 Mace iv. 21) l j
had sided with Apollonius, and was attacked «"
Digitized by
Google
JOPPA
raptured by Jonathan Maccabaeus (1 Mace. x. 75,
76 ; cp. Joseph. Ant. xiii. 4, § 4). It witnessed
the meeting between the latter and Ptolemy
(1 Mace. xi. 6). Simon had his suspicions of
its inhabitants, and set a garrison there (xii. 33,
34), which he afterwards strengthened con-
JOPPA
1781
siderably (xiii. 11). But when peace was re-
stored, he re-established it once more as a haven
(xir. 5). He likewise rebuilt the fortifications
(t>. 34). This occupation of Joppa was one of
the grounds of complaint urged by Antiochus,
son of Demetrius, against Simon ; but the Utter
illeged in excuse the mischief which had been
lone by its inhabitants to his fellow-citizens
it. 28, 35). It would appear that Judas
Maccabaeus had burnt their haven some time
sack for a gross act of barbarity (2 Mace. xii.
J, 6, 7). Tribute was subsequently exacted for
its possession from Hyrcanus by Antiochus
Sidetes (Joseph. Ant. xiii. 8, § 3). By Pompey
it was rebuilt, made a free city, and placed
under the jurisdiction of Syria (Ant. sir. 4,
§ 4) ; but by Caesar it was not only restored to
the Jews, but its revenues — whether from land
Digitized by
Google
1782
JOPPA
or from export-duties — were bestowed upon the
second Hyrcanus and his heirs (xir. 10, §6). When
Herod the Great commenced operations, it was
seized by him, lest he should leave a hostile
stronghold in his rear, when he marched upon
Jerusalem (xiv. 15, § 1), and Augustus confirmed
him in its possession (xv. 7, § 3). It was after-
wards assigned to Archelaus, when constituted
ethnarch (xvii. 11, § 4), and passed with Syria
under Cyrenius, when Archelaus had been de-
posed (xvii. 13, § 5). At the commencement of
the Jewish war it was plundered and burnt by
Cestius, and the inhabitants slaughtered (B. J.
ii. 18, § 10) ; but such a nest of pirates had it
become, when Vespasian arrived in those parts,
that it underwent a second and entire destruc-
tion — together with the adjacent villages— at
his hands (iii. 9, §§ 3, 4). Thus it appears that
this port had already begun to be the den of
robbers and outcasts which it was in Strabo's
time (Oeog. xvi. p. 759); while the district
around it was so populous, that from Jamnia,
a neighbouring town, and its vicinity, 40,000
armed men could be oollected (ibid.). There was
a vast plain near it, as we learn from Josephus
(Ant xjii. 4, § 4) ; it lay between Jamnia and
Caesarea — the latter of which may be reached
" on the morrow " from it (Acts x. 9 and 24) —
and not far from Lydda (Acts ix. 38). It gave
it* name to the portion of the Mediterranean
near it, " Sea of Joppa" (Joseph. Ant. xiii. 15,
§ 1). The people of Joppa worshipped Ceto,
or Derceto, a goddess, half woman, half fish,
who was also worshipped at Ascalon under the
name Atargatis.
When Joppa first became the seat of a
Christian bishop, is unknown ; but the subscrip-
tions of its prelates are preserved in the acts of
various synods of the 5th and 6th centuries (Le
Quien, Orient Christian, iii. 629). In the 7th
century Arculfus sailed from Joppa to Alexandria,
the very route usually taken now by those who
visit Jerusalem ; but he notices nothing at the
former place (E. T. p. 10). Saewulf, the next who
set sail from Joppa, A.D. 1 103, is not more explicit
(ibid. p. 47). Meanwhile Joppa had been taken
possession of by the forces of Godfrey de Bouillon
previously to the capture of Jerusalem. The
town had been deserted and was allowed to fall
into ruin ; the Crusaders contenting themselves
with possession of the citadel (William of Tyre,
Hilt. viii. 9) ; and it was in part assigned subse-
quently for the support of the Church of the
Resurrection (ibid. ix. 16); though there seem
to have been Bishops of Joppa (perhaps only
titular after all) between A.D. 1253 and 1363
(Le Quien, 1291 ; cp. p. 1241). Saladin, in a.d.
1188, destroyed its fortifications (Sannt. Secret.
Fid. Cruets, lib. iii. part. x. c 5) ; but Richard
of England, who was confined here by sickness,
rebuilt them (ibid., and Richard of Devizes in
Bonn's Ant. Lib. p. 61). Its last occupation by
Christians was that of St. Louis, A.D. 1253 ; and
when he came, it was still a city and governed
by a count. "Of the immense sums," says
Joinville, " which it cost the king to enclose
Jaffa, it does not become me to speak ; for they
were countless. He enclosed the town from one
side of the sea to the other ; and there were
twenty-four towers, including small and great.
The ditches were well scoured, and kept clean,
both within and without. There were three
JORAH
gates "... (Chnn. of Cnu. p. 495, Bonn), St
restored it fell into the hands of the Saltan of
Egypt, together with the rest of Palestine, ky
whom it was once more laid in ruins, A.D. 1SR.
So much so, that Bertrand de la BroeqtutR,
visiting it about the middle of the 15th cater,
states that it then only consisted of a few tenti
covered with reeds ; having been a strong; putt
under the Christians. Guides, accredited by tic
Sultan, here met the pilgrims and received tie
customary tribute from them ; and here UV
papal indulgences offered to pilgrims commeaoal
(E. T. p. 286). Finally, Jaffa fell under tie
Turks, in whose hands it still is, eihibitag
the usual decrepitude of the cities po sta na l
by them, and depending on Christian em-
merce for its feeble existence. During tie
period of their rule it has been three timet
sacked— by the Arabs in 1722; by the Miae-
lukes in 1775 ; and lastly by Napoleon L "
1799, upon the glories of whose early care
" the massacre of Jaffa " leaves a stain that m
never be washed out (v. Moroni, Dixit*. Sed,
s. v. ; Murray's Hdbk. ; Guerin, judes, L 1-22:
Sepp, Jer. vnd d. h. L. i. 1-21 ; Baedeker-Som.
Hdbk.).
Y&fa stands on a high round hill, close to tie
sea. The town rises in terraces from the mtc,
and is surrounded on all sides by rapidly dear-
ing fortifications. The port is very bad. TV
bazaars are amongst the best in Palestine. TV
population is about 8,000. The supposed new
of Simon the tanner is still shown.
The gardens ,of Y&fa, surrounded by stew
walls and cactus hedges, stretch inland atRt
one and a half miles, and are over two mils it
extent north and south. Palms, oranges, lemon-
pomegranates, figs, bananas, tic, grow is ]»
fusion, water being found beneath the mi
which overlies a rich soil. The garden! m
skirted on the south by vineyards.
The ancient cemetery, on the N.W. side of tfe
town, was discovered in 1874 by M. Clenam-
Ganneau, and numerous Greek inscriptions whi
Jewish emblems have been found in it (TH.
Mem. ii. 254-258, 275-278 ; Ganneau, Kara
en Pal. et en Phtfbieie). [E. S. Ff.] [*•)
JOPPA, SEA OF (Ezra iii. 7> R- *•
translates " to the sea, unto Joppa." [J0PM-]
JOFPE (*Io»xn; Joppe\ 1 Esd. t. »;
1 Mace x. 75, 76, xi. 6, xii. S3, xiii 11, •"■
5, 34, xv. 28, 35 ; 2 Mace iv. 21, rii. % '•■
[Joppa.]
JOTS AH (nif; 'Impi; Jora), the snosa*
of a family of 112 who returned from Babrln
with Ezra (Ezra ii. 18). In Neh. rii. » »•
appears under the name Haripb, or men
correctly the same family are represented c
the Bene-Hariph, the variation of name origins'"
ing probably in a very slight confusion of tk
letters which compose it. In Ezra two of I*
Rossi's MSS., and originally one of Keanietf'i.
had mi\ i.e. Jodah, which is the readinj f
the Syr. and Arab. Versions. One of KenniMt*'
MSS. had the original reading in Ezra niton
to Q~n\ i.e. Joram ; and two in Neh. read D*"fl-
i.e. Harim, which corresponds with 'Asfla of u»
A. MS., and Hurom of the Syriac In say <**
the change or confusion of letters which nip'
Digitized by
Google
JOBAI
have canted the variation of the name is so
slight, that it is difficult to pronounce which is
the true form, the corruption of Jorah into
Hariph being as easily conceivable as the reverse.
Burlington (Qeneal. ii. 75) decides in favour
of the latter, bnt from a comparison of both
passages with Ezra x. 31 we should be inclined
to regard Harim (Din) as the trne reading in
all cases. Bnt on any supposition it is difficult
to account for the form Azephorith, or more
properly 'ApvupouptB, in 1 Esd. v. 16, which
Bnrrington considers as having originated in a
corruption of the two readings in Ezra and
Nehemiah, the second syllable arising from an
error of the transcriber in mistaking the uncial
E for X [W. A. W.]
JOTtAI pii« = nj-rt» = Jehovah teaches
[MV. 11 ]; B. 'lltfti, A." 'layer; Jorat). One of
the Gadites dwelling in Qilead in Bashan, whose
genealogies were recorded in the reign of Jotham
king of Judah (1 Ch. v. 13). Four of Kenni-
cott's HSS., and the printed copy used by Lather,
read HV, i.e. Jodai.
JCB AM (Dl'liV, and D^', apparently indis-
criminately ; 'lupin > Joram). 1. Son of Ahab ;
king of Israel (2 K. viii. 16, 25, 28, 29 ; ii. 14,
17, 21-23, 29). [Jehoram, 1.]
2. Son of Jehoshaphat ; king of Judah (2 K.
viii. 21, 23, 24; 1 Cb. iii. 11 ; 2 Ch. xxii. 5, 7 ;
Matt. L 8). [Jehoram, 2.]
& A priest in the reign of Jehoshaphat, one
of those employed by him to teach the Law of
Hoses through the cities of Judah (2 Ch. xvii. 8).
4. (D^.) A Levite, ancestor of Shelomitb
in the time of David (1 Ch. xxvi. 25).
6. (BA. 'USSovpdr, as if reading Hadoram with
1 Ch. xriii. 10.) Son of Toi, king of Hamath,
sent by his father to congratulate David on bis
victories over Hadadezer (2 Sam. viii. 10).
[Hadoram.]
a 1 Esd. i. 9. [Jozabad, 3.] [A. C. H.]
JOBT5AN (JTP, i.e. Yarden, always with
the definite article, JVWJ = the Descender, ex-
cept Pa. xiii. 6 and Job "xl. 23, from TV, Farad,
"to descend;" 'lopSArns ; Jordanis), 'liptaros
(Pausan. v. 7, §3); in the earlier Arab
chronicles it is always given the name el-
Urdwmf after the time of the Crusades it
began to be called esh-Sherl'ah, " the watering
place," with the addition sometimes of el-Kebir,
"the great," the name by which it is known
to the Bedawtn of the present day. It is never
called " the river," or " the brook," or any other
name than its own, " the Jordan," in the Bible ;
and Joaephos only once, in describing the borders
of Issachar {Ant. v. 1, § 22), calls it tok
woreyioV, without any distinctive name. Jerome
(OS.* p. 1 14, 26, >. v. Dan) derives the name from
Jor, which he states is equivalent to piTSpov,
flumut, and Dan, the city, where one of its
principal sources was situated ; and he says
(Oomm. m Matt. xvi. 13), " Jordanes oritur ad
radices Libani; et habet duos fontes, unum
nomine Jor, et alterum Dan ; qui simul mixti
Jordanis nomen efficiunt." This etymology was
* M-Urdmm gave its name to the military district of
the Jordan.
JORDAN
1783
adopted by the earlier commentators and pil-
grims (Corn, a Lap. in Dent, xxxiii. 22 ; Ant.
Hart. vii. ; Arcnlfns, ii. 17 ; Wm. of Tyre, xiii.
18 ; John of Wurzburg, xx., &c), and is current
amongst the native Christians of to-day. The
Hebrew |^*V, Yarden, has however no relation
whatever to the name Dan, and the river was
called Jordan in the days of Abraham, at least
five centuries before the name Dan was given to
the city at its source.
The Jordan is not only the most important
river in Palestine, but one of the most remark-
able rivers of the world. It flows from N. to
S. in a deep trough, parallel to the western
shore of the Mediterranean, and, for more than
two-thirds of its course, lies below the level of
the sea in the deepest depression on the globe.
Its name is used in the Book of Job (xl. 23) as
the synonym of a perennial stream. Bnt in
contrast to the rivers of other countries, " the
Jordan, from its leaving the Sea of Galilee to its
end, adds hardly a single element of civilisation to
the long tract through which it rnshes " (8. $ P.
p. 286). It has never been navigable ; it has never
boasted of a single town of eminence upon its
banks ; and it flows into a sea that has never
known a port — has never been a highway to more
hospitable coasts — has never possessed a fishery.
Its fall from the great fountain at Tell el-K&dy,
Dan, to the Dead Sea, a distance of 104 miles,
is 1797 feet, and from this rapid descent it
probably derived its name, " the Descender." It
is, and must always have been, "the great
watering-place " of the nomad tribes, bnt it is
the river of a desert. Excepting a few oases,
produced by its tributary streams, and the
rank mass of vegetation within the narrow
range of its own bed (the " pride," of Jordan,
Zech. xl 3; Jer. b xii. 5, xlix. 19, 1. 44), the
valley through which it finds its way, in innu-
merable windings, is a naked desert in which,
for ten months of the year, every particle of
verdure is withered np by the intense heat.
Dean Stanley well observes that, " as a separa-
tion of Israel from the surrounding country, as
a boundary between the two main divisions of
the tribes, as an image of water in a dry and
thirsty soil, it played an important part ; but
not as the scene of great events, or the seat of
great cities" (5. f P., p. 287).
The earliest allusion to the Jordan in the
Bible is not so much to the river itself as to
the "plain," or "circle," ciocar, at the north
end of the Dead Sea, through which it ran, and
in which " the cities of the ciocar " stood before
their destruction. " Lot lifted up his eyes, and
beheld all the plain (ctccar) of Jordan, that it
was well watered everywhere . . . even as the
garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt.
. . . Then Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan ;
and Lot journeyed east " (Gen. xiii. 10, 11) ;
that is, from the spot, between Bethel and Ai,
where he and Abram were then sojourning
(v. 3). Abram had just left Egypt (o. 1), and
therefore the comparison between the fertilising
properties of the Jordan and the Nile is very
apposite. How far the plain extended in length
b In Jer. the Hebrew word "Oaon" is wrongly
translated "swelling" in A. V. ; In B. V. correctly
"pride."
Digitized by
Google
1784
JORDAN
or breadth is not laid, but the same oasis is
evidently referred to in Gen. xiii. 12, xix. 17,
25, 28, 29; and Dent, xxxiv. 3, "the plain of
the valley of Jericho. . . unto Zoar." In 2 Sam.
xviii. 23 the word ciccar, " plain," apparently
JORDAN
means the floor of the Jordan valley,' and it
has the same meaning in 1 K. vii. 46, 2 Ob. ir.
17, where the clay ground between Suceoth asd
Zarthan, in which Solomon established k»
brass foundries, is said to have been in lit
"plain" of Jordan.* Other words used in
reference to parts of the Jordan valley are:
gelilothj the " borders of," or " region about,"
Jordan (Josh. xxii. 10, 11 ; cp. Ezek. xlvii. !)■
hi/Pah, "the plain" of the valley of Jerk*o
(Dent, xxxiv. 3); A'demoth, "the fields" »f
• Ewald (Omca. ill. 337) explains the won! here as | 'In Neb. 111. Si, ill. 28, the reference doesHSqtev
meaning a manner of quick running. to be to the " plain " of Jordan.
Digitized by
Google
JOBDAN
"domorrah (Dent, xxxii. 32); arboth, "the
j>lains" of Moab(Num. xxii. 1, xxvi. 3, 63, xxxi.
12, xxxiii. 48-50, xxxv. 1, xxxvi. 13; Dent.
xxxiv. 1,8; Josh. xiii. 32), and of Jericho (Josh,
iv. 13, v. 10 ; 2 K. xxv. 5; Jer.xxxix. 5, lii. 8).
The expression "all the region round about
Jordan " (Matt. iii. 5 ; Luke iii. 3) appears to
include the wilderness of Judaea (cp. Matt.
iii. 1). That portion of the Jordan valley which
lies between the Sea of Gennesareth and the
Dead Sea is always called in the 0. T. ha-
Arabak, " the desert," A. V. " the plain."
£ARABAH.]
The Jordan, when not in flood, can be forded
at more than fifty places between the Sea of
Galilee and the Dead Sea. In flood-time it is im-
passable, and at other times, excepting where it
is fordable, it is, and always must have been, an
obstacle to the passage of large bodies of men
(1 Mace. ix. 34-48). The main lines of commu-
nication between Eastern and Western Palestine
naturally crossed by the easiest fords, and the
seizure of these by friend or foe, during the pro-
gress of hostilities, was considered of great im-
portance. There were fords over against Jericho,
to which point the men of Jericho pursued the
spies (Josh. ii. 7) ; the same probably as those " to-
ward Moab," * which the Israelites seized after
the assassination of Eglon, and at which they
slaughtered the Moabites (Judg. iii. 28). These
fords are apparently those now known as the
Mukhidet Ohdraniyeh, immediately opposite
Tell et-Sulta'n, Jericho, and perhaps also the
M. Hajlah, where pilgrims bathe in Jordan.
Higher np the river, either at the M. ed-Ddmieh
or the M. ez-Zakkumeh, were the fords, A. V.
•" passages," of Jordan (Judg. xii. 5, 6), at
which the Ephraimites, who could not pronounce
the word Shibboleth, were slaughtered by
.Tephthah and the men of Gilead. Higher up
again were the "waters unto Beth-barah and
Jordan" (R. V. "as far as Beth-barah, even
Jordan"), which the Ephraimites seized before
the flying Midianites, and where they seem to
have captured Oreb and Zeeb (Judg. vii. 24, 25).
As the Midianites fled by Abel-meholah, 'Ain
el-Heliteh, these " waters " must have been at the
S. end of the plain of Bethshean, and they are
possibly the streams running to the river below
M. esh'Sher&r. [Beth-barah.] Higher still
were the fords by which the roads approaching
the plain of Bethshean, from the east, crossed the
river. It was by one of these that Judas and
his followers, having crossed by one of the
southern fords (1 Mace. v. 24), passed over
Jordan, when they were retracing their steps
from the land of Galaad to Jerusalem (1 Mace.
v. 52 ; Joseph. Ant. xii. 8, §5); and one of them,
M. 'Abdrah, is supposed by Major Conder to be
Bethabara {PEF. Mem. ii. 89). The questions
connected with the position of Bethabara are
discussed elsewhere [Beth-abara] ; it need only
be observed here that if identical with Beth-
barah it must have been near the S. and not the
N. end of the plain of Bethshean. Nearer to
the Sea of Galilee were other fords, of which the
most frequented was that on the road from
Accho to the cities of Decapolis.
• R. V. translates "took the fords of Jordan against
the Moabites."
JOBDAN
1785
The first passage of the Jordan, recorded in
the 0. T., is that of Jacob : " With my staff I
passed over this Jordan, and now I am become
two bands " (Gen. xxxii. 10). There is no in-
dication of position, but the Patriarch perhaps
crossed by the same ford, M. ed-DSmieh, by
which he seems to have entered the land of
Canaan after his parting with Esau (Gen. xxxiii.
16-18). David, in his campaign against the
Syrians (2 Sam. x. 17), crossed by one of the
northern fords ; but subsequently, when a
fugitive himself, on his way to Mahanaim (xvii.
22), he probably gained the eastern bank by
the M. Q/tdrSniyeh. Here, " at the fords (A. V.
plain) of the wilderness" (xv. 28, xvii. 16),
David tarried until he received Zadok's message
from Jerusalem ; and hither Judah came to
reconduct him home (xix. 15). On this last
occasion he passed at or on the " Abara " (t>. 18),
which the LXX. translates Siifieurts (as if it were
a moving raft), Joseph u» (Ant. vii. 11, § 2)
yt<pvpa (as if it were a bridge), A. V. and E. V.
"a ferry boat;" and on reaching the western
bank he was met by Shimei (1 E. ii. 8). Some-
where in these parts Elijah most have smitten
the waters with his mantle, "so that they
divided hither and thither " (2 K. ii. 8), for be
bad just left Jericho (r. 4), and by the same
mute that he went did Elisha probably return
(r. 14). Naaman, on the other hand, may be
supposed to have performed his ablutions (v. 14)
at one of the upper fords, for Elisha was then
in Samaria (v. 3), and it was by these fords,
doubtless, that the Syrians fled when miracu-
lously discomfited through his instrumentality
(vii. 15).
One of the earliest facts mentioned in con-
nexion with the Jordan is its periodical over-
flow during the season of barley harvest. In
the language of the author of the Book of Joshua
(iii. 15), "Jordan overflowed all his banks all
the time of harvest:" a "swelling" which,
according to the 1st Book of Chronicles (xii. 15),
commenced " in the first month " (i.e. about the
latter end of our March), drove the lion from
his lair in the days of Jeremiah (xii. 5, xlix. 19,
1. 44), and had become a proverb for abundance
in the days of Jesus the son of Sirach (Ecclus.
xxiv. 26). The context of the first of these
passages may suffice to determine the extent of
this exuberance. The meaning is clearly that
the channel or bed of the river became brimfull,
so that the level of the water and of the banks
was then the same. The ancient rise of the
river has been greatly exaggerated, so much so
as to have been compared to that of the Nile
(Reland, Palest, xl. 111). Evidently, too, there
is nothing extraordinary in this occurrence. All
rivers that are fed by melting snows are fuller
between March and September than between
September and March ; but the exact time of
their increase varies with the time when the
snows melt. The Po and Adige are equally full
during their harvest-time with the Jordan ; but
the snows on Lebanon melt earlier than on the
Alps, and harvest begins later in Italy than in the
Holy Land. Possibly " the basins of Hflleh and
Tiberias" may so far act as "regulators " upon
the Jordan as to delay its swelling till they
have been replenished. On the other hand,
the snows on Lebanon are certainly melting
fast in April.
Digitized by
Google
1786
JORDAN
^
.;/ Ay ».6<. •
^^^JJertiSli
c
LrU
(. x ~~
. K«fc«h\
L£^
V-TEbenaa$
The last feature which remains to be noticed in the Scriptural account of the Jordan is its
frequent mention as a boundary (Gen. 1. 10; Kara. xm.
29, xxxii. 5 ; Deut. ii. 29, ir. 21 ; Josh. Hi. 1-17, it. 1-SS,
xiii. 27 ; 1 Sam. xiii. 7 ; 2 Sam. ii. 29 ; Is. ix. 1 ; Jaaak
i. 9; Matt. ir. 15, 25, xix. 1 ; Hark iii. 8, x. 1 ; Jeha i
28, Mi. 26, x. 40) : " over Jordan," " this " and " the otae?
side," or " beyond Jordan," were expressions as fiunilm
to the Israelites as " across the water," " this " and - tit
other side of the Channel," are to English ears. In ea?
sense indeed — that is, in so far as it waa the eastern bsta-
dary of the land of Canaan — it was the eastern bouadarc
of the Promised Land (Num. xxxir. 12 ; cp. xiii. 29). h
reality, it was the long serpentine vine, trailing over thi
ground from N. to S., round which the whole family of tat
twelve tribes were clustered. Four-fifths of their mnabfr
— nine tribes and a half — dwelt on the W. of it, and en-
fifth, or two tribes and a half, on the E. of it, with tfe
Levites in their cities equally distributed amongst both, and 3
was theirs from its then reputed fountain-head to its uu
into the Dead Sea. Those who lived on the £. of it had sea
allowed to do so on condition of assisting their brethren a
their conquests on the W. (Nnm. xxxii. 20—33) ; and thee
who lived on the W. " went out as one man " when their
countrymen on the E. were threatened (1 Sam. xi. 6-1 ll
The great altar built by the children of Reuben, of Gad, sad
the half-tribe of Hanasseh, on the banks of the Jordan, n>
designed as a witness of this intercommunion and mntu
interest (Josh. xxii. 10-29). In fact, unequal as the rn
sections were, they were nevertheless regarded as integral
parts of the whole land ; and thus there were three cities of
refuge for the manslayer appointed on the E. of the Jordss :
and there were three cities, and no more, on the W. — is
both cases moreover equidistant one from the other (Not.
xxxv. 9-15 ; Josh. xx. 7-9 ; Lewis, Beb. SepttU. ii. lil
When these territorial divisions had been broken up in fc
captivities of Israel and Judah, some of the ■* coasts beyssc
Jordan " seem to have been retained under Judaea (MiU
xix. 1). [Judaea.]
The contact of the Jordan with the history of the peep!':
," is exceptional, not ordinary, confined to rare and reau*.-
occasions, the more remarkable from their very rarity " (£
and P. p. 287). The earliest instance is that in which Abran
and Lot looked down, from the heights between Bethel a»i
Ai, upon the deeply-sunk valley beneath them, and Lot chat
for himself the fertile "circle" of Jordan (Gen. xiii. 10, 11}
where the Canaanites had established their earliest settle-
ments on the east of Palestine (x. 19). It was apparently
in the same rich district, in " the vale of Siddun," that la*
five allied kings were defeated by Chedorlaomer, king of Else
(xiv. 8-12) ; and it was at the Sidonian Laish, afterwards tk*
Israelite Dan, by one of the sources of Jordan, that "Abras:
the Hebrew " defeated the invaders and rescued his nephew
Lot (ct). 14—16). A few years later the catastrophe otxam'.
which overwhelmed the five cities of the " circle " [Gomobkba]
and destroyed one of the most flourishing oases of the Jordss
valley (xix. 1-29).
The most important events in sacred history connected
with the Jordan are the passage of the children of Israel so:
the Baptism of Christ. The Israelites, on descending from tar
eastern plateau, encamped, in the first place, " in the plaint
of Moab, by Jordan," from Beth-Jesimoth, 'Am Simeimei, U
Abel-Shittim, Keferein (Num. xxxiii. 48, 49); and it ws>
only three days before the passage that they moved do«s
from the upper terraces of the valley to the banks of the
river (Josh. iii. 1, 2). They probably crossed the river is
several columns at or near the ford Qhiraniyek, opposite
Jericho, but the exact spot is unknown. The passage took
place at the time of barley harvest, corresponding to oar
April or May, when Jordan is in a state of flood, " overflowing
all his banks"; and the operation must have been one oT
great magnitude, for— of the children of Reuben and of Gad,
n*pof Jonbn. and half the tribe of Hanasseh only — "about forty thousand
"♦JL^adar*
Abiln
ffj'MMtJL
r^
E&sflLT
Digitized by
Google
JOBDAN
prepared for war passed over before the Lord onto
battle " (Josh. iv. 12, 13). The ceremonial of the
crossing is too well known to need recapitulation.
It mar be observed, however, that, unlike the
passage of the Red Sea, where the intermediate
agency of a strong east wind is freely admitted
(Ex. xir. 21), it is here said, in terms equally
explicit, that as soon as " the feet of the priests
that bare the ark were dipped in the brink of
the water, . . . the waters which came down
from above stood, and rose up in one .heap, a
great way off, at (or from) Adam .... and
those which went down toward the Sea of the
Arabah, even the Salt Sea, were wholly cat off"
(Josh. iii. 15, 16, R. V. ; cp. Ps. cxiv. 5). As a
memorial of the passage twelve stones were set
up in the midst of Jordan, and twelve at Gilqal,
where the Israelites encamped after they " came
up out of " the deep channel of the river. In
a.d. 12S7, whilst the bridge, Jitr D&mieh, was
being repaired, a somewhat similar stoppage
of the waters of the Jordan is said to have
occurred. Upon this occasion, a landslip, in the
narrow part of the valley, some miles above
Jitr D&mieh (Adam), dammed up the Jordan
for several hours, and the bed of the river
below was left dry by the running off of the
water to the Dead Sea/
The place of our Lord's Baptism is uncertain.
John, who was a native of a city in the hill-
country of Judah (Luke i. 39), commenced
preaching in the wilderness of Judaea (Matt. iii.
1 ; Hark i. 3 ; Luke iii. 2), and in " all the
region round about Jordan " (Luke iii. 3). His
preaching drew persons from Galilee, as far off
aa Nazareth (Mark i. 9) and Bethsaida (John i.
35, 40, 44), as well as from Jerusalem, Judaea,
and " all the region round Jordan " (Matt. iii. 5 ;
Mark i. 5) ; and the preaching was followed by
baptism. These baptisms were apparently
administered at more places than one. There
was the place beyond Jordan, within easy reach
of Bethany, "where John was at the first
baptising; " (John x. 40), possibly the same as
the place " in the wilderness " (Mark i. 4), and
as "Bethabara (or Bethany) beyond Jordan,"
where the Baptist, having previously baptized
our Lord — whether there or elsewhere — bears
record to the descent of the Holy Ghost upon
Him which ensued (John i. 28-34). There was
the place on the lower Jordan where all " Jeru-
salem and Judaea " went out to be baptized of
John (Matt. iii. 6; Mark i. 5). There was
Aenon, near to Salem, where John was baptizing
apon another occasion, " because there was much
water there " (John iii. 23) ; and there was
some place "in the land of Judaea " where our
Lord, or rather His disciples, baptized about the
same time (v. 22).
Jeans came from Galilee to be baptized, and
His Baptism apparently followed that of the
multitude from Jerusalem and Judaea (Matt. iii.
6, 13 ; Mark i. 5, 9), and was distinct from it
(Luke iii. 21). According to St. Matthew (iii. 13 ;
iv. IX St. Mark (i. 9, 12), and St. Luke (iv. 1), He
was baptized in Jordan, and immediately after-
wards was "led np of the Spirit into the wilderness
' A notice of this historical stoppage of the Jordan
has been found, In the history of Sultan Blbars, by
M . Glermont-Qanneau, who has communicated the above
particulars to the writer.
JORDAN
1787
to be tempted of the devil " ; John (i. 32-34) only
alludes to the Baptism as having already taken
place. The inference from the Bible narrative
is that Jesus was baptized at the same place as
the multitude, and that that spot was not far
removed from the wilderness of Judaea, and
within easy reach of Jerusalem and all Judaea.
This view is supported by tradition, which, from
the 4th century onwards, has consistently main-
tained that Jesus was baptized in Jordan at a
point nearly opposite the Roman Jericho. The
Bordeaux Pilgrim, a.d. 333, places it, on the
east bank of the river, 5 miles from the Dead
Sea, and connects it with the little hill whence
Elijah was caught up to heaven (/tin. Hitrot.).
Jerome alludes to the same place (Per. S. Paulae,
xv.), and connects it with the spot where the
priests that bare the Ark stood firm on dry
ground in the midst of Jordan (Josh. iii. 17), and
where Elijah and Elisha passed over Jordan on
dry ground (2 K. ii. 3). See also Theodosius
(xvit, xviii.), Antoninus (ix.-xii.), Arculfus
(ii. 14), Willibald (Hod. xvi.), &c. This tradi-
tion refers to a place near Kusr et-Yth&d
(Monastery of St. John) ; and as it agrees gene-
rally with the indications of the narrative, there
seems little reason to doubt its accuracy.'
Bethabara was possibly the same place as Beth-
Nimbah. But if it was a ford, it must have
been either M. Ohdrdntyeh, where the Israelites
crossed, and where there appears to have been a
ferry in David's time (Bethany, " the house of
a ship"), or at the S. end of the plain of
Bethshean.
II. The Bible contains no information respect-
ing the sources of the Jordan. What Josephus
and others say about the Jordan may be briefly
told. Panium, says Josephus (Le. the sanctuary
of Pan), appears to be the source of the Jordan ;
but in reality it has a secret passage hither
under ground from Phiala, as it is called, about
120 stadia distant from Caesarea, on the road to
Trachonitis, and on the right-hand side of and
not far from the road. Being a wheel-shaped
pool, it is rightly called Phiala from its ro-
tundity (irtpupfpftat) ; yet the water always
remains there up to the brim, neither subsiding
nor overflowing. That this is the true source
of the Jordan was first discovered by Philip,
tetrarch of Trachonitis ; for by his orders chaff
was cast into the water at Phiala, and it was
taken up at Panium. Panium was always a
lovely spot ; but the embellishments of Agrippa,
which were sumptuous, added greatly to its
natural charms (from B. J. i. 21, § 3, and Ant.
xv. 10, § 3, it appears that the temple there
was due to Herod the Great). It is from this
cave at all events that the Jordan commences
its ostensible course above ground ; traversing
the marshes and fens of Semechonitis ("the
waters of Merom," Baharet cl-H&leK), and then,
after a course of 120 stadia, passing by the town
Julias and intersecting the lake of Genesareth,
winds its way through a considerable wilderness
(toXaV ifrriixitw) till it finds its exit in the lake
Asphaltites(£. /.iii. 10, §7). Elsewhere Josephus
somewhat modifies his assertion respecting the
s Possibly the place of Baptism was a little higher
np the river, at the OMrOntyek lord, and In this case
the same spot witnessed tbe Baptism of Christ and
the passage of the Israelites.
Digitized by
Google
1788
JORDAN
nature of the great plain [JERICRO]; while on
the physical beauties of Genesareth, the palms
and figs, olives and grapes, that flourished round
it, and the fish for which its waters were far-
famed, he is still more eloquent (B. J. iii. 10, § 8).
In the first chapter of the next book (iv. 1, § 1)
he notices more fountains, at a place called
Daphne, b which supplied water to the little
Jordan, under the temple of the golden calf, and
ran into the great Jordan (cp. Ant. i. 10, § 1 ;
v. 3, § 1 ; and viii. 8, § 4). While Josephus
dilates upon its sources, Pausanias, who had
visited the Jordan, dilates upon its extraordinary
disappearance. He cannot get over its losing
itself in the Dead Sea ; and compares it to the
submarine course of the Alpheus from Greece to
Sicily (lib. v. 7, 4, ed. Dindorf). Pliny goes so
far as to say that the Jordan instinctively shrinks
from entering that dread lake, by which it is
swallowed up. On the other hand, Pliny attri-
butes its rise to the fountain of Paneas, from
which he adds Caesarea was sumamed (H. N.
r. 15). Lastly, Strabo speaks of the aromatic
reeds and rushes, and even balsam, that grew
on the shores and marshes round Genesareth;
but can he be believed when he asserts that the
A radians and others were in the habit of sailing
up Jordan with cargo 1 (xvi. 2, 16.) It will be
remembered that he wrote during the first days
of the empire, when there were boats in abun-
dance upon Genesareth (John vi. 22-24).
In the Middle Ages the Jordan was supposed
to have two sources, Jor and Dan, which issued
from the foot of Libanus, and united at the base
of the mountains of Gilboa. Jor was the river
running down the valley from lidnids, and Dan
was identified with the Yarmak, and supposed
to run underground to a place called Medan,
apparently el-Mezeirib in the Hawdn (John of
Wurzburg, xxv.; Theoderich, xlv.). The first
attempt to explore the Jordan, in modem times,
was made in 1835, by Mr. Costigan, who de-
scended the river in a boat from the Sea of
Galilee to the Dead Sea and died on his return
to Jerusalem. In 1846 Lieut. Molyneux, R.N.,
made the descent, and wrote a short account of
his voyage, but died soon after rejoining his ship
(Journ. JR. Geog. Soc. xviii. pp. 104-130, 1848) ;
in 1848 Lieut. Lynch, U.S.N., under the authority
of the United States Government, made a com-
plete survey of the river and the Dead Sea
{Narrative and Official Report) ; and in 1872-78
the course of the river from Bdnias to the Dead
Sea and the valley lying to the west of it were
surveyed by Lieuts. Conder and Kitchener, R.E.,
for the Palestine Exploration Fund (PEF.
Memoirs).
III. The Jordan flows from north to south in
the deep trough, or fissure, parallel to the
Mediterranean, which extends from the foot of
the Taurus mountains to the Red Sea, and
divides, as if by a fosse, the maritime highlands
from those further east. In the northern and
higher portion of the trough are the rivers
Orontes and Leontes; in the central and more
depressed is the Jordan, which pours its waters
into the Dead Sea, 1292 feet below the
Mediterranean, and lies for more than three-
* Probably Dan should be read here, as there are no
large springs at Dtfnch, the ancient Daphne, about
It miles below IWJ d-Kaay, Dan.
JORDAN
fourths of its course, including lake* Hileh and
Tiberias, below the level of the sea ; and in tat
southern are the W. el- Arabah and W. ef-
'Akabah, the Gulf of 'Akabah, and the Red Sea.
The entire fissure from the Sea of Galilee to the
Gulf of 'Akabah is called in the Bible "ti;
Arabah " (A. V. " the plain ") ; but at present
that portion only which lies S. of the Dead Ses
is called the 'Arabah. The valley to the N-, >
broad depressed plain, shut in between two
ranges of mountains, — the Aulon (AftAiSw) of the
Greeks, — is known amongst the Arabs by the
name of el-Ghor.
The Jordan, after the junction of its head
streams, expands into the Baheiret et-BHek
Then, " after rushing down a rocky chasm ia
several miles, it again spreads out into the
Lake of Tiberias." From this lake, until it
enters the Dead Sea, the Jordan " flows in iU
own well-defined and still deeper vallev, windiag
through the plain of the Ghor. Along a»i
within this deeper valley (called by the Arabi
the Zdr), the channel of the river winds exceed-
ingly, and is in most parts fringed by a narrow
tract of verdure on each side, made up of trees,
bushes, reeds, and luxuriant herbage " (Robis-
son, Phys. Geog. of the H. L. p. 131).
The theory that the Jordan at one time ran to
the Gulf of 'Akabah, and that the depression of
its valley and the interruption of its flow wen
due to intense volcanic activity, has been
entirely disproved by recent investigation. The
deep depression is the direct result of a fault er
" fissure " of the earth's crust, accompanied by >
displacement of the strata, to the extent in some
cases of several thousand feet. " I am disposed
to think," Prof. Hull writes, "that the fracture
of the Jordan-Arabah valley and the elevation
of the table-land of Edom and Hoab on the east
were all the outcome of simultaneous operation
and due to similar causes, namely, the tangential
pressure of the earth's crust due to contractus,
— the contraction being in its turn due to tin
secular cooling of the crust." The fracture is
supposed to have taken place at the close of the
Eocene period. " As the land area was gradually
rising out of the sea, the table-lands of Judaea
and of Arabia were more and more elevated,
while the crust fell in along the western side of
the Jordan-Arabah fault; and this seems U
have been accompanied by much crumpling and
Assuring of the strata " (PEF. Mem., Geology,
p. 108 sq.). From the time of this great
fracture the basin of the Dead Sea must have
been a salt lake dependent on evaporation to
remove the waters poured into it by the Jordan
and other streams. The level of its waters
must, however, have varied greatly at different
times, for a succession of terraces of Dead Sea
deposits extends around the basin of the sea and
far up the Jordan valley (Dawson, Egypt and
Syria, pp. 106, 107 ; see also Lartet, GeUogie de
la Palestine, and Hull, /. &). The waters of the
Dead Sea are supposed to have reached their
present level at the close of the Miocene or
commencement of the Pliocene period (Hull,
Geology, p. 112), so that there cannot have beea
any material change in the course and character
of the Jordan during historic times.
The Upper Jordan is formed by the jonctioa
of three perennial streams having their origin is
three large springs, near Hasbeiya, at Tell tl-
Digitized by
Google
JORDAN
Kady, and at Banias. The streams are fed by
numberless springs and rivulets that gush forth
from the slopes of Anti-Lebanon, but none of
these are of sufficient importance to be regarded
as permanent sources of the Jordan. The
stream from the spring near H&sbeiya (1700
feet), which, though not mentioned by any
ancient writer, is the remotest source, runs
down through the ravine of W. et-Teim, and is
known as the Nahr H&sb&ny. About 6 miles
below Hdsbeiya, the Hasbany is joined by a fine
stream from .'Am Seraiyib, a large fountain at
the foot of Hermon ; and, after a rapid descent,
it enters the Huleh plain, running in a deep
channel that it has worn for itself in the basalt.
After receiving the waters of the Nahr Bareighit,
it joins the united streams from Banias and Tell
el-K&dy. The road from Damascus, through
B&nias, to the west crosses the river by a bridge
below Ghujar.
At Tell el-K&dy, Dan, one of the largest
springs in Palestine, bursts forth from the
ground (altitude 505 feet) ; and its waters rush
off a full-grown rirer, the Nahr Leddan, to join
the stream from B&nias and form the Jordan.
This is clearly the Daphne of Josephus (B. J. iv.
1, § 1), who also calls the spring Dan {Ant. i.
10, § 1), and the stream & /wcpbs 'lopt&rns
<viii.8,§4).
The spring at Banias is the most picturesque
and celebrated of all the sources of Jordan
[Caesarea Pbiuppi]. It is a copious fountain
(altitude 1080 feet) springing out from the
earth, in numberless rills, at the foot of a mass
of loose stones and rubbish, in front of a cave
formerly dedicated to Pan — the place called
Panium by Josephus. The spring, apparently,
once issued from the cave, which is now dry ;
bnt not at all in the manner described by
Josephus, who speaks of a yawning chasm in the
cave itself, and an unfathomable depth of still
water of which there is no trace at present (Ant.
xv. 10, § 3 ; B. J. i. 21, § 3). The little lake
Phials, which according to Josephus was the
true source of the fountain at B&nias, is now
called Birket er-R&m. It lies at the bottom of
a cup-shaped basin, is supplied by the surface
drainage of a small area, and has no outlet.
The water is stagnant and impure, and, if it had
a subterranean outlet, would be exhausted in a
few hours. The topographical features also
forbid any connexion with the spring at Banias.
The stream from the spring is joined by another,
coming down W. Pa&reh, at the N.W. corner of
Banias, and the united waters flow off as the
Nahr B&nias to the Huleh plain. In the first
four miles of its course the stream descends at
the rate of 200 feet a mile, and its volume is
nearly equal to that of the Nahr Leddan, which
it joins about 4J miles below Tell el-K&dy ;
half a mile lower down the river is joined by
the Nahr H&sb&ny.
The Huleh plain through which the Jordan
runs is covered by a very intricate system of
streams, some running in their natural channels,
others in artificial aqueducts, used for irrigating
the very fertile but malarious plain. A short
distance below the junction of the H&sb&ny the
river enters a dense impenetrable mass of
papyrus, which extends for 6 miles and is from
1 J to 2 miles wide. Below the papyrus marsh
are the " Waters of Merom," Baheiret el-Hileh
JORDAN
1789
(alt. 7 feet), bordered by the great plain of
Ard el-Kheit. On issuing from the lake, the
Jordan flows through a narrow cultivated plain,
but about 2 miles below its exit it commences a
rapid descent, of about 60 feet a mile, over a
rocky bed to the Sea of Galilee. The direct dis-
tance between the two lakes is 10 miles, and the
fall 689 feet. Not quite 2 miles below Lake
Huleh there is a bridge called Jisr Benat Y'akib,
by which the great caravan route from 'Akka to
Damascus crosses the river. Below et-Tell the
Jordan runs in a tortuous course through the
western half of the plain ei-Batihah, and at Its
mouth there is a bar where it can be forded.
Its turbid waters can be traced running far out
into the lake, and this has, perhaps, given rise to
the fable that the Jordan passed through the
Sea of Galilee without mingling its waters. That
the waters of the river do not condescend tomingle
in any sense with those of the lake, is as true as
that the Rhone and the Lake of Geneva never
embrace. [Gennesaret, Sea of.] The river
leaves the lake, a clear gently-flowing stream,
close to the site of Tarichaeae.
The two principal features of Jordan are its
descent and its sinnosity. From its fountain-
heads to the point where it is lost in the acrid
waters of the Dead Sea, it rushes down one con-
tinuous inclined plane, only broken by a series of
rapids or precipitous falls. Between the Sea
of Galilee and the Dead Sea, Lieut. Lynch passed
down 27 rapids which he calls threatening, be-
sides a great many more of lesser magnitude.
According to the most recent surveys the dis-
tance between the Sea of Galilee and the Dead
Sea, in a direct line, is 65 miles ; the depression
of the former below the level of the Mediter-
ranean is 682 feet, and that of the latter 1292
feet. The difference of level between the two
lakes is thus 610 feet, and there is a fall of 9*3
feet per mile. The sinuosity of the Jordan is
not so remarkable in the upper part of its course,
but, in the space of 65 miles between the two
lakes, it " traverses at least 200 miles " (Lynch,
Narr, p. 265). " It curved and twisted north,
south, east, and west, turning, in the short space
of half an hour, to every quarter of the com-
pass" (p. 211). During the whole passage of
8J days, the time which it took Lynch s boats to
reach the Dead Sea from Gennesaret, only one
straight reach of any length, about midway
between them, is noticed. The rate of stream
seems to have varied with its relative width and
depth. The greatest width mentioned was 180
yards, the point where it enters the Dead Sea.
Here it was only 3 feet deep. On the 6th day
the width in one place was 80 yards, and the
depth only 2 feet, while the current on the
whole varied from 2 to 8 knots. On the 5th
day the width was 70 yards, with a current
of 2 knots, or 30 yards with a current of 6
knots.
The principal tributaries of Jordan between
the Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea are : (1) Prom
the East. The Sherpat el-Mandhur, Yarmok,
or Hieromax, which enters the Jordan about 4)
miles below the lake. There is no allusion to
this river in the Bible, but it is mentioned in
the Mishna (Parah, viii. 9) and by Pliny (H. N.
v. 16). It is formed by the confluence of a large
number of streams which rise in Jebel Hauran
and the eastern plateau, and amongst these is
Digitized by
Google
1790
JOBDAN
doubtless the " brook by Raphon " (1 Mace, v.
37, 39, 40, 42). About 2 J miles before it reaches
the Jordan Valley the Yarmuk receives the
waters of the celebrated hot springs of Amatha.
[Gadara.] The Nahr ez-Zerka, Jabbok, which
rises in the plateau £. of Gilead, and enters the
Jordan a short distance above Jisr D&mieh.
[Adam; Jabbok.] The Wady Nimrtn and the
W. Hesb&n. (2.) From the West. The Nahr
el-Jdlid, which flows down the valley of Jezreel,
and, past Bethshean, to the Gh6r. The beauti-
ful W. F&r'ah, which rises on the eastern
slopes of Ebal and enters the Jordan 4J miles
below Jisr D&mieh. The streams in W. Fusdil
and W. el-Kelt do not reach the Jordan in
summer.
The bridges over the Jordan mark the points
at which the Roman roads crossed the river.
Host, if not all of them, appear to have been
constructed during the Roman occupation, and
to have been afterwards rebuilt or repaired by
the Arabs. They are all on important lines of
communication, and not far from frequented
fords. The bridges of el-Ohujar and Benat
Y'akib above the Sea of Galilee have already
been noticed. At Tarichaeae, where the river
leaves the lake, there are the ruins of a bridge,
and, a little lower down, there are the remains
of two others, one called Jisr es-Sidd, over which
passed the roads connecting Tiberias, and 'A/tka
with Gadara and the Decapolis. The next bridge,
nearly 6 miles below the lake, is Jisr Huj&mi'a,
which is still passable. It marks the point at which
the great caravan-route from Ndblus and Beisdn
to Damascus crosses the river — a route following
the line of one of the most important Roman roads
in Palestine. The only other bridge is the Jisr
D&mieh, nearly opposite the mouth of W. F&r'ah,
which, from a change in the course of the river,
has been left dry on the east bank. At this
point the great road from Neapolis and the
West, to Gilead and Bashan, crossed the river ;
and at the present day there is a road by the
ed-D&mieh ford, from Nablus to et-Salt and
J. 'Ajlun.
Much information respecting the fords of
Jordan ' was obtained during the survey of
Western Palestine. It would appear (PEF.
Mem. ii. 79, 225, 385; iii. 170) that there are
fifty fords in the 42 miles above Jisr Damieh,
and only five in the 23 miles below. No less
than twenty-six of the fords are between TV. el-
Jdlid and W. el-Mdleh, which mark the north
and south limits of the plain of Bethshean ; and
this serves to explain the ease with which the
nomads east of Jordan made their frequent in-
cursions into the valley of Jezreel and the plain
of Esdraelon. The principal fords and their
possible identification with those mentioned in
the Bible have already been noticed. At If. el-
Hajlah, opposite Roman Jericho, the annual
bathing of the Oriental pilgrims takes place, of
which Dean Stanley has given a lively description
(S * P. pp. 314-16).
The Jordan Valley varies considerably in
width. About 7 miles above Jisr D&mieh, its
narrowest point, it is only some 3 miles wide ;
whilst its greatest breadth, 12 miles, is at
Jericho. The ZSr, or depressed bed, in which
the river winds, is in most parts a quarter of a
mile wide, but above the Dead Sea it opens out
to nearly 2 miles. It lies between " dins of soft
JORDAN
marl," from 50 ft. to 100 ft. high, 1 and a
frequently flooded during the rainy season. The
plain of the OhSr falls pretty evenly towards
the river; it is much cut up by the torrents
that find their way across it from the mountain
on either side.
The sites of the cities situated in the Gh&r
are discussed under their respective names, sad
the physical features of the Jordan Valley will
be treated more at large under the general head
of Palestine. The climate on the shores of tat
Sea of Galilee is sub-tropical, and the temperatare
increases until the maximum is reached as the
shores of the Dead Sea. Here frost is unknown :
in the depth of winter the thermometer range
from 60° to 80°, and a night temperature of 42°
is quite exceptional. In April the thermometer
often registers 105° in the shade ; and in sumac
the heat is intense. In this tropical climate the
corn is ripe in March, and melons ripen in winter.
The natural products of the Jordan Valley, " t
tropical oasis sunk in the temperate zone, sni
overhung by the Alpine Hermon," are unique.
The course of the river, in this most unlike the
Nile, hardly fertilises anything beyond its in-
mediate banks. But, " from its extraordinary
depression, whatever vegetation there is, u
called into almost unnatural vigour by the lift-
giving touch of its waters" (Tristram, SaL
Hist, of the Bible, p. 11). In the If&leh marshes
the papyrus reaches a height of 16 ft. and
flourishes luxuriantly, and on the borders of the
Hileh lake large crops of wheat, barley, maize,
sesame, and rice are obtained. Corn-fields wan
on the plain of Gennesaret ; the palm and viae,
fig and pomegranate, are still to be seen here
and there ; and here is also found the thorn'
nubk (Zizyphus spina-Christi), a tropical tree, the
characteristic of the whole of the lower course
of the river. Below the Sea of Galilee indigo e
grown ; pink oleanders, and a rose-colonrei
species of hollyhock in great profusion, wail
upon every approach to a rill or spring; asd
tamarisks of peculiar species crowd the banks ef
Jordan. As the Dead Sea is approached "the
zukkum or false balm of Gilead, the oaher tree
of Nubia and Abyssinia, the henna or camphire,
the Salvadora persica, and many other products
of the torrid zone, abound " (p. 12). The jungle
of the Z6r is the same throughout, consistiag
principally of tamarisks, acacia, willow, gigantic
thistles 10 to 15 ft. highland reeds ; whilst cane,
frequently impenetrable, is ever at the water's
edge. " Here and there," Lynch writes, *• were
spots of solemn beauty. . . . The willow branches
were spread upon the stream-like tresses, and
creeping mosses and clambering weeds, with a
multitude of white and silvery little flowers,
looked out from among them .... Many is-
lands, some fairy-like and covered with s
luxuriant vegetation, others mere sandbars and
sedimentary deposits, intercepted the course of
the river, but were beautiful features in the
general monotony of the shores. The regular
and almost unvaried scene of high banks of
alluvial deposit and sand-hills on the one hand,
• The stoppage of the waters of the Jordan ta Utt
was apparently due to the sliding forward of these beds
of marl some miles above Jitr D&mieh; and the nmnhv
off of the waters to the Dead Sea, when the IsnrOUt
crossed, may have followed a similar landslip.
Digitized by
Google
J0BIBA8
and the low swamp-like shore covered to the
water's edge with the tamarisk, the willow, and
the thick, high cane, would hare been fatiguing
without the frequent occurrence of sand-banks
and verdant islands " (Narr, pp. 211-215). This
thick jungle was formerly a covert for wild
beasts, from which they were dislodged by the
periodical overflow of the river, and the lion
coming up from the " pride of Jordan " is a
familiar figure in the Prophet Jeremiah (xliz. 19 ;
1. 44). The lion, though mentioned by Phocas
(xxiii.) and by Felix Fabri (ii. p. 27, Eng. trans.),
has probably long been extinct. The leopard,
however, still exists, and it was apparently two
of these animals that Molyneux mistook for
tigers. The fishes of the Jordan and its feeders
do not differ from those of the Sea of Galilee.
They are chiefly barbel and bream, and in every
permanent stream abound in amazing numbers.
The Jordan itself is alive with fish to its very
exit. The flora and fauna of the Jordan Valley,
and the large infusion of Ethiopian types that
they present, have been described by Canon
Tristram (PEF. Mem. Flora and Fauna of Pal.),
who considers that " the unique tropical out-
lier of the Dead Sea basin is analogous, both in
its origin and in the present isolation of its
various assemblages of life, to the boreal out-
liers of our mountain-tops, and our deep-sea
bottoms." [W.]
JO'BIBAS Cl<&pt0os; Joribus) = Jakib
(1 Esd. viii. 44; cp. Ezra viii. 16).
JOTtLBUS (*IeV<0o>; Joribus) = Jarib
(1 Esd. ix. 19 ; cp. Ezra x. 18).
JO'EIM Cfopf'/Ot ">» of Matthat, in the
genealogy of Christ (Luke iil. 29), in the 13th
generation from David inclusive; about con-
temporary, therefore, with Ahaz. The form of
the name is anomalous, and should probably be
either Joram or Joiarim. [A. C. H.]
JOK'KOAM (Offj5T; B. 'Io«A&v and "I«-
\dv x A. 'Upicady ; Jercaam), either a descendant
of Caleb the son of Heiron, through Hebron, or,
as Jarchi says, the name of a place in the tribe
of Judah, of which Raham was prince (1 Ch.
ii. 44). It was probably in the neighbourhood
of Hebron. Jerome gives it in the form Jer-
chaam (Quacst. Hebr. in Parol.).
JCSABAD. 1. 0?ri' i Btt. 'IowfoMS ;
A. 'lcc(a0<U; Jexdbad.) Properly Jozabad, the
Gederathite, one of the hardy warriors of Ben-
jamin who left Saul to follow the fortunes of
David during his residence among the Philistines
at Ziklag (1 Ch. xii. 4).
2. (B. 'lcHTa&tts, A. 'Iccoa&tis ; Josadus) =
Jozabad, son of Jeshua the Levite (1 Esd. viii.
63 ; cp. Ezra viii. 33, BA. *I«»fa/M*).
3. (B. Zdfitos, A. 'a(i$aSos ; Zabdias), one of
the sons of Bebai (1 Esd. ix. 29). [Zabbai.]
JC8APHAT CIuooQ&tx Josaphat) = Jeho-
shaphat king of Judah (Matt. i. 8).
JOSAPH1AS CI«<ra$fot; Josaphias) = Jo-
3IPUIAH (1 Esd. viii. 36 ; cp. Ezra viii. 10).
JO'SEDBC Cl»«W*i Jotedec, Joaedech),
1 Esd. v. 5, 48, 56, vi. 2, ix. 19 ; Ecclus. xlix.
JOSEPH
1791
12 = Jebozadak or Jozadak, the father of
Jeshua, whose name also appears as Josedech
(Hag. L 1).
JO'SEDECH (P"|Si?V = Jehovah it righteous ;
'Iwo-soVx ; Josedec). Jehozadak the son of
Seraiah (Hag. i. 12, 14, ii. 2, 4; Zech. vi. 11).
JOSEPH (tlrt* ; 'I»<rr}$> ; Joseph). 1. Son of
Jacob and Rachel. The meaning of the name Jo-
seph, according to Gen. xxx. 23, 24, is connected
with his family history.* Joseph became the
favourite son of his father, being the youngest
of all the sons of Israel born in Mesopotamia, the
gift late in life from the wife whom Jacob loved
the best. " Son of his old age " and " favourite
son" were names given also to Benjamin after
the loss of Joseph. Joseph was not only " a child
of sorrow," but he became finally the deliverer
and the pride of his whole family, and one of
the most important personages in the history
of Israel ; because it was through him that the
Hebrews went down into Egypt, where it was
decreed that they should become " a great
nation."
It is easy to grasp the deeper meaning under-
lying the story, which teaches plainly how God
leads those whom He has ordained to higher
spheres through trouble and humiliation, that
He may raise them so much the higher after-
wards. In Christian times Joseph has been
regarded as a type of our Saviour, or as one
whose character is in many respects related to
His, so that the one has been compared with the
other. Luther says, " As it was with Joseph and
his brethren, so it was with Christ and the Jews."
The history of Joseph in the Book of Genesis
was compiled from two different documents,
now indicated by Biblical scholars as J and E.
They are classified in the art. Genesis, p. 1155.
The story (Gen. xxx. 22-24) of the birth
of Joseph, as well as that of his life and
death (Gen. xxxvii.-l.), is known to everyone.
It became a favourite subject in Eastern
poetry. Allah himself (Koran, ch. 12) is said
to relate the history of Joseph to the prophet
Mohammed as the " most beautiful of all stories."
The story of Joseph and Potiphar's wife (Zuleikha)
has particularly excited the imitation of Eastern
poets. The poem of Yusuf and Zuleikha is the
last song of the Persian epic poet Firdusi, and
the figure of Joseph is surrounded here with
so much mysterious splendour that many have
supposed that by Zuleikha's love for the pure
youth Tusuf (Joseph), the poet wished to repre-
sent the longing of the soul for God. Though,
as a whole, the history of Joseph is easily un-
derstood, yet it may be interesting to show
how faithfully it represents the circumstances of
time and place in which it occurred. We shall
• A double etymology la suggested In this passage.
According to E (v. 23) the name Is from C|Dt*> '&aj>*.
"to take away " ; according to J (v. 24), it is from B]D».
y/uapK, " to add." The name has been compared with
Huietho's Osar-df, as though Jo, Jebo-, i.e. Jehovah,
bad been substituted for Oaar, i.e. Osiris. I-s-p-a-1
occurs in the Kamak lists, and has been supposed
equivalent to Joseph-el (?K*t|DV)- It la the name of
an old Canaanlte town taken by Tutmes IIL Cp. the
similar Joalph-lah, Kara viii. 10.— {C. J. R]
Digitized by
Google
1792
JOSEPH
establish this in detail, but we must first point
oat at what period the entrance of Jacob's family
into Egypt took place. Ex. xii. 40 gives 430 years
as the time of sojourn of the Hebrews in Egypt.
This compels us to place the Exodus in the reign
of Heneptah I., the son of Barneses II., at the
close of the 14th century B.C. If we then
reckon back 430 years, it brings us to the end of
the Hyksos government over Egypt ; that is, if
we may trust to the time given on the monu-
ments as to the length of the different reigns.
If, with Lepsius, we place the Exodus in 1314
B.C., the entrance of the Hebrews into Goshen
will be in 1744 B.C., which year belongs to the
close of the Hyksos government, and we reach
the same conclusion if we take the figures lately
arrived at by Malker's astronomical calculations,
which place the reign of Thothmes III. from
March 20th, 1503, to Feb. 14th, 1449.
Dr. Brugsch (Egypt under the Pharaohs, i.
302, 2nd ed., P. Smith) endeavours to make the
famine mentioned in the tomb of a dignitary
named Baba, at El Kab, coincide with the one
which Joseph so effectually opposed, and the
time of Baba's life actually concurs with that
of the dominion of the later Hyksos kings over
Lower Egypt, while the native kings who had
been forced back into Upper Egypt were making
preparations to drive the Hyksos out of the
country. The coincidence is not impossible, yet
a similar " time of distress " is also mentioned
at Beni Hasan in the tomb of Ameni, who lived
before the time of the Hyksos (12th dynasty),
and we know from the later history of the
country that inundations either too low or too
high have often occasioned want and distress in
Egypt. It is true that the famine mentioned in
the tomb of Baba lasted "many years," and
such a long period of distress occurs only in the
history of Joseph and in this inscription ; it is
therefore tempting to consider them identical,
but investigators must be careful not to speak
of that as certain, which is only possible or
probable. It is not certain which Hyksos king
was ruling in the Valley of the Nile at the
time of the famine mentioned in the tomb of
Baba. According to most chronographers, it was
Apophis (Josephos), Aphobis (Jul. Africanns),
AphophU (Eusebius), and in hieroglyphics,
Apepa — the same under whom began the ex-
pulsion of the Hyksos, according to a fabulous
story contained in the Papyrus Sallier I,
which says that this Apophis was in alliance
with the native governor of Upper Egypt,
Kasekenen or Sekenen-Ra; and the dignitary
Baba, in whose tomb is the inscription mentioning
the famine of many years, lived in the time of a
Rasekenen, and, indeed, the third with the
additional name Ta'a. The Byzantine chrono-
grapher who is known under the name of
Syncellus (he held the office of Syncellus in his
monastery) calls the Pharaoh of Joseph Apophis,
while the Arab tradition, in which little or no
reliance can be placed, calls him an Amalekite
of the name of Raian Ibn el-Walid. We should
not have mentioned him at all if Neville,
under the auspices of the Egypt Exploration
Fund, had not found in his excavations at
Bubastis a block with the name of Apophis, and
near it the lower part of a black granite statue
with the name Ian-Ra, or Raian, in hieroglyphics.
Dr. Rieu and Mr. Cope Whitehouse, relying on the
JOSEPH
Certainly very surprising discovery of this uu,
maintain that the Arab tradition was founded m
a fact. The monument with the name of Raian u
now in the Ghizeh Museum. We must therefore
leave it uncertain whether Joseph came down iat>
Egypt in the reign of Apophis, or in that of the
hitherto unknown Raian.
Let us now inquire where the son of Jscok
met with Pharaoh. The answer seems to he it
Zoan (Tanis), at Bubastis, or st Memphis. Tae
first of these three towns [Zoah] is situate.)
in the north-east of the Delta, and is very oM,
as is proved by Petrie's excavations and the
words of the Bible (Mum. riii. 22), where it u
said to have been built seven years later tku
Hebron. Tanis was a residence of the Hykvx
kings, and here Hariette found the monumeati
called the " Hyksos sphinxes." Like those placed
by the native Egyptian kings in avennes before
the temples, these sphinxes are formed of the
human head, symbolic of intelligence, and tk
lion's body, symbolic of strength. While, how-
ever, the sphinxes of other Pharaohs posset*
heads of true Egyptian cast, those of the Hykso*
sphinxes appear to be portraits of a foreign race.
The races are wider and have higher cheek-booa;
the noses, which in profile seem to be slightly
curved, are flatter, and the corners of the
mouth are turned a little downwards. The bet
seems to disappear in a head-dress resembling s
mane ; the expression of the features, takes u
a whole, is much rougher and more brutal thaa
that of the true Egyptian face, which meets
the eyes of the spectator with a quiet peacc&i
dignity, and often with a smile. Even th»;
unfamiliar with Egyptian art can see at a glaiK\>
that wehavehere striking likenesses of foreigner*;
and the same is true of other monuments whiei
have been found belonging to the Hyksos perisd-
These have been found only in the Delta, and iso-
lated instances in the oasis of the Feyftm, wfcks
stretches into the desert in a westerly directed
from Memphis. Most come from Tanis, thoegrs
latterly many have been found by Navilfc it
Bubastis, the Pibeseth of the Bible. Tanis
is the Zoan of the Bible, the Egyptian fas
or fa, called Tanis by the Greeks and Romans.
This splendid residence of the Hyksos aai
of other dynasties of Egyptian kings, tat
city called "great" by Strabo and Stephens
of Byzantium, is now a fishing village, aal
nothing remains of its early glory except frag-
ments of obelisks, statues and great tempi*
buildings, and the name, which has becouK
amongst the Arabs San, or San el-Hagr. Tasis
was in the fourteenth nome of Lower Egyj',
on the branch of the river called by the wr
name, which in early times was wide enootit
near its mouth for naval battles to be foor.ii;
on its waters, as seems to be proved by tor
inscription in the tomb of the naval commander
Ahmes at El Kab. The plain now is only
intersected by a narrow little stream, called
by the Arabs the Mulzz canal. Tanis, whki
was formerly a harbour for ships, is new
separated from the sea by a large deposit «"
land, and little is to be seen of the wonderful
fertility for which the neighbourhood was famecs
in old times. The Hyksos kings ss well as the
Pharaohs who preceded and followed them pro-
vided for the irrigation of the province of Zoan,
and the officers who were stationed at Taais
Digitized by
Google
JOSEPH
under the Pharaoh of the Exodus (19th dy-
nasty) speak in their letters of the life there
as " sweet," and praise the neighbourhood for
its fertility and for the abundance of food it
produced. Whether the fortified camp of the
Hyksos, called Avaris by the Greeks, was at
Tanis or at Pelusium, we cannot here determine.
Anyhow, Zoan (Tanis) was one of the residences
of the Hyksos kings, and may have been the
town which gave a friendly reception to Joseph.
The same may be said of Bubastis and of Mem-
phis, for On (Heliopolis), which lay close to the
latter town, certainly belonged to the Hyksos ;
and as a daughter of a priest of On was chosen
by Pharaoh to be Joseph's wife, we can easily
imagine that he was residing at Memphis at the
time, close to the home of this daughter of the
priests, instead of at Tanis, which was divided
from On (Heliopolis) by a wide stretch of
country. Yet it is curitfus that the pyramids, so
characteristic of Memphis, are never once men-
tioned in the story of Joseph.
The Biblical history of Joseph gives us the
conditions of court and state life in Egypt.
It seems true that this was very much the
same under the Hyksos kings as under the
native Pharaohs. Joseph could only have
come into Egypt during the latter part of the
rule of the foreigners, after they had lived
some centuries in the country and conformed to
the Egyptian life in every respect. To which
nation the intruders belonged is discussed under
Eoypt, p. 885, where it is shown that they
probably came from Mesopotamia. At first their
rule in Egypt must have been very severe, though
they may not have been guilty of the devastations
with which the hatred of the Egyptians charged
them in later times ; for in many towns where
they ruled, we find that the monuments of their
predecessors have been spared, — a considerable
number from Tanis, Bubastis, Memphis, Helio-
polis, etc., having come down to us. Later the
conquerors assimilated themselves so entirely
with the conquered Egyptians that they erected
monuments of pure Egyptian style, and allowed
the priestly scholars to go on with their studies.
The handbook of Egyptian mathematics called
the Rhind Papyrus (British Museum) was written
under a Hyksos king, and the monuments prove
that Egyptian civilisation was very little influ-
enced by the Hyksos; for those erected shortly
before theirtime (12th-13th dynasties)correspond
in every way with those erected soon after their
expulsion in the beginning of the 18th dynasty,
the pure Hyksos being the 15th and 16th
dynasties. The Hyksos also used the hiero-
glyphic writing without alteration ; and as they
retained everything in the higner intellectual
spheres, it is probable that they did the same
in the lower domains of material life. There
were native kings in Upper Egypt at the same
time, and it would hare been strange if their
courts and household arrangements had been
essentially different in arrangement. The
foreigners were obliged to allow the native
officials free scope and to learn much from
them, specially with regard to the irrigation of
the Nile, without which the fertile valley would
have become a wilderness. Joseph therefore
found everything arranged in the Egyptian
manner at the court of the Hyksos king, whose
favour he had won.
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
JOSEPH
1793
We now pass to the details which need explana-
tion in the history of Joseph. In Gen. xxxvii. we
have, as some think, two stories woven together,
relating how Jacob preferred Joseph above his
brothers, and so excited the envy of the latter."
Ch. xxxvii. 5, &<:., shows how their dislike changed
to hatred on account of Joseph's dreams, and
how, after their father had sent the " dreamer "
after them, they resolved to murder him, but
on Reuben's advice (xxxvii. 22) they only took
the coloured coat off him, and threw him into a
pit. This coat was, according to Josephus ( Ant.
vii. 8, § 1), one with sleeves worn only by
distinguished and elderly persons. We can see
what is here meant by a picture with the colours
well preserved in Khnum-hotep's tomb at Beni
Hasan, of the 12th dynasty (before the Hyksos'
time) ; it represents the coming of thirty-seven
Amu (Shemites) into Egypt. The less important
people in this procession wear only white sleeve-
less coats, like shirts, which reach just over the
knee ; or when the upper part of the body is bare,
a coloured apron like a short petticoat, fastened
above the hips and only covering the thighs.
The dress of Joseph's brothers was probably of
this kind. The chief in this picture, the earliest
representation of a Semitic family, walks in front
of his own people ; he is called Absoha (or Abousa)
and wears a coat made of brightly-coloured stuff
(blue, white, and red) which entirely covers the
upper part of his body, and reaches to his knees.
The right arm is bare, but the left is covered by a
wide sleeve as far as the elbow. Joseph's coloured
coat probably resembled the dress of this chief.'
The pit into which the brothers threw Joseph was
situated near Dothain or Dothan (double well).
The position of this place is described under Do-
than. It must have been peculiarly interesting
for Dr. E. D. Clarke {Travels, ed. 1812, Pt. ii.
§ 1, p. 509) just at this spot to meet a caravan
of Ishmaelitish spice merchants, who would
willingly have bought another Joseph and carried
him with them into Egypt (Gen. xxxvii. 28).
These Ishmaelites are here more specifically
Midianites. d That they were in alliance with
b From Jacob's expression •• thy mother " (xxxvii. 10)
It might be inferred that Rachel was living (and therefore
Benjamin unborn) about the time that Joseph was sold.
If she was dead, as the continuity of the narrative
would suggest (xxxv. 18), "mother" would be used In
a laxer sense, meaning mother of the bouse, Jacob's
wife Leah, and this may be the best way of under-
standing the passage (cp. Speaker's Comm. on xxxvii .
10)..— Editors.
•Another opinion given by Or. Poole In the first
edition is that this coat was a long tunic with sleeves
worn by youths and maidens of the richer class. Its
name (D'DB 11303) seems to signify •' a tunic reach-
ing to the extremities'." The dress of David's daughter
Tamar, and of "the king's daughters that were virgins,"
bears the same name in the Hebrew, rendered in A. V.
"garment of divers colours" (3 Sam. xlil. 18, 19).
There seems no reason for the LXX. rendering x'TWf
wotxtAot, or the Vulgate polymita, except that It is very
likely that such a tunic would be ornamented with
coloured stripes or embroidered. Of the dress described
in the text there Is an engraving la Bmgsch's Histoire
d'&gypte dis Us premiers temps, ed. 1859, p. 63. For
authorities on the nature of the dress, see Speaker's
Comm. on Gen. xxxvii. 3, where the view given In the
text is preferred.— Editors.
d That the two names are used interchangeably seems
clear from this passage ; it must therefore be supposed
5 I
Digitized by
Google
1794
JOSEPH
Egypt at the time of the Hyksos (having been
previously at war) is proved by the inscriptions
lately discovered by Glaser in Arabia, and by
Homel's interpretation of those which relate to
Egypt.
the chief articles of trade which the Ishmael-
itish and Midianitish merchants brought to Egypt
in the time of the Pharaohs, were spices of
different kinds, metal work, glass beads, certain
woven stuffs, chariots, semi-precious stones such
as lapis-lazuli and malachite, and above all
slaves. Throughout the whole time of the
Khalifa slaves were the chief article of trade
with the caravans that came from Asia, and
down to the present time many white slave-girls
are brought to Egypt by Syrian traders. We
learn from several texts that slaves were brought
from Asia under the 12th dynasty (before the
arrival of the Hyksos). A very high price was
alwavs paid for fine youths. For certain par-
ticularly noble and well-formed Circassian boys
under the Mamluk Sultans, much more was paid
than for a fine horse. The Midianitish traders,
into whose hands Joseph fell when he was seven-
teen years of age, would be able to make great
profit out of him, for the twenty shekels of silver
[Shekel] which they paid for him was a very
low price even at that time. Slaves were
needed in all great houses ; and the names of a
few which have come down to us from the time
of the Pharaoh of the Exodus, prove certainly
their Semitic origin. Besides these, the monu-
ments mention slaves from Syria (Charu), from
Canaan, and from many places in Western Asia,
such as Karka, Tarbasana, &c. Several of these
rose to high dignity at court. The usual words
for slave and servant are Aon-u and oaA-ti. Their
value is well proved by the trouble people took
to catch those who escaped. A Leyden papyrus
tells of six who escaped from Prince Atef-amen
and of the search for them.
Joseph would be sold in the slave market at
Zoan (Tanis), Bubastis, or more probably Mem-
phis; he was sold to Potiphar,an officer of Pharaoh,
captain of the guard, an Egyptian (Gen. xxxix. 1).
Potiphar is called " an Egyptian," and his name is
astruly Egyptian as his office. The name Potiphar
is rightly rendered IleTetJjpK (Petephre)
by the Coptic translator of Genesis; it
must be the Hebrew form of the hieroglyphic
Pe-du-pa-Ra or Pe-du-Sa, which means the
gift of the snn-god, and corresponds with the
Greek 'HKiotapos. Analogous forms occur with
the names of other gods: e.g. Pe-du-Amen
= gift of Amen, Pe-dv-hor = gift of Horus,
Pe-du-Net = gift of Neith.* It is gram-
matically right to put the masculine article
pa before the name of the god in Potiphar.
The Hebrew Version gives it as pha, and this
proves that the writer of Genesis heard the word
from a native of Lower Egypt, where the dialect
would change Pa-Ra into Pha-Ra or Phra, by
aspirating the initial p.
that one of them is generic; and since the caravan was
from Qilead, It is reasonable to infer that the merchants
were more strictly Mldlanltea, and called Ishtnaelltes
by a kind of generic use of that name. — Editors.
* Brngsch explains this name as Pe-du-per^iAe gift
qf him who appeared. This is founded on no analogy
and la refuted by the Coptic translation above cited.
JOSEPH
The word rendered " officer " in the IV.ai
R. V. is literally " eunnch," and the 1X1.
Vulg., and Coptic so translate it here (ewJw,
emuchus, ClOTf p> We need not be sorpros!
at finding eunuchs at the Egyptian court: fe
though in Egypt monogamy was the rak fe
private people, the Pharaoh was allowed to to-
many concubines, besides his lawful quera. tat
these formed a harem, just like those of tfe
Eastern courts of the present time.
With regard to the second title of Potipto.
he was a D'rQtSn "iff. The Septuagint rata
this &px>My<tpos ; the Coptic ipX"'
JU.A.\*eipOC, which means "chief cau-
tioner." According to the Syrian truths*
of the Bible, the word means "captain ciu-
body-guard." The first part of the woriT.
is, in the Egyptian language, sar, "captaia" «
"prince," and the second part may be tre>
lated " body-guard." Pharaoh, like otfc I
Eastern kings, possessed a body-guard. Cafe i
the peaceful rule of the old Empire, the Egyfts
army was small, and its organisation b.«
simple. The body-guard consisted then of tfc
shes-u, or followers. [Potiphar.]
Gen. xxxix. 1-12. Joseph rises so high is A
house of his master, that Potiphar makes bin b
servant, and sets him over his house. Bene
here means a free functionary, not a slave. Ei«
now in the East a slave who distinguishes hit-
self by his good behaviour may receive hu fw
dom and remain in his master's house as an upre
and confidential servant. The mer-per or head-
master is often mentioned on the monuments.
As an introduction to what follows, •- '
ends with these words: "And Joseph w»>
goodly person and well favoured." Ft. 7-5?
treat of the story of Joseph and Potipktf'i
wife, which under the name of Zuleikhs i> •
favourite subject for Oriental poetry. fi»
story awakens peculiar interest from the fo
that there exists another, with true Egypt^t
colouring, agreeing in its principal details *&
the Biblical narrative. It forms the begum*
of the " Story of the Two Brothers," whidi »
written in hieratic at Thebes, about the tim* *'
the Exodus. The MS. which contains h i» »
the British Museum: it is called the Papn-'
d'Orbiney, after the name of the lady **
brought it into Europe. The whole story i»
much in common with the German tale «'
the "Juniper Tree."' We will give s that
pricis of the beginning of the Papyrus <FO
biney, which corresponds very nearly with tfc
story of Joseph and Potiphar'a wife, tho*! 3
the latter takes place in the house of » &■
tinguished Egyptian officer, and the forst"
amongst simple Egyptian peasants.
"There were once two brothers, who lir>:
together in the country. The elder was ealK
' Several accurate translations have been pro***'
since E. de Rouge made known the substance of *
story. The original text was published by S. Bhri -
his Select Papyri, 11., pp. ix.-xlx., 18«o. Tk» t»
English translation Is by Le Page Keooof. hi BM>
and Sayce's Jtaordt o/ the Past, voL li., pp. IS-M ■
the best French translation is by Ifaspero; wMte »«»■
translations have been published in Genus by K-
Brugsch and O. Ebeis (1868).
Digitized by
Google
JOSEPH
Anubis, the younger Batan ; the former was
married, and his brother lived with him and
undertook all the work with the cattle and in
the fields for him. This was done so excellently
that there was not his equal in Egypt. So they
all three lived together in perfect union. One
day, however, when the inundation had gone
down so that the time for ploughing had
come, both brothers worked busily with the
oxen until the seed-corn was finished ; the elder
brother then sent the younger home to fetch
some more. The latter found his sister-in-law
plaiting her hair; nnd when he asked her for the
corn, she told him to go to the granary and take
as much as he needed. Batan laded himself with
a very heavy load of wheat and durra corn ; but
as he came back with it on his shoulder, his
brother's wife changed her voice, forgot her duty
to her husband, and tried to seduce him." Then
he was very angry, and repulsed her in words
very similar to those with which Joseph ad-
monished his master's wife to remember her
duty. We will place the two refusals side by
side that they may be compared.
Tale or Two Bbothebs :
Papieus d'Orbixit.
JOSEPH
179J
And hast not thou been
as a mother to me, and tby
husband as a lather? and
be who is my elder brother,
he tt is who provides fur
my living. Alas! what
thou sayest to me is
shameful. Say it not to
mc again. But I will tell
it to no one ; I will not
betray it to a single person.
Gkx. xxxix. 8, 9.
Behold, my master wot-
teth not what Is with me In
the house, and be hath com-
mitted all that he bath to
my hand. There is none
greater in this bouse than
I, neither hatb he kept
back anything from me,
but thee, because tbou art
his wife: how then can I
do this great wickedness,
and sin against God?
" Therefore Batan went back to the field ; but
the wife of the elder brother was afraid, because
of the request she had made to him : she therefore
disfigured herself, so that when her husband re-
turned he should believe that some one had done
violence to her. Towards evening he came home,
and when he found his wife in such a sad state,
he asked her what had happened. She then
accused Batan of having requested her to do
wrong, and, when she refused, of having beaten
her, adding that if her husband allowed his
younger brother to live, he would kill her as
soon as he fonnd out that she had betrayed bis
evil intentions." How Anubis then attempted
to kill his younger brother, and how the latter
called upon the sun-god to prove his innocence,
&c, does not belong here.
This so much resembles our Bible narrative,
that many have supposed that the one was
borrowed from the other. E. Meyer and others
think that the Egyptian tale is the foundation
of our story, but it is much more probable that
the contrary is the case, or that the two are
entirely independent. The fact that rejected
love begets hatred is an experience repeated
amongst all nations in all circles of life, as in
the Greek legend of Phaedra and Uippolytus.
The picture at Beni Hasan, mentioned above,
explains also how Joseph could leave his coat
behind with his tempter; this garment being
only fastened round the neck and by one sleeve.
In Gen. xxxix. 17 Potiphar's wife assures her
husband that the Hebrew servant, whom he had
brought into the house, came in to mock her :
which may be an allusion to the unmanly em-
ployment of her husband, who was a eunuch.
Vv. 20-23. Potiphar puts Joseph into prison,
but through the Lord's " mercy " the keeper
of the prison loves Joseph, and places so much
confidence in him, that he lets him go free
in the prison, with authority over the other
prisoners. In this " keeper of the prison," we
have not, as some maintain, Potiphar, but a new
character introduced into the story. In Egypt,
where every department had its superintendent,
Potiphar, the overseer of the harem, could not
at the same time be governor of the prison.
Joseph's lovable and excellent character won for
him esteem and respect everywhere, even here
also, and for this reason, " because the Lord was
with him."
Chapter xl. follows with the interpretation
of the dreams by Joseph. Pharaoh's " chief
of the butlers" and "chief of the bakers"
were his fellow-prisoners. They had roused the
anger of the king, and the young Hebrew was
destined to be of service to them. We have
information on the monuments about both these
officials. The " butler " had not only to present
the wine, but also to mix it before the banquets.
This was done during the meal, probably with
the help of syphons, as we see depicted on a monu-
ment at Thebes (Wilkinson, ii. 314 [8vo ed.]).
The monuments teach us that the Egyptians
were good vine-growers, and the classical
writers mention their good vintages. The cup-
bearer belonged to the class of the abu-u, whose
duty it was to seal the vessels as a safeguard
against poison and pollution. They are repre-
sented bringing in jars of wine to the king.
Some of these men held high offices in the State,
at the same time performing their court duties,
which brought them into close intercourse
with the Pharaoh. Amongst them we find
the overseer of the abu-u dep-u arp-u, who
tasted the wines, and corresponds certainly
with our chief cup-bearer.' Even amongst
the Greeks the Egyptians were celebrated for
their cookery, and so many different dishes are
mentioned on the monuments that the cooks
in the Pharaonic time must have been extra-
ordinarily clever. The baker was called chenti,
but we know of a number of these craftsmen
who, as specialists, were concerned only with
the preparation of particular kinds of pastry :
— thus the baker of cakes (baker of the pastry),
the preparer of cakes (which Maspero translates
" biscuits durs "), the maker of the persa~u
(" pastry "), and finally the maker of a kind of
cake, t'airir or t'airoiro (according to Maspero,
gaieties communes).
Each of Joseph's companions dreamed a dream
connected with his calling. The cup-bearer
pressed three bunches of grapes into Pharaoh's
cup, and gave it into his hand. This may
appear a surprising custom in a country where
wine was made in exactly the same manner as
now in the districts given up to vine cultivation.
The monuments show us how they picked the
s This title, as well as others, are found In the Hood
Papyrus (Brit. Mus.), lately edited by Maspero. In
this MS. people are arranged according to their various
offices and occupations; and though tt belongs to a
later date, yet most of those mentioned are also found in
earlier times.
5 Y 2
Digitized by
Google
1796
JOSEPH
grapes, trod them with their feet, caused the
juice to run into great barrels, from which the
wine vessels were filled. [Eotft, p. 866.] We
hare already mentioned its intoxicating power ;
bat at the same time the Egyptians used the
juice of grapes squeezed into water as a sort of
lemonade at certain feasts. The description of
the life of the gods corresponds with that of the
king and his courtiers ; and in the Horus text of
Edfu (PI. xiii. 1. 3), edited by Naville, we find
that after Horns had killed the companions of Set
(Typhon), be was embraced by his father Ra ;
the younger god then commands that the juice
of grapes should be squeezed into water, that
this drink may gladden the heart of the goddess
(Hathor or Astarte). We read literally: "Squeeze
grapes into water; what comes out of them
(the juice) will refresh the heart of the god-
dess." From this we may take it for granted
that this drink was also used at court, specially
after great exertions. All that is necessary has
already been said about the "bake-meats" which
the baker carried on his head, and of which the
birds ate.
To the cup-bearer Joseph explained that
his dream signified that Pharaoh would be
gracious to him, and give him back his office ;
but on the other hand he was obliged to tell the
baker that Pharaoh would turn his face from
him, and cause him to be hanged. It was on
Pharaoh's birthday that there was a feast to
all the servants (xl. 20-23). The cup-bearer was
reinstated in his office and the baker hanged. In
Egypt the birthday of the king was kept with
great rejoicings, and down to Ptolemaic times
it was usually the occasion for acts of mercy of
various kinds. On the Rosetta Stone (1. 10) we
read of the hru mea netr nefr, the birthday
of the good god. The Septuagint rightly
translates our passage hf-'pa ytriatas, and
the Coptic is ne&oo** JrZ JU.ICI
JUl$4.p£.lO (dies natalis Pharaonii). Even
at the birth of a royal child there were great
festivities. In the Papyrus d'Orbiney we read
that when the "favourite" presented a son
to the king, the whole country rejoiced, and
his majesty solemnised a holy day. According
to the bilingual text of the Rosetta Stone, an
assembly of priests was called together in the
temple of Memphis on the king's birthday, an
amnesty was decreed for those criminals who
were in prison, and freedom was given to some
who, in spite of some misdemeanour, bad long
been considered by the judges as deserving of
pardon. In the decree of Canopus (the second
bilingual text found by Lepeius), we read of a
similar assembly of priests called together for
this purpose on the birthday of Ptolemy III.
(Euergetes I.). On the stele of Kuban, of the
time of Rameses II., the Pharaoh of the oppres-
sion, we read, nehm-m-prt-u hnt-n mest-f:
" There was rejoicing in heaven on the day of
his (the king's) birth." We may be sure there
were also rejoicings on earth. The baker was
hanged. The monuments tell us that this was
the usual punishment of criminals condemned to
death. Beheading was not usual; but in the
lawsuit against the robbers of the royal tombs,
a few culprits were condemned to be impaled.
Gen. xli. 1, &c. Here we read of Pharaoh's
dreams, and how, when no one could interpret
JOSEPH
them, the chief cup-bearer, who bad forgotUi
Joseph (xl. 23), was reminded of his own drcaa
and of the young Hebrew. Joseph, disclaiming
all ability in himself and attributing that b-
God, intimating also that the dream is a revels-
tion by God of His purposes in regard to Egypt
(xli. 16, 28, 32), declares tbe interpretative,
gives good counsel at the same time, and »
raised to high honour. The learned men mat
always called together when the king DtMtJ
advice or an interpretation; they were generally
called the rec/i-u diet-*, i.e. those who bait
knowledge of things. [Magic] Many of tie
monuments, e.g. the stele of the Great Sphhu
and the so-called dream-stele, show how am
importance was attached to dreams in Pbaracei
times, and under the Ptolemies there are several
papyri of tbe time of Ptolemy Philometor, wluJ
show that hermits lived alone in the Serapns
and devoted their lives to the explanatioa tf
dreams. The dreams are well known. In tat
first, the list and lean cattle come up oat J
the Nile: several pictures represent this, <a>
when the first were found, it was thought tkt
they were representations of Pharaoh's dream?
but this was not the case, for from the earlkc
times, long before the Hyksos or the Hebrrx
came into Egypt, rich landed proprietors hi
representations of their herds in the interior d
their tombs, to show their descendants how gre>'.
were the possessions of their ancestors.
The Nile is called in Hebrew ~MC\ us. the
river par excellence, corresponding with tbt
hieroglyphic aw, in old texts ittr, from waiti
comes the Coptic ULpO = Jiuvms. [Ecm
p. 864.] The bank is called in Hebrew, at :a
Egyptian, " the lips of the river." The numta
seven is very Egyptian, seven being a sarrw.
comprehensive number, often used on sjsuIji
occasions. Many attempts have of late ten
made to explain the importance of seven amoar?*
symbolic numbers. Three is said to stand hi
the divinity, four for the cosmos, 3 ■+- 4 = 7 fir
the union of God with the world. Toe atro
planets and the seven Hathors are well knsn
in Egyptian mythology. The Hathors may Is
cow-headed, or they may appear in the form s
cows, those animals being sacred to them, sal
this explains why ootcs should appear to Pharaw
in a dream.
In hieroglyphics tbe number seven is ate
denoted by a head, on account of it* seres
openings. In one copy of the Book of tbe Dead,
the deceased are seen cutting 2x7 ears «i
corn in the Elysian fields. The medicinal asi
magical 'writings of ancient Egypt prove *t>
the significance of the number seven. In &
Ebers Papyrus, when several drugs are {in-
scribed, seven is the number preferred, sat
never six, eight, or nine. In Pap. Ebers (71.
20-7) we find seven tmmt, little fish ; (70, H.
seven plants of utu, herbs ; (74, 14), seven opaot
(snakes or worms), seven off (flies), seven oca of
the earth (moles ?), &c are to be taken ; (54, lt\
seven heated stones must be used to torn water
into steam, which the sick person has to iahaV
through a reed.*
» In the symbolic numbers of Pythagoras, srrca «•>
alio the number signifying health. TU1 a lata «**
hr> was used by preference in tbe magical wiuua?
Digitized by VjOOQIC
JOSEPH
Vt. 28-32. Joseph's interpretation.
Yt. 33-36. His advice to Pharaoh. He should
choose a judicious wise man to he over the
land of Egypt. Farther, " let him appoint over-
seen (R. V.) over the land, and take up the fifth
part of the land of Egypt in the seven plenteous
years : and let them gather all the food of those
good years that come, and lay up corn under the
hand of Pharaoh, and let them keep food in the
cities. And that food shall be for store to the
land against the seven years of famine which
shall be in the land of Egypt ; that the land
perish not through the famine." We men-
tioned above that this famine may be identical
with that famine of many years mentioned in
the grave of Baba at El Kab. Even before the
Hyksos' time, a low inundation was often the
cause of want and distress, and the governors of
the nomes gloried in helping their subjects and
saving them from distress ; e.g. Ameni, in his
tomb at Beni Hasan, extols himself in the follow-
ing words : — " There were none in distress in my
time, and none starving as long I lived. And
when the years of famine came, I ploughed all the
fields of the nome Mah, from the Southern to
the Northern boundary. 1 I nourished the in-
habitants, by preparing bread for it (the nome).
No starving ones were to be found in it, for I
gave to the widow, as to the lady of a husband,
and never did I prefer the great to the small in
nil that I bestowed."
Thus acted Ameni, prince of the nome, in
accordance with the old law and custom, still
preserved in many texts, to feed the hungry,
give drink to the thirsty, and to clothe the
nuked.'
V. 37. These words pleased Pharaoh and his
servants.
V. 38. The king acknowledges that the
Spirit of God is in Joseph, and in v. 40 he says
to the wise interpreter, "Thou shalt be over my
house, and according to thy word shall all my
people be ruled ; only in the throne will I be
greater than thou."
V. 42. " And Pharaoh took off his ring from
his hand, and put it upon Joseph's hand,
and arrayed him in vestures of tine linen,
e.g. in a Graeco-Egyptian papyrus, a twig of laurel,
wbich was needed for some magical purpose, had to have
seven leaves, &c.
["The perfectly Egyptian colour of all this part of
tbe narrative le very noticeable, and nowhere more
so than in tbe particulars of tbe first dream. The
cattle coming up from tbe river and feeding on the bank
may be seen even now, though among them the lean
tine predominate ; and the use of one Egyptian word,
if not of two, in the narrative probably shows that the
■writer knew the Egyptian language. The corn with
many ears on one sulk most be wheat, one kind of
w lilcb now grown In Egypt has this peculiarity. Another
point to be remarked is that Joseph shaved before he
went into Pharaoh's presence, and we find from the
monuments that tbe Egyptians, except when engaged
In war, shaved both the bead and face, the small beard
that was worn on the chin being probably artificial." —
K. S. P.]
■ On the west and east were the Libyan desert and the
Arabian mountains; therefore no boundary-etones were
needed.
i Tbe supposition of Bunsen (Egypt's Place, Hi. 334,
1st ed.) that this inscription refers to Joseph's famine
is controverted by Brugsch {Egypt, 1. 158, 2nd ed.,
p. Smith).— Editobs.
JOSEPH
1797
and put a gold chain about his neck. And
he made him to ride in the second chariot
which he had ; and they cried before him,
'Abrek'" (see below; A. V. and B. V. "Bow
the knee "). This is entirely in accordance
with Egyptian customs of the time of the
Hebrews (after the importation of horses) and
later. Rings were worn by men and women
from the earl iest times. Most of those which have
come down to us are seal rings, often engraved
with the name of the reigning king on the flat
underside of a scarabaeus. k Most of the rings we
have were taken from the fingers of mummies.
Some of them show very artistic work ; some
are of pure gold ; some have scarabaei, others
movable plates of semi-precious stones, on which
the seal was engraved. A few are richly orna-
mented, e.g. one in the Louvre with two golden
horses, beautifully cut. On the king's ring was
his cartouche, r » ■ framing his name, and
underneath his usual title : " King of Lower
and Upper Egypt." In Egypt, as in all Eastern
countries, the seal was the confirmation or
endorsement of a person's will; and when he
delivered up his ring to any one, he gave him
(to use a modern expression) the power to act
for him with legal authority. Decrees and
letters were sealed; animals and bricks were
stamped with the name of the owner or builder.
Even the most sacred things in the temples were
sealed, and part of the ritual was the breaking of
the seal on the entrance of the king or high-
priest. Thus the " keeper of the seal " was the
deputy of the king, the adon, and his office is
called on the monuments adonnu mer chetam,
that of the king's deputy and keeper of the seal.
The garment given to Joseph (so. 41, 42) is
called shesh; it means fine white Egyptian
cotton, and the material into which it is made.
It therefore signifies a garment of fine white
texture. Although it stands for flax, there
were cotton as well as linen stuffs in Egypt,
and there was a special name for byssus,
pek, peh-t. The opinion expressed in the last
edition of Gesenius' Heb.-Chald. Diet, is correct
with regard to Egyptian also : " The words for
flax and cotton flow into each other." It is very
possible that the Hebrew shesh is derived from
the Egyptian shesh = " the white." In the Ebers
Papyrus, a qneen of the 1st dynasty is called
shesh = "the white." The hieroglyphic reading
shes signifies, according to Brugsch, a woven
stuff of peculiar fineness: this is translated
"byssus" by the bilingual texts; it was of a
light colour, and Brugsch considers, this shesthe
Egyptian form of the Hebrew B"E>. The word
may also be connected with the Old Egyptian
shendi-t, shenti, the apron-garment. At the time
of our history, Pharaoh could not have presented
a greater mark of favour to any one than the
royal apron-garment, the shendi-t. Erman was
the first to teach us to distinguish the dif-
ferent fashions of dress of the men and women
of Old Egypt. Before the Hyksos' time a certain
dress was authoritative for foreigners, and Joseph
could hardly (as has been till now asserted)
have been honoured with that long shirt-like
■ The oldest known bears the name of Khufu (Cheops),
the builder of the Great Pyramid, and is in the possession
of Herr Platherothe at Bremen.
Digitized by
Google
1798
JOSEPH
garment, such as was worn by great men under
the New Empire ; it is far more probable that
the royal apron is here meant, which under the
Old Empire was a sign of royalty, and which
later might only be worn by men in high office,
and by the confidential advisers of the Pharaoh.
The title " wearer of the shendi-t " is found in
the tombs of the Old Empire, and betokens a
particular honour. In the time of Joseph, the
costume of the highest officers of state consisted
of a thick under-apron, over which was worn
the shendi-t. The latter was made of fine
transparent byssus, and reached from the hips
to the middle of the leg, covering the lower part
of the body. It probably consisted of a long
piece of byssus wound round the body. The end
was drawn through the girdle, which was orna-
mented with go.d clasps. Long garments cover-
ing the whole body were almost unknown at this
time, though we find one prince of a nome under
the 12th dynasty represented in one of them.
The white linen or cotton material of which
the shendi-t was made (probably the shesh of
the Bible) was so thin, that though in folds it was
probably transparent, and therefore the under-
apron became a necessity. Under the Pharaohs,
after the expulsion of the Hyksos, the heads of
all the Government departments were allowed to
wear the shendi-t on public occasions ; later it
gradually lost its significance and honour.
The golden chain was such a common orna-
ment at the Egyptian court, that in hiero-
glyphics a golden necklace signifies " gold." It
is written nub, = " gold." In the pyramid time
the necklace was part of the dress of royal
personages, and was worn over the otherwise
bare upper part of the body.
" Pharaoh made Joseph to ride in the
second carriage which be had." No horses are
represented on the monuments before the time
of the Hyksos, nor do we ever see the king in a
carriage, though later he seems to have gene-
rally used one on leaving his palace. We there-
fore conclude that horses and carriages were
introduced into the Nile valley by the Hyksos.
Daring the time of their subjection, the native
princes also learnt to make use of vehicles
drawn by horses, both in war and peace, for the
monuments show us the king penetrating far
into the interior of Asia with his chariots of
war, and also going for a quiet drive with his
family. At Tell-el-Amarna Amenophis IV.
(Khunaten) drives out with his daughters, and
in the D'Orbiney Papyrus Pharaoh and his
favourite wife take a drive for pleasure. The
king, with wreaths of flowers round his neck,
first leaves the palace in a carriage of silver-
gilt (electron). The favourite is in the next
carriage, of which the description is not given.
That of the governor was inlaid with precious
metals : the " second " carriage, which Joseph
was to use, would naturally be less beautiful
and costly. For an account of the Egyptian
chariots, see Chariot ; and for the horses, see
Hobsb.
V. 43. "They cried before him Ipatjl (Abrek),
and he (Pharaoh) set him over ail the land
of Egypt." Abrek is an old Egypto-Hebrew
word, and Brugsch is right when he makes it
correspond with the hieroglyphic word brok or
brek, and considers M (abh) to represent the
Egyptian exclamation calling the people to
JOSEPH
obedience. Abrok is therefore to be traralxto
" Bow the knee," or better, " Up, bow the bat,"
and expresses an act of deep submission, la
an instance borrowed from Dumichen's sister.-
cal inscriptions, it is construed with n, te. '•It-
fore," and means, "We bow the knee beir?
(brok-n) thy double crown." We have on nt
met with brok in any older text ; still it cer-
tainly belongs to the Old Egyptian language'
V. 44. Pharaoh said unto Joseph that whim',
him should no man lift up hand or foot is a.1
the land of Egypt ; and in v. 45 he eaiW
Joseph's name Zaphenat-Pa'neach, and "jin
him Asenath, the daughter of Potiphena, te
priest of On, for his wife." The name waki
Pharaoh gave to Joseph has been generally rati
Zaphnath-pnaneah, and its explanation has cat*;
great difficulty. Dr. G. Steindorff™ paraphras
this group of words, Zaphenat-Pa' neach, mi
shows that there is doubtless an Egyptian fore
written Ze-pnute-ef-anch, corresponding te u*
Coptic xe-nnoirre-eq-u3it£,. tv
meaning of this name is, " God speaks and r-»
lives." Many texts give analogous nana:
"The god Khona speaks and he lives;" "Thet*
Ptah speaks and he lives ; " " The goddess Nut u
the goddess Isis speaks and he lives." Brerict
translates Zaphnath-paaneah. " Governor of uV
Sethroitish nome ; " but his theory is refuted ti-
the above explanation of SteindorfTs, which wfl
certainly meet with universal acceptation.
Joseph received this name because the liasfi?
name under which he had come as a slave t.-
Egypt was no longer befitting for him. H-
needed a more distinguished name, Hun
pleasing to Egyptian ears, and as with him so r
was with many Shemites who came to Pharsea >
court. We need only mention the herald (liter-
ally, a speaker) Ben Mat 'ana, son of Iupa-a, i
Shemite, who was obliged to allow himself to b
called at Pharaoh's court " Rameses in ta>
Temple of Ka." Change of name was also ussai
with parvenus whom the king wished to beoscr.
The fact that names with the meaning "Go.
speaks and be lives " only began to be comnwtl}
used in the time of the 22nd dynasty, easte-
Steindorff to place at that period the las
redaction of the Hebrew story to which or
passage belongs. The names which folic*
(Asenath and Potipherah) also belong to tki:
epoch, and it may be that the later Hebro
writer added them to the original text- If tk'
Hyksos king whom Joseph served lived at Tans.
it would be difficult to explain how he eovU
choose a wife for Joseph, whose father lived sc
far away, and was a priest of the sun-god EV
for the king and bis family served no god to
Set. If Memphis and the conditions of ca«n
life under the 20th dynasty were in the rote--
of the Hebrew writer at the conclusion of tbv
passage, then each statement is in exact atr«-
ment, for the name Asenath is a regular cbaoc
of form of the Egyptian female name Setmk.
meaning " belonging to the goddess Net " (Neita '
' Benfey explains It by the Coptic BvLtp ate*
mewing " to prostrate ; " and with the a (or U* lav
perauve and the suffix fc, the second person (ofcn*'
would mean " Prostrate thyself." [Abbco.]
» Zeittckrift fir aegypt. Spradu wd sUaUmmt-
kunde, 1889, p. 43.
Digitized by
Google
JOSEPH
Analogous names with ncs = " belonging to,"
are very numerous; and names like Nes-Hor,
Nes-Hathor, Xes-Khons, Nes-Isis, appear earlier,
but are particularly numerous in the second
division of the New Empire.'
The father of Joseph's wife was called in the
Hebrew Potipherah, according to the Septuagint
IlfTdppij. This Greek translation, as well as
the Coptic, reads HeTG^pKi and compels
us to recognise m this name, as in that of Joseph's
first master, the Egyptian Pe-du-fia-Xa = " the
gift of the surt-god Ra." He was a priest of
On, the Greek Heliopolis, the very ancient town
of the sun, lying a few miles north of Cairo, on
the east bank of the Nile, and throughout the
history of ancient Egypt the centre of the sun-
worship. The high-priest of the highest solar
deity was called the Urma; he was also chief
prophet of the god, and under him were priests
of various orders, to which, under the Hyksos
kings, the doctors also belonged.
One of the chief tribunals of Egypt sat at
Heliopolis, and the " faculty of medicine " in
the " great halls " of this town was the most
ancient and most famous tin the land. To
which order of priests in this temple and
college Joseph's father-in-law belonged, we
know not. The great sanctuary of Ea, de-
scribed so fully by Strabo, has disappeared :
nothing remains but a sacred obelisk still
standing out against the sky, erected by Uaer-
tesen I. (12th dynasty), before the coming of
the Hyksos, who spared it as well as the whole
temple, for we are told in a MS. on leather in
the Berlin Museum that the temple, which was
rebuilt magnificently under the 12th dynasty,
was still standing in the Ptolemaic time. The
beautiful ruins are described by Arabian writers,
who visited them even after the conquest of
Egypt by Islam.
V. 46 states that " Joseph was thirty years
old when he stood before Pharaoh, king of
Egypt."
The end of chap. xli. relates how Joseph
travelled through the whole country (carrying
out his measures), and how everything he had
prophesied came to pass. First the seven years
of plenty, in which Joseph stored up the corn as
"the sand of the sea." This is a favourite
simile in Old Egyptian : we have noted a number
of sentences similar to the following: — "The
provision is more in quantity than the sand of
the sea-shore" (Diimichen, Temple Inscrip.
86, 5). In the years of plenty two sons were
born to Joseph by Asenath. v. 50, and he named
the first-born Manasseh [Manasseii], and the
second Ephraim [Ephraim]. Then came the
years of famine, and " the dearth was in all
lands, but in all the land of Egypt there was
bread " (c. 54). This famine is spoken of as one
that is " over all the face of the earth " (t>. 56) ;
n The "n" In names composed with run disappears
in the language of other nations. The Greek Zfitrtc
corresponds with the Egyptian Nu-Min. To facilitate
pronunciation an a Is often introduced before the double
consonant at the beginning: thus Ziuvis becomes
'Ea-fitrtc. This « Is rendered (K)i-nit In the Hebrew
translation. We cannot accept Brugsch's theory that
Asenath Is the old female name Snat. On the other
hand, the laws of phonetic change are in favour of
our theory.
JOSEPH
1799
it therefore was not dne entirely to the misfortune
of the low Nile. At any rate it extended over
Palestine, for Jacob (chap. xlii. 1, &c.) sent his
sons to Egypt to buy corn there. The expres-
sion " the face of the earth " often meant but a
small sphere ; here probably Egypt and Western
Asia are spoken of, and one can easily imagine
climatic conditions which would be injurious to
the corn in those parts of the world.
The position of Joseph is one we often meet
with on the monuments of all ages. The pros-
perity of Egypt always depended on the produce
of her fields; and even in the time of the
pyramids the superintendent of the granaries
was one of the highest officers of state. One
inscription says, " He had the superintendence of
the stewards in all domains of Pharaoh, from
the miserable country of Cush (Ethiopia) to the
borders of Mesopotamia (Naharina)." Under
the 18th dynasty we find, that when there were
good harvest returns, these officials were honoured
by the golden necklace and other rewards. Men
both of the highest priestly and secular rank held
also this office. They were generally called
" superintendents of the granaries of the South
and of the North," and a certain Rnmen-cheper-
seueb called himself "the royal scribe of the
granaries of the North and of the South"
(Ledrain's Catalogue, 1314). We know the ap-
pearance of the granaries, for Naville has
cleared out the remains of some at Tell-el-
Maskhutah (Pithom Succoth), and they are
also often represented on the monuments. They
were large rectangular long buildings, with no
decoration, built of bricks of Nile mud, with
slightly inclining walls and a row of windows
high up, to admit air. A staircase led to the
roof, for the openings into the ■ rooms were at
the top, and the corn was shaken into them
from above. Near the granaries were offices for
the scribes and the weighing-rooms, and every
sack of corn which was brought in was regis-
tered by the clerks, who squatted on the roof.
Joseph's position was more than simple overseer
of the granaries, as we have already seen ; he
was "keeper of the seal," and this office was
often connected with that of Vat or governor,
the chief justice who superintended the whole
administration of the country, and, like Joseph,
was called the second after tue king (De Rouge,
ffier. Ins. 303). Even those of high rank had
to obey him, and he was supreme at court.
The sons of Israel then came to Egypt (xlii.) :
Benjamin only, Jacob's favourite, the last-born
of Rachel, was left behind — for fear that mis-
chief should befall him. Joseph, the governor of
the land, also sold the corn, and his "brethren
came and bowed down themselves before him
with their faces to the earth " (c. 6). This sign
of submission was required from all who came
to Egypt with a petition to the king. Absoha,
the Semitic captain represented with his fol-
lowers at Beni Hasan, is only bowing low.
when he meets the prince of the nome Mah,
but he comes with gifts, not with a petition.
Other pictures show us Egyptian and Asiatic
suppliants in a position corresponding exactly
with the words " bowed down themselves before
him with their faces to the earth," for they
throw themselves down before him from whom
they hope for favours, so that their nose or
mouth would touch the ground. This custom
Digitized by
Google
1800
JOSEPH
was called contemptuously by the Greeks rpotr-
Kvrtiv, and by the Egyptians senta — " to smell
or kiss the earth.") Under the Old Empire
a royal prince, high-priest at Memphis (Puh-
shepses), counted it the highest honour to kiss
the king's foot, and the stele or Entef (12th
dynasty) teaches us that even the great people
of Upper Egypt threw themselves down on the
ground before the t'at, the highest officer in
Egypt. In later times, people of rank, if native
Egyptians, were spared this humiliation, but
those of lower rank and conquered princes and
foreigners were always compelled to " smell the
earth " before Pharaoh nnd his highest digni-
taries, as e.g. the conquered rebel kings before
Pianchi, the Ethiopian Pharaoh.
The brothers did not recognise the youth
now grown to manhood; he however knew
at once who they were, and "spake roughly
to them," and accused them of having come
as spies " to see the nakedness of the land "
(v. 12). By this is surely meant the only
way by which Egypt could be entered by
enemies from the east, i.e. by the Isthmus of
Suez. At this point fortresses had been erected
under the Old Empire (12th dynasty), which in
the time of Seti I. and Rameses II. (19th
dynasty) were extended into a regular line of
forts, called the chetam, or the key, corresponding
to the word Etham in the Bible.* The various
forts followed almost the same direction as the
present Suez Canal. The most important strong
points were chetam en Tar, " the fortress of the
North," probably the Pelusium of the Greeks
(called rightly by Suidas the key of Egypt,
$ K\*is fijr Atyowrov), and to the South the
later Hero, Heroonopolis. 1 ' The latter was called
by the Egyptians by the sacred name of Pithom
(house of the god Turn), and Thekut (Heb.
Succoth), as Nnville has shown by the Egypt
Exploration Fund excavations. It touched the
western extremity of the Red Sea, which must
therefore have extended much further north than
it does now. Here was a fortified storehouse,
and in Roman times a castrum, which may have
been close to an Egyptian entrenched camp. As
the lakes of Timsah and Balah were a protection
from invaders on this side, it was only necessary
to erect a few forts. One, as we 6nd from
the sculptures of Seti I. on the north wall
of Karnak, was called Makthol, Heb. Migdol,
the strong castle, or fortified tower ; another,
more to the west, is mentioned by Jer. ii. 16,
xlvi. 14, xliii. 7, xliv. 1, and by Ezek. xxx. 18. It
was called in Hebrew Tahpahnes [Tahpahnes],
and in the Septuagint Taphne, Taphnai. The
Egyptian name was Thabne, and its position has
lately been approximately determined. Thus in
later times the eastern boundary of Egypt was
well protected. Under the Hyksos, however,
there only existed the town fortified by them,
called by the Greeks Araris, and a row of forts
on the isthmus, spoken of in the Travels of
Senelia as " obstructions " (12th dynasty).
The eastern nations, if intending to conquer
Egypt, had, above all, to discover the weak
points in this line of fortifications; or, as the
• See Ebera, Egypt and the Booki of Motet, p. 78, tec.
p Herr H. Mailer places tkur before far and makes
It coincide with the Biblical Sbur.
JOSEPH
Bible expresses it, " to spy out the nakednu
of the land."
The brothers defended themselves (t. 13),
and began : "Thy servants are twelve brethna."
The phrase " thy servants " is quite Egrptn.
for, as Borchardt has lately shown, Mosi
to be understood as a courteous formalin- for
" I," or " I thy servant ; " so Joseph's brothers.
instead of saying " we," said, " thy serrjau."
This expression is used most frequently is the
time of the 12th dynasty, therefore before the
time of the Hyksos. Also the oath "by the
life of Pharaoh," introduced by Joseph a his
reply, is genuinely Egyptian ; even tit
Pharaohs swore by their own names: <\j. tie
Pharaoh Pianchi, on the stele named after bra.
uses the expression anch-a mer-a Ba, "byrcr
life," " by my love to Ra,"
Vv. 15, &c. Joseph explained to the brother!
that he intended to keep them prisoners wfc
one fetched the youngest brother. They ike:
talked to each other, and reminded each otto
sorrowfully of the wrong they had done te
Joseph. They talked in their own laagiuge.
and did not know that the prime minister w
the king understood them, " for he spake aw
them by an interpreter." This shows ns tkr.
Egyptian was spoken at the Hyksos court, s fact
we have already assumed from other cirw»-
stances (see p. 1793). Interpreters were foaK
in Egypt at all times ; and, indeed, under tin
founder of the 26th dynasty (middle of Tt's
century B.C.), when the king PsammeticJa
relied on Greek soldiers, and when nmnerots
Greeks settled in Egypt, the interpreters, ic-
cording to Herodotus (ii. 154, 164), formed i
distinct class. In Roman times, Roman trartllen
conversed with the Egyptians through inter-
preters, whose profession fell into bad repntent
want of truthfulness.
Vv. 24, &c, show us how Joseph, in spite c'
his emotion, caused Simeon to be bound; tse
others were sent away with corn and provisos.
while the money which they had paid wis p»i
back into their sacks. The custom of asus
coined tokens began mnch later than the dia
of this story, so that money such as we rise ii
not meant here, but metal paid in the fcra
of balls or small bars, weighed in d*1ik»
with two scales. [Weights and Meascsb.]
That this weighed metal is meant, we see froa
xliii. 21, "our money in full weight" The
brothers laded their asses with the corn. Jk>
were much used in Egypt as beasts of burden:
the camel was introduced mnch later, pro-
bably not before the time of the Ptolemies, a
Barth has proved. The monuments do not p«
us a single example of the camel, though the
papyri of the New Empire show as that people
knew of them, but did not consider them suit-
able for use in Egypt, and the Egyptians were
afraid of travelling in foreign countries.
Ch. xlii. 27. One of the brothers opened his
sack in the inn and found his money. There
must have been wins in very early times it
those countries where numbers of people of >"
classes flocked together to certain places >«
pilgrimage, and remained there for severs! dirt.
Thousands of people assembled at Bubastis tor
the feast of Sekhet (Pasht), or at Abydos, when
was the tomb of Osiris. Here, as well as it
Tanis and Memphis, the destination of so dubt
Digitized by
Google
JOSEPH
JOSEPH
1801
caravans, there mast have been inas, probably
much like the Oriental iA-ms of the present day.
The rest of the story of Joseph and his
brethren contains but a few points further
which need explanation. On the return of the
brothers with Benjamin, with presents from
taeir father, and with the money which hud
been put into their sacks, Joseph ordered the
" ruler of his house " (xliii. 16) to " slay and
make ready, for these men shall dine with
me at noon." Every great man had (as is said
iibovo) an overseer for his house. The monu-
ments often show ns pictures of the slaying
of animals. Every temple had its slaughter-
court, and the animals killed were generally
oxen and a sort of large antelope, which was
domesticated in old times. The animal was
bound and its throat cut with a Bint knife, no
other knife being used for this purpose. The
blood was carefully saved, and the body cut
into pieces, the legs being considered the best
part. In private houses, oxen, calves, and tame
antelopes were preferred to any other kind of
meat. Geese and ducks were preferred to all
other birds. The Egyptian feasts, of which
many are represented in the tombs, were not
like ours; the .guests sat on chairs in long
rows opposite the richly-laden sideboard, which,
like the tables of offerings, was always decorated
with Sowers. Servants, with serviettes in their
hands, waited on the guests with dishes also
decked with flowers. At ordinary meals a
small table with a tray of food and drink was
placed near each person : this is also customary
in the East now. Under the Old Empire, the
guests often squatted on the ground ; in later
times, however, four-legged chairs were used,
which were often upholstered and had comfort-
able backs. Near these were placed jugs, from
which, as is now the custom in the East, water
was poured over the hands of those who ate:
the use of knives and forks was unknown. The
Egyptians never reclined on sofas at meals, like
the Greeks and Romans. There was always a
special dining-hall in the houses of the great.
In the middle stood a large table, probably of
stone or brick, on which dishes were placed as
upon our sideboards.
Ch. xliii. 21. When the brothers defended
themselves to the ruler of Joseph's house
because of the money they had found in their
sacks, he encouraged them with an expression
used as much in Egyptian as in Hebrew ; for in
many hieroglyphic texts we find a friendly con-
versation beginning with the greeting net' her
<<•«=" Peace be to yon," or" Peace to you." In
Joseph's house the steward brought water for
the brothers to wash their feet ; for this Eastern
custom existed also iu ancient Egypt, as we
might expect with a nation where everything,
even their religion, inculcated cleanliness of body.
According to Herod, ii. 37, the priests always
had to bathe twice a day and to wear sandals,
while people of high rank often preferred to go
barefoot, and had shoe-bearers to carry their
sandals. Unwashen feet would have soiled the
plaster floor of the cleanly-kept rooms, and that
they were much afraid of doing this is proved
by the fact that many mummies have the soles
of their feet removed that they should not soil
the floor of the hall of judgment in the
underworld.
Vo. 26, &c. Joseph received his brothers,
asked for news of his father, and at the sight
of Benjamin, his mother's son, was so moved
that he was obliged to withdraw into the inner
chamber, in order to weep. Representations
and ground-plans of Egyptian houses show us
that this " inner chamber " would probably be
the sleeping room, and could only be reached by
passing through the court, the verandah, a
reception-room, the dining- lall, and a sitting-
room. It was usually at the back of the house,
and (according to the representation of Herira's
house) from the dining-hall Joseph would pass
through the sitting-room on the right, which
occupied one-third of the space behind the
dining-hall, and enter the sleeping chamber
which opened into it.
When at last they sat down to table, v. 32,
" They set on for him by himself, and for them [his
brothers] by themselves, and for the Egyptians,
which did eat with him, by themselves : because
the Egyptians might not eat bread with the
Hebrews, for that is an abomination unto the
Egyptians." This passage shows us how com-
pletely Egyptian the court of the Hyksos kings
had become, for the Hebrews, who were really
their blood relations, were considered as unclean
as all other foreigners. To a patriotic Egyptian
it was always an abomination to eat at the same
table with a foreigner, or to cut bread with the
same knife, and this abhorrence still survived
(according to the classical writers) long after
Egypt had been opened out to foreigners under
Psammetichus I. (26th dynasty), and after
the Pharaohs had for centuries married foreign
princesses. From the Pianchi stele (end of 9th
century B.C.) we learn that the conquered rebel
kings might not enter the king's palace,
"because (11. 150, 151) they were unclean
(ama-u) and they ate fish." " Unclean " means,
as we see by the determinative, uncircumcistd,
and " they ate fish " means every kind of fish,
not those only that were allowed to the
Egyptians for food. It seems to have been a
cause of special abhorrence to the Egyptians
that foreigners did not keep the laws which
regarded cleanliness of the body and food.
Besides this, foreign lands and their inhabitants
belonged to Set (Typhon), and everything be-
longing to him was despised and unclean, even
red-haired people, red being his colour; the word
for "red" therefore signified also "wicked and
bad." We know nothing more of the dishes of
honour (v. 31) which Joseph caused to be served,
except that Benjamin's share was five times as
much as that of any of the others. At the end
of the meal " they drank and were merry with
him." The scenes of the Egyptian tombs show
that it was usual to drink freely, men and
women being represented as overpowered with
wine, probably as an evidence of the liberality of
the entertainer.
Ch. xliv. Joseph continued his rough treat-
ment of his brothers, and brought them under
suspicion of having stolen his own particular
"silver cup." Various forms of goblets are
represented on the monuments, some certainly
made of precious metals, gold, silver, or electron.
The cup was found in Benjamin's sack, and
Joseph immediately pronounced the sentence of
punishment that the boy should be left behind
as his slave. Then Judah, mindful of the oath
Digitized by
Google
1802
JOSEPH
he had sworn to Jacob, stepped forward and
offered himself as a slave in the place of
Benjamin, that he might not see the evil that
should come upon his lather.
Ch. xlv. Joseph's heart was overcome by these
words, and he made himself known to his
brethren. Then follows the beautiful passage
(rr. 3, &c.) in which he quiets the troubled
men, by declaring that all has happened under
God's guidance.
V. 8. " So now it was not you that sent me
hither, but God." Then he sent them back to
fetch his father, and promised that they and
their flocks and herds should settle near him in
the land of Goshen. There he would take care of
them, for there were yet " five years of famine."
Goshen is praised as a land of great fertility.
[Goshen.]
Vv. 16, &c. Pharaoh and his servants were
pleased at the arrival of Joseph's brothers, and
the king assured his favourite minister that both
they and their father were welcome to the land
of Egypt. " I will give you the good of the land
of Egypt, and ye shall eat the fat of the land."
So Joseph, as Pharaoh had commanded, gave them
wagons to fetch their father, their wives and
children, and presented them with rich presents
for themselves and their father, in all of which
Benjamin had the preference. Here one point only
needs notice : Jacob and his family were to be
brought into Egypt in Egyptian wagons. There-
fore in the time of the Pharaohs there were roads
by which people could travel from Palestine to
Egypt. In the present day, since the Roman
roads have fallen into decay, this journey can
only be made riding or on foot, and even to
drive through the Delta is impossible. In Old
Egypt the Egyptian war-chariots went as far
as the north of Syria, and we see from this
passage that private conveyances could be
driven over this district. Under Barneses III.
we rind Asiatic tribes invading Egypt, and
amongst their camp-followers are ox-carts for
the conveyance of the wives and children.
These carts are really only boxes on four wheels,
while the baggage-waguns of the Egyptians,
instances of which are represented in the camp
of Rameses II., and the chariots for war or for
pleasure, were two-wheeled. For the baggage,
box-like tops were added to the conveyance.
They were drawn, not by horses but by oxen, as
is now the case in Ethiopia. We cannot decide
which sort of \cagon was sent to meet Jacob.
Ch. xlvi. 1, &c. Jacob and his family went
down into Egypt, and the Lord promised him
there (r. 3) to make of him "a great nation."
Then follow the names of the sons and grand-
children of Jacob who came with him into
Egypt. '• All the souls of the house of Jacob
which came into Egvpt were three score and
ten " (o. 27).
Vv. 28, &c Judah was sent on before to
Joseph, who caused his chariot to be made
ready and went up to meet his father in
Goshen. This helps us to settle the position of
Goshen, which must have been between the
eastern boundary of the Delta, and one of the
king's residences, Tank, Bubastis, or Memphis.
See Goshen.
Vv. 29, 30. Joseph went up in his chariot
and met his father.
Vv. 31-34. Joseph advised his brethren to
JOSEPH
make themselves known to Pharaoh as shepherd?
and herdsmen, so that he might allow then tv
remain in the land of Goshen ; for (t>. 34)
"every shepherd is an abomination unto tb*
Egyptians." Herodotus, a good authority on all
he saw himself and a most careful observer
when in Egypt, tells us (ii. 47) of the great
contempt in which all swineherds were held.
This is not surprising, for swine were held in
as much abhorrence by the Egyptians as by the
Jews and Mahommedans, and were kept hot
rarely (for certain sacrifices, e.g. in Nechebt, <>.
el-Kab). That shepherds were also hated, it is
difficult to understand, for the ram was sacred
in Egypt, and some Egyptians possessed Urge
flocks of sheep. But though rams and bullocks
are very often represented, the sheep appears
very rarely, and the reason for this was pro-
bablv religious, the sheep perhaps not being
wholly a clean animal, and much inferior to
the bullock, the favourite of the Egyptian land-
owner. Everything concerning the sheep was
undertaken (as with swine) by the shepherds.
On the other hand, it was the pride of the great
man to enumerate on the walls of his tomb the
number of each kind of bullock i which he
possessed. Bullocks were treated with lovinc
care ; they were adorned with gay cloths and
tassels. Their keeper is on friendly terms with
them, and in the Papyrus d'Orbiney the cows
are supposed to talk with the shepherd : they
tell him where the best pasture is to be found,
and the leading cow warns him that he i-
pursued.
The bullocks also were treated with median?
when tbey were ill, and were specially cared for
at breeding time. The chief breed in Egyi'.
was the old African zebra breed with the hump:
the horns grew in the form of a lyre to >
magnificent length : while another breed wis
kept artificially with short horns, or with rw
horns at all. Foreign bulls were brought into
the country to improve the breed, some bunt-
imported under the New Empire from the Kbeta
country ; that is, North Syria. Though the over-
seers, the stewards, the governors, and the scribes
of the herds were illustrious civil servants, the
shepherds and herdsmen were despised. Their
business forced them to wander about, and they
could not always keep out of contact witb
unclean things ; they were, therefore, abhorrent
to the Egyptians, with whom a settled life and
cleanliness were held in the highest estimation
They were called secAti-u or marsh-men, ami
at certain seasons they bad to take their
cattle into the marshy districts, jnst as shep-
herds in the mountains at the present dav take
them up to " the Aim." In the marshes oi
the Delta, where birds were snared and wild
animals trapped, they would probably com*
across strangers. Instead of houses they had
huts, something like tents, quickly put np and
taken down; and of all Egyptians (as we see
by their pictures), they took the least pains
4 A certain Sabu bad 405 of one breed, 1337 el
another, 1300 of another; besides 1200 calves of eoe
breed, and 1138 of another; in addition 1303 antek^n.
1136 gazelle*, and 1244 head of a kind of antelope-goat.
A relation also of king Khafra inch, whose grave is at
Olieh, possessed 836 long-horned cattle, 220 wttbsot
horns, 974 sheep, 2236 goats, and 760 i
Digitized by
Google
JOSEPH
with their appearance. They wore a rough
apron of plaited grass, and shaved neither their
heads nor their beards. Though people avoided
coming in contact with the herdsmen, they
considered them very intelligent, just as we
ascribe a power of sharp observation to our
shepherds, who lire in close intercourse with
nature. Joseph made use of the prejudice
against shepherds to settle his relatives on good
pasture-land beyond the cultivated and thickly
populated lands of the native Egyptians.
Pharaoh willingly agreed (vv. 3-6), and told
Joseph that if there were capable men amongst
them to place them as overseers over his
own herds. The mer or overseer is often
mentioned on the monuments. One was called
" overseer of the horn, of the leg with the cloven
hoof, and of the feather." He was therefore
over all the cattle, the bullocks, the smaller
animals, and the feathered flocks. The king
must have possessed large herds of cattle ; the
royal domains were not much less than those
belonging to the temples, and the latter owed
most of their possessions to the gifts of the great
landowners.'
Ch. zlvii. 7, &c. Jacob, who was 130 years
old, blessed Pharaoh, and this need not surprise
us when we remember the reverence the
Egyptians paid to old age.
Vv. 13, &c. The wise financier Joseph gath-
ered into the treasury of Pharaoh all the money
of the Egyptians and of the inhabitants of
Canaan by means of his accumulated stores
of food. V. 14: "And Joseph brought the
money into Pharaoh's house." By this house is
meant the treasury, which, together with the offi-
cials attached to it, appears countless times on
the monuments. It is usually called ptr-het =
■'the house of silver," and the head-treasurer
was a high officer of state.' His office was often
connected with that of the t'at (see p. 1800),
and he had many men under him, called " the
stewards or clerks of the house of silver." The
title of head-treasurer was given, even under
the Old Empire, as an honorary title to the
highest officers and to the royal relatives.
Thus, in an inscription of the 6th dynasty,
there is a list of the high officers of state; the
princes precede every one, and next come the
head-treasurers (the word used is in the plural,
though one man discharged the duties of the
office). There are many pictures of the treasure-
house, with its scales on which a large number
of clerks weighed and kept the register of the
rings and bars. Each temple also had its
treasure-chambers, e.g. those of Medinet Haboo
of Rameses III. On the walls are represented
the treasures it contained, metals of all kinds,
as well as precious metals, precious stones,
vessels of gold and silver, &c.'
The Bible tells us how the Egyptians gave all
their money to save themselves from starvation,
and how they were at last obliged to pledge
their cattle and their land.
* According to Ennan, during thirty-one years under
tbe Mew Empire they received 6H.M8 head of cattle.
■ The reading is uncertain, though the meaning is
quite clear.
• F. DOmlchen has published drawings of the objects
in this treasure-house, the same of which Herodotus
relates his beautiful story of the " Treasure-house."
JOSEPH
1803
Vv. 20, ice.: "And Joseph bought all the
land of Egypt for Pharaoh ; for the Egyptians
sold every man his field, because the famine
prevailed over them: so the land became
Pharaoh's . . . Only the land of the priests
bought he not ; for the priests had a portion
assigned them of Pharaoh, and did eat their
portion which Pharaoh gave them : wherefore
they sold not their lands." Then he gave
the people seed for their fields, and required
them in return to give Pharaoh the fifth part of
the produce, the other four parts being their
own, for seed of the field, and for their food.
V. 26, " And Joseph made it a law over the land
of Egypt unto this day, that Pharaoh should
have the fifth part, except the land of the priests
only, which became not Pharaoh's." *
We have here a true picture of the agrarian
relations in the valley of the Nile after the ex-
pulsion of the Hyksos. Under the Old Empire,
as is related in the graves of that period, the
nobility and princes of the nomes possessed large
freehold estates, and in times of famine had to
take care of their people. Under the New Em-
pire, till long after the time of the Exodus, it
was quite different ; and if we review in chrono-
logical order the agrarian relations of Egypt,
referred to on the monuments, we find that the
reversion to the Crown of the landed property
of the nobility must hare occurred in the period
just before the expulsion of the Hyksos. In
Lower Egypt, also, the native Egyptian Pha-
raohs, from the time of Rasekenen I. to that
of Ahmes, seem to have confiscated the large
estates, and the story of Joseph gives an interest-
ing account of this proceeding. It is certain
that under the 18th dynasty (that following the
Hyksos) all the land, with the exception of the
priests' fields, belonged to Pharaoh, and that
those in possession had to pay 20 per cent,
of the produce (the fifth part) to the king,
while under the Old Empire there is no trace of
such a regulation ; the statutum or fixed income
of the priests (mentioned xlrii. 22) is also found
in later times. Under the Old Empire the
princes of the nomes presided over the colleges
of the priests in their small feudal states, and
received a fixed amount of the revenues (bread,
meat, and beer). This was all changed later,
for under the 19th and 20th dynasties the
priests, instead of paying out part of their
revenues, were continually begging, and so
many gifts were added to the old emoluments
that after the time of Rameses III. the priest-
hood had very large endowments (see Pap.
Harris, I., Brit. Mus.), and became richer and
more powerful than the king himself, so that
under tbe 21st dynasty they deposed the old
family of Pharaohs and usurped the throne.
* This transaction of Joseph and that of the Egyptian
king Sesoetrla as recorded by Herodotus (U. 108),
dividing the soil of Egypt among the inhabitants on the
terms of an annual rent payable to the Crown, have led
some writers to identify Sesoetrla with Joseph's Pharaoh.
Such an identification Is extremely precarious [Phakaoh,
sec. 2, The Pharaoh of Joteph, p. 813 a J. But however
that may be, the statement of Herodotus (with which
may be read Diod. I. 54, Strabo xvll. p. I8J) Is held to
corroborate Gen. xlvil. 20 so far aa this, that Egyptian
land tenure was believed In his day to have originated
in assignments of land by the Crown as the supreme and
ultimate owner of the soil. — Editors.
Digitized by
Google
1804
JOSEPH
Under the Persians, 454 B.C., Herodotus ob-
serves (ii. 168) that the priests were exempt
from taxes as well as the soldiers. The revenue
brought in by a certain allotment of the taxes
agrees with the fixed income (pfl) in our his-
tory, and consisted daily of 5 minae of bread
(between 4 and 5 lbs.), 2 minae of beef (not
quite 2 lbs.), and 4 bowls of wine: money, of
course, is not mentioned. The account of the
changes which by the wisdom of Joseph were
so much to the advantage of the Crown pro-
perty, causes us to place our story towards the
end of the Hyksos period; for from that time
to the time of the Exodus, there are no his-
torical indications of a similar revolution in the
agricultural laws.
J'e. 27-31. We see how Joseph's family
took firm root in the land, and multiplied
quickly ; and how Jacob, in his 147th year,
feeling his end approaching, made Joseph swear
to him that he would not bury him in Egypt,
but in the burying-place of his fathers at
Hebron.
Ch. xlviii. 1, &c, contains the last farewell of
Jacob to Joseph, and the adoption of Ephraim
and Manasseh, the sons of Joseph, by Jacob,
who received them into the number of his sons,
so that "as Reuben and Simeon they shall be
mine." Joseph was lost to Jacob because he
had become an Egyptian, but by the adoption of
the two sons of Rachel's firstborn the gap in
the brotherhood to whom God had promised the
land of Canaan was filled up. In spite of the
fact that Manasseh was the elder son, Israel
placed his right hand on the head of Ephraim,
thus giving him the privileges of the first-born.
V. 21. Jacob promised Joseph that the Lord
should bring his descendants back into the land
of his fathers.
Chap. xlis. gives the blessing of Jacob to his
sons [Jacob], and the repetition of his wish that
he should be buried in the cave of Machpelah,
by the side of Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and
Rebekah, and his own wife Leah [Machpelah].
V. 33. Jacob " gathered up his feet into the bed,
and yielded up the ghost, and was gathered unto
his people."
Ch. 1. 1, &c. Joseph mourned for his father,
and commanded his servants the physicians to
embalm him: "And forty days were fulfilled
for him ; for so are fulfilled the days of those
which are embalmed : and the Egyptians mourned
for him threescore and ten days " (t>. 3). This
statement corresponds with the length of time
required for embalmment, according to the
accounts given by the classical writers and by
the monuments. Herodotus (ii. 86) and Dio-
dorus (i. 91) give us many details about em-
balming. [Embalming.]
The body of the father of Joseph, the most
distinguished man in Egypt, could only have
been embalmed in the most costly method. An
account of what was to be done with the body
of a distinguished person is found in the Rhind
Papyrus (Brit. Mus.). In this account the
various substances are enumerated which are
used in embalming, and seventy days are spoken
of as the appointed time for the embalmment
of a body. This is most interesting to us, as in
our passage the time of mourning takes exactly
the same length of time. In the Rhind Papyrus
thirty-six days are given for the first process,
JOSEPH
instead of which we find (Gen. 1. 3) the round
number of forty. Pharaoh willingly granted
that Joseph should fulfil his father's wish and
take the body to the family burial-place. The
funeral procession was as splendid as if Jacob
had been of royal birth, for (1. 7) there followed
all the servants of Pharaoh, the elders of his
house, and all the elders of the land of Egypt.
V. 9. "And there went up with him both
chariots and horsemen : and it was a very great
company." Such great funeral processions are
often represented in the tombs of Abd-el-
Kurua at Thebes ; the horsemen alone are
wanting, and some maintain that the Egyptians
never used the horse for riding. This opinion,
however, is not correct ; for though horses with
chariots are more often represented than riding
horses, yet there are several pictures of Egyptians
riding, and the hieroglyphic texts sometimes
speak of horse-soldiers, e.g. an inscription at
Karaak, where we find " soldiers riding on war-
horses," and further on we read that they pursue
the enemy. The finest picture of a man riding
a horse without a saddle is one in the Museo
Civico at Bologna. A man on horseback is also
found carved in open work on a battle-axe of
the time of the expulsion of the Hyksos. Joseph
naturally accompanied the mortal remains of
his father (on the place of burial, see Jacob).
When he returned, his brothers (I. 15) feared
that he would hate them, because of the evil
they had done to him, and, throwing themselves
at his feet, they begged him to forgive them for
their father's sake. Then again we see the good
and noble character of Joseph, who calms them
with the beautiful, oft-repeated words (re. 19
and 20) : " Fear not : for am I in the place of
God? Te thought evil against me; bat God
meant it unto good."
Joseph continued to live in peace with his
family in Egypt, and his earthly happiness was
great in seeing Ephraim's descendants to the
third generation, that is, his great-great-grand-
children ; also his great-grandchildren, the
grandchildren of Manasseh, the children of
Machir. Joseph also wished to rest in the land
of his fathers (1- 25). This wish was fulfilled,
though much later, for we read (Ex. xiiL 19)
that Moses took the bones of Joseph with him ;
and in Josh. xxiv. 32 we are told that the bones
of Joseph, which the children of Israel had
brought with them out of the land of Egypt,
were buried in Shechem, in the field which
Jacob bought from the sons of Hamor, the
father of Shechem, for one hundred pieces of
silver.
V. 26 tells us that Joseph was 110 years
old. We often find that the Egyptians prayed
that they might reach their 110th year, for* to
live 110 years was the last wish to be fulfilled
for a happy life. In the most ancient MS. we
possess, the Papyrus Prisse, a life of 110 years
is declared to be the best, and in the Papyrus
Anasti IV. (T. 4, 1. 4) we read : " Fulfil 110 year,
on the earth, whilst thy limbs are vigorous."
On a granite statue at Vienna, there is a prayer
to the goddess Isis that she should grant life,
health, happiness, and a good old age in this
world, and also a splendid and excellent burial
at Heliopolis, after 110 years on earth. It is
written of the prophet Roma (19th dynasty)
that when he had lived 110 years on earth, be
Digitized by
Google
JOSEPH
had attained the most perfect age of mortal
men. " God," as he says himself, " granted me
110 years of life." Many similar passages speak
of 110 years as the most perfect age to be
desired, and therefore by the number 110 is
inferred an especially blessed and prosperous
life.' This number 110 is certainly worthy of
attention, for it proves that the author of this
passage was perfectly conversant with Egyptian
matters, and that the story of Joseph's life, as
it has come down to us, has in part, at least,
obtained its local colouring on Egyptian soil.
[G. E.]
Joseph's character. — We have as full an account
of Joseph as of Abraham and Jacob, a fuller one
than of Isaac ; and if we compare their histories,
Joseph's character is the least marked by wrong
or indecision. His first quality seems to have
been, the greatest resolution. He not only
believed faithfully, but could endure patiently,
and could command equally his good and evil
passions. Hence his strong sense of duty, his
zealoos work, his strict justice, his clear dis-
crimination of good and evil. Like all men of
vigorous character, he loved power; but when
he had gained it, he nsed it with the greatest
generosity. He seems to have striven to get
men unconditionally in his power that he
might confer benefits upon them. Generosity
in conferring benefits as well as in forgiving
injuries is one of his distinguishing character-
istics. With this strength was united the
deepest tenderness. He was easily moved to
tears, even weeping at the first sight of his
brethren after they had sold him. His love for
his father and Benjamin was not enfeebled by
years of separation, nor by his great station.
The wise man was still the same as the true
youth. These great qualities explain his power
of governing and administering, and his extra-
ordinary flexibility, which enabled him to suit
himself to each new position in life. The last
characteristic to make np this great character
was modesty, the natural resnlt of the others.
Joseph's place in history. — In the history of
the chosen race Joseph occupies a very high
place as an instrument of Providence. He was
" sent before " his people, as he himself knew,
to preserve them in the terrible famine, and to
settle them where they could multiply and
prosper in the interval before the iniquity of the
Canaanites was full.
Joseph as a type. — In the N. T. Joseph is only
mentioned (Heb. xi. 21, 22). Tet the striking
particulars of the persecution and sale by his
brethren, his resisting temptation, his degrada-
tion and yet greater exaltation, the saving of his
people by his hand, and the confounding of his
enemies, seem to indicate that he was a type of
our Lord. [R. S. P.]
2. Father of Igal, who represented the tribe
of Issachar among the spies (Num. xiii. 7).
8. A lay Israelite of the family of Ban!
who was compelled by Ezra to put away his
» It Is not without design that the Papyrus Ebers
ends at the 110th page, and Aulas QelUus knew some-
thing of the significance of this Dumber, for In his
Noctes Attieae he explains (x. 10) that the Egyptians
only lived 110 years, because the heart loses each year
seven drachms np to the age of fifty years, and then
two drachms yearly till the hundredth year.
JOSEPH
1805
foreign wife (Ezra x. 42). In 1 Esd. it is given
as J06EPHCS.
4. Representative of the priestly family of
Shebaniah, in the next generation after the
Return from Captivity (Neh. xii. 14).
5. ("Wo-tiipoj.) A Jewish officer defeated by
Gorgias c. 164 B.O. (1 Mace. v. 8, 56, 60).
6. In 2 Mace. viii. 22, x. 19, Joseph is named
among the brethren of Judas Maccabaeus ap-
parently in place of John (Ewald, Gesch. iv. 384,
note ; Grimm, ad 2 Mace. viii. 22). The con-
fusion of 'luiyyys, 'lw<rf/cj>, 'Iwotjj is well seen in
the various readings in Matt. xiii. 55.
7. An ancestor of Judith (Jud. viii. 1).
[B. F. W.]
8. One of the ancestors of Christ (Luke iii.
30), son of Jonan, and the eighth generation
from David inclusive, about contemporary there-
fore with king Ahaziah.
8. Another ancestor of Christ, son of Judah
or Abiud, and grandson of .'oanna or Hananiah
the son of Zerubbabel (Luke iii. 26). Alford,
Westcott and Hort, &c, adopt the reading
Josek, a mistake which stems to originate with
the common confusion in Heb. MSS. between
S| and -l.
10. Another, son of Mattathias, in the
seventh generation before Joseph the husband
of the Virgin.
11. Son of Heli, and reputed father of Jesus
Christ. The recurrence of this name in the
three above instances, once before and twice
after Zerubbabel, whereas it does not occur once
in St. Matthew's genealogy, is a strong evidence
of the paternal descent of Joseph the son of
Heli, as traced by St. Luke to Nathan the son
of David.
All that is told us of Joseph in the N. T. may
be summed up in a few words. He was a just
man, and of the house and lineage of David, and
was known as such by his contemporaries, who
called Jesus the son of David, and were disposed
to own Him as Messiah, as being Joseph's son.
The public registers also contained his name
under the reckoning of the house of David
(John i. 45 ; Luke iii. 23 ; Matt. i. 20 ; Luke ii.
4). He lived at Nazareth in Galilee, and it is
probable that his family had been settled there
for at least two preceding generations, possibly
from the time of Matthat, the common grand-
father of Joseph and Mary, since Mary lived
there too (Luke i. 26, 27). He espoused Mary,
the daughter and heir of his uncle Jacob, and
before he took her home as his wife received the
angelic communication recorded in Matt. i. 20.
It must have been within a very short time of
his taking ber to his home, that the decree went
forth from Augustus Caesar which obliged him
to leave Nazareth with his wife and go to
Bethlehem. He was there with Mary and her
first-bom, when the shepherds came to see the
babe in the manger, and he went with them to
the Temple to present the infant according to
the Law, and there heard the prophetic words of
Simeon, as he held him in his arms. When the
wise men from the East came to Bethlehem to
worship Christ, Joseph was there ; and he went
down to Egypt with the Mother and the Child
by night, when warned by an Angel of the danger
which threatened them ; and on a second message
be returned with them to the land of Israel,
intending to reside at Bethlehem, the city of
Digitized by
Google
1806
JOSEPH
JOSEPH OF ABOIATHAEA
David ; bat being afraid of Archelaua he took
up his abode, as before his marriage, at Naza-
reth, where he carried on his trade as a
carpenter. When Jesus was twelve years old,
Joseph and Mary took Him with them to keep
the Passover at Jerusalem, and when they re-
turned to Nazareth he continued to act as a
father to the child Jesus, and was reputed to be
so indeed. But here our knowledge of Joseph
ends. That he died before our Lord's crucifixion,
is indeed tolerably certain, by what is related in
John xix. 27; and perhaps Mark vi. 3 may
imply that he was then dead. But where,
when, or how he died, we know not. What
was his age when he married, what children he
had, and who was their mother, are questions
on which tradition has been very busy and
very contradictory, and on which it affords no
reliable ^information whatever, in fact, the
different accounts given are not traditions, but
the attempts of different ages of the early
Church to reconcile the narrative of the
Gospels with their own opinions, and to give
support, as they thought, to the miraculous
conception. It is not necessary to detail or
examine these accounts here, as they throw
light rather upon the history of those opinions
during four or five centuries, than upon the
history of Joseph. But it may be well to add
that the origin of all the earliest stories and
assertions of the Fathers concerning Joseph — as,
e.g., his extreme old age, his having sons by a
former wife, his having the custody of Mary
given to him by lot, and so on — is to be found in
the apocryphal Gospels, of which the earliest is
the Protevangelium of St. James, apparently
the work of a Christian Jew of the second
century, quoted by Origen, and referred to by
Clement of Alexandria and Justin Martyr (Tis-
chendorf, Prokg. xiii.). The same stories are
repeated in the other apocryphal Gospels (see
Smith and Wace, Diet, of Christian Biography,
». v. " Gospels, Apocryphal "). The monophysite
Coptic Christians are said to have first assigned
a festival of St. Joseph in the Calender, viz. on
the 20th July, which is thus inscribed in a Coptic
almanack : — " Requies sancti senis justi Josephi
fabri lignarii, Deiparae Virginis Mariae sponsi,
qui pater Christi vocari promeruit." The
apocryphal Bistoria Josephi fabri lignarii (see
" Gospels, Apocryphal," p. 706), which nowexists
in Arabic, is thought by Tischendorf to have
been originally written in Coptic, and the
festival of Joseph is supposed to have been
transferred to the Western Churches from the
East as late as the year 1399.* The above-
named history is acknowledged to be quite
fabulous, though it belongs probably to the
4th century. It professes to be an account
given by our Lord Himself to the Apostles on
the Mount of Olives, and placed by them in the
library of Jerusalem. It ascribes 111 years
to Joseph's life, and makes him old and the
father of four sons and two daughters before
he espoused Mary. It is headed with this
sentence : " Benedictiones ejus et preces servant
nos omnes, o fratres. Amen." The reader who
wishes to know the opinion of the ancients on
* Calmet, however, places the admission of Joseph
into the calendar of the Western Church as early as
before the year too. See Tischendorf, tit tup.
the obscure subject of Joseph's marriage may
consult Jerome's acrimonious tract Contra BA-
vidium. He will see that Jerome highly dis-
approves the common opinion (derived from the
apocryphal Gospels) of Joseph being twice
married, and that he claims the authority of
Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and
" many other apostolical men," in favour of his
own view, that our Lord's brethren were his
cousins only, or at all events against the opinioa
of Helvidius, which had been held by Ebicn,
Theodotus of Byzantium, and Valentine, that
they were the children of Joseph and Mary.
Those who held this opinion were called
Antidicomarianitae, as enemies of the Virgin.
(Epiphanius, Adv. Baeres. lib. iii. t ii. ; Hatr.
lxxviii., also Boer. Ii. See also Pearson on tie
Creed, art. Virgin Mary ; Mill, on the Brethren
of the Lord; Calmet, de S. Joseph. &. Mar.
Viry. conjuge ; and for an able statement of the
opposite view, Alford's note on Matt. xiii. 55;
Winer, SWB. s. vv. Jesus and Joseph ; and the
article in this Dictionary, " The Brethren of the
Lord.") [A. C. H.]
JOSEPH OF AEIMATHAEA (•««»** •
dro 'Apiua$alas), a rich and pious Israelite who
had the privilege of performing the last offices
of duty and affection to the Body of oar Lord.
He is distinguished from other persons of the
same name by the addition of his birth-place
Arimathaea. the Ramah of 1 Sam. i. 1, 19.
Joseph is denominated by St. Mark (xr. 43)
an honourable counsellor, by which we are pro-
bably to understand that he was a member of
the Great Council, or Sanhedrin. He is further
characterised as "a good man and a just"
(Luke xxiii. 50), one of those who, bearing in
their hearts the words of their old Prophets,
was waiting for the kingdom of God (Mark
xv. 43 ; Luke ii. 25, 38, xxiii. 51). We are
expressly told that he did not " consent to the
counsel and deed " of his colleagues in con-
spiring to bring about the death of Jesus ; but
he seems to have lacked the courage to protest
against their judgment. At all events we know
that he shrank, through fear of his countrymen,
from professing himself openly a disciple of our
Lord.
The awful event, however, which crushed the
hopes while it excited the fears of the chosen
disciples, had the effect of inspiring him with a
boldness and confidence to which he had before
been a stranger. The Crucifixion seems to have
wrought in him the same clear conviction that
it wrought in the Centurion who stood by the
Cross ; for on the very evening of that dreadful
day, when the triumph of the chief priests and
rulers seemed complete, Joseph " went in boldly
unto Pilate and craved the body of Jesus." The
fact is mentioned by all four Evangelists. Pilate,
having assured himself that the Divine Sufferer
was dead, consented to the request of Joseph,
who was thus rewarded for his faith and courage
by the blessed privilege of consigning to his own
new tomb the Body of bis crucified Lord. In
this sacred office he was assisted by Nicodemus,
who, like himself, had hitherto been afraid to
make open profession of bis faith, but now dis-
missing his fears brought an abundant store of
myrrh and aloes for the embalming of the Body
of his Lord according to the Jewish custom.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
JOSEPH BABSABAS
These two masters in Israel then, having en-
folded the sacred Body in the linen shroud which
Joseph had bought, consigned it to a tomb hewn
in a rock— a tomb where no human corpse had
ever yet been laid.
It is specially recorded that the tomb was in
a garden belonging to Joseph, and close to the
place of Crucifixion.
The minuteness of the narrative seems pur-
posely designed to take away all ground or
pretext for any rumour that might be spread,
after the Resurrection, that it was some other,
not Jesus Himself, that had risen from the
grave. But the burial of Jesus in the new
private sepulchre of the rich man of Arimathaea
must also be regarded as the fulfilment of the
prophecy of Isaiah (liii. 9) : according to the
literal rendering of Bishop Lowth, " with the
rich man was His tomb " (cp. Delitzsch* in loco.
The passage is much disputed ;cp. Dillmami* in
loco). Nothing but of the merest legendary
character is recorded of Joseph, beyond what
we read in Scripture. There is a tradition,
surely a very improbable one, that he was of
the number of the seventy disciples. Another
(cp. Fabric. Cod. Apoc. N. T. i. 270), whether
authentic or not, deserves to be mentioned as
generally current ; namely, that Joseph being
sent to Great Britain by the Apostle St. Philip,
about the year 63, settled with his brother dis-
ciples at Glastonbury, in Somersetshire ; and
there erected of wicker-twigs the first Christian
oratory in England, the parent of the majestic
abbey which was afterwards founded on the
.same site. The local guides to this day show
the miraculous thorn (said to bud and blossom
every Christmas-day) that sprung from the staff
which Joseph stuck in the ground as he stopped
to rest himself on the hill-top (see Dugdale's
Monasticon, i. 1 ; and Hearne, Hist, and Ant. of
Glastonbury ; Assemann, Bibl. Orient, iii. 319).
[E.H— «.] [P.]
JO'SEPH, called BAB'SABAS, and sur-
named Justus ; one of the two persons chosen
by the assembled Church (Acts i. 23) as worthy
to fill the place in the apostolic company from
which Judas had fallen. He, therefore, had
been a companion of the disciples all the time
that they followed Jesus, from His Baptism to
His Ascension.
Papias {ap. Euseb. B. E. iii. 39) calls him
Justus Barsabas, and relates that having drunk
some deadly poison he, through the grace of the
Lord, sustained no harm. Eusebius (/T. E. i. 12)
states that he was one of the seventy disciples.
He is to be distinguished from Joses Barnabas
(Acts iv. 36) and from Judas Barsabas (Acts
xv. 22). The signification of Barsabas is quite
uncertain. Lightfoot {Bar. Hebr. Acts i. 23)
gives five possible interpretations of it, viz. the
son of conversion, of quiet, of an oath, of wis-
dom, of the old man. - He prefers the last two ;
and suggests that Joseph Barsabas may be the
same as Joses the son of Alphaeus, and that
Judas Barsabas may be his brother the Apostle.
[W. T. B.]
JOSE'FHUS Ql&<m<pos), 1 Esd. ix. 34.
[Joseph, 3.]
JO'SE-S Qlaaiis, "Iijo-oSi, Alford; 'Iexr^ is
the genitive case). 1. Son of Eliezer, in the
JOSHUA
1807
genealogy of Christ (Luke iii. 29), 15th gene-
ration from David, i.e. about the reign of
Manasseh.
2. One of the Lord's brethren (Matt. xiii. 55 ;
Mark vi. 3). His name connects him with the
preceding. See the Brethren of the Lord
and James. All that appears with, certainty
from Scripture is that his mother's name was
Mary, and his brother's James (Matt, xxvii. 56).
8. Joses Barnabas (Acts iv. 36). [Bar-
nabas.] [A. C. H.]
JO'SHAH(nf*»; B. 'l»<r«cL. B>. 'Wlo,
A. '\uaias; Jota\ a prince of the house of
Simeon, son of Amaziah, and connected with
the more prosperous branch of the tribe, who,
in the days of Hezekiah, headed a marauding
expedition against the peaceable Hamite shep-
herds dwelling in Gedor, exterminated them, and
occupied their pasturage (1 Ch. iv. 34, 38-41).
JO'SHAPHAT (OBW = CBEnn* = Je-
hovah hath judged; 'lu<ra<pir, H*. 'lavtup&s ;
Joaaphaf), the Mithnite, one of David's guard,
apparently selected from among the warriors
from the east of Jordan (1 Ch. xi. 43). Buxtorf
{Lex. Talm. p. 1284) gives Mathnan as the
Chaldee equivalent of Bashan, by which the
latter is always represented in the Targ. Onk. ;
and if this were the place which gave Joshaphat
his surname, he was probably a Gadite. In the
Syriac, Joshaphat and (Jzziah (c. 44) are inter-
changed, and the latter appears as "Azi of
Anathoth."
JOSHAVTAH (fV1t#\ of uncertain ety-
mology ; BK. 'laxrui ; A. 'Ionrfa ; Jotala), the
son of Elnaam, and one of David's guards (1 Ch.
xi. 46). The LXX. make him the son of Jeribai,
by reading 133 for \)3. The name appears in
eight, and probably nine, different forms in the
MSS. collated by Kennicott.
JOSHBEKA'SHAH (ntS>i53B»: in v. 4, B.
'Ittfkurcucd ; A. ZsjSa* /tcurdv ; in v. 24, B. Ba-
Kari, A. 'Uo-ftaitarAr : Jesbacassa), head of the
16th course of musicians. [Jesharelah.] He
belonged to the house of Heman (1 Ch. xxv.
4, 24). [A. C. H.]
JOSH'DA (renrV; *b,»-oS»; Josua; i.e.
" whose help is Jehovah," Gesen., or rather
" Jah is Salvation " ; cp. Pearson, On the Creed,
Art. II., p. 89, ed. 1843): on the import of his
name, and the change of it from Oshca or
Hoshea, Num. xiii. 16 = " welfare " or " salva-
tion," see Pearson, I. c. ; it appears in the
various forms of Hoshea, Oshea, Jehosht/a,
Jeshua, and Jesus. 1. The son of Nun, of the
tribe of Ephraim* (I Ch. vii. 27). The future
captain of invading hosts grew up a slave in the
brick-fields of Egypt. Born about the time
when Moses fled into Midian, he was a man of
nearly forty years when he saw the ten plagues,
and shared in the hurried triumph of the
Exodus. The keen eye of the aged Lawgiver
• Tbe attempts to make Joshua an unblstorlcal
personage or a tribal-captain magnified Into a leader of
Israel, have signally tailed. These attempts are suffi-
ciently examined and refuted by Kittel, Oetchichte d.
Hibriitr, I. pp. 247 sq., 264 sq.— [F.J
Digitized by
Google
1808
! JOSHUA
soon discerned in Hoshea those qualities which
might be required in a colleague or successor
to himself. He is mentioned first in connexion
with the fight against Amalek at Rephidim,
when he was chosen (Ex. xvii. 9) by Moses to
lead the Israelites. When Moses ascended
Mount Sinai to receive for the first time (cp.
Ex. xxiv. 13 and xxxiii. 11) the two Tables,
Joshua, who is called his minister or servant,
accompanied him part of the way, and was the
first to accost him in his descent (Ex. xxxii. 17).
Soon afterwards he was one of the twelve chiefs
who were sent (Num. xiii. 17) to explore the
land of Canaan, and one of the two (xiv. 6) who
gave an encouraging report of their journey.
The forty years of wandering were almost
passed, and Joshua was one of the few sur-
vivors, when Moses, shortly before his death,
was directed (Num. xxvii. 18) to invest Joshua
solemnly and publicly with definite authority in
connexion with Eleazar the priest, over the
people. And after this was done, God Himself
gave Joshua a charge by the mcuth of the
dying Lawgiver (Deut. xxxi. 14, 23).
Under the direction of God, again renewed
(Josh. i. 1), Joshua, now in his eighty-fifth year
(Joseph. Ant. v. 1, § 29), assumed the command
of the people at Shittim, sent spies into Jericho,
crossed the Jordan, fortified a camp at Gilgal,
circumcised the people, kept the Passover, and
was visited by the Captain * of the Lord's Host.
A miracle made the fall of Jericho more terrible
to the Canaanites. A repulse, due to the tres-
pass of Achan, in the first assault on Ai im-
pressed upon the invaders the warning that
they were the instruments of a holy and jealous
God. Ai fell : and the Law was inscribed on
Mount Ebal, and read by their leader in the
presence of all Israel.
The treaty which the fear-stricken Gibeonites
obtained deceitfully was generously respected by
Joshua, It stimulated and brought to a point
the hostile movements of the five confederate
chiefs of the Amorites. Joshua, aided by an
unprecedented hailstorm, and a miraculous
prolongation of the day, obtained a decisive
victory over them at Mnkkedah, and proceeded
at once to subjugate the south country as far as
Kadesh-bamea and Gaza. He returned to the
camp at Gilgal, n aster of half of Palestine.
In another campaign he marched to the
waters of Merom, where he met and overthrew
a confederacy of tho Canaanitish chiefs in the
north, under Jabin king of Hazor ; and in the
course of a protracted war he led his victorious
soldiers to the gates of Zidon and into the
valley of Lebanon under Hermon. In six years,
six nations with thirty-one kings swelled the
roll of his conquests ; amongst others the
Anakim — the old terror of Israel — are specially
' It baa been questioned whether the Captain of the
Lord's Host was a crested being or not. Dr. W. H.
Mill discusses this point at full length and with great
learning, and decides in favour of the former alter-
native (On the Hittorical Character of St. Lukt'i
Pint Chapter, Camb., 1841, p. 92. Cp. DUlmann' on
Josh. v. 13, = an Angel, comparing Gen. xxxii. 2 and
1 K. xxii. 19). But J. G. Ablcht (.Dt Due* Xzercittu,
<tc., ap. Nov. Thei. Thtotogicophilolog. 1. SOS) la of
opinion that He was the uncreated Angel, the Son of
God— "God manifested in the Person of His Word"
(Espin in Speaker'i Qmm., in loco).
JOSHCA
recorded as destroyed everywhere except ia
Philistia. It must be borne in mind that tic
extensive conquests of Joshua were not intended
to achieve and did not achieve the complete
extirpation of the Canaanites, many of wbun
continued to occupy isolated stronghold?
throughout the land.
Joshua, now stricken in yean, proceeded Is
conjunction with Eleazar and the heads of the
tribes to complete the division of the conquered
land ; and when all * as allotted, Timnath-serab
in Mount Ephraim was assigned by the people
as Joshua's peculiar inheritance. The Taber-
nacle of the congregation was established at
Shiloh, six cities of refuge were appointed,
forty-eight cities assigned to the Levites, aa-j
the warriors of the trans-Jordanic tribes dis-
missed in peace to their homes.
Alter an interval of rest, Joshua convoked an
assembly from all Israel. He delivered r««
solemn addresses reminding them of the mar-
vellous fulfilment of Gcd's promises to their
fathers, and warning them of the conditions ua
which their prosperity depended ; and lastly, be
caused them to renew their covenant with God.
at Shechem, a place already famous in con-
nexion with Jacob (Gen. xxxv. 4) and Joseph
(Josh. xxiv. 32). Respecting these two cloaiag
addresses of Joshua, see also Joshua, Book or,
pp. 1810 b, 1811a.
He died at the age of 110 years, and si-
buried in his own city, Timnath-serah.
Joshua's life has been noted as one of the
very few which are recorded in history with
some fulness of detail, yet without any stain
upon them. In his character hare been traced,
under an Oriental garb, such features as chkdj
kindled the imagination of Western chronicler!
and poets in the Middle Ages : the character
of a devout warrior, blameless and fearless, «rt*
has been taught by serving as a youth how u>
command as a man; who earns by manly
vigour a quiet honoured old age ; who combine
strength with gentleness, ever looking np for
and obeying the Divine impulse with the
simplicity of a child, while he wields grta:
power and directs it calmly, and without
swerving, to the accomplishment of a bigs
unselfish purpose.
All that part of the Book of Joshua whiek
relates his personal history seems to be writte
with the unconscious, vivid power of an eye-
witness. We are not merely taught to look wttl
a distant reverence upon the first man who bean
the Name which is above every name. W-
stand by the side of one who is admitted to heir
the words of God, and see the vision of ti-
Almighty. The image of the armed warrior is
before us when in the sight of the two armie
he lifted up his spear over unguarded Ai. W»
see the majestic presence which inspired ail
Israel (iv. 14) with awe ; the mild father »t
remonstrated with Achan; the calm, digmnV>i
judge who pronounced his sentence ; the devest
worshipper prostrating himself before the Op-
tain of the Lord's Host. We see the lonely mao
in the height of his power, separate from the*
about him, the lost survivor, save one, of s
famous generation; the honoured old man »t
many deeds and many sufferings, gathering hi»
dying energy for an attempt to bind his peopi?
more closely to the service of God, whom be had
Digitized by
Google
JOSHUA
so long served and worshipped, and whom be
was ever learning to know more and more.
The great work of Joshua's life was more ex-
citing but less hopeful than that of Moses. He
gathered the first-fruits of the antumn harvest
where his predecessor had sown the seed in
spring. It was a high and hopeful task to
watch beside the cradle of a mighty nation, and
to train its early footsteps in laws which should
last for centuries. And it was a fit end to a life of
expectation to gaze with longing eyed from Pisgah
upon the Land of Promise. But no such bright-
ness gleamed upon the calm close of Joshua's life.
Solemn words, and dark with foreboding, fell
from him as he sat " under the oak that was by
the sanctuary of the Lord in Shechem." The
excitement of his battles was past ; and there had
grown up in the mind of the pious leader a con-
sciousness that it was the tendency of prosperity
and success to make a people wanton and
worldly-minded, idolaters in spirit if not in act,
and to alienate them from God.
Holy Scripture itself suggests (Heb. iv. 8) the
consideration of Joshua as a type of Christ.
Many of the Christian Fathers hare enlarged
upon this view; and Bishop Pearson, who has
collected their opinions (On the Creed, Art. II.
pp. 87-90 and 94-96, ed. 1843). points out the
following and many other typical resemblances :
— (1.) The name common to both : (2.) Joshua
brings the people of God into the Land of Pro-
mise, and divides the land among the tribes ;
Jesus brings His people into the Presence of God,
and assigns to them their mansions : (3.) as
Joshua succeeded Moses and completed his work,
so the Gospel of Christ, succeeding the Law,
announced One by Whom all that believe are
justified from all things from which we could
not be justified by the Law of Moses (Acts xiii.
39): (4.) as Joshua the minister of Moses re-
newed the rite of circumcision, so Jesus, the
Minister of the circumcision, brought in the
circumcision of the heart (Kom. ii. 29, xv. 8).
The treatment of the Canaanites by their
Jewish conquerors is fully discussed by Dean
Graves, On the Pentateuch, Pt. 3, Lect. i. He
concludes that the extermination of the Canaan-
ites was justified by their crimes, and that the
employment of the Jews in such extermination
was quite consistent with God's method of
governing the world. Prof. Fairbairn (Typology
of Scripture, bk. iii. ch. 4, § 1, ed. 1854) argues
with great force and candour in favour of the
complete agreement of the principles on which
the war was carried on by Joshua with the
principles of the Christian dispensation. Cp.
also Mozley, Lectures on the Old Testament;
Lect. iv., " Exterminating Wars."
Among the occurrences in the life of Joshua,
none has led to so much discussion as the alleged
prolongation of the day of the battle of Mak-
kedah (x. 12-14). Was it an astronomical
miracle by which the motion of the heavenly
bodies was for some hours suspended ? Or, was
the motion of the earth on its axis temporarily
suspended ? Or, was the miracle an optical
illusion ? Such solutions have been accepted by
many (cp. Winer, HWB. and the 1st edition of this
work) ; bat in the present day they seem to be sur-
rendered in favour of the view — that the passage
(so. 126, 13a) taken from a poetical book with
a prose reflection upon it (re. 136, 14a) is a
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
J08HUA, THE BOOK OF 1809
fragment interpolated into the text, which does
not commit the Book of Joshua to upholding
that the marvel in the heavens actually took
place (cp. Espiu in Speaker's Comm., Add. note on
Josh. x. 12-15, and Dillmann* in loco, who give
references to the enormous literature on the
subject).
Procopius, who flourished in the 6th century,
relates ( Vandal, ii. 10) that an inscription ex-
isted at Tingis in Mauritania, set up by Phoeni-
cian refugees from Canaan, and declaring in
the Phoenician language, " We are they who fled
from the face of Joshua the robber, the son of
Nun." Ewald (Gesch. Isr. ii. 297, 298) gives
sound reasons for forbearing to use this story as
authentic history (cp. also Eittel, Geschichte d.
Hebraer, i. p. 264, n. 1). It is, however, accepted
by Rawlinson (Bampton Lecture for 1859, iii.
91).
Lightfoot (ffor. Heb. in Matt. i. 5, and Chorogr.
Lucae praemis. iv. § 3) quotes Jewish traditions
to the effect that Rahab became a proselyte and
the wife of Joshua, and the ancestress of nine
prophets and priests ; also that the sepulchre of
Joshua was adorned with an image of the sun in
memory of the miracle of Ajalon. The LXX.
and the Arab. Vers, add to Josh. xxiv. 30 the
statement that in bis sepulchre were deposited
the flint-knives which were used for the circum-
cision at Gilgal (Josh. v. 2). In Heb. iv. 8, the
A. V. " Jesus " (see marg.) is correctly replaced
by "Joshua "in the R. V. and Versions pre-
ceding the A. V. in order to avoid confusion.
The principal occurrences in the life of Joshua
are reviewed by Bishop Hall in his Contempla-
tions on the 0. T., bks 7, 8, and 9.
2. (B. 'fl<rq«, A. 'l-naou ; Jennie.) An inhabi-
tant of Bethshemesh, in whose land was the
stone at which the milch-kine stopped, when
they drew the Ark of God with the offerings of
the Philistines from Ekron to Bethshemesh
(1 Sam. vi. 14, 18).
3. ("iTjoroCj ; ./osue.) A governor of the city
who gave his name to a gate of Jerusalem (2 K.
xxiii. 8).
4. ('IfiroSs; Jesus.) Called Jeshua in Ezra
and Nehemiah ; a high-priest, who returned
from the Captivity with Zerubbabel. For de-
tails see Jeshda, No. 4. [W. T. B.] [F.]
JOSH'UA, THE BOOK OF, so called from
the name of the leader, with whose public life
it is principally concerned, the sixth Book of
the O. T. Canon. Among the Jews, the Book of
Joshua was placed in a different category from
the Pentateuch (the "Law"), and forms the
first of the group of writings called by them
the " Earlier Prophets " (i.e. Joshua, Judges,
Samuel, and Kings) : but this distinction is an
artificial one, depending on the fact that the
Book could not be regarded, like the Penta-
teuch, as containing an authoritative rule of
life. Its contents, and still more (as will be
seen) its structure, show that it is intimately
connected with the Pentateuch, and describes
the final stage in the history of the Origmes of
the Hebrew nation [Genesis, § 1]. It forms,
in fact, the concluding part of a whole, which,
consisting as it does of six Books, has been
conveniently termed by modern writers the
Hexateuch.
§ 1. Contents.— the Book of Joshua falls
5 7.
Digitized by
Google
1810 JOSHUA, THE BOOK OF
naturally into two part*, the first (ch. i.-xii.)
narrating the paaaage of Jordan and the con-
quest — «o far as it was completed at the time —
of Canaan ; the second (ch. xiii.-xxiv.) describ-
ing the allotment of the conquered territory
among the Israelites, and ending with the death
of Joshua and of Aaron's son Eleazar.
I. Ch. i. Joshua is encouraged by God for the
task imposed upon him, and receives, according to
the stipulation (Num. xixii. 6-33), the promise
of assistance from the two-and-a-half tribes
whose territory had been already allotted to
them on the E. of Jordan. Ch. ii. The mission
of the spies to Jericho, and the compact with
Rahab. Ch. iii.-iv. The passage of the Jordan,
and the erection of two monuments in com-
memoration of the event, consisting of two
cairns of stones, one set up in the bed of the
river itself, the other at the first camping-place
on the W. side, Gilgal. Gilgal, probably Tell
Djeldjul, in the plain midway between the
Jordan and Jericho, becomes henceforth the
head-quarters of the Israelites, till the conquest
is completed. Ch. v. 1-12. Joshua circumcises
the people at Gilgal : after this the Passover is
kept there with cakes made of the produce of
Canaan, and the manna ceases. Ch. v. 13-vi.
Joshua receives instructions with reference to
the conquest of Jericho ; the city is taken and
"devoted" (according to Deut. vii. 2, 25 aq.),
Rahab and her household being spared accord-
ing to the agreement made with the spies.
Joshua utters a curse upon any one who should
attempt to rebuild Jericho. Ch. vii. 1-viii. 29.
The Israelites advance against Ai, in the heart
of the land near Bethel: they are at first
unsuccessful in consequence of Achan's sin, in
having appropriated part of the spoil " devoted "
at Jericho: but afterwards, Achan's offence
having been discovered and punished, they ob-
tain possession of Ai by means of a stratagem.
Ch. viii. 30-35. Joshua builds an altar on Ebal,
above Shechem, and fulfils the injunctions, Deut.
xxvii. 2-8. Ch. ix. The Gibeonites, by a strata-
gem which disarms the suspicions of the Israel-
ites, secure immunity for their live?, and are
permitted to retain rights as dependents, on
condition of their performing certain menial
offices for the Sanctuary. Ch. x. The conquest
of South Canaan: the defeat of the kings of
Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon
at Beth-horon, and the subsequent conquest
of Makkedah, Libnah, Lachish, Gezer, Eglon,
Hebron, and Debir : further particulars are not
given, but Joshua's successes in this quarter
of Palestine are generalized in ee. 40-43.
Ch. xi. The conquest of Northern Canaan: the
defeat of Jabin king of Hazor and his allies at
the waters of Merom, followed by the capture of
the towns belonging to them (ee. 1-15) : with
a review (en. 16-23) of the entire series of
Joshua's successes in the South as well as in the
North of Canaan. Ch. xii. A supplementary
list of the kings smitten by the Israelites — Sihon
and Og (with an account of the territory belong-
ing to them) on the east of Jordan, and thirty-
one kings slain by them under Joshua on the
west of Jordan (of these sixteen have not been
before mentioned in the Book : see § 3, note 11).
II. Ch. xiu.-xxiv.— Ch. xiii. (a) ee. 1-14.
Joshua is commanded to proceed with the dis-
tribution of the conquered territory among the
JOSHUA, THE BOOK OF
nine-and-a-half tribes, ee. 1, 7 (ee. 2-6 contain
a parenthetic notice of certain districts not yet
conquered) : tw. 8-12 define anew the borders of
the Israel it ish territory E. of Jordan ; e. 13 states
particulars respecting tribes not dispossessed by
the Israelites. (6) ee. 15-33. The borders and
cities of the three trans-Jordanic tribes, Reuben,
Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh. Ch. lit.
Preparations for the division of the land by lot, by
Joshua and Eleazar (on. 1-5). Caleb receives
from Joshua his portion at Hebron, in accordance
with the promise, Deut. i. 36 (ee. 6-15). Ch. xv.
The borders of the tribe of Judah, ee. 1-12,
followed by a notice of Caleb's exploit against
Hebron, and Othniel's conquest of Kirjath-
sepher, en. 13-19 (en. 14-19 almost verbally =
Judg. i. 10-15), and by a list of the cities of
Judah, arranged by districts, er. 20-63. Ch.
xvi.-xvii. The lot of the children of Joseph, Le.
Ephraim and the western half of Miinsisrh
The description is much less complete than in
the case of Judah, and also less clearly arranged.
Ch. xvi. 1-3 describes the S. border (but only this)
of the two tribes, regarded as a whole : ch. xvi. 5-
10 describes the borders of Ephraim, with a notice
(e. 9) of certain cities belonging to Ephraim, but
situated in the territory of Manasseh, and (e. 10)
of the fact that Gezer continued to be inhabited
by Canaanites (e. 10= Judg. i. 29: see alas
1 K. ix. 16, 20, 21). Ch. xvii. describes the
borders of Manasseh, with a notice of the cities
belonging to it in Issachar and Asher (re. 1-13),
concluding (ee. 14-18) with an account of the
complaint of insufficient territory made by the
joint tribes and of the permission given to them
by Joshua to extend their territory for them-
selves. Ch. xviii. The Israelites assemble at
Shiloh, and set up the Tabernacle there. At
Joshua's direction, a survey (" describe,'* UL
"write") of the land yet undivided is made,
and its distribution by lot to the seven remain-
ing tribes is proceeded with at Shiloh, ee. 1—10.
An account of the borders (ee. 11-20) and cities
(re. 21-28) of Benjamin occupies the rest of
the chapter. Ch. xix. The cities belonging to
Simeon, ee. 1-9; the borders of Zebviun, *c
10-16 (the list of cities is incomplete); the
cities and border (partly) of Issachar, ec 17-23 ;
the borders of Asher, re. 24-31 (list of cities
incomplete) ; the border and cities of KaphtaH,
ee. 32-39; the cities belonging to Dan, re.
40-48; the assignment of Timnath-serah, in
Ephraim, to Joshua, e. 49 sq. Ch. xx. Appoint-
ment of the cities of refuge (in accordance with
Num. xxxv. 9 sq. and Deut. xix. ; Deut. iv. 41-3
being disregarded). Ch. xxi. List of the forty-
eight cities, assigned in the different tribes, to
the tribe of Levi (in accordance with Num. xxxv.
1-8). Ch. xxii. Joshua dismisses the two-and-
a-half tribes to their homes on the eaat of Jordan,
ee. 1-8. The remonstrance addressed to them
by the other tribes on account of the altar
erected by them at the point where they crossed
the Jordan, and their reply to it, ee. 9-34. Ch.
xxiii. The first of Joshua's two closing addresses
to the people, in which he exhorts the Israel-
ites to adhere faithfully to the principles of the
Deoteronomic law, and in particular to refrain
from all intercourse with the native inhabitants
of Canaan. Ch. xxiv. 1-25. The second of
Joshua's closing addresses, delivered at Shechem.
This discourse diners in scope from that in
Digitized by
Google
JOSHUA, THE BOOK OF
eh. xxiii. : it comprises a review of the mercies
shown by God to His people from the patriarchal
days, upon which is based the duty of discarding
all false gods and serving Him alone. The people,
responding to Joshua's example, pledge them-
selves solemnly to obey ; and a stone, in attesta-
tion of their act, is erected in the sanctuary at
Shechem, m. 16-28 (with ro. 14, 26 cp. Gen.
xxxv. 2—4). The Book closes with notices of
the death of Joshua, and his burial at Timnath-
serah, c. 29 sq. ; of the burial of Joseph's bones
(in accordance with Gen. 1. 25 ; Ex. xiii. 19) at
Shechem, v. 32 ; and of the death and burial of
Joshua's companion, Eleazar, e. 33 (no. 28-31
recur, with slight variations, in Judg. ii. 6, 8, 9,
7). Chronological notes in the Book are rare
(iv. 19, v. 10; and incidentally, xiv. 10); and
the period of time embraced by it can only
be determined approximately. From a com-
parison of xiv. 10 with Deut. ii. 14, it would
seem that, in the view of the writer of the
section, xiv. 6-15, the war of conquest occupied
about seven years.
§ 2. Composition and Authorship. — The com-
posite structure of the Book of Joshua discloses
itself unmistakably as soon as it is studied
with attention. Groups of passages occur in it,
distinguished from one another partly by mate-
rial differences, partly by differences of style
and expression, which mark them as the work of
different authors. Thus, one group of such
passages has the characteristics of the Penta-
teuchal source known as P (see Genesis):
while another has strong affinities with Deu-
teronomy, esp. with ch. xxix.-xxxi.* In ch.
-i.-iii. the main narrative consists of a work,
itself in its torn composite, which is regarded
-by critics as the continuation of "JE" (see
ibid.}, though whether its component parts
are definitely J and E, or whether it is rather
the work of the writer who combined J and E
into a whole, and in this Book, perhaps, per-
mitted himself the use of other independent
JOSHUA, THE BOOK OF 1811
sources, may be an open question. In ch. xiii.—
xxiv., especially in the topographical descrip-
tions, the work of P predominates, and his dis-
position of material seems mostly to have been
retained unaltered. The process by which the
Book appears to have reached its present form
may be indicated in ontline as follows. The
composite work JE, just alluded to, being taken
as a basis, was amplified by a writer strongly
imbued with the spirit of Deuteronomy, who
may be accordingly termed the Deuttronomie
Editor, and denoted by the abbreviation D*. The
parts due to the hand of D* are in most cases
readily recognizable by their strongly marked
style. The chief characteristic of the Deut.
additions is that they exhibit Joshua as the
fulfiller of Mosaic ordinances, especially of the
injunction to show no quarter to the native
population of Canaan, and explain how accord-
ingly success accompanied him, and the people
under his guidance took triumphant possession
of Canaan : see i. 1-9 ; iii. 7, 10; iv. 14 ; v. 1 ;
vi. 2 ; viii. 1, 29 (Deut. xxi. 23), 30-35 ; and esp.
x. 40-42; xi. 12, 14, 15, 16-23; xxi. 43-45
(Heb. 41-13) ; lxiii. 3, 9, 14 b ; xxiv. 13, and the
addition in v. 11. In point of fact, as other
passages of the Book, and especially Judg. i.,
show (see § 6), the conquest was by no means
effected with the rapidity and completeness here
represented : but the writer, as it seems, gene-
ralizes with a free hand. Another characteristic
of the Deut. additions is the frequent reference
to the occupation of the trans-Jordanic terri-
tory by the two-and-a-half tribes— not merely
in i. 12 sq. and xxii. 1-6, but also ii. 10, ix. 10,
xii. 2-6, xiii. 8-12, xviii. 7 b. The work which
left D*'s hands was afterwards combined, by an
independent compiler, with the source P ; and,
with the exception possibly of a few notes
which may have been added subsequently, the
Book of Joshua was thus produced.* The
accompanying tables, followed by short explana-
tory notes, exhibit the analysis of sources.*
§ 3. Part I. : chs. i.-xii. The Conquest of Palestine.
P
JE Ii. l-».
DS U
P
Ii. 10-11,*
<U:
a.MU. 1.
111. 2-4,
10-11,
12.
lj-u.
It. 13,
1»,
JE {
iv. 1-3.
Iv. 4-7,
s-lls,
110,12,
".
16-18,
20,1
v. a-s.
21-24. v. 1.
*-7,
P v. 10-12.
JE
P
v.« 11-vL 27.
vU. 2-2«.» viii.« 1-J».
ix.l6b, 17-21,
vttl.' 30-36.
IX. 1-2.
ix.3-»e.
JE
V lx. »b-10,
_P
JE
ix. 11-16*.
".
23-23,
24-26,
26-27* bo.
27bS.
X." 1-7.
D» X.8.
X.9-11,
12b-14a,
12s, 14b,
16-24,
28-43.
XL" l-».
xi. 10-23. Xii."
1 Ch. I. Is in all probability based in parts (especially ee. 1, 2, 10, 11a) upon an earlier narrative (that of JE) ;
trat as a whole it is the composition of D» (see y 6).
' The Dent, style of these two verses— and of these slone In the entire chapter— Is evident : see Deut. xxxl. 4 ;
1. 28 ; snd esp. iv. 39 : slso Joeh.lv. 23, v. l.vil. 6b (all D*> V. » contains reminiscences from the Song in Ex. xv.
(m. IS, 16). The verses afford an excellent Illustration of the practice of (the Hebrew historians to represent
historical characters ss employing words and phrases familiar to themselves. (So, for Instance, David In 1 K. 11.
•See Hollenberg, ««d. und Kritiken, 1874, p. 472 sqq.
» Dillmann (less probably) holds that P was united
with JE before It paaaed into IP's hands. The differ-
ence does not affect the analysis of sources, but only the
manner in which they are supposed to have been com-
bined.
* To avoid complication, subordinate details are not
Introduced Into the tables.
5 Z 2
Digitized by VjOOQIC
1812 JOSHUA, THE BOOK OF
5-4 nan the phraseology of the compiler of Kings : throughout 1 Ch. xxlx. he expresses himself in the phraieoUej
of the author of Chronicles.) Shittim In U. 1 ts Num. XX*. 1 (J El.
• The umtlre In ch. ill.-iT. is intricate, and it ts very possible that the true analysis Is more complicated this
Is allowed for In the tables. Though some of the details are, consequently, uncertain, two things, however, in
clear: (1) that the narrative la composite, (2) that it has been amplified in parts by a Deuteronomtc turn!.
(1) a. While lii. II states that the passage of Jordan Is already completed, lr. 4, S, 10b implies that the people
have not yet crossed : thus, IT followed carefully, it will be seen that the narrative at iv. 11 is at precisely tat use
point that was reached at IU. IT. ft. iv. 8 and Iv. 9 describe two different ceremonies— the location of stones, tike
from Jordan, at GUgal, and the erection of stones in the bed of the river Hetty: e. 8 however manifestly costumes
the narrative of e. 3, while v. (la the sequel of tie. 4-T, which on the other hand interrupt the connexion of t. 3
with v. 8. c. ill. 11 ts not needed, if it end iv. 2 belong to the same narrative ; it is however required tor tr. I.
The verses assigned to a form a continuous narrative, relating to the stones deposited at Ollgal: the narrative » hu
not been preserved in its Integrity, parte having been omitted when it was combined with a. (2) The combbH
narrative o 6 has been amplified by D' (as the style shows) in 111. 7, iv. 14, 11-24, and probably In one or two puces
besides, e.g. lit 3, " the priests the Leviles " (cp. DiDTEKOSOirr, » 16), 111. 10b (cp. below, y 6, L). (The lettm
a and 6 have been naed because It seems doubtful whether the two narratives belong to J and E respectively.)
• In vi. 2, 27 there are indications of the hand of D»: thus with ». 2 cp. Dent. II. 14 ; ch. vUL 1 ; i. 14 1 vB.J:
x. 7 ; with v. 17, ch. I. 5, ix. 9b. In the rest or the chapter It Is probable that Wellh. and Dillm. are right hi bant
traces of a double narrative, one earlier and simpler than the other, with which it Is now combined; but for tsis
it must suffice to refer to Wellh. Cbmp. pp. 121-4, and Dillm. Oomm. p. 481 sq.
• With probably a few phrases added by D» (cp. e.g. ». 26b with Dent. xiii. 17 (Reb. 18]).
• Likewise slightly amplified by D», as v. 1, " Fear not, neither be thou dismayed " (cp. Deut. 1. 21, iisj- < ;
ch. x. IS), " See, I have given," Ac. (cp. vL 2) ; 2a (to yotsrseinu), 27 (cp. Dent. 11. 35), and perhaps in one « t»>
places besides. On the rest of these verses, cp. Wellh. Camp. p. 12$ sq., Dillm. p. 472 sqq.
' With regard to this passage, a difficulty arises on account of the position which it occupies In the Book. Ebtl is
situated considerably to the north of Al ; and while the Intervening territory remained unconqurred, it is difficult to
understand how the Israelites could have advanced as far. One suggestion Is that the verses are misplaced, sal
should follow xi. 23: more probably the narrative of JE has not been preserved in its Integrity, and the aoosssi
which — to Judge from the analogy of ch. x. and of ch. xi. — it must once have contained respecting the conquest of
Central Palestine has been omitted by the compiler of the Book. On tbe analysis of the verses, cp. Knenen, ratsl
TijdKkr. 1878, pp. 315-322. vili. 30-32 agrees with Deut. xxvli. 1-8 ; e. 33 also agrees tolerably with Dent, it 3.
xrvli. 11-13, but not completely, there being no mention of tbe curse. The reading of the Law, v. 34 sq., »Mt
enjoined In Deuteronomy. In v. 34 tbe words " the blessing and the curse," which, though they tens ts be
explanatory of " a/l the words of the law," evidently cannot be so in reality, are perhaps a later insertion, made
for the purpose of rectifying the apparent omission in v. 33. In e. 33 notice the Deuteronomic phrase, u the priests
the Levites " (Dsutkboxoht, v 18) ; and with e. 35b cp. Deut. xxix. 11 (Deb. 10).
• In V. 27 the words " for the congregation, and " are derived, in alt probability, from the narrative of P. to
V. 27D0, cp. DtCTtstOHOKT, y 30, No. 2.
• The Deut. additions In x. 1-14 are similar in character to those In ch. vi., vlil. F. llb-13a(to smaaia)
is an excerpt from the ancient collection of national songs, called the Book of JaSHAU ; r. 13b-14a is tbe oomaeri
or the narrator (here, perhaps, E). In m. 12a, 14b, notice the Deuteronomic phraseology (see p. 778, So. It); »*!
below, 6 6, No. 3 ; with ^K"C *Vxh< *• 1'. <T- Den'- zxxi. 7). With tbe excerpt Itself, Jndg. v. 20 should be
compared. As regards the sequel of the battle of Beth-boron, «. 28 sqq.. It is to be observed that J not. 1. 1-»
attribute* the conquest of the South of Palestine to Judah : and Hebron and DeMr are represented in Josh. xv. 14-lf
(=Jodg. I. 10-18) as having been taken under circumstances very different from those here presupposed. It teem
that D* generalizes sometimes In his descriptions ; and that be here attributes to Joshua more than ill ectoaUj
accomplished by him in person.
>• With traces of D* in «t>. 2, 3, 6, 7, 8. In w. 10-15 the consequences of the victory at tbe waters of Mews Be
generalised by D> very much as those of the victory at Beth-boron are generalised in x. 28-3*. Te. 14-U Ion
a concluding survey of the whole course of the conquest. In r. 21 f., as Dlllmann remarks, what in other natr«tft»
(xiv. 12 ; xv. 14-19= Judg. i. 10-16) Is referred to Caleb and Judah, is generalised and attributed to Joehsa.
it Another generalising review by D*, ve. 1-8 being a retrospective survey of the conquests made under Mas*
on the E. of Jordan (baaed, as Hollenberg, p. 4M sq. [see y 7J, shows, not on Num. xxi., etc , but on De"t. H-
9-12, 14-17), m. 7-24 containing a list of the kings defeated by Joshua In Canaan itself. Of tbe thirty-one (or, !'
v. 18 be corrected after the LXX. (see QPB.'], 30) places named, sixteen (fifteen) are not mentioned ebestef
among tbe conquests under Joshua, viz., Geder, Adullam, Beth-el, Tappuah, Hephcr, Aphek of the Sharon (LK .;.
Taanach, Metrlddo, Kedeab, Jokneam, Dor, the nations of (LXX.) Galilee, Tirsah (on Hortnah and And, tp
Judg. L 17, Num. xxl. 1-3). It Is probable, therefore, either that omissions have been made In the narrative ol J E
(cp. n. 7) in the process of Incorporation by I)', or that this list has been derived from an independent source.
§ 4. Part II. : eh. xiii.-xxir.
_P xiii. 15-32, xlv. l-o.r
JE xiii.i 1. T, it, xlv. sHi?
D* xiii. l-«, 8-12, 14. 33.
P XV. 1 -13. 20-44, 48-62. xvl. 4-8, __
JE " XV. 14-19, 45-47, 63. xvi.« 1-3. «-'••
D*
P xvU. la, (lb-2), 3-4, 7. 9s, 9c, 10a, xvUI. 1.
JK 6,(6), 8, Sb, lob-is. xvnl.H-
f JK
ID*
P xvUI. 11-28. xl x. 1-8. 10 -46, 48 , SI. XX.'J^*
.IE xvili. 8-10. Xix. »," 47, 49-50,
D« xvili. 7.
_P XX. 6a,t 7-9. xxl. 1-42. (xxU. 9-34«).
JE XXlv. 1-30,' »*-*»-
VT- (XX. 4-6), (6b), xxl. 43-6. xxil. 1-6, (7-8). xxiH. 31.
* Except v. 3, "(and) unawares." f to "Judgment."
Digitized by
Google
JOSHUA, THE BOOK OF
1813
1 The connexion in xlU. 1-1 is imperfect. Vt>. 3-6 contain an enumeration of the parts of the country still
unsubdued, viz. certain districts on the S.W. coast and in Lebanon ; v. 7, by the expression " this land," appears
to refer to the parts Just enumerated, while the injunction for its " division " refers it not less plainly to the whole
country W. of Jordan. For a conjecture designed to explain the anomaly, see Wellh. Composition, p. 130 sq.,
or Kueneo, The Hatateuch, y 1. 27. At the beginning of v. 8 the text yields an Incorrect sense, and must be in
wme way defective : see Dillm., or QPB>. On the notice of the trans-Jordanic tribes, m. 8-12, cp. above 6 2 :
with the notices of Levi (ok. 14, 33), cp. xviii. 7a, and see (for the expressions used) Dent. x. », xviiL lb, 2.
* This Introduction to the account of the division of W. Palestine is taken (as appears both from the style and
from its dependence on Num. xxxiv. 13-17, xxxv. 1-8) from P. It is possible that Wellh., Kuen., and Dillm. are
right in supposing that xviii. 1 stood originally before xiv. 1 : the mention of the assembly at Shlloh, and the
notice that the land " was subdued before them," are more significant as preparatory to the allotment of the entire
land than to that of the territory of seven tribes only. Throughout this and the following chapters the co-operation
of Kleazar, It may be noticed, is mentioned only in P (xiv. 1, xvii. 4, xix. 81, xxl. 1) ; in JE Joshua always acts
alone (xiv. 8, xvtl. 14, xviii. 3, 8, 10, xxlv. 1).
3 Expanded, perhaps, in parts by D». The most characteristic allusions are to the narrative In Deut. I., not to
that In Num. xlli.-xlv. : thus v. 1, 7] "17, to tpy out, to Deut. 1. 24 (the words used In Num. xilL-xiv. are
different) ; the " servant of Jehovah," see $ s ; v. 8a to Deut. 1. 28 (" our brtthrcn . . . made our heart to melt ") ;
v. 8a to Dent. i. 36 (" to him will I give the land whereon he hath trodden, and to hie children ") ; v. 12, fj'pj J),
to Deut. 1. 28, Q^pjJJ '33 (in Num. xiii. 22, 28, as ch. xv. 14, pjjjn H*?*} i »• »«•> to Deut- 1- 36 (" because he
bath gone fully after Jehovah''). See further on this section Kuenen, Theol. Tijdtchr. 1877, p. 651 sq.,
558 sq. ; Dillm. ad lot. ; or more briefly the writer's Introduction to the Lit. oj the 0. T., p. 103.
* The description of the territory of the two sons of Joseph compares unfavourably, in point of both clearness and
completeness, with the accounts of the territory occupied by the other tribes. The narrative of JE appears here
to have diverged more than usually from that of P ; and in order to retain its distinctive features, the compiler, who
united JE with P, bas sacrificed the systematic arrangement of P, and also abbreviated It more than Is his usual
wont. Thus, though In parts P has been followed, the main description Is that of JE. The narrative betrays more
than one mark of compilation. In JE, for Instance, the lot of the two tribes sprung from Joseph Is constantly
spoken of as one (xvl. 1, xvii. 14-18, xviii. 5) : In P it is expressly denned as twofold (xvi. 6, 8, xvii. la),
ManaAseh being named first, in agreement with xiv. 4, Gen. xlviii. 6, by the same narrator. Further, after the
southern border of Josepb, and that alone, has been described (xvi. 1-3), a fresh beginning is made (xvi. 4), the
description Just given being In great part repeated (xvl. 6-8). The verses xvl. 4-8 contain also several expres-
sions characteristic of the style of P. On xvii. lb-2, which differs In representation from V (cp. Num. xxvi.
28-34), see Kuenen, Tk. Tijdtchr. 1877, pp. 484-488 ; or, more briefly, Dillm. p. 642.
» In the main ch. xx. belongs manifestly to P, and presupposes P*s law of homicide In Num. xxxv. 9 sqq.;
but in certain ports— viz., t>. 3, "(and) unawares" (JTITI v33 i >ee Deut. lv. 42, xix. 4) ;* vv. 4-6 ; ». 6, from
" (and) until" to " whence he fled ; " v. 8, the words "at Jericbo eastward " — it exhibits points of contact with
Deut. It is remarkable, now, that Just these passages are omitted in the LIX. It is difficult to resist the con-
clusion that the original text of P has been amplified by Insertions from the law of homicide in Deut. (ch. xix.),
which had either not been made at the date of the LXX translation, or, if made, had not yet been introduced into
all MSS. of the Hebrew.
* The source of xxii. 8-34 is uncertain. In parts the section exhibits the phraseology of P, but this is not
traceable throughout. It seems either that a narrative of P has been combined with elements derived from another
source in a manner which renders a satisfactory analysis difficult, or that the whole Is the work of a distinct
author, whose phraseology is partly that of P, but not entirely. The source of vv. 7-8 is uncertain : notice in v. 8
the late, Aramalztng word Q'DSJi richa (elsewhere in the 0. T. only 2 Ch. 1. 11, 12, Eccles. v. 18, vi. 2 ; and In
the Aramaic of Ezra, Ezra vi. 8, vil. 26).
' With inconsiderable additions (similar to those in cb. vi., viti.) by D* : principally In v. 1, middle clause
(cp. Deut. xxix. 10 [Heb. 9]), v. 11, "the Amorite ... the Jebusite " (cp. Deut. vii. 1 : the context relates solely
to the war with Jericho, with which these words do not accord), v. 13 (cp. Deut. vi. 10b, 11), v. 31 (Deut. xl. 7).
1 n t>. 12 " twelve " should certainly be read with LXX. for " two " (see QPS*) : the mention of the " two " kings of
the Amorltes (i.e. Sihon and Og, on the Bait of Jordan) Is here out of place: the context requires a reference to
gome event subsequent to the capture of Jericbo ; and the conquest of the Eastern Amorltes has been noticed already
1 11 e. 8. For the grounds on which this narrative is referred to E, It most suffice to refer to Dillm. p. 683 sq.
* The preceding term "unwittingly" (ri3JC2i ■"- •"" error) Is the phrase of P (Num. xxxv. 11,16; Lev.
i v. 2, 22, 27 ; Num. xv. 26, 26, and elsewhere).
§ 5. The close affinities subsisting between
the sections which have been styled Deutero-
nomic and Deuteronomy may be illustrated
in two ways : (i.) by reference to the passages
identical verbally, or nearly so, with passages in
Deut. ; (ii.) by reference to the turns and ex-
pressions characteristic of Deut., which here
recur. Let the reader who would fully estimate
these affinities, underline the passages and
expressions referred to, supplementing them,
where necessary, from his own observation.
(i.) Ch. i. is constructed almost wholly of
phrases borrowed from Deut. Thus, cp. vv. 3-5a
nnd Deut. xi. 24, 25a; 5 b, 6 a and Deut. xxxi.
23 end, 6, 7, 8 (also i. 38, iii. 28); 7 b and
Deut. T. 32 (Heb. 29), xxix. 9 (Heb. 8) ; 8 (" this
book of the law ") and Dent. xxix. 21, xxx. 10,'
* Cp. Dectekokoht, } 2.
xxxi. 26 ; 8 b and Deut. xxviii. 29; 9 and Deut.
xxxi. 6 ; also i. 29, vii. 21, xx. 3 (the uncommon
p»); lib and Deut. xi. 31 ; 13b-15 and Deut.
iii. 18-20; 17b as t). 5; 18b as v. 6a. The
parallels with ii. 10, 1 1, as well as with some
other of the shorter insertions, have been
noticed above. In ch. iii. cp. v. 7 (" this day
will I begin ") and Deut. ii. 25 ; v. 7 b as ch. i. b;
v. 10, with "the Qirgashite," as xxiv. 11,
Deut. vii. 1 only ; with iv. 24 cp. Deut. iii. 24,
&c. ("mighty hand "), xiv. 23b, xxviii. 10. In
ch. xxii. the Deut. phrases are evident in vv. 1-6 ;
in vv. 9-34 they are conspicuously absent, in
spite of the abundant opportunity for their
use, had the author been the same as before.
Ch. xxiii. shows throughout the hand of 1'-'
(cp. ch. i.), it* object apparently being to supple-
ment the negative exhortations to discard strange
gods, which D* found in E and incorporated in
Digitized by
Google
1814 JOSHUA, THE BOOK OF
ch. xxiv., with a definite positive injnnction to
carry out faithfully the principles of the Dent,
law, and a special warning to hold no manner
of intercourse with the Canaanite populations.
Thus cp. v. 1 (so i. 13) and Dent. xii. 10 b,
xxt. 19 a; e. 2 (so viii. 34) and Dent. xxix. 10 ;
v. 3 and Deut. xxix. 2; v. 4 (cot off) and Dent,
xii. 29, xix. 1; v. 4 b as i. 4 ; v. 5 and Deut. vi.
19, ix. 4 (Spit, so used only in these pas-
sages) ; m. 5, 13, " driTe ont from before you "
(op. xiii. 6), and Deut. ix. 4, 5, xi. 23 ; v. 6 and
Deut. xxx. 10, ch. i. 7; v. 7 to serve and
bow down in parallelism, as often in Deut. ; v. 8
( u cleave ") and Dent. xxx. 20 al. -, v. 9 a and
Dent. iv. 38 ; v. 9 b and Dent. vii. 24, xi. 25 (in
Josh. TCP, as x. 8, xxi. 44, varied from the
synon. aVlV of Deut.); v. 10a and Dent,
xxxii. 30 (the Song) ; v. 10 b, " that fighteth for
you " (cp. below, ii. No. 3) ; e. 11 a and Deut.
iv. 15; v. 11 b, " love," the keynote of Deut.,*
ejj. xxx. 6, 16, 20, in a similar context; v. 12
and Deut. vii. 3; v. 13 b ("until ye perish,"
&c.) and Dent, xxviii. 20; v. 14 b, as xxi. 45;
r. 15 and Dent, xxviii. 63, xxix. 27; v. 16b and
Deut. xxix. 26, 27, xi. 17. Even where the
expressions used are not identical, the style and
spirit of this discourse are still emphatically those
of Deuteronomy.'
(ii.) Recurring phrases or expressions. Seve-
ral passages in Joshua where these occur have
been quoted under Deuteronomy-, §§ 34, 36, a
reference to which will make it still further
apparent, how completely the style of D* was
moulded upon that of Deut. To the examples
there given may be added :
1. WrP 1233, the tenant of Jehovah, of Moses :
Deut. xxxiv. 5; — Josh. i. 1, 13, 15; viii. 31, 33 ;
xi. 12 ; xii. 6 bit ; xiii. 8 ; xiv. 7 ; xviii. 7 ;
xxii. 2, 4, 5 [of Joshua, xxiv. 29]. So my servant,
i. 2, 7 [cp. Num. xii. 7, 8] ; hit tenant, ix. 24,
xi. IS [cp. Ex. xiv. 81].
2. q)D3*n^K *"\ Jehovah your (thy) God,
peculiarly frequent [some 200 times] in Deut. ;
—Josh. i. 9, 11, 13, 15, 17; ii. 11; Hi. 8, 9;
iv. 5, 23 Ms, 24; viii. 7; ix. 9, 24; x. 19;
xxii. 3, 4, 5 ; and 13 times in ch. xxiii. Though
not confined to Deut. sections, the expression
greatly preponderates in them.
3. r3tOB"ft mr6r) Dnfrxm *, Jehovah [is
he that] fighteth [will fight] for (Israel, you,
&c.) : Deut. i. 30 ; iii. 22 (from Ex. xiv. 14, 25) ;
cp. xx. 4; — Josh. x. 14 b, 42 ; xxiii. 3, 10.
4. ? n\Ji1, to give rest to (sometimes with the
addition of from your enemies round about) :
Deut. iii. 20, xii. 10, xxv. 19 ; — Josh. i. 13, 15 ;
xxii. 4; xxiii. 1.
5. RIO, see ! calling attention to some-
thing about to be said : Deut. i. 8, " See, I have
given the land before you ;" 21 ; ii. 24, " See, I
have given into thy hand Sihon;" 31; iv. 5 ;
xi. 26 ; xxx. 15 ; — Josh. vi. 2, " See, I have given
into thy hand Jericho ;" viii. 1, " See, I have given
• See Dnrrtaoitosrr, $ 34, No. 1.
' See also the passages of Josh. I., xxllt., containing
the same phrases as Deut., cited under Dbutkronomt,
$y 34, 3*. Even with the addition of these, the literary
affinities between these chapters and Deut. are not
exhausted.
JOSHUA, THE BOOK OF
into thy hand the king of Ai : " cp. the pL UT»
viii. 4, 8; xxiii. 4. Occasionally elsewhere;
but not with the same comparative frequency.
6. TDETI, to destroy (a favourite term m
Deut., 28 times in the discourses) ; — Josh. ix. 24 :
xi. 14, 20 ; xxiii. 15 ; xxiv. 8 b [cp. Deut. n. 12,
21, 22; xxxi. 3. This clause may, however,
belong to E ; cp. the seeming allusion in Ana
ii. 9}
7. nt?3Dn[with the arfirM in the phrase "tit
half tribe of (the) Manasseh ": Deut. iii. 13;—
Josh. i. 12 ; iv. 12 ; xii. 6 ; xiii. 7 ; xviii " ;
xxii. 7, 9, 10, 11, 21. Not elsewhere.
8. D'lnn, to ban or devote*: Deut. ii. J4;
iii. 6, and especially in the injunctions for ti»
future, vii. 2, xiii. 16, xx. 17 ; — frequently is
the summaries or retrospects of D", Joah. ii. 10 ;
I. 1, 28, 35, 37, 39, 40; xi. 11, 12, 20, 21. Is
vi. 18, 21, viii. 26, the term belongs no doubt
to the original source: cp. Ex. xxii. 20 [Hrk.
19], Num. xxi. 2, 3 — both belonging to ii;
and note also the subst. Din ch. vi, 17, 18, m.
11-13.
9. TIP TKC7I ft& Tbl T», («m«) *r
left none remaining : Deut. iii. 3, cp. it 34 [Nue.
xxi. 35];— Josh. vui. 22; x. 28, 30, 33, 37,3?.
40 ; xi. 8. [2 K. x. 11.] Not elsewhere.
10. There mat not a . . . tchich . . . (form of
sentence): Dent. ii. 36; iii. 4; — Josh. viii. 35;
xi. 19.
11. DD3, to melt, of the heart : Dent. xx. 8:-
Josh. ii. 11 ; v. 1 ; vii. 5. (On Josh. xiv. 8,
based upon Deut. i. 28, cp. above § 4, note *.)
12. rrDCJWl) ^>3, all that breathed (lit afl
breath) : Deut. xx. 16;— Jonh. x. 40; xi. 11,14.
[1 K. xv. 29 ; Ps. cl. 6.] Not elsewhere.
(iii.) Noticeable words and phrases not ocear-
ring before.
1. Vfin '133, mighty men of valour : i. H
[in Deut. iii. 18, Wl »J3 k ] ; vi. 2 ; via. 3 ; x. 7.
[2 K. xv. 20 ; xxiv. 14.]
2 'JDD CSlit, to dry np from bef<rt
: ii. 10; iv. 23 Ws; v. 1.
3. rtDn?Dn OS, the people of trar.- viii. I,
3, 11 (DVD, with the art^ strangely ') ; x. 7 ; xi. ".
Not elsewhere, except 1 Sam. xiii. 15, LSi
The usual expression is nDTPDTl H73K : DrM-
ii. 14, 16 ; Josh. v. 4, 6, vi. 3, x. 24 ; 1 Saw
xviii. 5, &c.
4. nO^OD, kingdom: xiii. 12, 21, 27,30, SI.
A peculiar form, possibly only an error cf
transmission for njTOD ; elsewhere only 1 Sas.
xv. 28 ; 2 Sam. xvi. 3; Jer. xxvi. 1 ; Hoa. i. 4.
5. np?riQ, division, in the expressue
DJlpSriDS: xi. 23; iii. 7; xviii. 10. S«
again, except in the n. pr. 1 Sam. xxiii. 28, tfc'.
s Cp. the writer's Jfotts on Uie fthw Text •»
Samuel (Oxford, 1890), on 1 Sam. xv. 33.
« Which Is not an archaism (Kelt, Bint. * IS. 1\ Vn.
llke^tl 'CjN. * common expression to prose. «
Jndg. xviii. 2, 2 Sam. II. t. a K. iL 16.
< Cp. the writer's Hibrew Tentet » (1«92\ } 19* OS*.
Digitized by
Google
JOSHUA, THE BOOK OP
Ezek. xlviii. 29: often in Chron., but in a (pedal
application, of the courses of the priests and
Levi tea.
6. »1jn> the nation, of Israel : iii. 17, iv. 1, v.
6, 8 ; '13, x. 13 (without the article), is pretty
clearly derived from the poem quoted. " This
nation," applied to Israel, is found occasionally
elsewhere ; " the nation " is very unusual, and is
never met with besides in prose.
7 'JB3 B»N 07O1W 1O0 K7, a man
stood not {shall not stand) tn the face of. . .:
x. 8, xxi. 44 (Heb. 42), xxiii. 9, varied from
. . . 'JD3 B*N 3XW N7, Deut. A 24, xi.
25 ; Josh. i. 5 (here with MB7, before). In
vii. 12, 13, the expression is a different one:
'3B7 Dip, to rise up, subsist, endure, before (not
elsewhere).
8. 0.N3) N3 73il, all came to pass : xxi. 45
(Heb. 43), xxiii. 14.
In x. 30, 32, 33, 37 bis, 39, there occurs an
inelegant construction, "IC?M 73 J1K1 • • • fl3M
n3 (for the normal f!3 Xtt 73 TltO rtlYK "p)»
of which, however, there are two examples in
Dent., viz. xi. 6 (contrast Num. xvi. 32) ; xv. 16
(about six times besides in the 0. T.) : see the
writer's Notes on Samuel, on 1 Sam. v. 10.
The attentive reader will not omit to notice
how frequently the expressions noted in this
lection are found aggregated in the passages
attributed above to D*.
§ 6. Thus the Book of Joshua as a whole
assumed its present form by a series of stages.
It follows that if the earliest form of the
traditions respecting the conquest of Palestine
is to be recovered, the stratum of narrative
containing it must be disengaged by critical
processes from those that have been superposed
upon it. The Deuteronomic elements contain
but little of direct historical import: in the
main, they either give prominence to the
motives and considerations by which Joshua is
conceived to have been actuated, or they
generalize and magnify the successes attributed
to him. These being disregarded, it appears
that in the first half of the Book, containing
details of the conquest of Palestine, the source
mainly followed is JE ; in the second half, con-
taining particulars of its topographical distribu-
tion among the tribes, it is P. The notices of
the conquest belonging to P are brief and
fragmentary. One group of the passages as-
signed to JE deserves special notice, on account
of ;their affinity with the 1st chapter of Judges.
This chapter, describing how certain of the
tribes conquered, or failed to conquer, the
territory allotted to tbem, is now generally re-
garded by critics as having formed originally
part of a narrative, or survey, of the conquest
of Palestine in the time of Joshua; the opening
words, "after the death of Joshua," being an
addition due to the compiler, who placed the
section where it now stands, as an introduction
to the Book of Judges." The notices in the
chapter relate in many cases, it is evident, to
* Cp. the Speaker'! Comm., 11. p. 123 sq.
JOSHUA, THE BOOK OP 1815
events synchronous with those recorded in the
Book of Joshua, rather than to what took place
subsequently. In some cases the same notices
recur, with but slight verbal variations, in both
Books ; in other cases, notices cast in a similar
form are met with in both equally. In all
probability, Judg. i. is an extract from what
was once a complete summary of the conquest
of Canaan, of which other excerpts have been
preserved in the verses of Joshua referred to.
The notices from the two Books may be combined
together somewhat as follows : — a. (Judah) Judg.
i. 1 b (from " and the children of Israel asked "),
2-7, 19, Josh. xv. 63 (nearly = Judg. i. 21) ;
Judg. i. 20, Josh. xv. 14-19 (nearly = Judg. i.
10-15; cp. also Josh. xiv. 13, 15); Judg. i.
16-18, 36.' 6. (Joseph) Judg. i. 22-26, Josh,
xvii. 14-18. c. (the ill success of different
tribes) Josh. xiii. 13, Judg. i. 27-28 (nearly =
Josh. xvii. 12, 13 [the names of the towns are
not stated here in v. 12, having been given just
before in v. 11]), 29 (Josh. xvi. 10), 30-33, 34j
Josh. xix. 47," Judg. i. 35.* Here we have
in succession particulars respecting the con-
quests of Judah and Simeon, Caleb and Othniel,
the "house of Joseph," Manasseh, Ephraim,
Zebnlun, Asher, Naphtali, Dan. Phraseological
points of contact between the passages qnoted
are: the "House of Joseph " (Josh. xvii.
17, xviii. 5; Judg. i. 22, 23, 35: not com-
mon elsewhere); "daughters" for dependent
towns, Josh. xvii. 11, 16, Judg. i. 27; "would
dwell" (peculiar), Josh. xvii. 12, Judg. i. 27 b,
35; "became tributary," • Josh. xvi. 10, Judg. i.
30, 33, 35 ; the form of the sentence, Josh,
iiii. 13, xv. 63, Jndg. i. 29, 30, 31, &c. ; ob-
serve also the allusion to the " chariots of iron,"
Josh. xvii. 16, Judg. i. 19. The representation
is, moreover, throughout similar : the joint
action of the tribes up to a certain point is pre-
supposed, followed first by the assignation to
each tribe of its lot of territory, and then the
conquest by the tribe of the lot thus assigned
to it, or, in some cases, its failure to conquer it.
The narrative, as we possess it, is evidently
incomplete. Enough of it, however, remains to
show how imperfectly the native inhabitants
had in fact been expelled, notwithstanding the
generalizing summaries of D* (e.g. x. 40, xi. 16-
20, xxi. 43-5). Lastly, the notice of the con-
quest of the land in the retrospect in ch. xxiv.
(E) should be alluded to (t>. 11-12). This does
1 Where AmoriUs is very probably a textual error for
JUomites. Cp. Hollenbcrg, ZATW. 1881, p. 103 sqq. ;
Buddc, RicUtr u. Samuel, p. 18 sq. ; Klttel, Getck. der
Hebraer, i. p. 243 (Cod. A. and other MSS. of LXX.
have h '1 6ov/*olof after tov 'Ajtoppatov).
- Cp. QP B.' ; and the expositor, Jan. 188T, p. St sq.
■ For a comparative estimate of tbe textual variations
between such of tbe passages as are parallel, see Bodde,
Richter u. Samuel, 1890, p. 1 sqq. (tee the references
on pp. 84-9), or more briefly Klttel, Cose*, der Hebraer.
I. p. 239 sqq. Naturally, no stress Is to be laid on tbe pre-
cise order In which the passages are combined ; Buddc
arranges them somewhat differently, I. c. pp. 84-9 (pre-
fixing also Num. xxxtl. 39, 41, 42 to Josh. xlll. 13: cp.
ZATW. 1888, p. 148).
• po? n«n. lit. "were for task-work :" similarly
DD7 lIUi Job- xvll. 13; DD7 DB% Jndg- L *«•
See B. V.; and cp. Deut. xx. 11 ; 1 K. lx. 21, Heb. ;
Is. xxxi. 8, Heb.
Digitized by
Google
1816
J08IAH
not perfectly agree with the picture in the
earlier part of JE. Nothing is there laid of the
" citizens of Jericho " who " fought against "
the Israelites ; nor is anv express mention made
of " twelve " ( LXX. t>. 12 : § 4, note ') "kings of
the Amorites " put to flight before Israel, 7 " not
with thy sword, nor with thy bow : " on the
other hand, the retrospect here is silent as to
the series of independent efforts by which the
Jehovistic tradition represents the Israelites as
slowly and toilsomely effecting the conquest,
and appears (v. 18 a) to treat the expulsion of
the native population as more complete than
was really the case. As ch. xxiv. is admitted
to belong to E, this divergence of representation
may be taken as an indication that the source
of the group of notices just referred to is J ;
the representation of E, on the other hand,
approximates to that of IV.
The description of the territories of the
different tribes, in the second part of the Book,
the "Domesday book of Palestine," derived
mainly from P, though invaluable on account of
the topographical data contained in it, refers, no
doubt, to a later period than that of Joshua.
This may be inferred from the fact that the
country is represented as completely in the
possession of the Israelites. The partition of
the land being conceived as ideally effected by
Joshua, its complete distribution and occupation
by the tribes is here treated as his work, and as
accomplished in his lifetime.
The text of Joshua, though not so faulty as
that of Samuel or Ezekiel, is nevertheless less
pure than that of the Pentateuch appears gene-
rally to be : the corruptions can in some cases
be emended by help of the ancient Versions ;
see the study of Hollenberg mentioned in § 7,
and Dillmann, p. 689 sq.
§ 7. Literature. — A. Knobel (in Numeri, Deutr
eronomium u. Josua, in the Kwzgefasstes Exeg-
Jlaiuib.), 1861, ed. 2 (re-written) by Aug-
Dillmann, 1886 (the best commentary); C. F.
Keil in Josua, Kichter u. Suth, ed. 2, 1874;
J. Hollenberg in the Stud. u. Kritiken, 1874,
pp. 472—506 (on the Deut. elements of the
Book), and Der Charakter der Alex. Ueber-
setxung des B. Josua, Moers, 1876; Wellhausen
in the Jahrb. f. Deutsche Theologie, 1876-7,
reprinted in Die Composition des Hexateuchs,
U.S.W., 1889, pp. 118-136 (cp. p. 351 sq.);
Kuenen in the Theol. lijdschri/t, 1877, p.
467 sqq. (on ch. n.), 1878, p. 315 sqq. (on
ch. viii. 30-35) ; K. Budde in the Zeitsch. fir
die Alttest. Wissenschaft, 1887, p. 93 sqq.;
1888, p. 148 (reprinted in Sichter und Samuel,
1890, pp. 1-83); R. Kittel, Gesch. der He-
brier, i. (1888), p. 238 sqq.; J. S. Black in
the ' Smaller Camb. Bible for Schools,' 1891 ;
Aibers, Die Quellenberichte in Josua i.-xii., Bonn,
1891. [S. K. D.]
JOSI'AH (WTCWs Jehovah heals [MV."];
'Iaxrfou; Josias). 1. The son of Anion and
Jedidah, succeeded his father B.C. 641 [al. 640],
in the eighth year of his age, and reigned thirty-
» Though Aibers, p. 149, thinks the twelve kings In-
tended to be those of Jericho, Al, Bethel (according to
the touted notice In viii. 17), the Ave kings of the South
(x. 3\ and the four kings of the Kortli (xi. 1).
JOSIAH
one years. His history is contained in 2 K.
xxii.-xxiv. 30; 2 Ch. xxxiv., hit.; and tit
first twelve chapters of Jeremiah throw unci
light upon the general character of the Jews in
his days.
He began in the eighth year of his reigs to
seek the Lord ; and in his twelfth year, sad fa
six years afterwards, in a personal progress
throughout all the land of Judah and Israel
he destroyed everywhere high places, graves,
images, and all outward signs and relics of
idolatry. Those which Solomon and Ahat kd
built, and even Hezekiah had spared, and those
which Manasseh had set up more recently, not
ceased to pollute the land of Judah ; sad it
Israel the purification began with Jeroboam's
chapel at Bethel, in accordance with the re-
markable prediction of the disobedient prophet,
by whom Josiah was called by name three
centuries before his birth (1 K. xiii. 2) The
Temple was restored under a special commission ;
and in the course of the repairs Hilkiah the
priest found that book of the Law of the Lord
which quickened so remarkably the ardent sell
of the king [see under Hilkiah]. The spectsl
commission sent forth by Jehoshaphat (2 Ch. rrii.
7) is a proof that even under such kings as An
and his son, the Levites were insufficient for the
religious instruction of the people. What ties
must have been the amount of informatioa
accessible to a generation which had grown of
in the reigns of Manasseh and Amon ? We d»
not know that the Law was read as a stated
part of any ordinary public service hi tl*
Temple of Solomon (unless the injunction Dent
xxxi. 10 was obeyed once in seven years), thongb
God was worshipped there with daily sacrifice,
psalmody, and prayer. The son of Amon begti
when he was sixteen years old to seek in earnest
the God of David, and for ten years he devote!
all his active energies to destroying the gross
external memorials of idolatry throughout bis
dominions, and to strengthening and multiplrit;
the visible signs of true religion. It is net
surprising that in the twenty-sixth year of hu
age he should find the most awful words is
which God denounces sin come home to b»
heart on a particular occasion with a new sad
strange power, and that he should send to >
prophetess to inquire in what degree of closeness
those words were to be applied to himself and
his generation. That he had never read tit
words is probable. But his conduct is »
sufficient proof that he had never heard then
before, or that he was not aware of the e listener
of a «' book of the Law of the Lord."
The great day of Josiah's life was that on
which he and his people, in the eighteenth ye*'
of his reign, entered into a special covenant to
keep the Law of the Lord, and celebrated tie
Feast of the Passover at Jerusalem with more
munificent offerings, better arranged services,
and a larger concourse of worshippers than had
been seen on any previous occasion.
After this, his endeavours to abolish ever*
trace of idolatry and superstition were still
carried on. But the time drew near which bad
been indicated by Huldah (2 K. xxii. W
When Pharaoh-Kecho went from Egypt to Csr-
chemish to carry on his war against Assyra
(cp. Herodotus, ii. 159), Josiah, possibly in >
spirit of loyalty to the Assyrian king, to who™
Digitized by
Google
JOSIAH
he may have been bound,* opposed his march
along the sea-coast. Necho reluctantly paused
and gave him battle in the valley of Eadraelon :
and the last good king of Judah was carried
wonnded from Hadad-rimmon, to die before he
could arrive at Jerusalem.
He was buried with extraordinary honours ;
and a funeral dirge, in part composed by Jere-
miah, which the affection of his subjects sought
to perpetuate as an annual solemnity, was
chanted probably at Hadad-rimmon (cp. the
narrative in 2 Ch. xxxv. 25 with the allu-
sions in Jer. xxii. 10, 18, and Zech. xii. 11, ami
Jackson, On the Creed; bk. viii. ch. 23, p. 878).
The prediction of Huldah, that he should " be
gathered into the grave in peace," must be
interpreted in accordance with the explana-
tion of that phrase given in Jer. xxxiv. 5 (cp.
Jackson, On the Creed, bk. xi. ch. 36, p. 664).
Josiah's reformation and death are commented
on bv Bishop Hall, Contemplations on the 0. T.,
bk. x'x.
It was in the reign of Josiah that a nomadic
horde of Scythians overran Asia (Herodotus,
i. 104-106). A detachment of them went to-
wards Egypt by the way of Philistia: some-
where southward of Ascalon they were met by
messengers from Psammitichua and induced to
turn back. They are not mentioned in the his-
torical accounts of Josiah's reign. But Ewald
<J9ie Psalmen, p. 165) conjectures that the 59th
Psalm was composed by king Josiah during a
siege of Jerusalem by these Scythians. The
town Bethshan is said to derive its Greek
name, Scythopolis (Reland, Pal. p. 992 ; Light-
foot, Chor. Marc. vii. § 2), from these invaders.
The facility with which Josiah appears to have
extended his authority in the land of Israel is
adduced as an indication that the Assyrian con-
querors of that land were themselves at this
time under the restraining fear of some enemy.
The prophecy of Zephaniah is considered to have
been written amid the terror caused by their
approach. The same people are described at a
later period by Ezekiel (xxviii.). See Ewald,
Gcsch. Isr. iii. 689. Abarbanel (ap. Eisen-
menger, Ent. Jud. i. 858) records an oral tradi-
tion of the Jews to the effect that the Ark of
the Covenant, which Solomon deposited in the
Temple (1 K. vi. 19), was removed and hidden
by Josiah, in expectation of the destruction of
the Temple ; and that it will not be brought
again .to light until the coming of Messiah.
[W. T. B.] [P.]
JOTHAM
1817
• Such is at least the conjecture of Prideaux
(Connexion, anno (10), and of Milmsn (HUtory of
the Jem, I. 313). But the Bible ascribes no such
chivalrous motive to Josiah: and It does not occur
to Joseph iw. who attributes (Ant. x. 6, $ 1) Josiah's
resistance merely to Fate urging him to destruction ;
nor to the author of 1 Esd. I. 28, who describes him
as acting wilfully against Jeremiah's advice ; nor to
Ewald, who (Getck. Itr. ill. 191) conjectures that It
may have been the constant aim of Josiah to restore
not only the ritual, bnt also the kingdom of David in
its full extent and independence, and that he attacked
Necho as an invader of what be considered as bis
northern dominions. This conjecture. If equally prob-
able with the former. Is equally without adequate
rapport in the Bible, and Is somewhat derogatory to
the character of Josiah. Opinions still differ on this
point (cp. Kautssch In Henog's HE.' s.n. " Josla").
2. The son of Zephaniah, at whose house the
prophet Zechariah was commanded to assemble
the chief men of the Captivity, to witness the
solemn and symbolical crowning of Joshua the
high-priest (Zech. vi. 9). It has been conjec-
tured that Josiah was cither a goldsmith, or
treasurer of the Temple, or one of the keepers
of the Temple, who received the money offered
by the worshippers, but nothing is known of
him. Possibly he was a descendant of Zephaniah,
the priest mentioned in Jer. xxi. 1, xxxvii. 3 ;
and if Hen in Zech. vi. 15 be a proper name,
which is doubtful, it probably refers to the same
person, elsewhere called Josiah. [W. A. W.]
JOSI'AS. 1, ('luo-Iat ; Josias.) Josiah,
king of Judah (1 Esd. i. 1, 7, 18, 21-23, 25, 28,
29, 32-34; Ecclus. xlix. 1, 4; Bar. i. 8; Matt,
i. 10, 11).
8. (B. 'Zalas ; A. "l«<r<riar ; Maasias.) Je-
shaiah, the son of Atbaliah (1 Esd. viii. 33;
cp. Ezra viii. 7).
JOSIBI'AH (!VaEn», i.e. Joshibyah = Jeho-
vah makes a dwelling [MV. 11 ]; BA. 'Ivafila;
Josabias), the father of Jehu, a Simeonite,
descended from that branch of the tribe of which
Shimei was the founder, and which afterwards
became most numerous (1 Ch. iv. 35).
JOSIPHI'AH (n;Dp"l» = Jehovah adds; B.
'luert(p*la, A. -<pta ; Josphias), the father or
ancestor of Shelomith, who returned with Ezra
(Ezra viii. 10). A word is evidently omitted in
the first part of the verse, and is supplied both
by the LXX. (A.) and the Svr., as well as bv
the compiler of 1 Esd. viii. 36. The I,XX. (A.)
supplies Boarf, i'.«. '33, which, from its resem-
blance to the preceding word \|3, might easily
have been omitted by a transcriber. The verse
would then read, " of the sons of Bani, Shelo-
mith the son of Josipbiah " (cp. QP£.*). In
the Syriac Shelomith is repeated, but this is not
likely to have been correct. Josiphiah is called
in Esdras Josaphias.
JOTAPATA. [Jiphtah-el.]
JOT-BAH (rDD» = goodness [MV.»] : B.
'I«re0dA, A. 'ltraxdA; Jos. *Ia0aVn: Jeteba),
the native place of Meshnllemeth, the queen of
Manassch, and mother of Amon king of Judah
(2 K. xxi. 19). The place is not elsewhere
named as a town of Palestine, and is generally
identified with Jot bath, or Jotbathah, mentioned
below. This there is nothing either to prove or
disprove. [G.] [W.]
JOT-BATH, or JOT-BA-THAH (mut?*'
Deut. x. 7, B TcuflMo, A. 'Irre/Scffla, F. hri-;
Num. xxxiii. 3.1, B. 2«T«/3d0a, B"F. 'Ere/Mela,
A. 'I«Tf/9a0aV), n desert station of the Israelites :
it is described as " a land of torrents of waters ; "
there are several confluences of Wldys on the
W. of the Arabah, any one of which might in
the rainy season answer the description, and
would agree with the general locality (see
Dillmann' on Num. /. c). [H. H.]
JO'THAM (DflV; 'ladta/i; Joatham). 1. The
youngest son of Gideon (Judg. ix. 5), who escaped
when his brethren, to the number of sixty-nine
Digitized by
Google
1818
JOZABAD
persons, were slain at Ophrah by their half-
brother Abimelcch. When tbis bloody act of
Abimelech had secured his election as king, Jo-
tham, ascending Mount Gerizim, boldly nttered,
in tbe hearing of the men of Shechem, his well-
known warning parable of the reign of the
bramble. Tbe historical character of the narra-
tive, impugned by Budde (Die BB. RicUUr und
Samuel, p. 118) and others, is defended by Kittel
(Gesch. d. Hebraer, ii. 76). Nothing is known
of Jotham afterwards, except that be dwelt at
Beer.
2. The son of king Uniah or Azariah and
Jerusbah. After administering the kingdom for
some years during bis father's leprosy, he suc-
ceeded to tbe throne B.O. 758 [al. 750. The
Biblical and Assyrian chronologies of this reign
hare not yet been reconciled ; see p. 592], when
he was twenty-five years old, and reigned sixteen
years in Jerusalem. He was contemporary with
Pekah and with the Prophet Isaiab. His history
is contained in 2 K. xv. 32-38 and 2 Ch. xxvii.,
and much light is thrown upon the character
and events of bis time by such passages as Is. ii.
5-iii. 11, vi. He did right in the sight of the
Lord, and his reign was prosperous, although
the high-places were not removed. He built
the high gate of the Temple, made some additions
to the wall of Jerusalem, and raised fortifica-
tions in various parts of Judab. After a war
with the Ammonites, he compelled them to pay
him the tribute they had been accustomed to
pay to his father. Towards the end of his reign
Rezin king of Damascus, and Pekah, began to
assume a threatening attitude towards Judah
(see the article " Jotham " in Herzog, BE.*, and
in Riehm, 1IWB.). [W. T. B.] [F.]
5. A descendant of Judah, son of Jahdai
(1 Ch. ii. 47>
J0'ZA-BAD= Jehovah hath given. 1. fI3n»;
B. 'IwfojScu?, A. '\»(a$iS ; Jozabad.) A captain
of the thousands of Manasseh, who deserted to
David before the battle of Gilboa, and assisted
him in his pursuit of the marauding band of
Amalekites (1 Ch. xii. 20). One of Kennicott's
MSS. reads nan', ».«. Jochabar.
8. (B. W«/W», N. -/8f«, A. •iwfojMJ.) A
hero of Manasseh, like the preceding (1 Ch. xii.
20).
8. (B. 'E(a0d$, A 'l*(api0, in 2 Ch. xxxi.
13.) A Levite in the reign of Hezekiah, who
was one of the overseers of offerings and
dedicated things in the Temple, under Cononiah
and Shimei, after the restoration of the true
worship.
4. (BA. 'lu(dfiat; Josabad.) One of the
princes of the Lcvites, who held the same office
as the preceding, and took part in the great
Passover kept at Jerusalem in the reign of
Josiah (2 Ch. xxxv. 9).
6. (BA. 'lafaPdS.) A Levite, son of Jeshua,
who assisted Meremoth and Eleazar in registering
the number and weight of the vessels of gold
and silver belonging to the Temple, which they
brought with them from Babylon (Ezra viii.
33). He is called Josabad in the parallel
narrative of 1 Esd. viii. 63 (v. 62, B. 'luoaffth,
A. -aa$Sos\ and is probably identical with 7.
6. (BNA. 'iMfaflaS in Ezra; B. 'nical\nSos,
A. 'nxcfSijAos, in 1 Esd. ix. 23: Jozabed.) A
priest of the sons of Pashur, who had married a
JUBILEE, THE TEAS OF
foreigner on the return from the Captivity (Ezra
x. 22). He appears as Ocidelus in the A. V.
of 1 Esd.
7. {'luCafiiSos, Jorabdus, in 1 Esd. ix. 23;
'Iwfa/MS, Jozabed, in Ezra x. 22.) , A Levitt
among those who returned with Ezra and h*i
married foreign wives. He is probably identical
with Jozabad the Levite, who assisted when the
Law was read by Ezra (Neh. viii. 7) ; and with
Jozabad, one of tbe heads of the Lcvites who
presided over the outer work of the Temple
(Neh. xi. 16). [W. A- WJ
JO'ZA-CHAR P3ri' = Jehovah hath re-
¥ T
membered; 'U(ttpx<i?, A. 'luQax&p ; Josadwr).
the son of Shimeath the Ammonitess, and one of
the murderers of Joash king of Judah (2 K. xii.
21). The writer of the Chronicles (2 Ch. xxir.
26) calls him Zabad, a clerical error for Jozachar;
the first syllable being omitted in consequence
of the final letters of the preceding word VTg.
In eighteen MSS. of Kennicott's collation the
name in the Kings is T3t1\ ue. Josabad, sad
the same is the reading of thirty-two MS.S.
collated by De Rossi. Another MS. in IV
Rossi's possession had *13t V, ue. Joxachad, and
one collated by Kennicott ~QtV, or Jozabar,
which is the reading of the Pe&hitto-Syriac
It is uncertain whether their conspiracy wu
prompted by a personal feeling of revenge for
the death of Zechariah, as Josephus intimates
{Ant. iz. 8, § 4), or whether they were urged to
it by the family of Jehoiada. The care of the
Chronicler to show that they were of foreign
descent seems almost intended to disarm s
suspicion that the king's assassination was an
act of priestly vengeance. But it is mere
likely that the conspiracy had a different origin
altogether, and that the king's murder was re-
garded by the Chronicler as an instance of
Divine retribution. On the accession of Amaxiaa
the conspirators were executed. f_W. A. W.]
JO'ZA-DAK (P"]VV ; W«W«; Josedec), Em
iii. 2, 8, v. 2, x. 18*; Neh. xii. 26. The name
is a contraction of Jehozadak.
JU'BAL (?3V ; 'lov0dx ; Jubal), a son of
Lamech by Adah, and the inventor of the * harp
and organ" (Gen. iv. 21; R. V. "harp and
pipe "). His name appears to be connected with
this subject, springing from the same root as
yobel, "jubilee " (cp. Delitzsch [1887], DiUmana*
in loco). That the inventor of musical instru-
ments should be the brother of him who intro-
duced tbe nomad life, is strictly in accordance
with the experience of the world. The con-
nexion between music and the pastoral life is
indicated in the traditions of the Greeks, which
ascribed the invention of the pipe to Pan and of
the lyre to Apollo, each of them being also
devoted to pastoral pursuits. [W. L. B.]
JUBILEE, THE YEAR OP (^i'n TOT-
and simply 73V ; trot rip A<f>«Veo>s, AeWow
o-tyuurfo, and &a)«o-tt ; annus jubilaei. and jnU~
laeus; R. V. "jubile"), the fiftieth year after
the succession of seven Sabbatical years (Lev.
xiv. 10; Ideler, Hob. d. Chronik, i. 505), in
which all the land which had been alienated
returned to the families of those to whom it
Digitized by
Google
JUBILEE, THE YEAR OF
had been allotted in the original distribution,
and all bondmen of Hebrew blood were libe-
rated. The relation in which it stood to the
Sabbatical year and the general directions for
its observance are given in Lev. xxv. 8-16 and
23-55.* Its bearing on lands dedicated to
Jehovah is stated in Lev. xxvii. 16-25. There
is no mention of the Jubilee in the Book of
Deuteronomy, and the only other reference to it
in the Pentateuch is in the appeal of the tribe
of Manasseh, on account of the daughters of
Zelophehad (Num. xxxvi. 4).
II. The year was inaugurated on the Day of
Atonement* with the blowing of trumpets'
throughout the land, and by a proclamation of
universal liberty.
1. The soil was kept under the same condition
of rest as had existed during the preceding
Sabbatical year. There was to be neither
ploughing, sowing, nor reaping ; but the chance
produce was to be left for the use of all comers.
[Sabbatical Year.]
2. Every Israelite returned to " his possession
• Kw»ld observes that tro. 17-22 in this chapter
should be read immediately after v. 7, since thej cany
on the account of the Sabbatical year, and have no
reference to the year of Jubilee.
• It does not seem likely that the rites of solemn
humiliation which marked the great fast of the year
were disturbed. The Joyful sound probably burst forth
in the afternoon, when the high-priest had brought the
services of Atonement to a conclusion. Toe contrast
between the quiet of the day and the loud blast of the
trumpets at Its close, must have rendered deeply im-
pressive the hallowing of the year of release from
poverty and bondage.
• The trumpets used in the proclamation of the
Jubilee appear to have been curved horns, not the long
straight trumpets represented on the Arch of Titus, and
such as are represented In Egyptian sculptures and
paintings (Wilkinson, Anc. Egypt. L 1M [1378]). The
straight trumpet wss called mx'Vn. the other -|Qig>
T : -: t
and pp. The Jubilee horns used in the siege of Jericho
are called B'^'H rt"l9^ (•'"*• *• «) i »°d. «•'-
lectlvely, in the following verse, 53^»n ]Tp. (See
Keil on Josh. vi. 4.) It is not quite certain whether
they were the horns of oxen or formed of metal
(Kranold, p. 60), but the latter seems by far more prob-
able. Connected with the mistake as to the origin of the
word *>3i» (which will be noticed below), was the notion
that they were rams' horns. R. Jehuda, In the Mlshna,
says that the horns of rams (D'IDt) vera ttse " 1 * l 'be
Feast of Trumpets, and those of wild goats (Q'71P) at
the Jubilee. But Haimonides and Bartenora say that
ranis' horns were used on both occasions (Roth Hcukana,
p. 342, edit. Sunn.). Bochart and others have Justly
objected that the horns of rams, or those of wild goats,
would form but sorry trumpets. [CoaxET.]
It is probable that on this, as on other occasions of
public proclamation, the trumpets were blown by the
priests, in accordance with Num. x. 9 (see Kranold,
Comment it Jubilam, p. 60 ; with whom agree Ewald,
Bahr, and most modern writers). Babr supposes that,
at the proclamation of the Jubilee, the trumpets were
blown in all the priests' cities and wherever a priest
might be living ; while, on the Feast of Trumpets, they
were blown only In the Temple. Maimonides says that
every Hebrew at the Jubilee blew nine blasts, so as to
make the trumpet literally "sound throughout the land "
(Lev. xxv. 0). Such a usage may have existed, as a
mere popular expression of rejoicing, but it could have
been no essential part of the ceremony.
JUBILEE, THE YEAB OF 1819
and to his family ; " that is, he recovered his
right in the land originally allotted to the
family of which he was a member, if he, or hia
ancestor, had parted with it.
(a) A strict rale to prevent fraud and in-
justice in such transactions is laid down : — if a
Hebrew, urged by poverty, 4 had to dispose of a
field, the price was determined according to the
time of the sale in reference to the approach of
the next Jubilee. The transfer was thus, not of
the land itself, but of the usufruct for a limited
time. Deduction was systematically made on
account of the number of Sabbatical years,
which would deprive the purchaser of certain
crops within that period.*
(6) The possession of the field could, at any
time, be recovered by the original proprietor, it
his circumstances improved, or by his next of
kin ' (yX J, i.e. one who redeems). The price to-
be paid for its redemption was to be fixed ac-
cording to the same equitable rule as the price
at which it had been purchased (r. 16).
(c) Houses in wailed cities * were not subject
to the law of Jubilee, but a man who sold his
house could redeem it at any time within a
full year of the time of its sale. After that
year, it became the absolute property of the
purchaser.
(d) Houses and buildings in villages, or in the
country, being regarded as essentially connected
with the cultivation of the land, were not
excepted, but returned in the Jubilee with the
land on which they stood.
(«) The Levitical cities were not, in respect
to this law, reckoned with wailed towns. If a
Levite sold the use of his house, it reverted to
him in the Jubilee, and he might redeem it at
any previous time. The lands in the suburbs of
the Lerites' cities could not be parted with
nnder any condition, and were not therefore
affected by the law of Jubilee (v. 34).
(J) If a man had sanctified a field of his
patrimony unto the Lord, it could be redeemed
at any time before the next year of Jubilee, on
his paying one-fifth in addition to the worth of
* It would seem that the Israelites never parted with
their land except from the pressure of poverty. The
objection of Naboth to accept the offer of Ahab (I K.
xxi. 1) appears to exemplify the sturdy feeling of a
substantial Hebrew, who would have felt it to be a
shame and a sin to give up any part of his patrimony —
" The Lord forbid It me that I should give the inhe-
ritance of my fathers to thee." For another view ot
the conduct of Naboth, see a dissertation by S. Andrea*,
in the Crilici Saeri, vol. xlll. p. «03.
• This must be the meaning of the price being cal-
culated on "the years of fruits," fliM3n" , JE' (!«•»•
xxv. 16, 16), the years of tillage, exclusive of the years
of rest (see Knobel-Dillmann in loco).
r Kranold observes (p. 64) that there Is no record
of the god ever exercising hia right till after the death
of him who bad sold the Held. Bat the Inference that
the goel could not previously exercise his power seems
to be hardly warranted, and Is opposed to what is per-
haps the simplest Interpretation of Ruth lv. 3, 4. See
note ", } V.
s A Jewish tradition, preserved by Maimonides and
others, states that no cities were thus reckoned, as
regards the Jubilee, but such as were walled In the
time of Joshua. According to this, Jerusalem was
excluded.
Digitized by
Google
1820 JUBILEE, THE YEAB OF
tli« crops, rated at a stated valuation (Lev.
nvii. 19). If not so redeemed, it became, at
the Jubilee, devoted for ever. If the man had
previously sold the usufruct of the field to
another, he lost all right to redeem it (re.
20, 21).
(g) If he who had purchased the usufruct of
a Held sanctified it, he could redeem it till the
next Jubilee, that is, as long as his claim lasted ;
but it then, as justice required, returned to the
original proprietor (tt>. 22-24).
3. All Israelites who had become bondmen,
either to their countrymen, or to resident
foreigners, were set free in the Jubilee (Lev.
xxt. 40, 41), when it happened to occur before
their seventh year of servitude, in which they
became free by the operation of another law
(Ex. xxi. 2). Those who were bound to resident
foreigners might redeem themselves, if they
obtained the means, at any time ; or they might
be redeemed by a relation. Even the bondman
who had submitted to the ceremony of having
his ears bored (Ex. xxi. 6) had his freedom at
the Jubilee.'
Such was the law of the year of Jubilee,
as it is given in the Pentateuch. It was, of
course, like the law of the Sabbatical year, and
that of those rites of the great Festivals which
pertain to agriculture, delivered proleptically.
The same formula is used — " When ye be come
into the land which I give unto you" — both in
Lev. xxv. 2 and Lev. xxiii. 10.
III. Josephus (Ant. iii. 12, §3) states that all
debts were remitted in the year of Jubilee, but
the Scripture speaks of the remission of debts
only in connexion with the Sabbatical year
(Deut. xv. 1, 2). [Sabbatical Year.] He
also describes the terms on which the holder of
a piece of land resigned it in the Jubilee to the
original proprietor. The former(he says) produced
a statement of the value of the crops, and of the
money which he had laid out in tillage. If the
■expenses proved to be more than the worth of
the produce, the balance was paid by the pro-
prietor before the field was restored. But if
the balance was on the other side, the pro-
prietor simply took back the field, and allowed
him who had held it to retain the profit.
Philo (Ve Septtnario, chs. 13, 14, vol. v. 37,
«dit. Tauch.) gives an account of the Jubilee
agreeing with that in Leviticus, and says
nothing of the remission of debts. 1
IV. Origin of the tcord Jubilee. — The doubt on
this point appears to be a very old one. The
Hebrew word is treated by the LXX. in dif-
ferent modes. They have retained it untrans-
lated in Josh. vi. 8, 13 (where we find xtpa-
-rivtu toS 'Im/frrjA, and trdAsryf tow 'I«»/3t)A).
In Lev. xxv. they generally render it by arf>«ru,
or fapifftus artfiAtna; but where the context
suits it, by tpdvri aiKwtyyot. In Ex. xix. 13
they have al dwwai koJ <u" vd\wiyyts. The
* Malmonldes says that the interval between the
yeast of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement, In the
year of Jubilee, was a time of riotous rejoicing to all
■servants. If there is any truth In the tradition that
lie records (which In Id Itself probable enough), the
-eight days must have been a sort of Saturnalia.
1 The Mlahna contains nothing on the Jubilee but
unimportant scattered notices, though it has a consi-
derable treatise on the Sabbatical year (AeoittA).
JUBILEE, THE YEAB OF
Vulgate retains the original word in Lev. xxv.,
as well as in Josh. vi. (** buccinae quarum tuns
est in Jubilaeo "), and by bucdna in Ex. xix. 13.
It seems, therefore, beyond doubt that uncer-
tainty respecting the word must have been felt
when the most ancient Versions of the O. T.
were made.
Nearly all of the many conjectures which
have been hazarded on the snbject are directed
to explain the word exclusively in its bearing on
the year of Jubilee. This course has been taken
by Josephus — 4\tv9tplay Si rnipaicet TofiVopa:
and by St. Jerome — Jobet est demittew out
mittens. Many modern writers have exercised
their ingenuity in the same track. Now in
all such attempts at explanation there must be
an anachronism, as the word is used in Ex. xix.
13, before the institution of the Law, where it
can have nothing to do with the Year of Jubilee,
or its observances. The expression there used
is ?3*.'i1 1]C7Q3; similar to that in Josh, vi
5, ^3i'n |Tp3 I'^PS. The question seems
to be, can 731* here mean a peculiar sound,
a long-drawn-out sound (Riehm), or the instru-
ment for producing the sound ? Kwald favours
the latter notion, and so does Gesenius (Tka.
sub ■JJB'D, and MV."), following the old Versions
(with which the A. V. agrees), though under
?3* he explains ^31* as clangor. De Wette
inclines the same way, rendering the words in
Ex. xix. 13 — beim lilazm des Jobelhorns.
Luther translates the same words — •
uird abcr lange tbnen (though he is not
tent with himself in his rendering of Josh. vi.
5) ; Bahr renders them, cum t rahetur sonus, and
recent critics agree with him. It would follow
from this view that what is meant in Joshua,
when the trumpet is expressly mentioned, is,
" When the sound called Jubilee (whatever that
may be) is prolonged on the horn."
As regards the derivation of the word, it is
by some ascribed to the root 73*, undaviL, copitxe
et cum quodain hnpetu fluxit. Hence Kxanold
explains 73*.*, id quod magno strepitu fluit ; and
he adds, " duplex igitur in ea radice vis dis-
tinguitur, fluendi et sonandi altera in 7330
(diluvium), Gen. vi. 17, altera in 73V (artU
musicae inventor), Gen. iv. 21, conspicna."
The meaning of Jubilee would thus seem to be,
a rushing, penetrating sound.* But in the
k Carpzov (App. p. 449) appears to hare been the
first who put forth this view of the origin and mean-
ing of the word. The figure of the pouring along of
the "rich stream of mneic" is familiar enough in most
languages to recommend it as probable. But Gesenne
prefers to make a second root, 52\ jubCare, wbioh be
ascribes to onomatopoeia, like the Latin jmbUart, and
the Greek oAoAvff .►.
The notion that 73V signifies a ram has some
interest, from its being held by the Jews so generally
and by the Chaldee Paraphrast; and from ita having
Influenced the A. V. and K. V. In Josh. vi. to call lbs
boms on which the Jubilee was sounded, trumfett e/
Digitized by
Google
JUBILEE, THE YEAB OF
uncertainty which, it must be allowed, exists,
the A. V. and R. V. hare taken a safer course by
retaining the original word in Lev. xxv. and
xxvii., than that which was taken by Lather,
who has rendered it by ffalljahr.
V. Maimonides, and the Jewish writer* in
general, consider that the Jubilee was observed
till the destruction of the first Temple. But
there is no direct historical notice of its obser-
vance on any one occasion, either in the Books
of the O. T., or in any other records. Passages
in the Prophets which can be regarded with
much confidence, as referring to the Jubilee in
any way, are Is. r. 7-10, xxxii. 7, Ixi. 1, 2;
Exek. rii. 12, 13, xlvi. 16-18. After the
Exile the special laws of the Jubilee fell into
desuetude, if in matters of detail they still
influenced social life (cp. Herzfeld, Qesch. d.
Volkes Israel, ii. 464). Some hare doubted
whether the law of Jubilee ever came into
actual operation (Michaelis, Laws of Moses, art.
lxxri., and Winer, sub voce), others hare con-
fidently denied it (Kranold, p. 80 ; Hupfeld, pt.
iii. p. 20). But Ewald and Riehm contend that
the institution is eminently practical in the
character of its details, and that the acci-
dental circumstance of no particular instance
of its observance having been recorded in the
Jewish history proves nothing. Besides the
passages to which reference has been made,
Ewald applies several others to the Jubilee. He
conceives that " the year of visitation " men-
tioned in Jer. xi. 23, xxiii. 12, xlriii. 44 denotes
the punishment of those who, in the Jubilee,
withheld by tyranny or fraud the possessions or
the liberty of the poor.' From Jer. xxxii. 6-12
he infers that the law was restored to opera-
tion in the reign of Josiah" (Alterthumcr, p. 424,
note 1).
rams' turns. It appears to come from the rabbinical
view respecting the ram which was sacrificed in tbe place
of Isaac They said (U. Becbal in Ex. xix. ap. Kranold)
that after tbe ram was burnt, Ood miraculously restored
the body. His muscles were deposited in the golden
altar ; from bis viscera were made tbe string* of David's
harp; his skin became tbe mantle of Elijah; his left
hom waa ihe trumpet of Sinai ; and his right horn was
to sound when Messiah comes (Is. xxvii. 13). It. Aktba,
connecting this with tbe Jubilee, affirm* that J03V Is
the Arabic for a ram, and the word ?3» appears to have
that signification in Phoenician (Ewald and Stade) and
in Assyrian (MV.ii). lHllmann on Exod. xlx. 13 accepts
this signification.
Other notions respecting the word may be found In
Kranold (p. llaq.).
I Tbe words of Isaiah (v. 7-10) may, it would seem
with more distinctness, be understood to the same
effect, as denouncing woe against those who had un-
righteously hindered the Jubilee from effecting its
object.
■ Is there not a difficulty In considering this passage
to have any bearing on tbe Jubilee, from Its relating,
apparently, to a priest's field? (See y II. 1 («).). At
all events, the transaction was merely tbe transfer of
land from one member of a family to another, with a
recognition of a preference allowed to a near relation to
purchase. The case mentioned In Ruth lv. 3 sq. appears
to go furtler in illustrating the Jubilee principle.
Naomi la about to sell a field of EUmelech's property.
Boas propose* to the next of kin to purchase It of her,
In order to prevent It from going out of the family, and,
on hi* refusal, takes It himself, as having the next
right.
JUBILEE, THE YEAB OF 1821
VI. The Jubilee is to be regarded as the outer
circle of that great Sabbatical system which
comprises within it the Sabbatical year, the
Sabbatical month, and the Sabbath dav.
[Feasts.] The rest and restoration of each
member of the state, in his spiritual relation,
belongs to the weekly Sabbath and the Sab-
batical month, while the land had it* rest and
relief in the Sabbatical year. But the Jubilee
is more immediately connected with the body
politic; and it was only as a member of the
state that each person concerned could partici-
pate in its provisions. It has less of a formally
religions aspect than either of the other Sab-
batical institutions, and its details were of a
more immediately practical character. It was
not distinguished by any prescribed religious
observance peculiar to itself, like the rites of
the Sabbath day and of tbe Sabbatical month ;
nor even by anything like the reading of the
Law in the Sabbatical year. But in the Hebrew-
state, polity and religion were never separated,
nor was their essential connexion ever dropped
out of sight. Hence the year was hallowed, in
the strict sense of the word, by the solemn
blast of the Jubilee trumpets, on the same day
on which the sins of the people had been
acknowledged in the general fast, and in which
they had been symbolically expiated by the
entrance of the high-priest into the Holy of
Holiea with the blood of the appointed victims.
Hence also the deeper ground of the provisions
of the institution is stated with marked em-
phasis in the Law itself. The land was to be
restored to the families to which it had been at
first allotted by Divine direction (Josh. iiv. 2),
because it was the Lord's. " The land shall not
be sold for ever: for the land is Mine; for ye
are strangers and sojourners with Me" (Lev.
xxv. 23), "I am the Lord your Ood which
brought you forth out of the land of Egypt, to
give you the land of Canaan, and to be your
God " (t>. 38). The Hebrew bondman was to
hare the privilege of claiming his liberty as a
right, because he could never become the pro-
perty of any one but Jehovah. " For they are
My servants which I brought forth out of the
land of Egypt ; they shall not be sold a* bond-
men " (v. 42). " For unto Me the children of
Israel are servants, whom I brought forth ont
of the land of Egypt " ■ (». 55).
If regarded from an ordinary point of view,
the Jubilee was calculated to meet and remedy
those incidents which are inevitable in the
course of human society ; to prevent the
accumulation of inordinate wealth in the hands
of a few ; and to relieve those whom misfortune
or fault had reduced to poverty. As far as
• Tbe foundation of the law of Jubilee appears to be
so essentially connected with the children of Israel, that
it seems strange that Michaelis should have confidently
affirmed Its Egyptian origin, while yet he acknowledges
that he can produce no specific evidence on the subject
(Jfiu. Law, art. 73). The only well-proved Instance of
anything like It In other nations appears to be that of
the Dalmatians, mentioned by Strabo, lib. vll. (p. 315,
edit. Casaub.). He says that they redistributed their
land every eight years. Kwald, following tbe statement
of Plutarch, refers to the Institution of Lycnrgua; but
Mr. Grot* has given another view of tbe matter (Hisi.
of Greece, 11. 630).
Digitized by
Google
1822 JUBILEE, THE YEAB OF
legislation could go, its provisions tended to
restore that equality in outward circumstances
which was instituted in the first settlement of the
land by Joshua.* But if we look upon it in its
more special character, as a part of the Divine
Law appointed for the chosen people, its prac-
tical bearing was to vindicate the right of each
Israelite to his part in the covenant which
Jehovah had made with his fathers respecting
the land of promise. The loud notes of the
Jubilee horns symbolised the voice of the Lord
proclaiming the restoration of political order, as
(according to Jewish tradition) the blast in the
Feast of Trumpets had, ten days before, com-
memorated the creation of the world and the
completion of the material kosmos.
In the incurable uncertainty respecting the
fact of the observance of the Jubilee, it is
important that we should keep in mind that
the record of the law, whether it was obeyed or
not, was, and is, a constant witness for the truth
of those great social principles on which the
theocracy was established.* Moreover, from the
allusions which are made to it by the Prophets,
it must have become a standing prophecy in the
hearts of the devout Hebrews. They who
waited in faith for the salvation of Israel were
kept in mind of that spiritual Jubilee which
was to come (Luke iv. 19), in which every one
of the spiritual seed of Abraham was to have, in
the sight of God, an equality which no accident
«ould ever disturb; and a glorious freedom, in
that liberty with which He that was to come
was to make him free, and which no force or
fraud could ever take from him.
The older monographs on the Jubilee are
mentioned in Winer, RWB. s. n. " Jubeljahr,"
in Kranold, Commmtatio <Je anno Hebraeorum
Jubileo, Gtfttingen, 1837, and in Bahr (Sym-
bolic, vol. ii. p. 572 sq.). References to
Ewald, Saalschiitz, Hupfeld, Wellhausen, and
others are given by Zdckler-Orelli in Herzog,
SE.' s. n. Sabbathjahr. Consult also Knobel-
Dillmann on Exod.-Lev. I. c ; Kiehm, HWB. a. v.
«' Jobeljahr ; " Hamburger, RE. i. v. "Sabbath-
jahr." Id these two last writers difficulties
now obsolete (cp. also 1st ed. of this work) are
discussed. [S. C.j frO
JUDAEA
JU'CAL (73V ;
Shelemiah (Jer.
Jkhucal.
'ludx"*- ; Jvchaty, son ef
xizviii. 1). Elsewhere called
• A collateral result of the working of the Jubilee
must have been tbe preservation of the genealogical
tables, and tbe maintenance of the distinction of tbe
tribes. Ewald and lUcbaells suppose that tbe tables
were systematically corrected and filled up at each
Jubilee. This seems reasonable enough. In order that
the fresh names might be filled in, that irregularities
arising from tbe dying out of families might be rectified,
and that disputed claims might be, as far as possible,
•authoritatively met.
Its effect In maintaining the distinction of the tribes
is illustrated in .the appeal made by tbe tribe of
Mansaaeh in regard to the daughters of Zelopbehad
(Num. zxxvl. 4).
As regards tbe reason of tbe exception of houses in
towns from tbe law of Jubilee, Bahr has observed that,
as they were chiefly inhabited by artificers and trades-
men, whose wealth did not consist in land, it was
reasonable that they abould retain them in absolute
possession. It has been conjectured that many of these
■tradesmen were foreign proselytes, who conld not hold
property in the land which waa subject to the law of
Jubilee.
p This view is powerfully set forth by Babr.
JU'DA Qloilas, U. Judas; 'IouSa ben;
only the genitive case).
1. Son of Joseph in the genealogy of Christ
(Luke iii. 30), in the ninth generation from
David about the time of king Joash.
2. Son of Joanna, or Hananiah [H axahiah,
8] (Luke iii. 26> He seems to be certainly the
same person as Abiud in Matt. i. 13. His
name, ITl'iT, is identical with that of "MrP3.lt
only that 3K is prefixed ; and when Rhesa u
discarded from Luke's line, and allowance is
made for St. Matthew's omission of genera-
tions in his genealogy, their times will agree
perfectly. Both may be the same as Hodaiah
of 1 Ch. iii. 24. See Henrey's Genealogia,
p. 118 sqq.
8. One of the Lord's brethren, enumerated
in Mark vi. 3. [Joses; Joseph.] On the
question of his identity with Jude the brother
of James, one of the twelve Apostles (Lake vi
16 ; Acts i. 13), and with the author of the
general Epistle, see p. 1836. In Matt. xjiL 55
His name is given in the A. V. as Judas.
4. The patriarch Judah (Sus. c 56; Lake
iii. 33; Heb. vii. 14 ; Rev. v. 5, vii. 5).
[A.C.H.]
JUDA, A CITY OF (Luke i. 39), U. a
city belonging to that tribe ; al. see JdttjLH.
JUDAEA or JUDEA ("loi&ua). The
southern province of Western Palestine, named
from the returning exiles of the tribe of Judah,
but extending beyond the old north border of
the tribal possessions to include all the territory
of Dan, Benjamin, and the southern part of
Ephraim, which districts were also recoloaised
by the exiles at the same time (Neh. xL
25-36). The A V. in one case (Exra v. 8)
renders the Aramaic *HiT by Judaea, in other
cases by Judah (Dan. ii. 25, vi. 13) or Jewry
(Dan. v. 13) ; the term meaning generally thai
part of the country in which the exiles had
settled round Jerusalem. At this time the
whole of Syria and Palestine formed a single
province (see Ezra v. 8; Neh. xi. 3) under a
satrap, and is counted by Herodotus (iii. 91) as
the fifth out of the twenty which formed the
Persian Empire. Classic authors, in the time of
the Roman rule in Syria, use the term Judaea
loosely in the same manner. Strabo (xvi.) in-
cludes all Palestine proper, south of the Leba-
non—the Jews in this period having spread over
the whole country. The unexplained notice of
Judah on Jordan (Josh. xix. 34) and the reading
(found in A.) "Judaea beyond Jordan" (Matt,
xix. 1) tempted Reland and others to extend the
application of the term to the regions east of
the river; but the translation of the first of
these passages, and the text, are alike perhaps
doubtful ; while in the second case other MSS.
(N, B, C) read " and beyond Jordan," agreeing
better with the parallel passage in Mark (x. IX
Joseph us defines Judaea (Wart, iii. 3-5) as ex-
tending from the Jordan to Joppa, and trom
Anuath and Borceos on the north, to Iarda
Clap**") on the south. The sites of the former
I towns are now marked by the ruins of 'Aim and
Digitized by
Google
JUDAEA
Beriit (see Conder's Handbook to the Bible, p. 306),
3.5 Roman miles south of Shechom, or in the
situation in which the Onomasticon (s. t. 'Ayoviy
places Anna. The Iarda of Josephos is ap-
parently the ancient Arad {Tell 'Ami), on the
border of the Beersheba deserts. The boundary
between Judaea and Idnmaea was, however, not
very distinctly drawn [see Edom], since the latter
province was also included within the limits of
the Holy Land as denned in early Rabbinical
works. The Talmud gives other indications
which serve to fix the boundary between Judaea
and Samaria very clearly. It ran along the
deep gorge of Waay Deir Ball at, from Antipatris
to Anuath, and thence N.E., including the Acra-
batene toparchy {Ware, iii. 3, 4) in Judaea.
Antipatris was the border town on the Judaean
aide of the frontier (Tal. Bab. Gittin, 76.i) on the
west (Tal. Bab. Sanhed, 946). Beth Rima (now
Beit Rima), Beth Laban (Lubben), and Keruthim
(Corea, now Keridt) were also near the border,
but within Judaea (Mishnah Menakhoth, ii. 7),
and lay immediately south of the boundary
gorge. Shiloh and Patris (probably the modern
jfudrus) were also in JudaeafTosiphta Demai, 1) ;
and since the beacon station of Sartaba (the
present JTurn Sartabah) was clearly in Judaea
(Mishnah Sash hash-Shanah, ii. 3), it follows
that the line must be carried east of Shechem,
to the important valley which runs down to
join the Jordan just north of that mountain.
Three natural divisions of Judaea are men-
tioned in the Mishnah (Shebiith, ix. 2) ; namely,
"the mountain" or "King's Mountain" (tl\
-^OH), the Shephelah or "low hills" (irW),
and Daroma or " the south " (Dill). To these
a fourth most be added on the east; namely,
the Wilderness of Judaea (Matt. iii. 1), which
included all the non-arable deserts west of the
Dead Sea. This region is called the Midbur of
Judah in the Old Testament (Josh. xix. 61 ;
Judg. i. 16 ; 1 Sam. xxiii. 14, 25) ; and in it were
the towns of Engedi, Ziph, Maon, and the " city
■of Salt," probably the present Tell el-Milh, or
" Hill of Salt," west of Arad. This is still the
most desolate region in Western Palestine, in-
habited only by small nomadic tribes, at inter-
vals along the plateau above the Dead Sea cliffs.
The term in the N. T. may perhaps include the
barren regions further north, where the wilder-
ness of Bethaven is mentioned in the 0. T., below
Bethel on the east (Josh, xviii. 12), since
these desert slopes, west of the Jordan valley,
were also within the limits of Judaea.
The subdivision of Judaea into Toparchies is
noticed by Josephus (Wart, iii. 3-5) and by
Pliny (H. N. v. 14) ; and there were eleven of
these districts with capitals at Acrabatta
■('Akrabeh), Thamna (Tibneh), Gophna (Jnfna),
Lydda (Lud), Jonpa ( Tdfa), Emmaus Nicopolis
■ ('Arnicas), Jericho (Rika), Herodium (Jebel
Fureidis), and Engedi ('Ain Jidy), while the two
last regions were Idumaea and Bethleptephah
(perhaps Tuffuh, near Hebron): this enumera-
tion shows that no region beyond Jordan was
included.
Other regions included in Judaea are men-
tioned in both the Talmud and the Onomasticon,
An addition to the natural regions already noted.
Daroma or the " dry " region, which stands for
vthe Hebrew Negeb in the Targum (Onkelos,
JUDAH
1823
Deut. xxxiv. 8), was subdivided into the upper
and the lower (Tosiphta Sanhed. 2, and Jer. and
Bab. Talmuds on the same Mishnah). The town
of Caphar Dhikrin (now Dhikrin in the north ol
Philistia) was in Upper Daroma as well as
Lydda (Midrash Ekha, ii. 2), so that the plains
south of Jaffa are evidently intended ; and the
region between Ekron and Jamnia still bears
the name of Deiran. Lower Daroma appears to
have been the Negeb proper or plateau of
Idumaea. The plains round Gerar (Dmm Jerdr)
were however known to these writers as Gerari-
tica (Tal. Jer. Shebiith, vi. 1) ; while the southern
part of Sharon, north of Jaffa, was also a region
in Judaea. Josephus indeed speaks of all the
towns (as far north as Accho) in the Sharon
plain as belonging to Judaea (Wars, iii. 3-5);
but from the Talmudic notices it would seem
that north of Antipatris the maritime plain was
regarded as no part of the Holy Land until the
border of Galilee was reached (Tal. Jer. Demai,
ii. 2) : there was certainly a mixed Jewish and
Samaritan population in this region, and Caesarea
appears not to be included in Judaea in the Mew
Testament (Acts xii. 19, xxi. 10). The Roman
Procurator of Judaea, however, resided during
part at least of the year at this maritime capital
instead of at Jerusalem (Antiq. xvii. 13, § 5 ;
xviii. 1, § 1 ; 2, § 1 ; 3, § 1) after the deposition
of Archelaus in 6 a.d. Judaea under the Pro-
curators was attached to Syria, and ruled by the
legate. The conquest of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
by Titus was commemorated by silver and brass
coins (see Madden, Coins of the Jews, pp. 207-
229), many of which bear the legend IVDAEA
CAPTA. In later Roman times Judaea was
approximately the Palestine Prima of the Greek
ecclesiastical organisation, with bishops under
the Patriarch of Jerusalem. The Talmudic
references in this article are mainly taken from
Keubauer's Geographie du Talmud, 1868 ; but
when that valuable work was written, the sites
of many important places, such as Anuath,
Borceos, &c, had not been discovered.
[C. R. C. ]
JU'DAH (fnW, i.e. Yehuda: 'lotto* in
Gen. xxix. 35 ; A. 'loita ; elsewhere 'loitas in
both MSS. and in N. T. ; and so also Josephus :
Juda). The fourth son of Jacob and the fourth
of Leah, the last before the temporary cessa-
tion in the births of her children. His whole-
brothers were Reuben, Simeon, and Levi, elder
than himself — Issachar and Zebulun younger
(see xxxv. 23). The name is explained as
having originated in Leah's exclamation of
" praise " at this fresh gift of Jehovah — " She
said, Now will I praise (fniK, 6deh) Jehovah,
and she called his name Tehudah " (Gen. xxix.
35). The same play is preserved in the bless-
ing of Jacob — " Judah, thou whom thy brethren
shall praise I " (xlix. 8). The name is not of
frequent occurrence in the O. T. . In the
Apocrypha, however, it appears in the great
hero Judas Maccabaeus ; in the N. T. in Jude,
Judas Iscariot, and others. [Juda ; Judas.]
Of the individual Judah more traits are pre-
served than of any other of the patriarchs with
the exception of Joseph. In the matter of the
sale of Joseph, he and Reuben stand out in
favourable contrast to the rest of the brothers.
Digitized by
Google
1824
JUDAH
JUDAH
But for their interference be, who was " their
brother and their flesh," would have been cer-
tainly put to death. Though not the firstborn,
he " prevailed above his brethren " (I Ch. v. 2),
and we And him subsequently taking a decided ,
lead in all the affairs of the family. When i
second visit to Egypt for corn had become is.
evitable, it was Judah who, as the moathpiect
of the rest, healed the remonstrance against
the detention of Benjamin by Jacob, and 6ds%
undertook to be responsible for the safety of the i scene it is Judah who unhesitatingly ackao*-
lad (xliii. 3-10). And when, through Joseph's
artifice, the brothers were brought back to the
palace, he is again the lender and spokesman
ledges the guilt which had never been
mitted, throws himself on the mercy »f tl*
supposed Egyptian prince, offers himself as »
of the band. In that thoroughly Oriental j slave, and makes that wonderful appeal to tat
Digitized by
Google
JUDAH
feelings of their disguised brother which ren-
ders it impossible for Joseph any longer to
conceal his secret (xliv. 14, 16-34). So, too, it
is Judah who is sent before Jacob to smooth
the way for him in the land of Goshen (xlvi.
•-J8). This ascendency over his brethren is
reflected in the last words addressed to him by
his father — "Thou whom thy brethren shall
praise 1 thy father's sons shall bow down before
thee I unto him shall be the gathering of the
people " (Gen. xlix. 8-10).* In the interesting
traditions of the Koran and the Midrash his
figure stands out in the same prominence.
Before Joseph his wrath is mightier and his
recognition heartier than the rest. It is he
who hastens in advance to bear to Jacob the
fragrant robe of Joseph (Weil's Biblical Legend*,
pp. 88-90).
His sons were five. Of these three were by
his Canaanite wife Bath-shua; they are all
insignificant; two died early, and the third,
Shelah, does not come prominently forward,
either in his person or his family. The other
two, Piiakez and Zerah — twins — were illegi-
timate sons by the widow of Er, the eldest of
the former family (Gen. xxxviii.). As is not
unfrequently the case, the illegitimate sons
surpassed the legitimate, and from Pharez, the
elder, were descended the royal and other
illustrious families of Judah. These sons were
born to Judah while he was living in the same
district of Palestine, which, centuries after, was
repossessed by his descendants — amongst villages
which retain their names nnaltered in the
catalogues of the time of the conquest. The
three sons went with their father into Egypt at
the time of the final removal thither (Gen. xlvi.
12 ; Ex. i. 2).
When we again meet with the families of
Judah, they occupy a position among the tribes
similar to that which their progenitor had
taken amongst the patriarchs. The numbers of
the tribe at the census at Sinai were 74,600
(Hum. i. 26, 27), considerably in advance of any
of the others, the largest of which — Dan —
numbered 62,700. On the borders of the Pro-
mised Land they were 76,500 (xxvi. 22), Dan
being still the nearest. The chief of the tribe
at the former census was Nahshon, the son of
Amminadab (Num. i. 7, ii. 3, vii. 12, x. 14), an
ancestor of David (Ruth iv. 20). Its repre-
sentative amongst the spies, and also among
those appointed to partition the land, was the
great Caleb the son of Jephunneh (Num. xiii.
; xxxiv. 19). During the march through the
desert Judah's place was in the van of the host,
on the east side of the Tabernacle, with his
kinsmen Issachar and Zebulun (ii. 3-9 ; x. 14).
The traditional standard of the tribe was a
lion's whelp, with the words, "Rise up, Lord,
and let Thine enemies be scattered I " (Targ.
Pseudojon. on Num. ii. 3).
During the conquest of the country the only
incidents specially affecting the tribe of Judah
are — (1) the misbehaviour of Achan, who was
of the great house of Zerah (Josh. vii. 1, 16-
18) ; and (2) the conquest of the mountain-
district of Hebron by Caleb, and of the strong
city Debir, in the same locality, by his nephew
• The obscure and much-disputed passage in v. 10
will be best examined under the head Shiloh.
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
JUDAH
1825
and son-in-law Othniel (Josh. xiv. 6-15, xv.
13-19). It is the only instance given of a por-
tion of the country being expressly reserved for
the person or persons who conquered it. In
general the conquest seems to have been made
by the whole community, and the territory
allotted afterwards, without reference to the
original conquerors of each locality. In this
case the high character and position of Caleb,
and perhaps a claim established by him at the
time of the visit of the spies to " the land
whereon his feet had trodden " (Josh. xiv. 9 ; cp.
Num. xiv. 24), may hare led to the exception.
The boundaries and contents of the territory
allotted to Judah are narrated at great length,
and with greater minuteness than the others, in
Josh. xv. 1-12, 20-63. This may be due
either to the fact that the lists were reduced to
their present form at a later period, when the
monarchy resided with Judah, and when more
care would naturally be bestowed on them than
on those of any other tribe ; or to the fact that
the territory was more important and more
thickly covered with towns and villages than
any other part of Palestine. The greater pro-
minence given to the genealogies of Judah in
1 Ch. ii., iii., iv. no doubt arises from the former
reason. However this may be, we have in the
records of Joshua a very full and systematic
description of the allotment to this tribe. The
north boundary — for the most part coincident
with the south boundary of Benjamin — began
at the embouchure of the Jordan, entered the
hills apparently at or about the present road
from Jericho, ran westward to En-shemesh —
probably the present 'Am Haud, below Bethany
— thence over the Mount of Olives to Enrogel,
the Fountain of the Virgin, in the Kedron valley ;
went along the ravine of Hinnom, under the
precipices of the city ; climbed the hill at the
north end of the Vale of Rephaim, and thence
by the waters of Nephtoah (probably the
springs near Solomon's Pools above Etam*),
Kirjath-Jearim (probably Kh. 'Erma), Beth-
shemesh QAin Shems), Timnath, and Ekron to
Jabneel on the sea-coast. On the east the Dead
Sea, and on the west the Mediterranean, formed
the boundaries. The southern line is hard to
determine, since it is denoted by places many of
which have not been identified. It left the
Dead Sea at its extreme south end, and joined
the Mediterranean at the WSdy el-Arish; but
between these two points it passed through
Maaleh Acrabbim, the Wilderness of Zin, Kez-
ron, Adar (R. V. Addar), Karkaa (R. V. Karka),
and Azmon ; the Wilderness of Zin the extreme
south of all (Josh. xv. 1-12). This territory —
in average length about 45 miles, and in average
breadth about 50 — was from a very early date
divided into four main regions.
(1.) The South — the undulating pasture
country, which intervened between the hills, the
proper possession of the tribe, and the deserts
which encompass the lower part of Palestine
(Josh. xv. 21 ; Stanley, S. £ P. ; Palmer, Desert
of the Exodus). It is this which is designated as
the wilderness (micftar) of Judah (Judg. i. 16).
It contained thirty-seven cities, with their
dependent villages (Josh. xv. 20-32), of which
» According to another view, Nephtoah li Lifla, and
Kirjatb-Jearun Is Kuryet O-'Knab. [BxarjAwrn.]
6 A
Digitized by
Google
1826
JUDAH
eighteen of those farthest (oath were ceded to
Simeon (lix. 1-9). Amongst these southern
cities the most familiar name is Beer-sheba.
(2.) The Lowlasd(xt. 33; A. V. » valley '*)
—or, to give it its own proper and constant
appellation, the Shefelah — the broad belt or
strip, of low hills and undulating ground, lying
between the central highlands — " the mountain "
— and the Mediterranean Sea; the lower por-
tion of that maritime plain, which extends
through the whole of the seaboard of Palestine,
from Sidon in the north to Rhinocolura at the
south. This tract was the garden and the
granary of the tribe. In it, long before the
conquest of the country by Israel, the Philis-
tines had settled themselves, never to be com-
pletely dislodged (Neh. xiii. 23, 24). There,
planted at equal intervals along the level coast,
were their five chief cities, each with its circle
of smaller dependents, overlooking, from the
natural undulations of the ground, the " standing
corn," " shocks," " vineyards and olivet," which
excited the ingenuity of Samson, and are still
remarked by modern travellers. "They are
all remarkable for the beauty and profusion of
the gardens which surround them — the scarlet
blossoms of the pomegranates, the enormous
oranges which gild the green foliage of their
famous groves" (Stanley, 8. f P. p. 257). From
the edge of the sandy tract, which fringes the
immediate shore right up to the very wall of
the hills of Judah, stretches the immense plain
of corn-fields. In those rich harvests lies the
explanation of the constant contests between
Israel and the Philistines (8. # P. p. 258). From
them were gathered the enormous cargoes of
wheat, which were transmitted to Phoenicia by
Solomon in exchange for the arts of Hiram, and
which in the time of the Herods still " nou-
rished " the country of Tyre and Sidon (Acts xii.
20). There were the olive-trees, the sycamore
trees, and the treasures of oil, the care of which
was sufficient to task the energies of two of
David's special officers (1 Ch. xxvii. 28). The
nature of this locality would seem to be reflected
in the names of many of its towns if interpreted
as Hebrew words: — DrjJSAK= cucumbers; Gt>
dehah, Gedeboth, Oederothaim, sheepfolds ;
Zobeah, wasps ; En-GAMBIM, spring of gardens,
&c. &c. But we have yet to learn how far
these names are Hebrew ; and whether at best
they are but mere Hebrew accommodations of
earlier originals, and therefore not to be de-
pended on for their significations. The number
of cities in this district, without counting the
smaller villages connected with them, was
forty-two. Of these, however, many which
belonged to the Philistines can only have been
alloted to the tribe, and if taken possession of
by Judah were only held for a time.
What were the exact boundaries of the Shefe-
lah we do not know. We are at present ignorant
of the principles on which the ancient Jews drew
their boundaries between one territory and
another. One thing only is certain, that cities
close to the sea-coast, and others, whose modern
representatives are found on the western slopes of
the central highlands, at altitudes of more than
1000 ft., are enumerated as in the " lowland."
(3.) The third region of the tribe — the
Moustaih, the "hill-country of Judah"—
though not the richest, was at once the largest
JUDAH
and the most important of the four. Beginning
a few miles below Hebron, where it attains its
highest level, it stretches eastward to the Dead
Sea and westward to the Shefelah, and forms
an elevated district or plateau, which, though
thrown into considerable undulations, yet pre-
serves a general level in both directions. It is
the southern portion of that elevated hilly dis-
trict of Palestine which stretches north until
intersected by the plain of Esdraelon, and on
which Hebron, Jerusalem, and Shechem are the
chief spots. The surface of this region, which
is of limestone, is monotonous enough, — round
swelling hills and hollows, of somewhat bolder
proportions than those immediately north of
Jerusalem, which, though in early times probably
covered with forests [Hareth], hare now,
where not cultivated, no growth larger than s
brushwood of dwarf-oak, arbutus, and other
bushes. In many places there is a good soft
turf, discoverable even in the autumn, and in
spring the hills are covered with flowers. The
number of towns enumerated (Josh. xv. 48-60)
as belonging to this district is 38 ; bat, if we
may judge from the rains which meet the eye
on every side, this mast have been very far
below the real number: hardly a hill which
is not crowned by some fragments of stone
buildings, more or less considerable, — those
which are still inhabited surrounded by groves
of olive-trees, and enclosures of stone walls
protecting the vineyards. Streams then are
none, but wells and springs are frequent — in
the neighbourhood of "Solomon's Pools" at
UrUu most abundant.
(4.) The fourth district is the Wilderness
(Midbar'), which here appears to signify the
sunken district immediately adjoining the Dead
Sea, and the Jeshimon, or desert tract to the
west,— the " wilderness of Judah " (Judg. L 16).
It contained only six cities, which must have
been either, like Engedi, on the slopes of the
clifls overhanging the sea, or else on the lower
level of the shore. The "city of Salt" may
have been on the salt plains, between the sea
and the clifls which form the southern termina-
tion to the Ghdr, or more probably at TeU d-
Milh, east of Beer-sheba.
Nine of the cities of Judah were allotted to
the priests (Josh, xxi 9-19). The Le rites had
no cities* in the tribe, and the priests had none
out of it.
In the partition of the territory by Joshua
and Eleazar (Josh. xix. 51), Judah had the first
allotment (xv. 1). Joshua had on his first
entrance into the country overrun the Shefelah,
destroyed some of the principal towns and killed
the kings (x. 28-35), and had even penetrated
thence into the mountains as far as Hebron and
Debir (m>. 36-39) ; but the task of really subju-
gating the interior was yet to be done. After
his death it was undertaken by Judah and
Simeon (Judg. i. 20). In the artificial contri-
vances of war they were surpassed by the
Canaanites; and in some places,' where the
• But Bethlehem appears to nave been closely cu»-
nected with them (Judg. xril. 7, » ; xlx. 1).
< The word here (Judg. 1. 19) Is Smdc, entirely s
different word from jks/sta*, and rightly r endered
"valley." It Is difficult, however, to fix upon any
" valley " in this region sufficiently important to o>
Digitized by
Google
JUDAH
ground admitted of their iron chariots being
.employed, the latter remained masters of the
field. But wherever force and rigour were in
question there the Israelites succeeded, and they
obtained entire possession of the mountain dis-
trict and the great corn-growing tract of Philistia
(Judg. i. 18, 19). The latter was constantly
changing hands as one or the other side got
stronger (1 Sam. iv., v., vii. 14, &c.); but in
the natural fortresses of the mountains Jndah
dwelt undisturbed throughout the troubled
period of the Judges. Othniel was partly a
member of the tribe (Judg. iii. 9), and the
JUDAH
1827
Bethlehem of which Ibzan was a native (xii.
8, 9) may have been Bethlehem-Judah. But
even if these two judges belonged to Judah, the
tribe itself was not molested ; and with the one
exception mentioned in Judg. xx. 19, when they
were called by the Divine oracle to make the
attack on Gibeah, they had nothing to do during
the whole of that period but settle themselves
in their home. Not only did they take no part
against Sisera, but they are not even rebuked
for it by Deborah.
Nor were they disturbed by the incursions of
the Philistines during the rule of Samuel and of
wndero«« of Jndah.
Saul, which were made through the territory ot
Dan and of Benjamin ; or if we place the valley
of Elah at the Wady tt-Sunt, only on the out-
skirts of the mountains of Judah. On the last-
named occasion, however, we know that at least
one town of Judah — Bethlehem — furnished men
to Sanl's host. The incidents of David's flight
from Saul will be found examined under the
heads of David, Saul, Maoh, Hachilah, &c.
The main inference deducible from these con-
alluded to. Can it be the valley of Elah, where
contests with the Philistines took place later?
siderations is the determined manner m which
the tribe keeps aloof from the rest — neither
offering its aid nor asking that ef others. The
same independent mode of action characterises
the fonndation of the monarchy after the death
of Saul. There was no attempt to set up a
rival power to Ishbosheth. The tribe had had
full experience of the man who had been driven
from the court to take shelter in the caves,
woods, and fastnesses of their wild hills ; and
when the opportunity offered, " the men of
Judah came and anointed David king over the
house of Jndah in Hebron" (2 Sam. ii. 4, 11).
6 A 2
Digitized by
Google
1828 JUDAH UrON JORDAN
The farther step by which David was invested
with the sovereignty of the whole nation was
taken by the other tribes ; Judah having no
special part therein ; and though willing enough,
if occasion rendered it necessary, to act with
others, their conduct later, when brought into
collision with Ephraim on the matter of the
restoration of David, shows that the men of
Judah had preserved their independent mode of
action. The king was near of kin to them ; and
therefore they, and they alone, set about bringing
him back. It had been their own affair, to be
accomplished by themselves alone, and they had
gone about it in that independent manner which
looked like " despising " those who believed
their share in David to be a far larger one
(2 Sam. xix. 41-43).
The same independent temper will be found to
characterise the tribe throughout its existence
as a kingdom, which is considered in the article
Judah, Kingdom of.
2. A Levite whose descendants, Kadmiel and
his sons, were very active in the work of re-
building the Temple after the return from
captivity (Ezra iii. 9). Lord Hervey has shown
cause for believing (Genealogies, &c, p. 119)
that the name is the same as Hodaviaii and
Hodevah. In 1 Esd. v. 58, it appears to be
given as JoDA.
3. (In Ezra, 'loitas, B. 'IoSojt, M. 'I«»o>; in
Neh. xii. 8, K*A. 'ImoW, K c 'B. 'Woo; in xii.
36, BA. omit : Judo, Judas.) A Levite who was
obliged by Ezra to pot away his foreign wife
(Ezra x. 23). Probably the same person is
intended in Neh. xii. 8, 36. In 1 Esd. his name
is given as Judas.
4. (K. 'Iooja, BA. 'loitas ; Judas.) A Ben-
jamite, son of Senuah (Neh. xi. 9). It is worth
notice, in connexion with the suggestion of Lord
Hervey mentioned above, that in the lists of 1 Ch.
ix., in many points so curiously parallel to those
of this chapter, a Benjaroite, Hodaviah, son of
Hassennuah, is given (v. 7 ; R. V.). [G.] [W.]
JUDAH UPON [R. V. AT] JORDAN,
the eastern termination of the boundary of
Naphtali (Josh. xix. 34). Von Raumer (Pal.
pp. 405-410) makes an elaborate attempt to
show that the villages of Jair are intended.
Keil adopts this view (Bib. Com. in loco), and
says that the district of Havoth-Jair is con-
sidered to be Jndah's, or in Judah, because Jair
was descended on the father's side from Judah
throngh Hezron (1 Ch. ii. 5, 21 sq.). The view
that the Havoth-Jair were largely colonised
" by Judahites," especially perhaps that portion
of them nearest the Jordan, and that that part
of the river and its valley adjacent to these
settlements was spoken of as "Judah upon
Jordan," or more literally "Judah of the
Jordan," is suggested in the Speaker's Comm.
(in loco). In connexion with this sugges-
tion it should be mentioned that near Bdnias
there is a Seiyid Huila ion V'akub, which Thom-
son (Land and the Book, p. 254) identifies with
Judah upon Jordan. But the difficulty — maxi-
mum atque ins lubilis nodus, qui plurimos inter-
pretet torsit — has defied every attempt ; and
the suggestion of Ewald (Qesch. ii. 380, note) is
the most feasible — that the passage is corrupt,
and that Cinneroth or some other word originally
occupied the place of " to Judah." [W.]
JUDAH, KINGDOM OF
JUDAH, KINGDOM OF. 1. When th-
disruption of Solomon's kingdom took place «*
Shecbem, only the tribe of Judah followed tbf
house of David. Bnt almost immediately after-
wards, when Rehoboam conceived the design it
establishing his authority over Israel by forcr
of arms, the tribe of Benjamin also is record*'!
as obeying bis summons, and contributing it-
warriors to make up his army. Jernsalenu
situate within the borders of Benjamin (JosL.
xviii. 28, tie.), yet won from the heathen by l
prince of Judah, connected the frontiers of tie
two tribes by an indissoluble political bond. Br
the occupation of the city of David, Benjanua't
former adherence to Israel (2 Sam. ii. 9) wn
cancelled ; though at least two Benjamite towns,
Bethel and Jericho, were included in the northern
kingdom. A part, if not all, of the territory of
Simeon (I Sam. xxvii. 6 ; 1 K. xix. 3 ; cp. Josk-
xix. 1) and of Dan (2 Ch. xi. 10 ; cp. Josh, xii
41, 42) was recognised as belonging to Judas ;
and in the reigns of Abijah and Asa, the southern
kingdom was enlarged by some additions takec
out of the territory of Ephraim (2 Ch. xiii. 15,
xv. 8, xvii. 2). After the conquest and depor-
tation of Israel by Assyria, the influence, an-i
perhaps the delegated jurisdiction, of the kinc
of Judah sometimes extended over the territory
which formerly belonged to Israel.
2. In Edom an independent king probably re-
tained some fidelity to the son of Solomon, and
guarded for Jewish enterprise the road to the
maritime trade with Opbir. Philistia maintain?-!
for the most part a quiet independence Syria,
in the height of her brief power, pushed her con-
quests along the northern and eastern frontier*
of Judah and threatened Jerusalem ; bwt th.r
interposition of the territory of Israel genera]]?
relieved Judah from any immediate contact wjti
that dangerous neighbour. The southern bonfcr
of Judah, resting on the uninhabited Desert,
was not agitated by any turbulent stream of
commercial activity like that which flowed by
the rear of Israel, from Damascus to Tyre. Ab4
though some of the Egyptian kings were atubitieu,
that ancient kingdom was far less aggressive aia
neighbour to Judah than Assyria was to Israel.
3. Some would find a gauge of the growth ef
the kingdom of Judah in the progressive aug-
mentation of the army under successive kings.
In David's time (2 Sam. xxiv. 9 and 1 Ch. xxi. 5)
the warriors of Judah are said to have numbered
at least 500,000. But Rehoboam brought into
the field (1 K. xii. 21) only 180,000 men : Abijah.
eighteen years afterwards, 400,000 (2 Ch. xiii.
3): Asa (2 Cb. xiv. 8), his successor, 580,000.
exactly equal to the sum of the armies of hi»
two predecessors : Jehoshaph:it (2 Ch. ivii. 14-
19), the next king, numbered his warriors in
five armies, the aggregate of which is 1,160,000,
exactly double the army of his rather, and
exactly equal to the sum of the armies of bb
three predecessors. After four inglorious reigns
the energetic Amaziah could muster only
300,000 men when he set out to recover Edom.
His son Uzziah had a standing (2 Ch. xxvi. II)
force of 307,500 fighting men. Unhappily, hot
little accuracy can be assigned to these numbers ;
though the deduction is drawn that the popu-
lation subject to each king was about four times
the number of the fighting men in his dominions.
[Isbaxu]
Digitized by
Google
JUDAH, KINGDOM OP
4. Judah had other means beside pasture and
tillage of acquiring wealth ; such as her mari-
time commerce from the Red Sea and possibly
Phoenician ports, or by keeping up and de-
veloping the old trade (1 K. x. 28) with Egypt.
Hence her ability to accumulate wealth, which
supplied the Temple treasury with sufficient
store to invite so frequently the hand of the
spoiler. Egypt, Damascus, Samaria, Nineveh,
and Babylon, had each in succession a share of
the pillage. The treasury was emptied by
Shishak (1 K. xiv. 26), again by Asa (1 K. xv.
18), by Jehoash of Judah (2 K. xii. 18), by
Jehoash of Israel (2 K. xiv. 14), by Ahaz (2 K.
xvi. 8), by Hezekiah (2 K. xviii. 15), and by
Nebuchadnezzar (2 K. xxiv. 13).
5. The smaller kingdom of Judah possessed
many advantages which secured for it a longer
continuance than that of Israel. A frontier less
exposed to powerful enemies, a soil less fertile,
a population hardier and more united, the pos-
session in Jerusalem and in the Temple of a fixed
and venerated centre of administration and
religion, an hereditary aristocracy in the sacer-
dotal caste, an army always subordinate, a stable
dynasty and a succession of kings which no
revolution interrupted, many of them being
wise and good ; men who strove successfully to
promote the moral and spiritual as well as the
material prosperity of their people ; still more
than these, the devotion of the people to the
One True God, which if not always a pure and
■elevated sentiment, but disfigured by worship
at " high places " and altars to foreign deities
And by a mischievous commingling of heathen
and purer rites (Riehm, HWB., s.n.% was yet
in much a contrast to devotion inspired by the
worship of the calves or of Baal ; and lastly the
jiopular reverence for and obedience to the Divine
Law, so far as they had learned it from their
teachers : — to these and other secondary causes
is to be attributed the fact that Judah survived
her more populous and more powerful sister
kingdom by 135 years; and lasted from B.C.
975 to B.c. 586. Cp. Kittel, Oesch. der BebrOer,
ii. § 64, whose opinion is preferable to that of
Wellhausen, Stade, and similar works referred
to by him ; Edershcim, Bible History, vols. iii.
and ir.
6. The chronological succession of the kings
of Judah is given at the end of the article
Israel. A detailed history of each king will
be found under his name.
Judah acted upon three different lines of
policy in succession. First, animosity against
Israel : secondly, resistance, generally in alliance
with Israel, to Damascus: thirdly, deference
and vassalage to Assyrian and Chaldaean kings.
(a.) The first three kings of Judah seem to
have cherished the hope of re-establishing their
authority over the Ten Tribes ; for sixty years
there was war between them and the kings of
Israel. Neither the disbanding of Kehoboam's
forces by the authority of Shemaiah, nor the
pillage of Jerusalem by the irresistible Shishak,
served to put an end to the fraternal hostility.
The victory achieved by the daring Abijah
brought to Judah a temporary accession of
territory. Asa appears to have enlarged it still
farther; and to have given so powerful a
stimulus to the migration of religious Israelites
to Jerusalem, that Baasha was induced to fortifv
JUDAH, KINGDOM OF 1829
Ramah with the view of checking the move-
ment. Asa provided for the safety of his sub-
jects from invaders by building, like Rehoboam,
several fenced cities ; he repelled an alarming
irruption of an Ethiopian horde; he hired
the armed intervention of Beuhadad, king of
Damascus, against liaasha; and he discouraged
idolatry and enforced the worship of the true
God by severe penal laws.
(6.) Hananis remonstrance (2 Ch. xvi. 7)
prepares us for the reversal by Jehoshaphat of
the policy which Asa pursued towards Israel
and Damascus. A close alliance sprang up with
strange rapidity between Judah and Israel.
For eighty years, till the time of Amaziah, there
was no open war between them, and Damascus
appears as their chief and common enemy;
though it rose afterwards from its overthrow to
become under Rezin the ally of Pekah against
Ahaz. Jehoshaphat, active and prosperous, re-
pelled nomad invaders from the desert, curbed
the aggressive spirit of his nearer neighbours,
and made bis influence felt even among the
Philistines and Arabians. A still more lasting
benefit was conferred on his kingdom by his
persevering efforts for the religious instruction
of the people, and the regular administration
of justice. The reign of Jehoram, the husband
of Athaliah — a time of bloodshed, idolatry, and
disaster — was cut short by disease. Ahaziah
was slain by Jehu. Athaliah, the granddaughter
of a Tyrian king, usurped the blood-stained
throne of David, till the followers of the ancient
religion put her to death, and crowned Jehoash
the surviving scion of the royal house. His
preserver, the high-priest, acquired prominent
personal influence for a time; but the king fell
into idolatry, and, failing to withstand the power
of Syria, was murdered by his own officers.
The vigorous Amaziah, flushed with the recovery
of Edom, provoked a war with his more power-
ful contemporary Jehoash, the conqueror of
the Syrians; and Jerusalem was entered and
plundered by the Israelites. But their energies
were sufficiently occupied in the task of com-
pleting the subjugation of Damascus. Under
(Jzziah and Jotham, Judah long enjoyed political
and religious prosperity till the wanton Ahaz,
surrounded by united enemies, with whom he
was unable to cope, became in an evil hour the
tributary and vassal of Tiglath-pileser.
(c.) Already in the fatal grasp of Assyria,
Judah was yet spared for a chequered existence
of almost another century and a half after the
termination of the kingdom of Israel. The
effect of the repulse of Sennacherib and of the
final overthrow of the Assyrian empire, x>f the
signal religious revivals under Hezekiah and
Josiah respectively, was apparently done away
by the ignominious reign and religious reaction
of Manasseh, and by the lingering decay of the
whole people under the four feeble descendants
of Josiah. Provoked by their treachery and
imbecility, .their Chaldaean masters drained in
successive deportations all the strength of the
kingdom. The consummation of the ruin came
upon them in the destruction of the Temple
by the hand of Nebuzaradan, amid the waitings
of prophets, and the taunts of heathen tribes
released at length from the yoke of David (cp.
Kittel, §§ 70-74).
7. The national life of the Hebrews seemed
Digitized by
Google
1830 JUDAH, KINGDOM OF
now extinct ; but there was still, as there had
been all along, a spiritual life hidden within the
body.
It was a time of hopeless darkness to all but
those Jews who had strong faith in God, with a
clear and steady insight into the ways of Pro-
vidence as interpreted by prophecy. The time
of the division of the kingdoms was the golden
age of prophecy. In each kingdom the pro-
phetical office was subject to peculiar modifi-
cations which were required in Judah by the
circumstances of the priesthood, in Israel by
the existence of the house of Baal and the
altar in Bethel. If, under the shadow of the
Temple, there was a depth and a grasp else-
where unequalled, in the views of Isaiah and the
Prophets of Judah ; if their writings touched
and elevated the hearts of thinking men in
studious retirement in the silent night-watches
— there was also, in the few burning words and
energetic deeds of the Prophets of Israel, a
power to tame a lawless multitude and to check
the high-handed tyranny and idolatry of kings.
The organization and moral influence of the
priesthood were matured in the time of David ;
from about that time to the building of the
second Temple, the influence of the Prophets
rose and became predominant. Some historians
have suspected that after the reign of Athaliah
the priesthood gradually acquired and retained
excessive and unconstitutional power in Judah.
The recorded facts scarcely sustain the con-
jecture. Had it been so, the effort of such
power would have been manifest in the exor-
bitant wealth and luxury of the priests, and in
the constant and cruel enforcement of penal
laws, like those of Asa, against irreligion. But
the peculiar offences of the priesthood, as wit-
nessed in the prophetic writings, were of another
kind. Ignorance of God's word, neglect of the
instruction of the laity, untruthfulness, and
partial judgments are the offences specially
impnted to them, just such as might be looked
for where the priesthood is an hereditary caste
and irresponsible, but neither ambitious nor
powerful. When the priest either, as was the
case in Israel, abandoned the land, or, as in
Judah, ceased to be really a teacher, ceased from
spiritual communion with God, ceased from
living sympathy with man, and became the
mere image of an intercessor, a mechanical per-
former of ceremonial duties little understood
or heeded by himself, then the Prophet was
raised up to supply some of his deficiencies,
and to exercise his functions so far as was neces-
sary. Whilst the priests sink into obscurity
and almost disappear, except from the genea-
logical tables, the Prophets come forward ap-
pealing everywhere to the conscience of indi-
viduals, in Israel as wonder-workers, calling
together God's chosen few oat of an idolatrous
nation, and in Judah as teachers and seers,
supporting and purifying all that remained of
ancient piety, explaining each mysterious dis-
pensation of God as it was unfolded, and pro-
mulgating His gracious spiritual promises in all
their extent. The part which Isaiah, Jeremiah,
and other Prophets also took in preparing the
Jews for their captivity, requires, in order to be
fully appreciated, to be supplemented by a
review of the succeeding efforts of Ezekiel and
Daniel. The influence which they exercised on
JUDAS BABSABAS
the national mind was undoubted, and t»
important to be overlooked in a sketch, however
brief, of the history of the kingdom of Judai,
even though that influence has been understood
differently by writers who have appreciated it
otherwise than as here sketched (cp. Kitttl,
§§65-74, Robertson, The Early Religion of Israel,
pp. 70 sq., 153 sq., on the one side; Wellhausea,
" Israel," § 8, in Encycl. Brit.; Stade, Gtsch. J.
Volkes Israel, ixtes Buch, " Die Prophetie •- a.
Untergang d. Staates," Robertson-Smith, Tht
0. T. in the Jewish Church*, Lect. 3L, on the
other). [W. T. B.] [F.]
JU'DAS ('lottos), the Greek form of tat
Hebrew name Judah, occurring in the UP
and N. T. [Judah.]
1. 1 Esd. ix. 23. [Judah, 3.]
2. The third son of Mattathias, " called Uac-
cabaeus " (1 Mace. ii. 4> [Maccabees.]
3. The son of Calphai (Alphaeus), a Jewish
general under Jonathan (1 Mace. xi. 70).
4. A Jew occupying a conspicuous position at
Jerusalem at the time of the mission to Aristo-
bulus [Aristobulcs] and the Egyptian Jews
(2 Mace i. 10). He has been identified with an
Essene conspicuous for his prophetic gifts (J«-
Ant. xiii. 11, 2; B.J. i. 3, 5) and with Judas
Maccabaeus (Grimm, ad toe.). Some agais
suppose that he is a person otherwise unknown.
5. A son of Simon, and brother of Joanne
Hyrcanus (1 Mace xvi. 2), murdered by Ptole-
maeus the usurper, either at the same time
(c. 135 B.C.) with his father (1 Mace, zrl 15 sq.),
or shortly afterwards (Jos. Ant. xiii. 8, 1 :
cp. Grimm, ad Mace 1. e).
6. The patriarch Judah (Matt. L 2, 3>
[B. F. vr.j
7. A man residing at Damascus, in "the
street which is called Straight," in whose house
Saul of Tarsus lodged after his miraculous con-
version (Acts ix. 11). The "Straight Street"
may be with little question identified with the
" Street of Bazaars," a long, wide thoroughfare,
penetrating from the southern gate into the
heart of the city, which, as in all the SyTo-Greek
and Syro-Roman towns, it intersects in a> straight
line. The so-called " House of Judas " is still
shown in an open space called "the Sheykh's
Place," a few steps out of the "Street «t"
Bazaars : " it contains a square room with a
stone floor, partly walled off for a tomb, shows
to Maundrell (Early Trav. Bonn, p. 494) as the
"tomb of Ananias." The house is an object
of religious respect to Mussulman as well as
Christian (Stanley, S. $ P. p. 412 ; Conybeare
and Howson, i. 102 ; Maundrell, /. c ; Pococke,
ii. 119). [g. V.]
JU'DAS, surnamed BAB'SABAS (I""*"
6 trtKoAointvos Bapaa&as : Judas am cog-
nominabatw Barsabas), a leading member of
the apostolic Church at Jerusalem (arJM iyov-
pcrot tv rots aSeXAois), Acts xv. 22, and " per-
haps a member of the Presbytery" (Neasder,
PL f TV. i. 123), endned with the gift of pro-
phecy (t>. 32), chosen with Silas to accompany
St. Paul and St. Barnabas as delegates to the
Church at Antioch, to communicate the decree
concerning the terms of admission of the Gen-
tile converts, and to accredit their commission
Digitized by
Google
JUDAS OF GALILEE
and character by personal intercourse («. 27).
After employing their prophetical gifts for the
confirmation of the Syrian Christians in the
faith, Judas went back to Jerusalem, while
Silas either remained at Antioch (for the reading
Acts xv. 34 is uncertain ; and while some MSS.,
followed by the Vulgate, add poVo> 'lovias Si
imptUri, the best omit the Terse altogether) or
speedily returned thither. Nothing further is
recorded of Judas.
The form of the same Barnabas = Son of
Sabas, has led to several conjectures : Wolf and
Grotius probably enough suppose him to have
been a brother of Joseph Barsabas (Acts i. 23) ;
while Schott (Isagog. § 103, p. 431), taking Sabas
or Zabas to be an abbreviated form of Zebedee,
regards Judas as an elder brother of James and
John, and attributes to him the " Epistle of
Jude." He must not be identified, as he has
been by some, with the Apostle Judas Thad-
daeus (see p. 1837 a). [E. V.] [F.]
JU'DAS OF GALILEE (lottos * ToX.-
Aoio j ; Judas Qalitaeiu), the leader of a popular
revolt " in the days of the taxing ",(«.«. the census,
under the prefecture of P. Sulp. Quirinus, A.D.
6, a.u.c. 759), referred to by Gamaliel in his
speech before the Sanhedrin (Acts v. 37). Ac-
cording to Josephus (Ant. xviii. 1, § 1), Judas
was a Gaulonite of the city of Gamala, a city
reckoned in Galilee, and hence his name of
Galilaean. His insurrection took its rise in
Judaea, and was of a theocratic character, the
watchword of which was " We have no Lord nor
master but God." He boldly denounced the
payment of tribute to Caesar, and all acknowledg-
ment of any foreign authority, as treason against
the principles of the Mosaic constitution, and
signifying nothing short of downright slavery.
His fiery eloquence and the popularity of his
doctrines drew vast numbers to his standard,
by many of whom he was regarded as the
Messiah (Orig. HomU. in Luc. xxv.), and the
country was for a time entirely given over to
the lawless depredations of the tierce and licen-
tious throng who had joined themselves to him.
But the might of Rome proved irresistible:
Judas himself perished, and his followers were
"dispersed," though not entirely destroyed till
the final overthrow of the city and nation.
With his fellow-insurgent Sadoc, a Pharisee,
Judas is represented by Josephus as the founder
of a fourth sect, in addition to the Pharisees,
Sadducees, and Essenes (Ant. xviii. 1, §§ 1, 6 ;
B. J. ii. 8, § 1). The point which appears to
have distinguished his followers from the Phari-
sees was their greater fanaticism and stubborn
love of freedom, leading them to despise torments,
or death for themselves or their friends, rather
than call any man master.
The Gaulonites, as his followers vtn called,
may be regarded as the religious ancestors of
the Zealots (cp. the Assumptio Mosis, x. 8) and
Sicarii of later days, and to the influence of his
tenets Josephus attributes all subsequent in-
surrections of the Jews, and the final destruction
of the City and the Temple. James and John,
the sons of Judas, headed an unsuccessful insur-
rection in the procuratorship of Tiberius Alex-
ander, a.D. 47, by whom they were taken
prisoners and crucified. Twenty years later,
a.d. 66, their younger brother Menahem, fol-
JUDAS I8CABIOT
1831
lowing his father's example, took the lead of a
band of desperadoes, who, after pillaging the
armoury of Herod in the fortress of Masada,
near the " gardens of Engaddi," marched to Jeru-
salem, occupied the city, and after a desperate
siege took the palace, where he immediately
assumed the state of a king, and committed
freat enormities. As he was going up to the
emple to worship, with great pomp, Menahem
was taken by the partisans of Eleazar the high-
priest, by whom he was tortured and put to
death Aug. 15, A.D. 66 (Milman, Hist, of Jews,
ii. 152, 231 ; Joseph. /. c. ; Orig. in Matt. xvii.
§ 25). References to the literature on this sub-
ject are given in Schiirer, Oesch. d. JSditchm
VoUen im Zeitalter Jesu Christi, i. pp. 406-7.
Dt V.] [F.]
JU'DAS ISCAE'IOT (lottos 'I<rjcapiwn>s ;
Judas Jscariotes). He is sometimes called " the
son of Simon " (John vi. 71, xiii. 2, 26), but
more commonly (the three Synoptic Gospels give
no other name) Iscariotes (Matt. x. 4 ; Mark iii.
19; Luke vi. 16 et at.). In the three lists of
the Twelve there is added in each case the fact
that he was the betrayer.
The name Iscariot has received many inter-
pretations, more or less conjectural (see the 1st
ed. of this work), but it is now universally agreed
that it is to be derived from Kerioth (Josh. xv.
25), in the tribe of Judah, the Heb. rrt*"l|J fc«£,
Tsh kebIyoth, passing into 'ItTKopiaWrit in the
same way as J,SO B"t< — 'Ish Tob,a man of Tob —
appears in Josephus (Ant. vii. 6, § 1) as "Iorw-
/Soi (Winer, RWB. s. v.). In connexion with
this explanation may be noticed the reading in
John vi. 71 received by Lachmann and Tischen-
dorf, Westcott and Hort, 'Itritapisrrov, which
makes the name of Iscariot belong to Simon, as
well as to Judas. On this hypothesis his position
among the Twelve, the rest of whom belonged to
Galilee (Acts ii. 7), would be exceptional.
Of the life of Judas, before the appearance of
his name in the lists of the Apostles, we know
absolutely nothing. It must be left to the sad
vision of a poet (Keble, Lyra Innocentium, ii. 13)
or the fantastic fables of an apocryphal Gospel
(Thilo, Cod. Apoc. A*. T. Evang. Infant, c. 35)
to portray the infancy and youth of the traitor.
What that appearance implies, however, is that
he had previously declared himself a disciple.
He was drawn, as the others were, by the preach-
ing of the Baptist, or his own Messianic hopes,
or the " gracious words " of the new teacher, to
leave his former life, and to obey the call of the
Prophet of Nazareth. What baser and more
selfish motives may have mingled even then
with his faith and zeal, we can only judge by
reasoning backward from the sequel. Gifts of
some kind there must have been, rendering the
choice of such a man not strange to others, not
unfit in itself, and the function which he ex-
ercised afterwards among the Twelve may in-
dicate what they were. The position of his name,
uniformly the last in the lists of the Apostles in
the Synoptic Gospels, is due, it may be imagined,
to the infamy which afterwards rested on his
name ; but, prior to that guilt, it would seem
that he took his place in the group of four
which always stand last in order, as if possess-
ing neither the love, nor the faith, nor the
Digitized by
Google
1882
JUDAS 1SCABI0T
JUDAS ISCAKIOT
devotion which marked the sons of Zebedee and
the son of Jonah.
The choice was not made, we must remember,
without a provision of its issue. " Jesus knew
from the beginning .... who should betray
Him" (John vi. 64); and the distinctness with
which that Evangelist records the successive
stages of the guilt of Judas, and his Master's
discernment of it (John xii. 4; xiii. 2, 27),
leaves with us the impression that he too
shrank instinctively (tiengel describes it as
"singularis antipathia," Gnomon A*. T. on
John vi. 64) from a nature so opposite to his
own. We can hardly expect to solve the
question why such a man was chosen for such
an office. Either we must assume absolute
foreknowledge, and then content ourselves with
saying with Calvin that the judgments of God
are as a great deep, and with Uilmann (Siind-
losiijk. Jem, p. 97) that he was chosen that the
Divine purpose might be accomplished through
him ; or else with Neander (Leben Jam, § 77)
that there was a discernment of the latent
germs of evil, such as belonged to the Son of
Han, in His insight into the hearts of men (John
ii. 25 ; Matt. ix. 4 ; Mark xii. 15), yet not such
as to exclude emotions of sudden sorrow or
anger (Mark iii. 5), or astonishment (Mark vi.
6 ; Luke vii. 9), admitting the thought " with
men this is impossible, but not with God."
Did He in the depth of that insight, and in the
fulness of His compassion, seek to overcome the
evil which, if not conquered, would be so fatal
to His follower ? It gives, at any rate, a new
meaning and force to many parts of our Lord's
teaching to remember that they must have been
spoken in the hearing of Judas, and may have
been designed to make him conscious of his
danger. The warnings as to the impossibility
of a service divided between God and Mammon
(Matt. vi. 19-34), and the destructive power of
the "cares of this world, and the deceitfulness
of riches" (Matt. xiii. 22, 23), the pointed
words that spoke of the guilt of unfaithfulness
in the "unrighteous Mammon" (Luke xvi. 11),
the proverb of the camel passing through the
needle's eye (Mark x. 25) must have fallen on
his heart as meant specially for him. He was
among those who asked the question, Who then
can be saved ? (Mark x. 26). Of him, too, we
may say, that, when he sinned, he was "kicking
against the pricks," letting slip his " calling
and election," frustrating the purpose of his
Master in giving him so high a work and
educating him for it (cp. Chrysost. Horn, on
Matt. xxvi. xxvii., John vi.).
The germs (see Stier's Words of Jesus, infra)
of the evil, in all likelihood, unfolded themselves
gradually. The rules to which the Twelve
were subject in their first journey (Matt. x.
9, 10) sheltered him from the temptation that
would have been most dangerous to him. The
new form of life, of which we find the first
traces in Luke viii. 3, brought that temptation
with it. As soon as the Twelve were recognised
as a body, travelling hither and thither with
their Master, receiving money and other offer-
ings, and redistributing what they received to
the poor, it became necessary that some one
should act as the steward and almoner of the
small society, and this fell to Judas (John xii.
6, xiii 29), either as having the gifts that
qualified him for it, or, as we may conjecture,
from his character, because he sought it, or, u
some have imagined, in rotation from time U
time. The Galiiaean or Judaean peasant (we
have no reason for thinking that his stalk*
differed from that of the other Apostles) fowls'
himself entrusted with larger soma of money
than before (the three hundred denarii of Join
xii. 5 are spoken of as a sum which he might
reasonably have expected), and with this there
came covetousness, unfaithfulness, embezzle-
ment. It was impossible after this that he
could feel at ease with One Who asserted so
clearly and sharply the laws of faithfulness,
duty, unselfishness; and the words of Jens.
" Have I not chosen you Twelve, and one of yeo
is a devil ? " * (John vi. 70), indicate that evw
then, though the greed of immediate or tit
hope of larger gain kept him from "goinf,
back," as others did (John vi. 66), hatred vat
taking the place of love, and leading him on to
a fiendish malignity.
In what way that evil was rebuked, what
discipline was applied to counteract it, has bees
hinted at above. The scene at Bethany (Jobs
xii. 1-9; Matt. xxvi. 6-13; Mark xiv. 3-8)
showed how deeply the canker had eaten into
his soul. That warm outpouring of love called
forth no sympathy. He himself ottered, fad
suggested to others, the complaint that it n.<
a waste. Under the plea of caring for the poor
he covered his own miserable theft.
The narrative of Matt, xxvi., Mark xiv. places
this history in close connexion (apparently ii
order of time) with the fact of the betrayal.
It leaves the motives of the betrayer opes t*
conjecture (cp. Neander, Lcbm Jem, § 264)
The mere love of money may have been strong
enough to make him clutch at the bribe offered
him. He came, it may be, expecting mere
(Matt, xxvii. 15); he will take that. He but
lost the chance of dealing with the three
hundred denarii ; it will be something to get
the thirty shekels as his own. It may hare
been that he felt that his Master saw through
his hidden guilt, and that he hastened on a
crisis to avoid the shame of open detection.
Mingled with this there may have been some
feeling of vindictiveness, — a vague, confused
desire to show that he had power to stop the
career of the Teacher Who had reproved him.
Had the words that spoke of " the burial " •<"
Jesus, and the lukewarmness of the people, and
the conspiracies of the priests led him at last t»
see that the Messianic kingdom was not as the
kingdoms of this world, and that his dream of
power and wealth to be enjoyed in it was s
delusion? (Ewald, Oesch. Israels, v. 441-
446.) There may have been the thought that,
after all, the betrayal could do no harm, that
his Master would prove His innocence, or by
some supernatural manifestation effect IBs
escape (Lightfoot, Hot. Heb. p. 886, in Winer,
and Whitby on Matt, xxvii. 4). Another
motive has been suggested (cp. Neander, JLchrn
Jesu, 1. c. ; and Whately, Essays on Dangers to
Christian Faith, Discourse iii.) of an entirely
different kind, altering altoget her the character
» Awful as the words were, however, we bM re-
member that like words were spukrn of and to >fastan
I\>tor(Matt. xvi. 23).
Digitized by
Google
JUDAS 1SCABI0T
•of the act. Not the love of money, nor revenge,
nor fear, nor disappointment, but policy, a
subtle plan to force on the hour of the triumph
of the Messianic kingdom, the belief that for
this service he would receive as high a place as
Peter, or James, or John : this it was that made
him the traitor. If he could place his Master
.in a position from which retreat would be im-
possible, where He would be compelled to throw
Himself on the people, and be raised by them
to the throne of His father David, then be
might look forward to being foremost and
highest in that kingdom, with all his desires
for wealth and power gratified to the fall.
Ingenious as this hypothesis is, it fails for that
very reason." It attributes to the Galilaean
peasant a subtlety in forecasting political com-
binations, and planning stratagems accordingly,
which is hardly compatible with bis character
and learning, hardly consistent either with the
)>ettiness of the faults into which he had
iiitherto fallen. Of the other motives that
have been assigned we need not care to fix on
any one, as that which singly led him on.
Crime is for the most part the result of a
hundred motives rushing with bewildering fury
through the mind of the criminal.
During the days that intervened between the
supper at Bethany and the Paschal or quasi-
1'aschal gathering, he appeared to have con-
cealed his treachery. He went with the other
disciples to and fro from Bethany to Jerusalem,
and looked on the acted parable of the barren
and condemned tree (Mark xi. 20-24), and
shared the vigils in Gethsemane (John xviii. 2).
At the Last Supper he is present, looking
forward to the consummation of his guilt as
drawing nearer every hour. All is at first as
if he were still faithful. He is admitted to the
least. His feet are washed, and for him there
are the fearful words, " Ye are clean, but not all."
He, it may be, receives the bread and the wine
which were the pledges of the new covenant.
Then come the sorrowful words which showed
him that his design was known. "One of you
shall betray Me." Others ask, in their sorrow
and confusion, "Is it I ?" He too must ask the
Mime question, lest he should seem guilty
(Matt. xxvi. 25). He alone hears the answer.
.St. John only, and through him St. Peter, and
the traitor himself, understand the meaning of
the act which pointed out that he was the
guilty one (John xiii. 26). 4 After this there
JUDAS ISOAKIOT
1833
* Cp. the remarks on this hypothesis. In which
■\Vbately followed (unconsciously perhaps) in the foot-
steps of Paulus, In Erech. u. Gruber's AUgtn. Encycl.
art. " Judas." See Speak*? '« Cortm. on St. John, Addtt.
note to xlli. 18.
« The question whether Judas was a partaker of the
lord's Supper Is encompassed with many difficulties,
lioth dogmatic and harmonlsttc. The general consensus
of patristic commentators gives an affirmative, that of
modern critics a negative answer (cp. Meyer, Qrnim. on
John xlli. 36). Bp. Westcott is of opinion that Judas
" was present at the distribution of the Sacramental
Bread, and not present at the distribution of the Sacra-
mental Cup " (Speaker* $ Comm. on St. John, In trod, note
to cb. xlli.).
* The combination of toe narratives of the four Gos-
pels to not without grave difficulties, for which har-
monists and commentators may be consulted. We have
given that which seems the most probable resnlt.
comes on him that paroxysm and insanity of
guilt as of one whose human soul was possessed
by the Spirit of Evil — " Satan entered into
him " (John xiii. 27). The words " What thou
doest, do quickly," come as a spur to drive him
on. The other disciples see in them only a
command which they interpret as connected
with the work he had hitherto undertaken.
Then he completes the sin from which even
those words might have drawn him back. He
knows that garden in which his Master and his
companions had so often rested after the weary
work of the day. He comes, accompanied by a
band of officers and servants (John xviii. 3),
with the kiss which was probably the usual
salutation of the disciples. The words of Jesus,
calm and gentle as they were, showed that this
was what embittered the treachery, and made
the suffering it inflicted more acute (Luke xxii.
48).
What followed in the confusion of that night
the Gospels do not record. Mot many stndent*
of the N. T. will follow Heumann and Arch-
bishop Whately (Essays on Dangers, 1. c.) in
the hypothesis that Judas was " the other
disciple " that was known to the high-priest,
and brought Peter in (cp. Meyer on John xviii.
15). It is probable enough, indeed, that he
who had gone out with the high-priest's officers
should return with them to wait the issue of
the trial. Then, when it was over, came the
reaction. The fever of the crime passed away.
There came back on him the recollection of the
sinless righteousness of the Master he had
wronged (Matt, xxvii. 3). He repented, and
his guilt and all that had tempted him to it
became hateful.* He will get rid of the
accursed thing, will transfer it back again to
those who with it had lured him on to destruc-
tion. They mock and sneer at the tool whom
they have used, and then there comes over him
the horror of great darkness that precedes self-
murder. He has owned his sin with "an
exceeding bitter cry," but he dares not turn,
with any hope of pardon, to the Master Whom
he has betrayed. He hurls the money, which
the priests refused to take, into the sanctuary
(root) where they were assembled. For him
there is no longer sacrifice or propitiation.' He
is " the son of perdition " (John xvii. 12). " He
departed and went and hanged himself" (Matt.
xxvii. 5). He went "unto his own place" 1
(Acts i. 25).
• This passage has often been appealed to, as Illustrat-
ing the difference between prrajicAtta and pcravoia. It
Is questionable, however, now far the N. T. writers re-
cognise that distinction (cp. Grotlus In loco). Still more
questionable la the notion above referred to, that St.
Matthew describes his disappointment at a result so
different from that on which be had reckoned.
' It Is characteristic of the wide, far-reaching sym-
pathy of Origen, that he suggests another motive for
the suicide of Judas. Despairing of pardon In this life,
he would rush on into the world of the dead, and there
(yvuvfj TjJ t/fvxif) meet his Lord, and confess bis guilt
and ask for pardon (Tract, in Matt. xxxv. : cp. also
Thcophanes, Horn, xxvii, in Suicer, Tku. s. v. 'Iovtat).
s The words Uux toVoc in St- Peter's speech convey to
our minds the impression of some dark region in Gehenna ;
or may be considered a euphemism for the condition of
the soul of Judas. LIglitfoot and GUI (In loco) quote
passages from Rabbinical writers who And that meaning
Digitized by
Google
1834
JUDAS ISCARIOT
We have in Acts i. another account of the
circumstances of his death, which it is not easy
to harmonise with that given by St. Matthew.
There, in words which may have been spoken by
St. Peter (Meyer, following the general con-
sensus of interpreters), or may have been a
parenthetical notice inserted by St. Luke (Calvin,
Olshausen, and others), it is stated —
(1) That, instead of throwing the money
into the Temple, he bought (eVrtyraro) a field
with it.
(2) That, instead of hanging himself, " falling
headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all
his bowels gushed out."
(3) That for this reason, and not because the
priests had bought it with the price of blood,
the field was called Aceldama.
It is, of course, easy to cut the knot, as Strauss
and De Wette have done, by assuming one or
both accounts to be spurious and legendary.
Receiving both as authentic, we are yet led to
the conclusion that the explanation is to be
found in some unknown series of facts, of which
we hare but two fragmentary narratives (cp.
Beyschlag in Riehm's HWB. s. n.). The solu-
tions that have been suggested by commentators
and harmonists are nothing more than exercises
of ingenuity seeking to dovetail into each other
portions of a dissected map which, for want of
missing pieces, do not fit. Edersheim, Life and
Times of Jems the Messiah, ii. 573, finds no
real divergence between the accounts.
The life of Judas has been represented here
in the only light in which it is possible for us
to look on it, as a human life, and therefore as
one of temptation, struggle, freedom, responsi-
bility. If another mode of speaking of it
appears in the N. T. ; if words are used which
imply that all happened as it had been decreed ;
that the guilt and the misery were parts of a
Divine plan (John vi. 64, xiii. 18 ; Acts i. 16),
we must yet remember that this is no single,
exceptional instance. All human actions are
dealt with in the same way. They appear at
one moment separate, free, uncontrolled; at
another they are links in a long chain of causes
and effects, the beginning and the end of which
are in the " thick darkness where God is," or
determined by an inexorable necessity. No
adherence to a philosophical system frees men
altogether from inconsistency in their language.
In proportion as their minds are religious, and
not philosophical, the transitions from one to
the other will be frequent, abrupt, and startling.
With the exception of the stories already
mentioned, there are but few traditions that
gather round the name of Judas. It appears,
however, in a strange, hardly intelligible way,
in the history of the wilder heresies of the
second century. The sect of Cainites, consistent
in their inversion of all that Christians in
general believed, was reported to have honoured
him as the only Apostle that was in possession
of the true gnosis, to have made him the object
of their worship, and to have had a Gospel
in the phrase, even In Gen. xxxl. M, w d Num. xxtv.
25. Some interpreters reject that explanation (cp.
Meyer In loco), and the great Anglican divine (Ham-
mond, Comment. \ on Vf. T. In loco) explained the sen-
tence, that St. Matthias should undertake the Apostolic
circuit which had been assigned to Judas.
JUDAS OB JUDB
bearing his name (cp. Neander, Church Histny,
ii. 153, Eng. Tr. ; Iren. adv. Haer. i. 35 ; Tertull.
de Praesc. c. 47). Kor the general literature
connected with this subject, especially for moao-
graphs on the motive of Judas and the maimer
of his death, see Winer, S WB. For a full treat-
ment of the questions of the relation in which
bis guilt stood to the life of Christ, cp. Stier's
Words of the Lord Jesus, on the passages where
Judas is mentioned, and in particular viL 40-
67, Eng. Tr. ; Edersheim, Life and Timet of
Jesus the Messiah, ii. 471-475 ; Farrar, The Lift
of Christ, pop. ed., Index, s. n. [E. H. P.] [F.J
JUDAS, or JUDE, or THADDAEUS, «
possibly LEBBAEUS ('IooSor 'loMifrw, Luke
vi. 16, Acts i. 13 ; QaStcuos, with v. I. At&Btuot,
Matt. x. 3, Mark ii. 18), one of the Twelve. Is sD
four lists of the Apostles he appears in the last
group with James of Alphaeus and Simon the
Zealot or the Cananaean ; the fourth member «:'
the group in the Gospels being Judas Iscsriot,
whose place is vacant in the Acta. In John xiv.
22 he is specially distinguished from Iscariot.
The usual identification of the Thaddacm
(Lebbaeus) in Matt, and Mark with the Judas of
James in Luke and Acts may be accepted without
serious hesitation. It is unlikely that four lists
of the Twelve should agree in all other case
and have a serious discrepancy here : and there
is nothing improbable in one of the Twelve
having even three names (trinomaa, as Jerome
calls him in Comm. on Matt. x. 3) ; although, like
Simon Peter and perhaps Bartholomew, Judas of
James probably had only two names — Judas ant'
Thaddaeus. This traditional identification is
ancient ; it solves a difficulty in a simple manner ;
and the only objection to it is the lack of direct
evidence ; for Syrian legends, which distinguish
Jude from Thaddaeus, the Apostle of Edeasa, are
not worthy of much credit. Those who reject
it either resort to the far more violent hypo-
thesis that Thaddaeus died, or left the apostolic
company, and that Judas of James took his
place (e.g. Schleiermacher and EwalJ), — so
hypothesis not easy to reconcile with Luke vi
16 ; or else suppose that primitive tradition as
to the names of the Twelve fluctuated (Strauss).
That the most natural translation of 'loMes
'laKii$ov is "Judas son of James" cannot be
doubted. It is true that the genitive does not
invariably denote the filial relationship (Moul-
ton's Winer, p. 237 ; Winer, Bibt. Sealw. ii. 57):
but the obvious and usual translation ought net
to be surrendered without clear evidence that
some other relationship must be meant. Among
the earliest Versions, the Old Latin and tb-
Memphitic reproduce the vagueness of the Greek,
Judas Jaoobi; while the Peahitto and the
Thebaic give the natural rendering, " Judas tie
ton of James." None suggest the exceptions!
rendering, " the brother of James." Moreover,
if St. Luke had meant this, why did he not
bracket the two brothers as he does St. Peter and
St. Andrew, St. James and St. John? He might
easily have made the matter clear by writing
" James of Alphaeus and Judas his brother," or
" James and Judas the sons of Alphaeus." But in
both lists he separates James and Judas by placing
Simon the Zealot between them. The inference
is that James and Judas were not related ; fcr
that James the father of Judas is identical with
Digitized by
Google
JUDAS OB JUDE
James of Alphaeus is most improbable. No-
where is any such relationship suggested ; and
James was a very common name (Lightfoot,
Oalatians, p. 263, 6th ed.). Among English
versions, Wiclif and the Rhemish follow the
indeliniteness of the Vulgate, " Judas (Jude) of
James " ; while Tyndale, Coverdale, and Cran-
mer hare "son : the highly improbable
" brother " comes from Beza and the Genevan
Version. Luther has Sohn. The fact that in
the opening address of the Epistle of Jude
&S*\<pb\ is expressed, tells against rather than
for its being understood in Luke vi. 16 and Acts
i. 13 ; for, if it had been meant, it would have
been expressed here also.
The name Lebbaeus or Lebaeus is probably an
early corruption of Thaddaeus. Neither name
is found in N. T., excepting in Matt. x. 3 and Mark
ii. 18 ; and " the clearly defined attestation is
unfavourable to the genuineness of At0$<uos in
either Gospel. This name is apparently due to
an early attempt to bring Levi (A«vcl>) the
publican (Luke v. 27) within the Twelve, it being
assumed that his call was to apostleship ; just
as in Mark ii. 14 Aevels is changed in Western
texts to 'Hku0os because rbv rov 'AA^olow
follows, and it was assumed that the son of
Alphaeus elsewhere named as one of the Twelve
must be meant. The difference between the two
forms of the name would be inconsiderable in
Aramaic, Lewi and Levi or Lebi and Lebbi ; and
At0fiaios might as easily represent Lebbi as
BaSbaiot Thaddi" (Westcott and Hort, ii. Ap-
pendix, p. 11 : cp. Origen c. Celsum, I. lxii.,
where Levi appears as Lebes and is not identified
with Matthew). If this is correct, discussions
as to whether Ae/SjSaios means " man of Lebba,"
which is supposed to have been a town of Gali-
lee (Baumgarten-Crusius), or "young lion"
(Schleusner), or " dear heart " (Jerome), are out
of place. Winer, Sieffert, and others would
identify the meaning of Lebbaeus and Thad-
daeus, interpreting the former as " heart " and
the latter as " breast," and making both equi-
valent to " darling " (Herzenskind). There may
be something in this, if the authors of the
Western text were trying to express different
varieties in the Aramaic. Ae/J/Saibi having been
substituted for 6a88oToj in some early copies,
the way was prepared for the conflate reading
followed in all English versions previous to the
R. V.,' Ae/90oToj o 6rucA.ij9«!t BaSSahs (C. 1 L.),
for which some cursives have BaSSatos 6 ixi-
kAij6«1j At0&a?os, while some Old Latin texts
read Judas Zelotes. This last perhaps comes
from a wrong punctuation of Luke vi. 16 ; rbv
KoAoifuvav ZtjXibtV koI 'loitay 'laic<i0ov being
taken together as meaning "him who was called
Zelotes and Judas Jacobi." A similar reading
appears in the Thebaic Version of John xiv. 22,
where "Judas the Cananaean" is substituted
for " Judas not Iscariot." Thus a fourth name
is added to Thaddaeus, Lebbaeus, and Jndas of
James : and the confusion is made worse by the
Curetonian Syriac, which has " Judas Thomas "
or " Judas the Twin " for " Judas not Iscariot."
Apparently the Syriac translator understood St.
John to mean Thomas Didymus, and not Judas
of James; for in the Syrian Church Thomas
JUDAS OB JUDE
1835
• Excepting Wiclif and the Rhemish, which of course
follow the Vulgate in reading simply Thaddaeus.
was commonly called Jndas. Thus Eusebiu»
says that intiertiKty alny (to Abgarus) 'loitas
i koI Ott/uis BaSScuov iar6<rro\oy, iva ruv
tflSofiiicovra (J7. E. I. xiii. 10). In the Gnostic
Acts of Thomas this Apostle is called Judas
Thomas, as also in the Edessan Acts and in the
Syriac Teaching of the Apostles ; and he is made
the twin brother of Jesus, and so like Him that
one was sometimes mistaken for the other
{Acta Thomae, § 31, p. 217 ed. Tischend., p. 23.
ed. Bonnet).* Thomas or "the Twin" looks
like a surname, and it is not improbable that
his first name was Judas. But it is not at all
probable that St. John by " Judas not Iscariot "
means the Apostle whom he everywhere else calls
Thomas (xi. 16, xiv. 5, xx. 24-28, xxi. 2). All
this confusion, however, admits of ready simpli-
fication without the employment of rash hypo-
theses. Judas and Thaddaeus are two names
for one and the same Apostle, who was the son
of an otherwise unknown James. " Lebbaeus "
is probably a corrupt reading, the result of a
mistaken identification of Thaddaeus with Levi
or substitution of Levi for Thaddaeus. " Judas
Zelotes " and " Judas the Cananaean " are
certainly corrupt readings, perhaps produced by
a misunderstanding of Luke vi. 16. "Judas
Thomas " is equally certainly a corrupt reading
in John xiv. 22, arising from the fact that
Syrian Christians called Thomas the Apostle
Judas. Thus all these substitutions or additions
may be rejected, and the three well-established
readings—" Thaddaeus," " Judas of James," and
" Judas not Iscariot " — retained.
The Apostle who is thus designated is little
more than a name to us in N. T., and traditions
respecting him are untrustworthy. That he-
had some share in founding the Church of
Edessa, is doubtful ; and perhaps there is not even
this element of truth in the Abgarus legend
(Eus. H. E. I. xiii.). The Syrian Church believed
that he went from Edessa to preach in Phoenicia,
and there found a martyr's death. In Abdias
the scene "of his preaching and martyrdom i»
Persia. Nicephorus Callistus makes him preach
in Palestine, Syria, and Arabia, and then die a
natural death at Edessa (H. E. n. xl.). In the
Apostolical Constitutions, viii. 25, 26, the regula-
tions about widows and exorcists are assigned to
" Lebbaeus surnamed Thaddaeus " ; and the two-
Vienna MSS. have a note stating that Thaddaeus
or Lebbaeus " was surnamed Judas the Zealot "
and preached in Mesopotamia. An apocryphal
Oospel of Thaddaeus is mentioned in connexion-
with a synod at Rome in A.D. 494 in the time of
Pope Gelasins: and we have some Acta Thad-
daei, in which the letter of Abgarus differs some-
what from the one given by Eusebius (Tisch.
Acta Apost. Apocr. p. 261 ; Lipsius, Apocr.
Apostelg. iii. 154-200). See Sieffert's article
" Judas Lebbaeus " in Herzog's Encycl. 2nd ed.,
Mangold's in Schenkel's Bibel-Lex., and the
articles on the Legend and Festival of Jude.
the Apostle in Smith's Diet, of Chr. Ant,
and on the Dootbina Addabi in the Diet, of
Chr. Biog. [A. P.]
» See also Wright, 4»er. Acts qf the Apostles, p. Ut(
Lipsius, Apocr. Apostelg. I. 21t ; Phillips, Doetrina
Addaei, p. 6 ; Cureton, Anc. Syriac Document/, p. 30 ;.
Aswnunl BOl. Orient. I. 318 ; Ante-Nioen* Library,
Apocr. Gotpds and Acts, pp. 389, 380. 3M.
Digitized by
Google
1836 JUDAS, THE LOBD'S BBOTHEB
JUDA8, THE LOBD'S BBOTHEB. In
Matt. xiii. 55 we read, " Is not thU the carpenter's
son ? U not His mother called Mary ? and His
brethren, James, and Joseph, and Simon, and
Judas?" The parallel passage in Mark vi. 3
runs, " Is not this the carpenter, the son of
Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and
Judas, and Simon ? " That the four brethren
of Christ mentioned by St. Matthew are identical
with the four mentioned by St. Mark, is manifest.
It is sometimes, however, assumed that " Mary
the mother of James and Joses " (Matt, xxvii.
5o), " Mary the mother of James the less and of
Joaes " (Mark. xv. 40), is the mother of the four
brethren mentioned in the first pair of passages.
But this is very precarious. The omission of
two of the four, the silence respecting any
relationship to the Lord, and the fact that both
James and Joseph were very common names, are
very much against the identification. More-
over, there is mention of the Lord's mother in
close connexion with the four brethren in the
one case, whereas in the other case another
Mary is the mother of the two brothers. The
further identification of two, or even three, of
the four brethren with the Apostles of the same
name is still more untenable. If James the
Lord's brother is James the son of Alphneus, and
Simon the Lord's brother is Simon the Zealot,
and Judas the Lord's brother is Judas not
Jscariot, then St. John could never have written
" even His brethren did not believe on Him "
(vii. 5). Moreover this theory involves two
sisters both bearing the name of Mary, with
other improbabilities. In none of the four lists
of the Apostles is there any hint that any one of
them was a brother of the Lord ; and in Acta i.
13, 14, and 1 Cor. ix. 5, the Lord's brethren are
distinguished from the Apostles. We may
safely conclude that the four brethren of the
Lord and His sisters are either the children of
His mother or else of some person whose name is
not known. In the latter case their precise
relationship to the Lord is uncertain. Of these
four, Joses or Joseph and Simon are not to be
identified with any other Josei and Simon ;. and
we know nothing respecting them beyond their
names and their relationship to Christ. Of the
other two, James is one of the most prominent
figures in the primitive Church, being overseer
of the mother Church of Jerusalem and the
writer of the Epistle which bears his name,
while his brother Judas or Jude is probably
the author of the Epistle of Jude (see next
article).*
Jude, like his brethren, did not at first believe
that Jesus was the Messiah (John vii. 5), but
was convinced by the Resurrection (Acts i. 14).
He was married (1 Cor. ix. 5), and Hegesippus
tells an interesting story of two of his grandsons
<£us. H. E. hi. xx. 1-8). These two men were
taken before Domitian as of the royal family of
David, and therefore dangerous to the Emperor.
For Domitian, says Hegesippus, " was afraid of
the appearance of the Christ, as was Herod."
They admitted their royal descent, but stated
that they were humble persons, living by
• [On the much-disputed question who were "the
brethren of the Lord," see further the different views
advocated In Brother, p. 461, and James, pp. 1512 eeq.
—Editors.]
JUDE, EPISTLE OF
manual labour; in evidence of which they
showed their rough hands. When asked about
Christ's kingdom, they said that it was a heavenly
one, and that at the end of the world He would
come to judge the living and the dead.
Domitian dismissed them as too simple to be
dangerous, and forbade any further persecution
of the family of David. A fragment of Philip of
Side (c. A.D. 425) states that Hegesippus gave
Zocer and James as the names of these two
grandsons of Jude (Ttzte tuxi UttUmvchmgn,
v. 2, p. 169). On their return to Palestine
they were honoured both as confessors and as of
the family of the Lord, and lived until the reign
of Trajan (Eus. H. E. III. xxxii. 5, 6). We
must suppose that, when they were taken before
Domitian, their father and grandfather were
dead, otherwise they would have been arrested
also. This seems to show that St. Jade died
before, or not long after, the accession of
Domitian, a.d. 81. [A. P.]
JUDE, EPISTLE OF. (See Jcdis or
JODE.)
There is no valid reason for doubting that
this Epistle was written by the person whose
name it bears. Nor is there very much doubt
as to who this Jude or Judas is. He styles
himself " servant of Jesus Christ and brother of
James." If he had been an Apostle, be would
probably have said so. His object in mentioning
his brother James must hare been to win the
attention and interest of his readers ; and to
have mentioned that he was one of the Twelve
would have been a far better way of securing
attention. It is true that an Apostle might
have written, " Remember ye the words which
have been spoken before by the Apostles of our
I.ord Jesus Christ " (r. 17 ; yet cp. Ephes. iii.
5 and Gal. i. 19): but such a charge comes
much more naturally from one who is not
himself one of the number. The author
evidently wishes to speak with all possible
authority, and we can conjecture no reason for
his suppressing the fact of his being an Apostle,
if he had been one. We cannot, therefore,
identify this Jude with Judas not Iscariot (John
xiv. 22 ; Luke vi. 16; Acts i. 13). Nor can we
identify his brother James with James of
Alphaeus, or James the son of Zebedee. There
is no reasonable doubt that the James of whom
our Jude is the brother is the first president of
the Church of Jerusalem, the brother of the
Lord, and the writer of the Epistle of James.
Jude, therefore, is also a brother of the Lord.
But neither he nor James claim any authority
in virtue of this relationship, and do not mention
the relationship in their Epistles, for reasons
which are indicated by Clement of Alexandria in
the AdumbraUones : "Judas, who wrote the
Catholic Epistle, brother of the sons of Joseph,
a very religious man, though he knew of his
relationship, did not call himself His brother.
But what said he ? ' Judas, the servant of Jesus
Christ ' as his Lord." That is, reverence kept
him silent. Jude, however, does think that his
close relationship to the revered James the Just
will win for him interest and attention ; and he
therefore mentions the relationship. The brother
of James would be specially acceptable to Jewish
Christians, whom the writer has chiefly in mind
as he writes.
Digitized by
Google
JUDK, EPISTLE OF
Authenticity. — The Epistles of both
brothers are classed by Eusebius among the
" disputed " books (itnt\ff6fupa) of the X. T.,
which means that some Christians had mis-
givings respecting them, and therefore proves
that these books were not admitted into the
N. T. without careful scrutiny. For some time
nfter these Epistles were written there were
Churches in the West that had never heard of
the Epistle of James, and Churches in the East
that had never heard of that of Jude. Even
where they were known, their claim to authority
wns open to doubt, because they did not appear
to be written by Apostles. The shorter Epistle
was open to a further objection. " Because in it
Jude derives a testimony from the Book of
Enoch, which is apocryphal, it is rejected by
some " * (Jerome, Catul. Sur. Eccl. iv.). The
strongest evidence of objection to the Epistle of
Jude, or of ignorance as to its existence, is
afforded by its absence from the Peabitto, a fact
which is of weight in determining the author-
ship. If the Apostle Judas Thaddaeus were the
author, his connexion with Edessa would have
secured the inclusion of his letter in the Syriac
versions. Its omission is intelligible, if the
author was not an Apostle. The silence of
early writers proves very little, for the letter is
too short to be often quoted. Even Chrysostom,
who must have known it, does not quote it once
in all his voluminous writings. Against the
silence of many and the condemnation of some
is to be set the general acceptance in the West
which is shown by the Muratorian Canon :
Epistola sane Iude et superscriptio Johannis
duos in catholica habentur. Here superscriptio is
a blunder for superscript!, " the John mentioned
above," or for super scriptae [Johannis duae], " the
two above-mentioned letters of John " j and
almost certainly in catholica means " in the
Catholic Church." But the evidence remains
strong whatever be the right reading. Clement
of Alexandria commented on it in his Hypo-
typoseis or Adumbrationes (Eus. H. E. VI. xiv. 1),
and quotes it as Scripture (Paed. III. viii. 280 ;
Strom, in. ii. 515); and his disciple Origen,
although aware of doubts respecting it, yet
accepted it himself and several times quotes it.*
In commenting on Matt. xiii. 55 he calls it
" an epistle of few lines, yet full of the strong
words of heavenly grace." And Didymus,
yet another head of the Catechetical School
at Alexandria, and the instructor of Jerome
and Rufinus, condemns those who rejected
the Epistle because of the passage about the
body of Moses, much as Jerome seems to
condemn those who rejected it because of the
quotation from the Book of Enoch. The testi-
mony from North Africa is also strong. Ter-
tullian maintains that the Book of Enoch ought
JUDE, EPISTLE OP
1837
» X pltritqve rtjicitur. The meaning of pUritqut Is
uncertain. The classical meaning of pterique was
extinct, for even In Tacitus It means not "most" but
"very many" (e.g. Hitt. iv. 84). Later on It came
to mean no more than " some." Thus Jerome, writing
to Dardanu* ( Kp. cxxix.), says of the Epistle to tbe
Hebrews, licet pirrique earn vtl Barnabac vet CUmcntii
arbitrentur, where plerique = the nWv of Origen and
Euaebtus (H. X. vi. zx. 3; xxv. 1).
» Uoma. in am. xill. ; in Jos. vll. ; in Estch. iv. ;
Comment, in Mat. xill.
to be regarded as Scripture, among other reasons
because it is quoted by " the Apostle Jude " (TV
Cult. Fern. I. iii.); and Augustine asks, "What
of Enoch the seventh from Adam ? Does not
the canonical epistle of the Apostle Jude declare
that he prophesied ? " (De Civ. Dei, xvm.
xxxviii. 1). But for the lack of testimony from
the East, this amount of evidence in favour of so
brief a document is surprising ; and about the
year A.D. 269 we get evidence from the East.
Eusebins has preserved part of the letter of a
synod at Antioch against Paul of Samosata, and
the tone of the document suggests acquaintance
with the Epistle of Jude ; e.g. " denying his God
[and Lord] " (cp. Jude r. 4) and " not guarding
the faith which he once held" (cp. Jude e. 9).
The quotations from Jnde in Ephrem Syrus
(A.D. 350-373) are found only in the Greek
translations of his writings, and cannot be relied
upon as original : but without them the Epistle
is sufficiently attested as of the apostolic age.
Renan places it as early as A.D. 54 ; but re-
gards it as an attack on St. Paul, who is one of
those who " defile the flesh, and set at nought
dominion, and rail at dignities." In this idea he
is probably alone. A forger covertly attacking
St. Paul would have written in the name of
some one possessing more authority than
"Judas, brother of James." Harnack (Dis
N. T. tun d. Jahr. 200, p. 79) admits that Zahu
{Qesch. d. N. T. Kannns, i. p. 321) exaggerates
very little when he declares that about
A.D. 200 the Epistle of Jude was accepted
"in the Church of all lands round the Mediter-
ranean Sea." Whatever misgivings existed in
some quarters were exceptional, and before
long passed away.
The Persons addressed in tbe Epistle are
" those that are called, beloved in God the
Father, and kept for Jesus Christ"; i.e. all
Christians, whether Jews or Gentiles, wherever
they may dwell. But it is probable that the
writer has Jewish Christians of Palestine and
Syria principally in his mind. Like that of
St. James, the Epistle is Palestinian in origin
and in tone, and the writer would think chiefly
nf the kind of Christians with whom he was
most familiar.
The Occasion of the letter is plainly stated.
St. Jude had been intending to write an Epistle
" about oar common salvation " (t>. 3), when
the invasion of the Church by ungodly men pro-
duced a crisis which constrained him to write at
once an Epistle of a different character, in order
to denounce the authors of this trouble and put
others on their guard respecting them. These
invaders had " crept in privily," and had turned
Christian liberty into the anarchy of heathen
licence. Clement of Alexandria (6'iroro. III. ii.
p. 515) thinks that St. Jude denounces pro-
phetically the licentious doctrine and practice of
Carpocrates. Some moderns suggest that tbe
writer was contemporary with Carpocrates, and
therefore cannot be Judas the brother of James.
The date of Carpocrates is uncertain, and
St. Jude may have known him : but there is no
reason for supposing that he refers to him or
any Antinomian teacher. These "ungodly
men" were not propagandists, but libertines.
They " denied our only Master and Lord," not
by anti-Christian doctrines, bat by unchris-
tian lives. They maintained that Christians
Digitized by VjOOQlC
1838 JUDE, EPISTLE OF
might indulge in gross sensuality; and, when
rebuked, they reviled those who were tet over
them.
The Contents of the Epistle exhibit a care*
ful plan. Introduction (1-4): Warning and
Denunciation: Three instances of God's ven-
geance (5-7) and application to the libertines
(8-10) ; Three examples of similar wickedness
(11), and threefold description corresponding to
them (12-15, 16-18, 19): Exhortation (20-23) :
Doxology (24, 25). The writer's fondness for
triplets is remarkable. We can trace a dozen,
most of which can hardly be accidental. (1)
Judas, a servant . . . and brother. (2) Called,
beloved, . . . and kept. (3) Mercy and peace
and love. (4) Ungodly, turning . . . and
denying. (5) Israelites, angels, cities of the
plain. (6) Defile . . . set] at nought . . . and
rail. (7) Cain, Balaam, Korah. (8) These are
. . . These are . . . These are. (9) Who make
separations, sensual, having not the Spirit. (10)
Building up . . . praying . . . looking for
mercy. (11) Have mercy . . . save . . . have
mercy with fear. (12) Before all time, and
now, and for evermore.
The Epistle presents some special difficulties.
a. From v. 4 to r. 18 the resemblance to the
central portion of 2 Peter is such that it is
universally admitted that one writer most have
borrowed from the other. That both have
borrowed from a third is a possible, but much
leu probable, alternative, and it lacks sup-
porters. Of late years the balance of opinion
has been in favour of the priority of this
Epistle, Spitta being a notable exception. The
main arguments on each side are these. For
the priority of Jude. (1) It is more probable
that most of a short document should be
inserted in a much longer one, than that a
fraction of a longer document should be made
the main portion of a short one. (2) It
is more probable that things that seemed
objectionable or difficult should be omitted in
2 Peter, than that they should be inserted in
Jude : e.g. " wells without water " (2 Pet. ii.
17) looks like a correction of the aelf-contra-
dictory " clouds without water " (Jude v. 12);
and without Jude t. 9 the less decided statement
an 2 Pet. ii. 11 is scarcely intelligible, as if the
writer disliked the apocryphal literature which
Jude uses so freely. The statements in Jude te. 6,
14, 15, 23 are either omitted in 2 Peter, or put
in a way less likely to offend (ii. 4, 11). For
the priority of 2 Peter. (1) If 2 Peter is
genuine, it is less probable that the chief of the
Apostles should borrow from one who was not
an Apostle at all, than vice versd; and if
2 Peter is not genuine, it is unlikely that a
plagiarist would discredit his forgery by incor-
porating what was already disliked for its use
of apocryphal literature. (2) The troubles
which 2 Peter speaks of as future (ii. 1) Jude
speaks of as present (t>. 4) ; and while 2 Peter
says that " in the last days mockers shall come
with mockery, walking after their own lusts "
(iii. 3), Jude gives these very words as an
apostolic prophecy (rr. 17, 18). The telling
points in Jude which are not found in 2 Peter
lead one to think that the writer of 2 Peter had
not seen Jude ; but these are balanced by telling
points in 2 Peter which are not found in Jude.
The triplets, so common in Jude, are not found
JUDE, EPI8TLE OF
in 2 Peter ; and it seems to be more probable
that the writer of 2 Peter has overlooked or
ignored them, than that St. Jude has inserted
them into borrowed material. The priority of
Jude may be regarded as the more tenable
hypothesis ; but certainty is unattainable.
b. Another difficulty, noticed from very early
times, is the use which St. Jude makes of
apocryphal writings. He quotes the Book of
Enoch as if it were inspired; and in other
passages, without exactly quoting, he seems to
be under its influence. Moreover he draws a
portion of his material from the Assumption of
Moses. The Book of Enoch is composite, and
some of the central portion may be later than
the Christian era. But chapters L-xxxvi. and
lxxiL-cv. are undoubtedly earlier ; and it is in
these that the quotation and the parallels are
found. "Angels which kept not their own
principality, but left their proper habitation,
He hath kept in everlasting bonds under dark-
ness unto the judgment of the great day"
(Jude v. 6) is a condensation of Enoch viL-xxi. :
see especially x. 6-16 ; xiv. 2 ; xxL 3, 6. The
expressions " rail at dignities " (glories), " wan-
dering stars, for whom the blackness of dark-
ness hath been reserved for ever," and "the
seventh from Adam " seem to have been sug-
gested by the Book of Enoch (vi. 4; xxvi. 2;
xviii. 6-16 ; xcii. 4). It is Origen who tells us
that the contest between Michael and Satan for
the body of Moses comes from the 'ArdAirfrts or
'Ayd&atris of Moses (fie Prindp. in. ii. sni
init.), a book known to Clement of Alexandria
(Strom, vi. xv. p. 806), Didvmus of Alexandria
(Gallandi Biblioth. Pair. vi. 307), Augustine
(Epixt. clviii. 3), and others. From the eighth
to the nineteenth century it disappeared. A
portion of it has been found in a palimpsest in
the Ambrosian Library at Milan, but the frag-
ment ends before the death of Moses. That the
Assumptio Moysis is earlier than the Epistle ol
Jude is almost universally admitted, the dates
assigned to it varying from a.d. 4 to A.D. 70
(Schiirer, The Jewish People in the time of Jens
Christ, Div. II. vol. iii. pp. 80-83 ; Herzog,
Plitt and Hauck, Beal-Encycl. vol. xii. p. 352);
and we need not doubt the statements of Origen
and Didymus that Jude e. 9 is based upon it.
That St. Jude received a special revelation on
the subject is a violent and untenable hypo-
thesis. That a true tradition had survived for
fifteen hundred years, without leaving any
trace throughout the O. T., is not credible. The
sober conclusion is that, in illustrating his
denunciations, St. Jude has made use of le-
gendary material ; and this ought not to offend
us. His spiritual teaching is not the less sound
because he has mistaken legend for history.
The Church, while profiting by his defence of
truth and holiness, has never been misled by
his lack of critical judgment. It has never
been in doubt as to the true nature of the
Assumption of Moses or the Book of Enoch.
There is an able, but unconvincing, statement
of the view that v. 9 comes from Zech. iii. 1-3,
and not from the Assumptio Moysis, in Wright's
Bampton Lectures, Hodder and Stoughton, 1879,
pp. 53-57. The express statements of Origen
and Didymus, who name the book, and of
Apollinaris, who says that Jude here quotes
from an apocryphal work, cannot lightly be set
Digitized by
Google
JUDE, EPISTLE OF
aside : * and the passage in Zechariah lacks the
most striking features in Jude v. 9, — " Michael
the Archangel," and " the body of Moses."
The Style of the Epistle is somewhat cum-
brous and harsh, as of one who does not express
himself with perfect ease ; but it exhibits a
Tough originality, which is less conspicuous in
2 Pet. ii. St. Jude writes better Greek than
we might have expected from a Jew of Pales-
tine ; but it is not so surprisingly good as that
of his brother St. James. Both brothers must
have had some special advantages in this
respect.
The following expressions are peculiar in the
N. T. to this Epistle, and seme of them are
rare in Greek literature : bcoryart(t<T6ai (t>. 3),
irapiiat&ttv (v. 4), iKToprtitiY, Stiyita, inix*iv
{b. 7), (pvffiicws (v. 10), OTrt\d$, <p6tvoirwpiv6s
{v. 12), 4ra^>pl(iiy, *\arlm)t (v. 13), yoy-
■yiHTr^j, fifptylfioipos, iwoStoplfaw (v. 16), Sir-
raurros (v. 24), »po wombs rod alayos (v. 25).
The last two occur in the doxology, which from
a literary point of view is the finest part of the
Epistle and may possibly be influenced by Rom.
xvi. 25-27.
Here and there the Epistle appears to be
influenced by the language of the 0. T., but
there is not much that can with certainty be
called quotation : cp. t>. 9 with Dan. xii. 1 and
Zech. iii. 2 ; v. 12 with Ezek. xxxiv. 8 ; v. 14
with Zech. xiv. 5 and Deut. xxiii. 2 ; v. 23 with
Zech. iii. 2, 3.
There is little evidence respecting the Place
in which the letter was composed, and not very
much respecting the Date. It is possible that
Jude, the brother of the Lord, never travelled
outaide Palestine, and the use of the Booh of
Enoch and of the Assumption of Moses favours
Palestine, for these are of Palestinian origin.
It is not likely that he survived by very many
years the destruction of Jerusalem, if he survived
it at all. The testimony of Hegesippus tends to
show that Jude died before the reign of Domitian.
That he would have mentioned the destruc-
tion of Jerusalem as a signal instance of God's
judgments upon sinners (vc. 5-7), if it had
already taken place, is by no means certain.
Renan's date (circa a.d. 54) is probably too
early; but if 2 Peter is genuine, and if the
Apostle made use of Jude's letter, and not Jude
of the Apostle's letter, — then our Epistle can-
not be placed much later than A.D. 62. Nothing
can be based upon the vague expression (■*'
Itt-x&Tou XP&'"> V ("• 18), which by no means
proves that the writer is far removed from the
apostolic age. St. Jnde considers the appear-
ance of these antichristian libertines a sign of
the "last time," as St. John considers the
appearance of "many antichrists" a sign of
the " last hour " (1 John ii. 18) ; and the Evan-
gelist probably wrote considerably later than
this brother of James. But v. 8 points to a
late date, and t>. 17 rather implies that these
words of the Apostles were spoken long ago.
Perhaps we may conjecture that Jude would
JUDGES
1839
« The passages will be found in mil, with those from
Clement of Alexandria and the letter of Evodlus to
Augustine (see above), In the Preface to Frltzscbe's
Libri Jpocryphi Vet. Test. Ortuct, pp. xxxlv., xxxv. ;
and the extant fragments of the Auumptio Moyteos
will be found pp. ?0O-»2».
not have written at all if his brother James
was still alive. In this case a.d. 62 is the
earliest date that we can assign to the Epistle.
Bibliography. — Considering that the Epistle
consists of only twenty-five verses, the amount
of literature respecting it is remarkable. In
the following list of commentaries the works
of those who have commented upon the whole
of the N. T. are not included ; but in many cases
the writer named has taken the Epistle of Jude
in conjunction with one or more of the Epistles
of Peter and of James. The advantage of com-
bining either James or 2 Peter with Jude is
obvious. Witsius, Meletem. 1739; Hanke,
Lips. 1748; Schmidt, Lips. 1769; Herder,
Lemgo, 1775; Semler, Hal. 1784: Hasse, Jena,
1786; Hartmann, Coth. 1793; Morus, Leipz.
1794; Elias, Ultraj. 1803; Haenlein, Erl.
1804; Laurmann, Gron. 1818; Scharling,
Havniae, 1841; Stier, 1850; Rampf, 1854;
Gardiner, Boston, 1856 ; Fronmuller in Lange,
1862 [Eng. Tr. New Tork, 1867]; Wiesinger
in Olshausen [Eng. Tr., T. & T. Clark, 1882] ;
Huther in Meyer [Eng. Tr., T. & T. Clark];
Schott, Erlangen, 1863 (attributes the Ep. to
Judas Barsabbas) ; J. C. K. Hofmann, Nardlingen,
1875, and C. F. Keil, Leipz. 1885 (are among
the last defenders of the apostolic authorship) ;
Spitta, Halle, 1885 ; Kuhl, Gattingen, 1887 ; Von
Soden, Freib. i. B., 1890; Plummer, in the Ex-
positor's Bible, 1891. Among these the comm. of
Huther and Kiihl may be specially commended.
See also the comm. on the Catholic Epistles by
Augusti, Benson, Ewald, Macknight, Reuss, anil
Welcker, with the Introduction to the Cath. Epp.
by Gloag, 1887. Among Introductions to the
N. T. (Bleek-Mangold, Hilgenfeld, Holtzmann,
&c.) the treatment of this Epistle in B. Weiss
[Eng. Tr., Hodder, 1888], and Salmon, Murray,
1891, should be studied. Dahl, De authent. Ep.
Petri post, et Judae, Rost. 1807, assigns this Ep.
to a presbyter named Jude ; Jeasien, De authent.
Ep. Judae, Lips. 1821, is thought to have
rendered the apostolic authorship untenable.
See also Arnaud, Essai crit. sur Vauth^ Strasb.
1835 ; F. Brun, Introd. crit. a Vtp. de Jude,
Strasb. 1842 ; Arnaud, Recherches crit. sur riZp.
de Jude, Paris, 1851 [Eng. Tr. in Brit, and For.
Ev. Rev., July 1859]; RitschL Abhandl. Ubcr
die Antinomisten in Stud, und Krit. 1861, i.
103; Guerike, Beitrage, 1875; Sieffert in
Herzog's Beal-Enc. 1880 ; Zoeckler, Handb. d.
Theol. Wisseiuch. I. ii. Ill, 1889. [A. P.]
JUDEA. [Judaea.]
JUDETH. [Judith, 2.]
JUDGES. The administration of justice in
all early Eastern nations, as amongst the Arabs
of the desert to this day, rests with the patri-
archal seniors ; * the judges being the heads of
tribes, or of chief houses in a tribe. Such from
their elevated position would have the requisite
leisure, would be able to make their decisions
respected, and through the wider intercourse of
superior station would decide with fuller expe-
• The expression 3K-JV3 N'CO (Num. xxv. u)
Is remarkable, and seems to mean the patriarchal
senior of a subdivision of the tribe (cp. 1 Ch. Iv. 38 1
Judg. v. 3, IB).
Digitized by
Google
1840
JUDGES
Hence and riper reflection. Thus in the Book '
of Job (xxix. 7-9) the patriarchal magnate i»
represented as going forth " to the gate " |
amidst the respectful silence of elders, princes,
and nobles (cp. xxxii. 9). The actual chiefs of
individual tribes are mentioned on various
occasions, one as late as the time of David, as I
preserving importance in the commonwealth ,
(Num. vii. 2, 10, 11, xvii. 6, or 17 in Heb. text;
xxxir. 18; Josh. xxii. 14; so perhaps Num. xvi.
2, xxi. 18). Whether the princes of the tribes
mentioned in 1 Ch. xxvii. 16, xxviii. 1, are
patriarchal heads, or merely chief men ap-
pointed by the king to govern, is not strictly
certain ; but it would be foreign to all ancient
Eastern analogy to suppose that they forfeited
the judicial prerogative, until reduced and
overshadowed by the monarchy, which in
David's time is contrary to the tenor of his-
tory. During the oppression of Egypt the
nascent people would necessarily have few
questions at law to plead ; and the Egyptian
magistrate would take cognizance of theft,
violence, and other matters of police. Yet the
question put to Moses shows that " a prince "
and " a judge " were connected even then in the
popular idea (Ex. ii. 14 ; cp. Num. xvi. 13).
When they emerged from this oppression into
national existence, the want of a machinery of
judicature began to press. The patriarchal
seniors did not instantly assume the function,
having probably been depressed by bondage till
rendered unfit for it, not having become ex-
perienced in such matters, nor having secured
the confidence of their tribesmen. Perhaps for
these reasons Moses at first took the whole
burden of judicature upon himself, then at the
suggestion of Jethro (Ex. xviii. 14-24) insti-
tuted judges over numerically graduated sec-
tions of the people. These were chosen for
their moral fitness, but from Deut. i. 15, 16,
we may infer that they were taken from
amongst those to whom primogeniture would
have assigned it. Save in offences of public
magnitude, criminal cases do not appear to
have been distinguished from civil. The duty
of teaching the people the knowledge of the
Law which pertained to the Levites, doubtless
included such instruction as would assist the
judgment of those who were thus to decide
according to it. The Levites were thus the
ultimate sources of ordinary jurisprudence, and
perhaps the " teaching " aforesaid may merely
mean the expounding the Law as applicable to
difficult cases arising in practice. Beyond this,
it is not possible to indicate any division of the
provinces of deciding on points of law as distinct
from points of fact. The judges mentioned as
standing before Joshua in the great assemblies
of the people must be understood as the suc-
cessors to those chosen by Moses, and had
doubtless been elected with Joahna's sanction
from among the same general class of patri-
archal seniors (Josh. iv. 2, 4, xxii. 14, xxiv. 1).
The judge was reckoned a sacred person, and
secured even from verbal injuries. Seeking
a decision at law is called " inquiring of God "
(Ex. xviii. 15). The term "gods'* is actually
applied to judges (Ex. xxi. 6 ; cp. Ps. lxxxii. 1,
6). The judge was told, "Thou shalt not be
afraid of the face of men, for the judgment is
God's;" and thus whilst human instrumen-
JUDGES
tality was indispensable, the source of justk?
was upheld as Divine, and the parity of it>
administration only sank with the decline *f
religious feeling. In this spirit speaks Ps.
lxxxii., — a lofty charge addressed to all wb»
judge ; cp. the qualities regarded as essentia] at
the institution of the office, Ex. xviii. 21, sol
the strict admonition of Deut. xvi. 18—20. Bat
besides the sacred dignity thus given to the
only royal function, which, under the Thec-
cracy, lay in human hands, it was made popular
by being vested in those who led public feehnj.
and its importance in the public eye appears
from such passages as Ps. Ixix. 12 (cp. cxix. 25).
lxxxii., cxlriii. 11 ; Prov. viii. 15, xxii. 4, 5, 2S.
There could hare been no considerable need for
the legal studies and expositions of the Levitt-
during the wanderings in the wilderness while
Moses was alive to solve all questions, and
while the Law which they were to expound was
not wholly delivered. The Levites, too, had a
charge of cattle to look after in that wildernev
like the rest, and seem to have acted also, being
Moses' own tribe, as supports to his executive
authority. But then few of the gTeater en-
tanglements of property could arise before the
people were settled in their possession a:
Canaan. Thus they were disciplined in smaller
matters, and, under Moses' own eye, for greater
ones. When, however, the commandment,
"judges and officers shalt thon make thee in
all thy gates " (Deut. xvi. 18), came to be
fulfilled in Canaan, there were the following
sources from which those officials might be
supplied : — 1st, the ex-officio judges, or their
successors, as chosen by Moses ; 2ndly, any
surplus left of patriarchal seniors when they
were taken out (as has been shown from Detrt.
i. 15, 16) from that class ; and 3rdly, thr
Levites. On what principle the non-Levitkal
judges were chosen after Divine superintendence
was interrupted at Joshua's death is not dear.
A simple way would have been for the existiae
judges in every town, &c, to choose their own
colleagues, as vacancies fell, from among the
limited number of persons who, being head* of
families, were competent. Generally speaking,
the reputation for superior wealth, as some
guarantee against facilities of corruption, would
determine the choice of a judge, and, taken in
connexion with personal qualities, would tend
to limit the choice to probably a very few
persons in practice. The supposition that
judicature will always be provided for is
carried through all the Books of the Law (see
Ex. xxi. 6, xxii. pass. ; Lev. xix. 15 ; Num.
xxxv. 24; Deut. i. 16, xvi. 18, xxv. 1> And
all that we know of the facts of later history
confirms the supposition. The Hebrews were
sensitive as regards the administration of justice ;
nor is the free spirit of their early common-
wealth in anything more manifest than in the
resentment which followed the venal or partial
judge. The fact that justice reposed on a
popular basis of administration largely con-
tributed to keep up this spirit of independence,
which is the ultimate check on all perversion!
of the tribunal. The popular aristocracy* of
» This term is used for want of a better; bat a*
regards privileges of rice, the tribe of Levi and tons*
of Aaron were the only aristocracy, and then, by tbssr
Digitized by
Google
JUDGES
heads of tribes, sections of tribes, or families, is
found to fall into two main orders of varying
nomenclature, and rose from the capite censi, or
mere citizens, upwards. The more common
■mine for the higher order is " princes," and for
the lower, " elders " (Judg. riii. 14 ; Ex. ii.
14; Job xxix. 7-9; Ezra x. 8). These orders
were the popular element of judicature. On
the other hand, the Levitical body was imbued
with a keen sense of allegiance to God as the
Author of Law, and to the Covenant as His
embodiment of it, and soon gained whatever
forensic experience and erudition those simple
times could yield ; hence they brought to the
judicial task the legal acumen and sense of
general principles which complemented the
Tuder lay element. Thus the Hebrews really
enjoyed much of the virtue of a system which
allots separate provinces to judge and jury,
although we cannot trace any such line of
separation in their functions, save in so far
as has been indicated above. To return to the
first or popular branch, there is reason to think,
from the general concurrence of phraseology
amidst much diversity, that in every city these
two ranks of " princes " and " elders " • had
their analogies, and that a variable number of
heads of families and groups of families, in two
ranks, were popularly recognised, whether with
or without any form of election, as charged
with the duty of administering justice. Suc-
-coth' (Judg. viii. 14) may be taken as an
example. Evidently the ex-officio judges of
Moses' choice would have left their successors
when the tribe of Gad, to which Surcoth per-
tained (Josh. xiii. 27), settled in its territory
and towns: and what would be more simple
privation as regards holding land, were an aristocracy
very unlike what bas usually gone by that name.
« A number of words— eg. K»C>3, X», T33. and
• » T "T
(especially in the Book of Job) 3 <1 J — are sometimes
rendered "prince" in the A. V. : the first most nearly
uniformly so, which seems deelgnatlve of the passive
eminence of high birth or position ; the next, "IB>,
T
expresses active and official authority. Yet as the
KH?3 wu m °st likely, nay, in the earlier annals,
certain, to be the It?, we must be careful of excluding
T
from the person called by the one title the qualities
•denoted by the other. Of the two remaining terms,
3<*13t expressing princely qualities, approaches most
nearly to N'tWi •"* T3J> expressing prominence of
station, to "lb-
T
* The princes and elders here were together 77. The
subordination in numbers, of which Ten is the base of
Ex. xvlil. and Deut. L 16, strongly suggests that 70+7
were the actual componeota; although they are spoken
of rather as regards functions of ruling generally than
of judging specially, yet we need not separate the two,
*a is clear from Dent. 1. 16. Such division of labour
assuredly found little place In primitive times. No
donbt these men presided "in the gate." The number
of Jacob's family (with which Succotb was traditionally
connected. Gen. xxxlil. 17) having been 70 on their
coming down into Egypt (Gen. xlvl. 27), may have been
the cause of this number being that of the " elders "
of that place, besides the sacred character of the
factor 7. See also Ex. xxlv. 9. On the other hand, at
Ramah about 30 perrons occupied a similar place In
popular esteem (I Sam. ix. 32: see also v. 13 and
vll. 17.)
BIBLE DICT. — VOL. I.
JUDGES
1841
than that the whole number of judges in that
tribe should be allotted to its towns in pro-
portion to their size ? As such judges were
mostly the headmen by genealogy, they would
fall into their natural places, and symmetry
would be preserved. The Levites also were
apportioned on the whole equally among the
tribes ; and if they preserved their limits, there
were probably few parts of Palestine beyond a
day's journey from a Levitical city.
One great hold which the priesthood had, in
their jurisdiction, upon men's ordinary life was
the custody in the Sanctuary of the standard
weights and measures, to which, in cases of
dispute, reference was doubtless made. It is,
however, reasonable to suppose that in most
towns sufficiently exact models of them for all
ordinary questions would be kept, since to refer
to the Sanctuary at Shiloh, Jerusalem, &c, in
every case of dispute between dealers, would be
nugatory (Ex. xxx. 13; Num. iii. 47; Ezek.
xlv. 12). Above all these, the high-priest in
the ante-regal period was the resort in difficult
cases (Deut. xvii. 12), as the chief jurist of the
nation, and who would in case of need be perhaps
oracularly directed ; yet we hear of none acting
as judge save Eli : * nor is any judicial act re-
corded of him; though perhaps his not re-
straining his sons is meant to be noticed as a
failure in his judicial duties. Now the judicial
authority of any such supreme tribunal must
have wholly lapsed at the time of the events
recorded in Judg. xix.' It is also a fact of
some weight, negatively, that none of the
special deliverers called Judges was of priestly
lineage, or even became as much noted as
Deborah, a woman. This seems to show that
any central action of the high-priest on national
unity was null ; and of this supremacy, had it
existed in force, the judicial prerogative was
the main element. Difficult cases would in-
clude cases of appeal, and we may presume
that, save so far as the authority of those
special deliverers made itself felt, there was no
judge in the last resort from Joshua to Samuel.
Indeed the current phrase of those deliverers
that they "judged" Israel during their term,
shows which branch of their authority was most
in request, and the demand of the people for a
king was, in the first instance, that he might
"judge them," rather than that he might
" tight their battles " (1 Sam. viii. 5, 20).
The special Judges enumerated are fifteen in
number : 1. Othniel ; 2. Ehud ; 3. Shamgar ;
4. Deborah and Barak ; 5. Gideon ; 6. Abime-
lech ; 7. Tola ; 8. Jair; 9. Jephthah ; 10. Ibzan ;
11. Elon; 12. Abdon; 13. Samson; 14. Eli;
15. Samuel. Their history is related under
their separate names.
• The remark in the margin of the A. V. on 1 Sam.
lv. 18 seems Improper. It is as follows : " He seems to
bare been a Judge to do Justice only, and that in South-
west Israel." When It was Inserted (1661), the function
of the high-priest, as mentioned above, would seem to
have been overlooked. That function was certainly de-
signed to be general, not partial ; though probably, as
hinted above, its execution was inadequate.
' It ought not to be forgotten that In some cases of
••blood" the "congregation" themselves were to
"Judge" (Num. xxxv. 24% and that the appeal of
Judg. xx. 4-7 was thus In the regular course of con-
stitutional law.
6 B
Digitized by
Google
1842
JUDGES
[It i« difficult to define accurately the station
and office of these " special deliverers," chiefiy
because the intimations respecting their exploits
and government are not always clear. There
had not arisen a second legislator such as
Moses, nor a second leader such as Joshua, to
instruct and guide the people, and the period
proper of the Judges presents rather a reversion
to patriarchal and tribal government than a
continuation of the form of constitution pre-
ceding it. in Judg. ii. 11, &c, the rationale of
their existence, their being raised up or appoint-
ment by the Lord in times of oppression. His
Presence with them, their special commission to
save His rebellious people time after time " out
of the hand of them that spoiled them," is given
in broad details, but is not applicable to all
Judges without distinction (e.g. Eli and Samuel
were not military Judges). In general, their
appointment varied with the exigencies of the
times, and was in conformity with the choice of
the people, though the direct Divine appoint-
ments of Gideon and Samson were notable ex-
ceptions to the rule. Noble and magnanimous
men whose patriotism was inspired by religious
dependence upon God, however imperfect, and
by a desire to help their fellow-countrymen
rather than enrich themselves, they were not,
and are not represented as, perfect men. They
are the children of their age, and exhibit both
its good and its bad points.
The chronology of their respective terms
of office and of the period generally is beset
with difficulties which are now recognised as
insuperable. How are the blanks to be filled
up? What value is to be attached to the
frequent recurrence of round numbers (e.g. 40
years)? Were any of the Judges contempora-
neous and ruling over separate districts ? These
are questions which have met with various
answers, satisfactory only to those who must at
all hazards find a solution. According to the
chronology of the Book of Judges itself, the
period of the Judges between Othniel and Sam-
son was 410 years, — a total too high to be con-
sistent with the period embraced in the 480
years of 1 K. vi. 1 or the 450 years of Acts xiii.
'20. A table has been printed in Kitto's Encycl.
of BM. Lit.*, s. n. " Judges," which gives the
conjecture, and systems of Josephus, Eusebius,
Ussher, Jackson, Russell, &c. ; but the conviction
remains that " an exact chronology of the period is
unattainable " (Driver, LOT. p. 152 ; cp. Budde,
Die BB. RichUsr u. Samuel, p. 135, s. v.).— F.]
The judicial function of the priesthood, being,
it may be presumed, in abeyance during the period
of the Judges, seems to have been merged in
the monarchy. The kingdom of Saul suffered too
severely from external foes to allow civil matters
much prominence. Hence of his only two re-
corded judicial acts, one (1 Sam. xi. 13) was the
mere remission of a penalty popularly demanded;
the other the pronouncing of a sentence (ib. xiv.
44, 45), which, if it was sincerely intended, was
overruled in turn by the right sense of the
people. In David's reign it was evidently the
rule for the king to hear causes in person, and
not merely be passively, or even by deputy
(though this might also be included),' the
« 8ee 2 Sam. xv. 3, where the text( A. V. and R. V.)
gives probably a better rendering than the margin (A. V.)
JUDGES
" fountain of justice " to his people. For this
purpose perhaps it was prospectively ordained
that the king should " write him a copy of the
law," and " read therein all the days of his life "
(Dent. xvii. 18, 19). The same class of cases
which were reserved for Moses would probably
fall to his lot ; and the high-priest was of course
ready to assist the monarch. This is further
firesumable from the fact that no officer ana-
ogous to a chief justice ever appears under the
kings. It has been supposed that the subjection
of all Israel to David's sway caused an influx of
such cases, and that advantage was artfully
taken of this by Absalom (2 Sam. xv. 1-4) ; but
the rate at which cases were disposed of can
hardly have been slower among the ten tribes
after David had become their king, than it was
during the previous anarchy. It is more prob-
able that during David's uniformly successful
wars wealth and population increased rapidly,
and civil cases multiplied faster than the king,
occupied with war, could attend to them,
especially when the summary process customary
in the East is considered. Perhaps the arrange-
ments, mentioned in 1 Ch. xxiii. 4, xrvi. 29 (cp.
v. 32, "rulers" probably including judges) of
the 6000 Levites acting as "officers and judges,"
and amongst them especially "Chenaniah and
his sons," with others for the trans-Jorda&ic
tribes, may have been made to meet the need of
suitors, in Solomon's character, whose reign of
peace would surely be fertile in civil questions,
the " wisdom to judge " was the fitting fiset
quality (1 K. iii. 9; cp. Ps. lxxii. 1—4). As a
judge Solomon shines "in all his glory" (1 K.
iii. 16, &c). No criminal was too powerful for
his justice, as some had been for his father's
(2 Sam. iii. 39; IK. ii. 5, 6, 33, 34). The
examples of direct royal exercise of judicial
authority are 2 Sam. i. 15, iv. 9-12, where sen-
tence is summarily executed, 11 and the supposed
case of 2 Sam. xiv. 1-21. The denunciation of
2 Sam. xii. 5, 6, is, though not formally
judicial, yet in the same spirit. Solomon
similarly proceeded in the cases of Joab and
Shimei (1 K. ii. 34, 46; cp. 2 K. xiv. 5, 6). It
is likely that royalty in Israel was ultimately
unfavourable to the local independence connected
with the judicature of the "princes" and
"elders" in the territory and cities of each
tribe. The tendency of the monarchy was
doubtless to centralise, and we read of large
numbers of king's officers appointed to this and
cognate duties (1 Ch. xxiii. 4, xxvi. 29-32). It'
the general machinery of justice had been, as is
reasonable to think, deranged or retarded during
a period of anarchy, the Levites afforded the
fittest materials for its reconstitution.' Being
h The cases of Amnon and Absalom, In which no
notice was taken of either crime, though set down by
MicbaeUs (lam of Mout, bk. i. art. x.) as Instances of
Justice forborne through politic consideration of the
criminal's power, seem rather to be examples of mere
weakness, either of government or of personal character,
in David. His own criminality with Ratbsbeba tt Is
superfluous to argue, since the matter was by Divine
Interference removed from the cognisance of human
law.
' From Num. Iv. a, 23, 30, It would seem that
after 50 years of age the Levites were excused from
the service of the Tabernacle. This was perhaps a
Digitized by
Google
JUDGES
to some extent detached, both locally, and by
special duties, exemptions, &c, from the mass
of the population, they were more easily brought
to the steady routine which justice requires,
and, what is no less important, were, in case of
neglect of duty, more at the mercy of the king
(as shown in the case of the priests at Nob,
1 Sam. xxii. 17). Hence it is probable that the
Levites generally superseded the local elders in
the administration of justice. But subsequently,
when the Levites withdrew from the kingdom
of the ten tribes, judicial elders probably again
filled the gap. Thus they conducted the mock
trial of Naboth (1 K. xxi. 8-13). There is in
2 Ch. xix. 5, &c, a special notice of a reappoint-
ment of judges by Jehoshaphat and of a distinct
court, of appeal perhaps, at Jerusalem, com-
posed of Levitical and of lay elements. In the
same place (as also in a previous one, 1 Ch. xxvi.
32) occurs a mention of "the king's matters "
as a branch of jurisprudence. The rights of
the prerogative having a constant tendency to
encroach, and needing continual regulation, these
may have grown probably into a department,
somewhat like our Exchequer.
One more change is noticeable in the pre- Baby-
lonian period. The " princes " constantly appear
as a powerful political body, increasing in in-
fluence and privileges, and having a fixed centre
of action at Jerusalem ; till, in the reign of
Zedekiah, they seem to exercise some of the
duties of a privy council ; and especially a
collective jurisdiction (2 Ch. xxviii. 21; Jer.
xxvi. 10, 16). These "princes" are probably
the heads of great houses k in Judah and Ben-
jamin, whose fathers had once been the pillars
of local jurisdiction; but who, through the
attractions of a court, and probably also under
the constant alarm of hostile invasion, became
gradually residents in the capital, and formed
an oligarchy, which drew to itself, amidst the
growing weakness of the latter monarchy, what-
ever vigour was left in the state, and encroached
on the sovereign attribute of justice. The
employment in offices of trust and emolument
would tend also in the same way, and such chief
families would probably monopolise such em-
ployment. Hence the constant burden of the
prophetic strain, denouncing the neglect, the
perversion, the corruption, of judicial function-
aries (Is. i. 17, 21, v. 7, x. 2, xxviii. 7, lvi. 1,
lix. 4 ; Jer. ii. 8, v. 1, vii. 5, xxi. 12 ; Ezek. xxii.
27, xlv. 8, 9 ; Hos. v. 10, vii. 5, 7 ; Amos v. 7,
15, 24, vi. 12 ; Hab. i. 4, &c). Still, although
far changed from its broad and simple basis in
the earlier period, the administration of justice
had little resembling the set and rigid system
of the Sanhedrin of later times. 1 [See SaNHE-
provtslon meant to favour tlieir usefulness in deciding
on points of law, since the maturity of a Judge has
hardly begun at that age, and before It they would nave
been junior to their lay coadjutors.
> That some of the heads of such bouses, however, re-
tained their proper sphere, reems clear from Jer. xxvi.
17, where " elders of the land " address un "assembly of
the people." Still, the occasion Is not Judicial.
1 The Sanhedrin Is, by a school of Judaism once
more prevalent than now, attempted to be based on
the 70 elders of Num. xi. 16, and to be traced through
the 0. T. history. Those 70 were chosen when Judi-
cature had been already provided for (Ex. xviit. 26),
JUDGES
1843
DRIM.] This last change arose from the fact
that the patriarchal seniority, degenerate and
corrupted as it became before the Captivity,
was by that event broken up, and a new basis of
judicature had to be sought for.
With regard to the forms of procedure little
more is known than may be gathered from the
two examples, Ruth iv. 2, of a civil, and 1 K.
xxi. 8-14, of a criminal character;" to which,
as a specimen of royal summary jurisdiction,
may be added the well-known "judgment" of
Solomon. Boaz apparently empanels as it were
the first ten " elders " whom he meets '• in the
gate," the well-known site of the Oriental court,
and cites the other party by "Ho, such an one;"
and the people appear to be invoked as attesting
the legality of the proceeding. The whole
affair bears an extemporaneous aspect, which
may, however, be merely the result of the
terseness of the narrative. In Job ix. 19, we
have a wish expressed that a " time to plead "
might be " set " (cp. the phrase of Roman law,
diem dicere). In the case of the involuntary
homicide seeking the city of refuge, he was to
make out his case to the satisfaction of its
elders (Josh. xx. 4); and this failing, or the
congregation deciding against his claim to sanc-
tuary there (though how its sense was to be
taken does not appear), he was not put to death
by act of public justice, bnt left to the " avenger
of blood " (Deut. xix. 12). The expressions
between " blood and blood," between " plea and
plea " (Deut. xvii. 8), indicate a presumption
of legal intricacy arising, the latter expression
seeming to imply something like what we call a
" cross-suit." We may infer from the scantiness,
or rather almost entire absence of direction as
regards forms of procedure, that the legislator
was content to leave them to be provided for as
the necessity for them arose, it being impossible
by any jurisprudential devices to anticipate
chicane. It is an interesting question how far
judges were allowed to receive fees of suitors ;
Michaelis reasonably presumes that none were
allowed or enstomary, and it seems, from the
words of 1 Sam. xii. 3, that snch transactions
would have been regarded as corrupt. There is
another question how far advocates were usual.
There is no reason to think that until the period
of Greek influence, when we meet with words
based on avrfryopos and itixpixKriros, any pro-
fessed class of pleaders existed. Vet passages
abound in which the pleading of the cause of
those who are unable to plead their own, is
spoken of as, what it indeed was, a noble act of
charity; and the expression has even (which
shows the popularity of the practice) become a
basis of figurative allusion (Job xvi. 21 ; Prov.
xxii. 23, xxiii. 11, xxxi. 9; Is. i. 17; Jer.
xxx. 13, 1. 34, li. 36). The blessedness of
such acts is forcibly dwelt upon in Job xxix.
12, 13.
There is no mention of any distinctive dress
or badge as pertaining to the judicial officer. A
staff or sceptre was the common badge of a
and their office was to assist Moses In the duty of
governing. But no influence of any such body Is
tractable in later times at any crisis of history. They
seem In fact to have left no successors.
» The example of Susannah and the elders is too
suspicious an authority to be cited.
6 B 2
Digitized by
Google
1844 JUDGES, BOOK OP
ruler or prince, and this perhaps they bore
(Is. xiv. 5 ; Amos i. 5, 8). They would perhaps,
when officiating, be more than usually careful
to comply with the regulations about dress laid
down in Num. xv. 38, 39 ; Deut. xxii. 12. The
use of the "white asses" (Judg. v. 10), by
those who "sit in judgment," was perhaps a
convenient distinctive mark for them when
journeying where they would not usually be
personally known. [H. H.]
JUDGES, BOOK OF (D'OBIE'; Kprral;
'H ray Kfu/iiraiy £ij3Aos, Philo, de Conf. Liny-
20, ed. Mang. i. 42+ ; Liber Judicnm).
I. Contents. — The part of the history of
Israel contained in this Book is of the highest
importance. Following on the conquest of
Canaan and the settlement of the tribes under
Joshua, it describes a transition period, in which
disorders, calamities, and want of union led to a
growing desire for a new form of government
promising greater unity and strength, which
ended in the institution of the monarchy. And,
apart from the lessons which it is intended to
teach, the narrative possesses a deep interest.
Owing to the character of the times, our atten-
tion is drawn to the part played by individual
rulers, of whom the greater number are pre-
sented to us with a distinctness, vigour, and
freshness not surpassed elsewhere in Scrip-
ture.
The Book derives its name from the Judges
whose history forma the greater part of it.
These were temporary leaders, neither inheriting
their office nor transmitting it. In some cases
— e.g. Jair, Ibzan, Elon, Abdon — they seem to have
only exercised the peaceful office which their
name implies. At least no deliverance of the
people is attributed to them. And in this they
were like Deborah, the prophetess, in the earlier
part of her history (iv. 4), and Eli, and Samuel's
sous (1 Sam. viii. 1). But the more prominent
were leaders in war, retaining in the time of
peace the authority they had earned. For this
reason they are called Saviours (Neh. ix. 27 : cp.
Judg. in. 9), who delivered, or rather saved, the
children of Israel (ii. 16, 18; iii. 31; x. 1).
This combination of offices had been seen in
Moses and Joshua (cp. 2 K. xv. 5). The root of
their Hebrew name, Shophet, is found in Assyrian
[MV. U ] and Phoenician. The title of Sufletes,
which the Carthaginians gave to their chief
magistrates, is well known from the Latin
writers (Festus — "Sufes quod velut consulare
intperium apud eos est ; " cp. Lir. xxviii. 37),
and is often found in inscriptions. But there
is no reason for thinking that the name any
more than the thing was borrowed on either
side. The history of six of these Judges is given
at more or less length, viz. Othniel, Ehud,
Deborah (with Barak), Gideon, Jephthah, and
Samson. Six others — Shamgar, Tola, Jair, Ibzan,
Elon, and Abdon — are noticed very briefly. It
has been thought that this number has been
purposely adopted. But the fact of their being
twelve is not brought forward prominently, as
we might expect, if an arbitrary number had
been chosen for reasons of symmetry. Eli and
Samuel judged Israel (1 Sam. iv. 18 ; vii. 6,
15, 17 : cp. viii. 1-2), but their close con-
nexion with each other, and Samuel's relation
to. the kingdom of Israel, are enough to explain
JUDGES, BOOK OF
their not being included in this Book. Again
Jael (v. 6) is often supposed to be distinct from
the wife of Heber, and to have been a judge
otherwise unknown to us, as well as Bedas
(1 Sam. xii. 11). But it is at least possible that
the two Jaels are the same person, and Bedan
has been variously identified with Samson,
Barak, and Abdon. If these or others hare
been omitted from this Book, the reason would
seem to be a want of records relating to
them.
The chief divisions are clearly marked : A, >.-
iii. 6 ; B, iii. 7-xvi. [at. A =i. 1-ii. 5 ; B = E.
6-xvi.] ; C, xvii.-xxi. This is true also of the
minor ones.
A, i.— iii. 6. This is an introduction consisting
of two parts, i. — ii. 5 and ii. 6— iii. 6. The first
of these contains an account of the sequel of
the conquest of Canaan in continuation of the
Book of Joshua, the cases in which the people
of the land retained their possessions, and the
rebuke which Israel received from an Angel (or
messenger) of the Lord who went np from
Gilgal to Bochim. After the death of Joshaa,
in answer to the inquiry of the Israelites, Judas
is directed by the Lord to go up first against the
Canaanites. His victories, with the help of
Simeon, including the special exploits of Caleb,
are related in i. 3-20. But his failure in ex-
pelling the inhabitants of the valley (c. 19) ii
followed by the similar case of Benjamin a
reference to the Jebusites of Jerusalem (r. 21).
One conquest of the house of Joseph is then
described, that of Bethel (cr. 22-26), which U
followed by the omissions of Manasseh, Ephraim,
Zebulun, Asher, Naphtali, and Dnn (rr. 27-36).
Thus Issachar alone is not mentioned in this
group. Levi also is not named anywhere. The
rebuke of the Angel and weeping of the people
are found in ii. 1-5. In this part there is a
close indirect connexion with the Book of
Joshua, the statements of which are presup-
posed throughout.
There are some difficulties in this account.
There is a repetition, with a difference, in i. 10,
20 ; and there are statements in which some
inconsistency lies on the surface (cp. i. 8, 21 ;
i. 18, 19, iii. 3). The explanation of it lies in the
brevity of the narrative. And while all the
events are placed after the death of Joshua (i. 1 ),
some occur in earlier Books (cp. i. 17 with Num.
xxi. 3, Josh. xii. 14, xix. 4; i. 20, 10-15 with
Josh. xv. 13-19; i. 27-28 with Josh. xviL
11-13; i. 29 with Josh. xvi. 10).
The second part of the Introduction (ii. 6-ui.
6) begins by going back as far as the last days
of Joshua (ii. 6-10), being almost entirely a
verbatim repetition of Josh. xxiv. 28-31. It
forms a direct connexion of Judges with Joshua.
But here, too, we must distinguish two parts (ii.
11-19 and 20— iii. 6). In the former of these we
are told that Israel continued to serve the Lord
all the days of Joshua and the elders which
outlived him, but that the new generation for-
sook the Lord and followed other gods ; that His
anger was hot against them, and He delivered
them into the hand of spoilers ; nevertheless He
raised np Judges which delivered them, for it
repented Him because of their groanings ; bat
when the Judge was dead, they corrupted them-
selves more than their fathers. Here we have s
general view of the following history and the
Digitized by
Google
JUDGES, BOOK OP
key to it. And thia stands in close connexion
with the so-called " framework," which unites
the greater part of the separate histories of the
Judges, and runs through the whole of that part
of the Book which is devoted to them. Not
only does the same mode of regarding the
history occur in it, but the same language.
The rest of this section (ii. 20-iii. 6) dwells
upon the effect of the presence of the remnant
of the seven nations and the Philistines ; repeats
the determination of the Lord not to drive them
out, already found in ii. 1-6 ; and adds other
reasons — the purpose of proving Israel (ii. 22-iii.
1, 4), and of teaching them war (iii. 2). Thus the
Introduction is double, the first part being
chiefly historical, and the second didactic, but
each in its own way making a fitting preparation
for what follows.
B, iii. 7-ivi. contains the histories of the
several Judges. The more important of these
have the same form. They contain an account
of the idolatry of Israel, its punishment by
means of a foreign oppressor for a certain num-
ber of years, the deliverance by a Judge, and
the length of time during which the land had
rest. This is not the case with those of whom
there is only a short notice. Besides the length
of the time during which they exercised their
office, little is recorded beyond what was of
personal interest, including the place of their
burial. Shamgar stands by himself for the
scantiness of information.
The subdivisions are — (1) The oppression of
Israel by Cushan Rishathaim, and the deliver-
ance by Othniel, of the tribe of Judah (iii. 7-11).
(2) The oppression by Eglon, king of Aloab, and
the deliverance by Ehud (Benjamin), iii. 12-30.
(3) Sbamgar's deliverance from the Philistines
(iii. 31) ; his tribe is not stated. (4) The oppres-
sion by Jabin, king of Canaan, and the deliver-
ance by Deborah (Ephraim ?) and Barak (Naph-
tali), iv. ; Deborah's Song, v. (5) The oppression
by Midian and deliverance by Gideon (Manasseh),
vi.-viii. ; the history of Abimelech, ix. (6)
Tola (Issachar), x. 1, 2. (7) Jair the Gileadite
(Manasseh), x. 3-5. (8) The oppression by
Amnion, and the deliverance by Jephthah the
Gileadite (Manasseh), x. 6-xii. 7. (9) Ibzan
(Zebulun, cp. Josh. xix. 15, or Judah), xii. 8-10.
(10) Elon (Zebulun), xii. 11, 12. (11) Abdon
(Ephraim), xii. 13-15. (12) The oppression by
the Philistines, and the history of Samson (Dan),
liii.-ivi.
0, xvii.-xxi. This part is commonly called an
Appendix. The time to which it belongs is
marked as that of the Judges, though they are
not mentioned in it, by being described as " the
days when there was no king in Israel " (xvii.
6 ; xviii. 1 ; xix. 1 ; xxi. 25). It consists of
two histories. The first of these (xvii.-xviii.)
narrates the conquest of Laish by a part of the
tribe of Dan, and the transference thither of
the idolatrous worship of Jehovah, instituted in
Mount Ephruim by Micah, under the charge of
Jonathan, the grandson of Moses. The name of
Manasseh, the same ns that of the idolatrous
king of Judah, has been introduced into the
text to save the honour of Moses. But the
memory of the substitution is preserved in many
MSS. and editions by writing the letter which
makes the change above the level of the rest —
nun nupensum.
JUDGES, BOOK OF 1845
The second (xix.-xxi.) describes the almost
total destruction of the tribe of Benjamin by
the united people of Israel, in consequence o'f
their supporting the cause of the wicked men of
Gibeah, and the means adopted for preventing
its completion. Both narratives belong to the
early part of the period. The mention of the
grandson of Moses in one case, and of Phinehas,
Aaron's grandson, in the other, mark the date in
some degree ; as well as the unanimity still
existing in the people, which was shown in the
punishment of Gibeah. Josephus therefore
gives the events a place at the beginning of his
account of the Judges.
II. ArjTHOBSlUP.— The authorship of the
Book is ascribed in the Talmud to Samuel
(" Scripsit librum suum et Judices et Kutham,"
Jkiba Bathra, xiv. 2) ; but of this there is no
proof. We can say for certain that the whole
Book, as it stands, is later than the setting up
of the kingdom (cp. xvii. 6, &c.) ; but we cannot
go safely beyond this. Keil and Cassel fix the
time of its composition to the reign of Saul.
Bleek ascribes it to the Jehovist in the reign of
David, except ii. 6-23, which he thinks much
later. Stade and Budde find more or less
ample traces of J and E in the central portion
of the Book ; Kuenen and Kittel dissent.
Ewald conceives that it forms the first part of
an historical work reaching to the end of
2 Kings, and that the final arrangement of the
whole must hare been after the 37th year of
Jehoiachin's captivity, or B.C. 562 (see 2 K.
xxv. 27). This view is founded on the similarity
of the way in which the history is regarded
(cp. Judg. ii. 11-19 with 2 K. xvii. 7-23); but
this is not conclusive. Bertheaa brings it as
late as Ezra, whom he is inclined to regard as
the author ; but this is not confirmed by any
reference in it to the Babylonian Captivity, or
any later event.
The inquiry as to the age of the separate
parts is a distinct one. It undoubtedly contain*
some contemporary monuments, such as the
Song of Deborah and Jotham's parable. But
there are also many parts having so distinct a
character in their language, containing many
words not found elsewhere, and so peculiar in
style, that there can be little doubt about their
having been incorporated as they came to the
author's hand. This point requires more par-
ticular notice. In the Introduction, ch. i. seems
to be a document older than David. Verse 21
witnesses to the same state of things as xviii. 28,
with which compare 2 Sam. v. 6-9. Nor is
there any reason for referring i. 28, 30, 33, 35
to a time so late as Solomon's (cp. 1 K. ix. 21).
The question arises, how are we to explain i. 20,
10-15, 21, 27-28, 29, which are found with
some differences in Josh. xv. 13-19, 63. xvii.
11-12, xvi. 10? Some change the name of
Joshua (i. 1) to that of Moses. But this makes
ch. i. a history of the conquest of Canaan with-
out any mention of Joshua. It seems more
likely that the passages in Joshua are anticipa-
tory, and borrowed at some time from Judges,
or from a common source. That Judges has
not taken them from Joshua seems to be shown
by the fact that the list of the tribes which did
not drive out the people of the land is more
complete in the former than in the latter. The
case is different with ii. 6-10 and Josh. xxiv.
Digitized by
Google
1846 JUDGES, BOOK OF
28-31. The new history begins with a repeti-
tion of the ending of the old. The relation of
Ezra i. 1-3 to 2 Ch. xxxvi. 22, 23 is analogous.
In the main portion of the Book (iii. 7-xvi.)
the account of Ehud clearly conies from near the
time of the events, both on account of the whole
look of the narrative and the obscure words
found in iii. 22, 23. The Song of Deborah is
undoubtedly contemporary with the victory it
celebrates. But cb. iv. is no mere echo of ch. v.,
and must have been associated with it in early
times. While it passes over much which is found
in the Song, it tells us of the relations between
Sisera and Jabin, and Deborah and Barak, and
explains how Sisera came to flee to Jael's tent.
The history of Gideon again stands out dis-
tinctly as derived from early sources; and it
reads as one whole, throughout which runs the
modesty and distrust of self which was com-
bined with his other high qualities, though it
has been attempted to trace the union of the
original narrative with another containing the
miraculous elements. The reality of the main
facts is guaranteed by Is. ix. 4, x. 26. The ac-
count of Abimelech in ch. ix. is an original and
early document, marked by the uniform use of the
name Jerubbaal instead of Gideon. In the same
way the preservation of the facts of Jephthab's
history cannot be doubted. But the genuine-
ness of his negotiations with the Ammonites is
questioned on grounds of probability and on
account of the similarity of the passage to
Num. xxi. Yet to mention nothing else, xi. 24,
which seems at least to imply an acknowledg-
ment of the existence of Chemosh, has not the
look of an invention by a late writer. And of
those who maintain the legendary exaggeration
of the facts of Samson's life, some at least are
unwilling to fix upon too late a time for the
adoption of the present form. As to the brief
histories of the Judges, we cannot be sure whether
the author has abridged fuller accounts of them
or not.
The suggestion of late origin attaches, then,
chiefly to the second part of the Introduction,
and to the kindred passages which connect the
longer histories. One argument is that the
writer sneaks throughout as if Israel as a whole
was oppressed and delivered, while the narratives
show that only part of the people was affected.
The writer was, of course, conscious of this,
and designedly treated the unity of Israel
as existing de jure. But that feeling, which
was never totally absent during the disintegra-
tion of the nation, reappeared with strength as
early as Samuel's time, and led to the establish-
ment of the kingdom. It is said again that the
language in these parts is Deuteronomic, and
that the peculiar mode of regarding history, in
which the fortunes of the nation depended on
the purity of its service of God, did not arise till
the 8th century. But, without entering on that
subject, may we not say, that the conception of
the Divine nature which Israel had at every
time, and without which its history is unin-
telligible, contained in it a belief in His jealousy
as well as His holiness, His power to punish and
His willingness to forgive? The bond which
unites the narratives may be of a later date
t han their own ; but how much later cannot be
tixed with certainty.
The histories in the third part of the Book
JUDGES, BOOK OF
(xvii.-xxi.) have no direct connexion with eaea
other, but they are united by the common
reference to the times in which there was no
king, they are wanting in any mention of the
Judges, they both relate to the fortunes of a
Levite in connexion with a tribe of Israel.
Their style is unusually diffuse and minnte.
This, however, does not exclude an energetic
brevity in places: see xix. 30, xx. 9, xxi. 17, and
compare the asyndeton in xviii. 17 and xx. 43.
The reality of the events recorded in chs. xix.-xxi
is confirmed by Hos. ix. 9, x. 9. But there is mucl
repetition, and the account goes backwards and
forwards, more after the manner of oral than of
written narrative. It is suggested that this
may be accounted for by the fusion of two
separate descriptions of the same events, chiefly
distinguished by the use of the terms " childrea
of Israel " and " men of Israel " respectively.
This is elaborately stated by Bertheau, and is not
improbable. And the poetical expressions which
occur, as well as rare words and forms, counte-
nance the notion that one of these documents
was a poem : see xix. 8, 9, 12 ; xx. 4, 6, 12, 34.
41, 38, 40, 43 ; xxi. 22, 24. This bears in sonu
measure on the date, for a doubling of the tra-
dition, it is urged, points to a high antiquity of
the kernel. And there are reasons for connect-
ing the Appendix with ch. i. : compare the pro-
minence of Judah (i. 2, xviii. 20), and the use of
peculiar expressions in i. 2, xviii. 10, 20, xx. 28 :
i. 27, 35, xvii. 11, xix. 6. Still the topo-
graphical notices in xx. 31, xxi. 19 (not neces-
sarily xxi. 12), seem added comparatively late.
And this perhaps is the best solution of the great
difficulty connected with xviii. 30. The most
natural explanation of " the captivity of the
land " refers it to the time of the Assyrians
(2 K. xv. 29, or xvii. 6). It is hard to suppose
that the going into captivity of the land was
involved in that of the Ark (1 Sam. ir. 11). And
if at that time the Philistines overran the
country and destroyed Shiloh, as is inferred from
Ps. lxxviii. 60-64, still the people were not
carried away. On the other hand, the difficulty
of thinking that idolatry could have existed
openly at Dan during the reign of the first three
kings is very great. To read " ark " for " land,"
according to Houbigant's conjecture, requires
the change of only two letters in the Hebrew,
but it is unsupported. May it not be that the
words were added at some time after the cap-
tivity of the ten tribes by some one who con-
nected in spirit the later idolatry at Dan with
the earlier?
These later chapters, by being placed together
at the end, leave uninterrupted the central part
of the Book, which is mainly taken up with tht
deliverance of Israel from foreign enemies.
Thcodoret rightly says (Qvoett. in Judic. xxrii.)
that this putting of the first events last was not
accidental.
We may speak in this connexion of the Song
of Deborah. The spirit which breathes through-
out it fixes its date. It marks, too, its author-
ship not only by vv. 3, 7, 9, 13, 21 (to which
t>. 12 is no objection), but by vt>. 24—30, which
show the thought and feeling of a woman.
The best division of it, following the guidance
of the sense, seems the following: — I. Prelude,
r,v. 2-3. God's glorious help in former times,
en. 4-5. The misery of the recent days, to. 6-7.
Digitized by
Google
JUDGES, BOOK OF
The change, oc. 8-11. II. Second Prelude, p. 12.
The gathering of the Tribes, vv. 13-15c. The
defaulters, vv. 15d-18. The battle and flight,
vv. 19-22. III. The curse on Meroz, v. 23.
The blessing on Jael, r. 24. Her deed, vv. 25-27.
The triumph over the mother and wires of
•Sisera, vv. 28-30. Conclusion, t>. 31. Another
more artificial division is adopted by Ewald and
Bertheau, consisting of a regular number of
strophes and subdivisions ; but this symmetry is
gained with some sacrifice of the connexion of
the thought. Cassel traces a highly developed
.-ind delicate alliteration. Btfttcher distributes
the several parts among a number of dramatis
jiersonae, and choruses of men and women. But
even the simplest arrangement gives the im-
pression of a cultivated state of poetry. The
language confirms its antiquity. It contains a
large number of words and senses not found
«lsewhere, besides several rare words and forms.
Hence its meaning is difficult. The result of the
modern study of it may be seen in the rendering
of the Revised Version. But some uncertainty
still remains. The embarrassment of the ancient
Versions is evident. The Vulgate makes impor-
tant omissions in vv. 2, 29, 30. The Targum of
Jonathan, usually a faithful representation of the
Hebrew, here forsakes the humbler task of trans-
lation, and seems impelled by enthusiasm into ex-
aggeration and magnifying of the Law, curiously
exhibiting the thought of a very different age.
The following passages are samples: "Quando
voluerunt rilii Israel ad serviendum erroribus
novis, qui de proximo facti sunt, quibus non
studuerunt in illis patres eorum, venerunt super
eos gentes, et expulerunt ex urbibus eorum ; et
-cum redierunt ad faciendum legem, non prae-
valuerunteis: donee fortificarentur et ascenderet
contra eos Zzizzara osor et tribulatur in quad-
raginta millibus principum castrorum, in quin-
■quaginta millibus tenentium gladios, in sexaginta
millibus tenentium hastas, in septuaginta milli-
bus tenentium clypeos, in octoginta millibus
sagittatorum jaculorum, praeter nougentos currus
Jerri qui fuerunt cum eo . . . Dixit Deborah in
prophetia, Ego missa sum ad laudandos scribas
Israel ; qui quando fuit tribulatio ilia, non
■cessarunt ab interpretanda lege . . . Benediceris
a benedictione mulierum bonarum Jaghel uxor
Hheber Salmaei : sicut una ex mulieribus quae
ministrantes in domibus Scholarum benediceris.
Aquas petivit ab ea Zzizzara impius, lacte potavit
«um, ad sciendum si cogitationes super eum, in
phialis virorum attulit ante eum pingnedinem
caseorum. Bona Jaghel uxor Hheber Salmaei,
quae praestitit quod scriptum est in libro legis
Mosis ; Non erit armatura viri super mulierem,
ueque ornabitur vir ornamentis mulieris: sed
manum suam ad clavum tetendit, et dexteram
suam ad malleum."
The historical testimony of the Song is very
valuable. It witnesses to the display of God's
power at Sinai, and looks back to that time as a
glorious one. The unity of Israel is strongly
i'elt in spite of those who to their shame have for-
saken the common cause ; and the wars of Israel
are those of the Lord. Dan appears as still in
contact with the sea. There is no mention of the
northern settlement of the tribe, which may not
yet have taken place. The absence of any mention
■of Judah, Simeon, and Levi, shows the extent
to which the separation of the tribes had gone.
JUDGES, BOOK OP 1847
III. Chbonolooy. — The chronology is a
matter of disappointment. We find a number
of dates given with particularity, which reckoned
together amount to 410 years. With this the
450 years assigned to the period of the Judges
in Acts xiii. 20 agrees only if the 40 years
of Eli be added to the numbers in Judges.
This passage, however, does not come into con-
sideration, if the reading of the Textus Receptus
is given up, as is now commonly done. But
a difficulty is created by xi. 26, which speaks
of the time from the conquests of Israel on
the east of Jordan to the days of Jephthah as
300 years; and still more by 1 K. vi. 1, where
the whole period from the Exodus to the build-
ing of the Temple in the fourth year of Solomou
is reckoned as 480 years. Josephus holds to the
410 years in Judges, and arrives at the 592 years
{Ant. viii. 3, 1 ; x. 8, 5), or 612 years {Ant. xx.
10), which he allows between the Exodus and the
building of the Temple, in a general sense only ;
viz., by allowing 40 years for the sojourn in the
wilderness, 25 for Joshua {Ant. v. 1, 29), 410
for the Judges, 40 for Eli, 12 for Samuel
{Ant. vi. 13, 5), 40 for Saul {Ant. vi. 14, 9 ; cp.
Acts xiii. 21), 40} for David = 607J years. On
the other hand, the genuineness of 1 K. vi. 1 is
called in question by Kennicott {Diss. Gen.
80, 3) and others, but it is commonly accepted.
In this case the sum of the numbers in Judges
must be lessened. This introduces at once an
element of uncertainty. And ■ several of the
minor periods up to the building of the Temple
— such as the length of the time of Joshua, the
interval between him and Cushan, the time of
Samuel and Saul — are not fixed in the Old Testa-
ment, the ordinary computation being grounded
on Josephus. Hence the different combinations
are conjectural, which accounts for their number
and variety. The length, however, commonly
assigned to the time of the Judges varies from
about 250 to 300 years. But the calculations
of the Bishop of Bath and Wells (cp. 'Introd.
to the Book of Judges,' § 4, in Speaker's Comm.),
based on several genealogies found in Scrip-
ture, diminish it to a duration of from 140 to
160 years. In all this uncertainty little help
seems obtainable from a source from which it
has been sought, — the inquiries into Egyptian
and Assyrian chronology.
IV. Circumstances op the Times. — It does
not belong to the present article to enlarge
on the history of the Judges, nor on their
separate lives and characters. But a few re-
marks upon points which readily suggest
themselves may not be out of place. The whole
period was one of degeneracy. The nation,
united in the time of Moses and Joshua by a
common faith and purpose, when the latter had
been accomplished to some extent in the incom-
plete conquest of Canaan, fell asunder into
disunion and the pursuit of separate interests.
No constitution had been provided by Hoses.
The only bond which united them on the loss of
their great leaders was that of religion. Under
this influence all Israel acted together "as one
man " in the early part of the period (chs. xix.-
xxi.). But this is the only instance. Some of the
tribes combined under the oppression of foreign
enemies, but never the whole number. Both the
Law and the worship of the sanctuary pass out
of sight. Other recognised centres of worship
Digitized by
Google
1848
JUDGES, BOOK OF
appear, or are aet up on private authority, a>
by Micah in an idolatrous form, and by Gideon.
There is a free use of sacrifice when the occasion
seems to require it. But there is a complete
silence throughout iii. 6 — xvi. about the Taber-
nacle, the priests, and the tribe of Levi. The
authorised centre had fallen into neglect and
powerlessness, no doubt in part by its own fault.
Bat the worship of the Tabernacle continued,
and at the latter part of the period reappeared
in something of its old importance in the days
of Eli and Samuel. To what this revival was
due, and what part Eli had taken in it, we are
not told ; but he and Samuel prepared the way
for the restoration and reforms of David's time.
The effacement of Judah and its comrade
Simeon is a similar fact. In i. 2 and xx. 18
a certain prominence belongs to Judah. But
there is no trace of this later. It supplied
indeed the first judge, and possibly one more,
xii. 8; but it is not named in the Song of
Deborah nor elsewhere, except the passing
mention x. 9, and the discreditable incident
xv. 9-13. Perhaps the jealousy of Epbraim
shut it off northwards, for it is characteristic of
the time that that powerful tribe was not so
ready for action on behalf of the others, as
provoked by their courage which was its own
reproach (viii. 1-3 ; xii. 1-6). But the time
came when the tribes felt the danger of dis-
union. Here, too, the particular steps in the
national revival are not strongly marked. But
Israel is one again in the days of Samuel in the
face of the Philistine oppression, and longs for a
continuance of the union by having a king.
This time the desire is granted. Two earlier
attempts had failed : the first, through Gideon's
loyalty to the tradition that the Lord was
Israel's only king ; the second, by the speedy
disappointment of his son Abimelech's ambition.
We must remember also that we have in this
Book a history of wars and of a time of tur-
bulence and calamity. The more peaceful
periods are only indicated. But the Book of
Ruth allows us a glance into daily life and
domestic piety. It has a place now in the
Hagiographa. But it is maintained that this is
not its original position, and that it once
formed part of the Book of Judges, or stood
next to it, as it does in the LXX. and in our
Bible. But this is not certain. Still in any
cose this is its natural place, as a third part of
the Appendix to the Book of Judges.
In reference to the Judges themselves, we are
struck by the contrast between what we expect
of men " raised up " by God (ii. 18 ; iii. 9) and
on whom " the Spirit of the Lord came " (iii. 1 ;
vi. 34 ; xi. 29 ; xiii. 25 ; xiv. 6, 19), and parts
of their conduct and moral judgment. Thus
Ehud's assassination of Eglon, Deborah's ap-
proval of Jael's treachery, Gideon's sanctuary at
Ophrah, the terrible nature of Jepbthah'a vow,
as well as his early mode of life and his
ambition, all detract from an ideal conception.
This is seen most of all in Samson. He is unlike
the other Judges in respect of his office. There
is no trace of his administering justice, nor did
he lead his countrymen in battle, in which
Shamgar may have resembled him. He main-
tained single-handed the resistance to the Philis-
tines. But there were other elements in his
character in addition to his sense of the work !
JUDGES, BOOK OF
assigned him before his birth and of which hi*
Nazariteship was the symbol. He showed
cunning as well as a light-heartedncss that
delighted in frolic and danger. There was a
humour in his actions and in bis speech, which
at times contains a play upon words and rhyme
(xiv. 14, 18 ; xv. 16). And all the occasions of
his conflict with the Philistines arose originally
out of his love for three women. But with all
this a vein of irony runs throughout his history,
making us feel that he is a victim of his own
sport, which ends tragically in his blindness and
death. Yet, such as he was, the space assigned
him in the records must agree with the impres-
sion which he made on his own generation. He
fulfilled his work, which was to "begin" tar-
deliverance of Israel (xiii. 5), by keeping before
men's minds that there was one Israelite un-
subdued, and who employed all his resources in
the service of that hostility to the enemies of
God's people to which he was dedicated. A call
to do God's work and the gift of His help in
doing it do not imply now, any more than then,
full enlightenment and perfection. He choose*
His instruments out of each age, but they are
men of that age, and show its characteristics.
V. Modern Criticism. — We may now briefly
notice the way in which some recent criticism
affects this Book. It is in part connected with
general views on the history of Israel and its
faith, which this is not the place to dis-
cuss. They minimize the work of Hoses,
with whom it is assumed that trustworthy
history begins, and regard almost the whole of
the legislation found in the Pentateuch as
having a later date than the Babylonian exile.
The early history of Israel is looked on as that
of the slow amalgamation into one nation of
tribes more or less akin, the time of the Judges
being mainly the formative period. Even the
recognition of the absolute unity of God, and of
Jehovah as God of all the earth as well as of
Israel, is attributed to the work of the prophet*
of the 8th century. Taking Wellhausen as the
chief exponent of these views, we will notice-
points in the history of the Judges which he
presents under an unusual aspect. Ch. u con-
tains an account of the conquest of Canaan mure
correct than that which is found in the Book of
Joshua. The first of the tribes to cross the
Jordan were Judah, Simeon, and Levi. Their
attack on the Canaanites was so unsuccessful
that the two latter tribes were almost anni-
hilated and disappear from history. Judah
itself was so crippled that it did not recover
during the period of the Judges, and was forced
largely to incorporate the tribes of the wilder-
ness, the Kenite and Kenezite. The fate of
Simeon and Levi is the basis of Gen. xxxiv..
xlix. 5-7. The next and happier attempt was-
made by Ephraim and the other tribes under the
leading of Joshua, though the only particular
event of their conquest recorded is the capture
of Bethel (i. 22-25). It is obvious that this-
chapter supplies no ground for all this hypo-
thesis. There is no mention in it of Levi.
Success, not failure, is attributed to Judah and
Simeon. The omission of any other conquest
than that of Bethel is fatal. And why i»
Joshua not named? In ch. iii. the whole-
history of Othniel is considered to be unhis-
toricaf. Ch. v. is genuine, and v. 8 supplies a
Digitized by
Google
JUDGES, BOOK OF
correction of the high numbers assigned to the
people of Israel in the Pentateuch ; but Deborah
is not the author, — the speaker throughout is the
people of Israel : in o. 7 we should translate
thus, " Until that Deborah arose." Ch. iv. is
not based on original sources, but is derived
from ch. v. The account of Jabin, who does not
appear in the Song, has arisen from confounding
this effort of the Canaanite kings under Sisera
with Josh. xi. 1-15 ; to bring this into union
with the Song, Sisera is represented as captain
of Jabin's host. The circumstances too of
Sisera's death are misrepresented from not
understanding v. 25-27. Sisera was standing
and drinking when Jael struck him. She used
only one hand and one weapon : the look of a
second arises from the poetical parallelism.
There are two separate sources of the history of
Gideon. The first assigns him a Divine call and
has a supernatural colouring (vi. 1-viii. 3) ; in
the second (viii. 4-21) his real motive appears
in the duty of becoming an avenger of blood.
What is said of Jair is another form of Num.
xxxii. 41-2. Jephthah's history may be de-
pended on, with the exception of xi. 12-28.
Samson's exploits are indeed unconnected with
any solar myth, but the basis of fact is hard to
distinguish. There are strong marks of reality
in ch. xvii.-xviii. The absence of any provision
for the Levites such as we find in the Pentateuch
is seen in the poverty of the grandson of Moses.
Chs. xix.-xxi. are a late fiction, ascribing a unity
of feeling and action to the tribes which could
not have existed at the time. Hosea ix. 9, x. 9
does not refer to these events, but to the
appointment of Saul as king. The way in which
these criticisms are supported is often acute, but
also wilful and confident.
VI. Text, &c. — Some miscellaneous observa-
tions follow here. The most important of the
readings of the Qeri or of MSS., as well as of
the ancient Versions, are noticed in the margin
of the Revised Version. We may remark
further that some word must have dropped out
of the text at the beginning of xvi. 2, though
it is not necessary to supply anything with
the Qeri in xx. 13. The soundness too of
the text may be doubted in xx. 38; xxi. 22.
The reading of the LXX. in x. 12 of Midian
for Maon is easy, and supplies a name which
we look for. But the Syriac reads Amman,
and the Vulgate Chanaan, which makes it
likely that the reading of the text, which is
found again in 2 Ch. xxvi. 7, is original. Of
conjectural emendations without ancient support
we may cite the proposal to read Motet for
Joshua, already mentioned, in i. 1 ; QUboa for
Gitead, viL 3 ; " in Arumah " for « in Tormah "
(or "privily"), ix. 31. Ewald's conjecture of
Shegai, "queen" or "consort," for Shalal,
"spoil," in v. 31 has met with great favour;
and in v. 26, by reading Tishlachennah ("she
put it forth," it. her hand), a grammatical
difficulty is removed.
Instances of playing on words as affecting the
choice or form of them are found in x. 4;
xvi. 16. The shortening of the relative to Shin
praefixum, which is frequent in the later Books,
occurs in v. 7, vi. 17, vii. 12, viii. 26, and is
allowed to be no objection to the antiquity of
the documents in which it is found. It has been
thought to be a mark of the language of
JUDGMENT-HALL
1849
Northern Palestine. The same view has been
taken of the use of the absolute form instead of
the construct in Ttedah (vii. 8) and Ophrah
(viii. 32). Bnt the only certain trace of pro-
vincialism in the Old Testament is the habit of
the Ephraimites of pronouncing Shin as Samech,
as in the case of Shibboleth (xii. C).
The part of Josephus parallel with the Book
of Judges is Ant. v. 2-8. Among the curiosities
of his account is the supplying of the name of
Jephthah's burial-place, Sebea (7, 12), and of
Abimelech's mother, Druma. (7, 1). Can the
latter hnve arisen in any way out of Arumah
(ix. 41)? So, too, Samson's mother is named .
Zelelponi in Jewish tradition from 1 Ch. iv. 2, 3.
The character of the patristic commentaries in
general is that of Jerome's often-quoted words
(ad Paulmum, 12), " In Judicum libro quot prin-
cipes populi, tot figurae sunt." Of the more
modern German commentaries, Studer's (2nd ed.,
Bern, 1842) led the way in the freer mode of
treatment. He was followed by Berthenu,.
Leipzig, 1845, 2nd ed., 1883. Besides Ewald's
History of the People of Israel, the following
works are important: — Th. Noldeke, DieaitteU.
Literatur, Leipzig, 1868, and his Untersuchungcn
zur Kritik del A. Tests., Kiel, 1869; Well-
hausen'a edition of Bleek's Einleitung, Berlin,
1878, and his Prolegomena zur Gesch. Itracl,
1883 (English translation, 1885, which includes
a reprint of his article on Israel in the EncycL
Brit, xiii.) ; Renss, Die Gesch. der heUigen
Schriften A. Tt., Braunschweig, 1881 ; Riebm,
H WB. s. n. " Richter '* ; Budde, Die BB. Biehtei-
u. Samuel, 1890 ; Eittel, Geschichte d. Hebraer,
ii. §§ 30, 33-38. Commentaries of a conservative-
character are those of Keil, 2nd ed., Leipzig,.
1872; Cassel, 1865; and Bachmann, as far as
the end of ch. v., Berlin, 1868. The first two
are translated into English. The more recent
English ones are those of Bishop Wordsworth,
the Bishop of Bath and Wells {Speaker's Com-
mentary), Dr. Farrar (Bishop Ellicott's), and
Mr. Lias in the Cambridge Series. See also
Driver's LOT.* ch. ii. § 1. Dean Stanley gives,
a vivid account of " the mediaeval history of the
Jewish Church " in his Lectures, xiii.-xvi.
Ewald's version of ch. v. is found in Dei
Dichter det A. B., 2nd ed., 1866, i. p. 178 «qq. ;
Stanley's is founded on Ewald's first edition.
See also BtJttcher, Die altesten Buhnendichtungen,
der Debora-Gcsang und das Hoht Lied, dramatitch
hergestellt, Leipzig, 1850. On the character of
Jael's act, see Arnold's Sermons on the Interpre-
tation of Scripture, and Mozley's Lectures on the
Old Testament, vi.-vii. ; who has also some
interesting remarks on the way in which Jabin
remains in the background and the prominence-
of Sisera, p. 145 sqq. A list of the literature
on this chapter is given by Bertheau and Cassel,.
but most fully by Bachmann. [E. R. 0.1
JUDGMENT-HALL. The word Prae-
torium (Jlpaniptor) is so translated five times.
in the A. V. of the N. T. ; and iu those five-
passages it denotes two different places.
1. In John xviii. 28, 33, xix. 9, it is the
residence which Pilate occupied when he visited
Jerusalem ; to which the Jews brought Jesus
from the house of Caiaphas, and urithin which He
was examined by Pilate, and scourged and*
mocked by the soldiers, while the Jews were
Digitized by
Google
1850
JUDGMEXT-HALL
waiting ttithout in the neighbourhood of the
judgment-seat (erected on the Pavement in front
of the PraetoriumX on which Pilate sat when
he pronounced the final sentence. The Latin
word praetorium originally signified (see Smith's
Diet, of Gr. $ Rom. Ant.) the general's tent in
a Roman camp (Liv. xxviii. 27, &c.) ; and after-
wards it had, among other significations, that
of the palace in which a governor of a province
lived and administered justice (Cic. Verr. ii. 4,
§ 28, &c). The site of Pilate's praetorinm in
Jerusalem has given rise to much dispute, some
supposing it to be the palace of king Herod,
others the Tower of Antonia; but it has been
shown elsewhere that the former was probably
the Praetorium. [Jerusalem, p. 1655.1 Pilate
certainly lived there at one time (Philo, Leg.
in Canon, 38, 39) ; and it is scarcely conceivable
that the Roman Governor would have occupied
any other palace than that which, with its three
great towers, formed the citadel of the Upper
City (Jos. B. J. ii. 3, § 2 j -v. 5, § 8). Herod,
who, at the time of the trial of Christ, was at
Jerusalem (Luke xxiii. 7), no doubt lived in the
old palace of the Asmoneans, which stood above
the Xystus, on the £. side of the Upper City.
[Jerusalem, p. 1647.] It appears from a
passage of Josephus (B. J. ii. 14, § 8) that
Gessius Florus not only resided in the palace,
but set up his judgment-seat in front of it.
Winer conjectures, with great probability, that
the procurator, when in Jerusalem, resided with
a body-guard in the palace of Herod (Jos. B. J.
ii. 15, § 5), while the Roman garrison occupied
Antonia. just in like manner, a former palace
of Hiero became the praetorium, in which Verres
lived in Syracuse (Cic. Verr. ii. 5, § 12).
2. In Acts xxiii. 35 Herod's judgment-hall or
praetorium in Caesarea was doubtless a part of
that magnificent range of buildings, the erection
of which by king Herod is described in Josephus
(Ant. xv. 9, § 6 ; see also B. J. i. 21, §§ 5-8).
3. The word " palace," or " Caesar's court,"
in the A. V. of Philip, i. 13, is a translation of
the same word praetorium. The statement in
a later part of the same Epistle (iv. 22) would
seem to connect this praetorium with the
imperial palace at Rome; but no classical
authority is found for so designating the palace
itself. The praetorian camp, outside the
northern wall of Rome, was far from the
palace, and therefore unlikely to be the prae-
torium here mentioned. The opinion advocated
by Wieseler, by Conybeare and Howson {Life of
St. Paul, ch. 26), and by Bp. Lightfoot (fiomm.
on Philip, in loco) is adopted by the R. V. text,
and is to the effect that the praetorium here
mentioned has a personal sense and was intended
to describe that detachment of the Praetorian
Guards which was in immediate attendance
upon the emperor, and had barracks in Mount
Palatine. It will be remembered that St. Paul,
on his arrival at Rome (Acts xxviii. 16), was
delivered by the centurion into the custody of
the praetorian prefect.
4. The word praetorium occurs also in Matt.
xxvii. 27, where it is translated " common hall "
or " Governor's Hoose " (marg.; R. V. "palace "),
and in Mark xv. 16. In both places it denotes
Pilate's residence in Jerusalem.
5. Christian tradition, without exception,
places the Praetorium east of the Church of
JUDITH, THE BOOK OF
the Holy Sepulchre. The Bordeaux Pilgrim,
proceeding from (modern) Sion to the Gate of
Neapolis (Damascus Gate), had Calvary on his
left band, and, on his right, " below in tie
valley " the ruins of the " house or praetorian
of Pontius Pilate." Cyril (Cat. xiii. 39) speaki
of it as "a desert place." Antoninus and
Theodosius identify it with a Church of S.
Sophia, apparently on the site now occupied br
the Dome of the Rock. At a later period it
was placed at the Gate of Neapolis (/aoavi-
§ 2). According to current tradition, it was si
the N.W. corner of the Hiram esh-Sherif, when
the Turkish barracks stand. [W. T. B-] [W.]
JUDGMENT-SEAT, the translation hi
various places of (trifia (ej/. Matt, xxvii. 19;
John xix. 13; Acts xviii. 12, xxv. 6; Rom. xiT.
10 ; 1 Cor. v. 10) and (t»n-fy>ior (e.g. Jaa. a.
6). The R. V. marg. in 1 Cor. vi. 2, 4 gives to
this latter word the rendering tribunal. Is
Matt, xxvii. 19, John xix. 13, the judgment-
seat or tribunal on which Pilate sat, when he
delivered our Lord to death, was outside the
praetorium or judgment-hall (see precedhu
article). This judgment-seat, we are told by
St. John (/. a), stood on a place " called The
Pavement, but in Hebrew Gabbatha." The
subject is discussed under Gabbatha. [F.]
JU'DITH. 1. (fHlfV; 'Uvtlt, natt'd,
'lowJ^e), " the daughter of Been the Hittrte,"
and wife of Esau (Gen. xxvL 34). [Ahouba-
mah.]
2. The heroine of the apocryphal book which
bears ber name, who appears as an ideal type of
piety (Judith viii. 6), beauty (xi. 2 IX courage,
and chastity (xvi. 22 bo,.). Her supposed
descent from Simeon (ix. 2), and the manner 'a
which she refers to his cruel deed (Gen. ixxjt.
25 sq.), mark the conception of the character,
which evidently belongs to a period of stern and
perilous conflict. The most unscrupulous
daring (xiii.) is combined with zealous ritualism
(xii. 1 sq.), and faith is turned to action rather
than to supplication (viii. 31 sq.). Clement at
Rome (Ep. i. 55) assigns to Judith the epithet
given to Jael flovoflS ri fuueapta) ; and Jerome
sees in her exploit the image of the victory of
the Church over the power of evil (Ep. lxxix. 11,
p. 508 : " Judith ... in typo Ecclesiae diabolum
capita truncavit ; " cp. £p. xxii. 21, p. 105).
The name is properly the feminine form of
'lirP, Judaeut (cp. Jer. xxxvi. 14, 21). In the
passage of Genesis it is generally taken as the
correlative of Judah, i.e. "praited." [B. F. W.]
JU'DITH, THE BOOK OP, like that of
Tobit, belongs to the earliest specimens (of
historical fiction. The narrative of the reign
of " Nebuchadnezzar king of Nineveh " (i. IX of
the campaign of Holofernes, and the deliverance
of Bethulia, through the stratagem and courage
of the Jewish heroine, contains too many and
too serious difficulties, both historical and geo-
graphical, to allow of the supposition that it
is either literally true, or even carefully moulded
on truth. The existence of a kingdom of Kine-
veh and the reign of a Nebuchadnezzar are in
themselves inconsistent with a date after the
Return ; and an earlier date is excluded equally
by internal evidence and by the impossibility of
Digitized by
Google
JUDITH, THE BOOK OF
placing the events in harmonious connexion with
the course of Jewish history. The latter fact
is seen most clearly in the extreme varieties of
opinion among those critics who have endea-
voured to maintain the veracity of the story.
Nebuchadnezzar has been identified with Cam-
byses, Xerxes, Esarhaddon, Sardanapalus, Kini-
lodon, Merodach Baladnn, Artaxerxes Ochus,
&c, without the slightest show of probability.
But, apart from this, the text evidently alludes
to the position of the Jews after the Exile when
the Temple was rebuilt (v. 18, 19 ; iv. 3), and
the hierarchical government established in place
of the kingdom (xv. 8, ij ypovcrla r&r vluv
"Io-pa^A: cp. iv. 4, Samaria; viii. 6, -npoaifi-
fiarov, xpoujotviov) ; and after the Return the
course of authentic history absolutely excludes
the possibility of the occurrence of such events
as the book relates. This fundamental con-
tradiction of facts, which underlies the whole
narrative, renders it superfluous to examine in
detail the other objections which may be urged
against it (e.g. iv. 6, Joacim ; cp. 1 Ch. vi. ;
Joseph. Ant. x. 8, § 6 [Joacim]). These objec-
tions are summarised by ZSckler (in Struck u.
Zockler's Kgf. Komm. "Die Apokryphen d.
A. T." ; Dot B. Judith, Einl. § 2).
2. The value of the book is not, however,
lessened by its fictitious character. On the
contrary it becomes even more valuable as ex-
hibiting an ideal type of heroism, which was
outwardly embodied in the wars of independence.
The self-sacrificing faith and unscrupulous
bravery of Judith were the qualities by which
the champions of Jewish freedom were then
enabled to overcome the power of Syria, which
seemed at the time scarcely less formidable than
the imaginary hosts of Holofernes. The peculiar
character of the book, which is exhibited in
these traits, affords the best indication of its
date ; for it cannot be wrong to refer its origin
to the latter portion of the Maccabaean period,
which it reflects not only in its general spirit
but even in smaller traits (see them collected in
ZSckler, § 3). The impious design of Nebu-
chadnezzar finds a parallel in the prophetic de-
scription of Antiochus (Dan. xi. 31 sq.), and the
triumphant issue of Judith's courage must be
compared not with the immediate results of
the invasion of Apollonius (as Bertholdt, Einl. p.
2553 sq.), but with the victory which the author
pictured to himself as the reward of faith. But
while it seems certain that the book is to be
referred to the last two centuries B.C., the
attempts which have been made to fix its date
within narrower limits, either to the time of the
war of Alexander Jannaeus, at the close of the
reign of John Hyrcanus (105 B.C., Movers) or
of Salome-Alexandra (B.C. 79-70, Ball), or of
Demetrius U. (129 B.C., Ewald), rest on very
conjectural data. It might seem more natural
(as a mere conjecture) to refer it to an earlier
time, c 170 B.C., when Antiochus Epiphanes
made his first assault upon the Temple.*
» The theory of Volkmar (Dai vitrtt Buck £ira,
p. 6; That. Jahrb. 1866-7) that the book of Judith re-
fers to the period of the Parthian war of Trajan, need
only tbe noticed In passing, as It assumes the spurious-
ness of the first epistle of Clement of Rome ($ 6). Volk-
mar*s theory Is examined by Ball, Speaker 1 * Ccmm. on
the Apocrypha, I. p. 344 sq., notes.
JUDITH, THE BOOK OF 1851
3. In accordance with the view which has
been given of the character and date of the book,
it is probable that the several parts may have a
distinct symbolic meaning. Some of the names
can scarcely have been chosen without regard to
their derivation (e.g. Achior = Brother of Light ;
Judith = Jewess ; Bethulia = iHvirD, the virgin
of Jehovah), and the historical difficulties of the
person of Nebuchadnezzar disappear, when he is
regarded as the Scriptural type of worldly
power. Luther looked upon the book as a kind
of Messianic prophecy (see ZSckler, § 5). But
it is, perhaps, a mere play of fancy to allegorise
the whole narrative, as Grotius has done (Prol.
in Jvd.), who interprets Judith of the Jewish
nation widowed of outward help, Bethulia
(n^K-JVS) of the Temple, Nebuchadnezzar of
the Devil, and Holofernes (BTI3 "lQ^TI, lictor
serpentis) of Antiochus, his emissary; while
Joacim, the high-priest, conveys, as he thinks,
by his name the assurance that " God will rise
up " to deliver His people. A similar attempt
at allegorising by Scholz is examined by ZSckler
(op. tit. § 2).
4. Two conflicting statements have been pre-
served as to the original language of the book.
Origen speaks of it together with Tobit as " not
existing in Hebrew even among the Apocrypha "
in the Hebrew collection (Ep. ad Afrio. § 13,
oto« yap txouatr atri [pi "E/3pa?oi] koI iv
'Aroicpiipois 'Efipalorl, tis a*' abrSv iiaBirrts
{yv&Kanfv), by which statement he seems to
imply that the book was originally written in
Greek. Jerome, on the other hand, says that
"among the Hebrews L the book of Judith is
read among the Hagiographa [Apocrypha] . . .
and being written in the Chaldee language is
reckoned among the histories " (Pracf. ad Jud.).
The words of Origen are, however, somewhat
ambiguous. There is now little doubt that the
book was written in Palestine in Hebrew, and
that the Chaldee text used by St. Jerome did
not represent the oldest form of the narrative,
bnt was itself a free translation or adaptation of
the Hebrew account, which in bis day was no
longer extant (Ball, i. 243). Some, however,
like Jahu (EM. ii. § 3) and Eichhorn (Einl. in d.
Apokr. p. 327), have maintained the originality of
the present Greek text, on the authority of some
phrases which may be assigned very naturally
to the translator or reviser. 11
5. The text exists at present in two distinct
recensions, the Greek (followed by the Syriac
and Old Latin Versions ; cp. Ball, i. 242, n. 1)
and the Latin. The former is evidently the
truer representative of the original, and it
seems certain that the Latin was derived, in the
main, from the Greek by a series of succes-
sive alterations. Jerome confesses that his own
translation was free ("magis sensum e sensu
quam verbum e verbo transferee ") ; and pecu-
liarities of the language (Fritzsche, p. 122)
prove that he took the Old Latin as the basis
of his work, though he compared it with the
Chaldee text which was in bis possession (" sola
ea quae intelligentia integra in verbis Chaldaeis
invenire potui Latinis expressi "). The Latin
* The present Greek text clearly points to a Hebrew
original (Ball, I. 344. The Illustration of this consti-
tutes an essential element Id his Commentary).
Digitized by
Google
1852
JUEL
text contains many curious errom, which Kern to
have arisen in the first instance from false hear-
ing (Bertholdt, fin/, p. 2574 sq. ; e.g. x. 5, xal
ifTwv KaSafiv. Volg. et panes et cateum, i.e.
Kol rvpov; xvi. 2, Sti fit Tcaptfifio\as atrov.
Vulg. qui potvit castra sua, it. 6 itts; xvi. 17,
mil KKaiaorrai iv alcrlHicrci. Vulg. ut urantur
et sentiant) ; and Jerome remarks that it had
been variously corrupted and interpolated before
his time. At present it is impossible to deter-
mine the authentic text. In many instances the
Latin is more full than the Greek (ir. 8-15,
v. 11-20, v. 22-24, vi. 15 sq., ix. 6 sq.), which
however contains peculiar passages (i. 13-16, vi.
1, Sic). Even where the two texts do not differ
in the details of the narrative, as is often the
case (e.g. 1, 3 sq., iii. 9, v. 9, vi. IS, vii. 2 sq.,
x. 12 sq., xv. 11, xvi. 25), they yet differ in
language (e.g. ch. xv., Sic.) and in names (e.g.
viii. 1) and numbers (e.g. i. 2) ; and these varia-
tions can only be explained by going back to
some still more remote source (cp. Bertholdt,
EM. p. 2568 sq.), which was probably an earlier
Greek copy.*
6. The existence of these various recensions of
the book is a proof of its popularity and wide
circulation, but the external evidence of its use
is very scanty. Josephus was not acquainted
with it, or it is likely that he would have made
some use of its contents, as he did of the apo-
cryphal additions to Esther (Jos, Ant. xi. 6,
§ 1 sq.). The first reference to its contents
occurs in Clem. Rom. (Kp. i. 55), and it is quoted
with marked respect by Origen (Set. in Jerem.
23; cp. Horn. ix. in Juii. i.), Hilary (in Ptal.
cxxv. 6), and Lucifer (De nan pare. p. 955).
Jerome speaks of it as " reckoned among the
Sacred Scriptures by the Synod of Nice," by
which he probably means that it was quoted in
the records of the Council, unless the text be
corrupt (see Ball, i. 242). It has been wrongly
inserted in the catalogue at the close of the
Apostolic Canons, against the best authority (cp.
Uody, D« Bill. Text. 646 a), but it obtained a
place in the Latin Canon at an early time (cp.
Hilar. Pro/, in Pa. 15), which it commonly
maintained afterwards. [Canon.]
7. The Commentaries of Fritzsche (Kurzge-
fastte* Extg. Handbuch, Leipzig, 1853) and Ball
(Apocrypha, edited by Dr. Wace, London, 1888)
contain good critical apparatus and scholarlike
notes. The literature is collected by Zockler
(§ 5) and Ball (p. 260). [B. F. W.] [F.]
JU-EL flovwi; Johel). 1. 1 Esd. ix. 34.
[Uel.] S. 1 Esd. ix. 35 (B. OtyA, A. "loi/ifX;
Jes»ei). [Joel, 13.]
JUXIA flovAfa), a Christian woman at
Rome, probably the wife, or perhaps the sister,
of Philologus, in connexion with whom she is
saluted by St. Paul (Rom. xvi. 15). Origen
supposes that they were master and mistress of
a Christian household which included the other
persons mentioned in the same verse. Both
names point to a connexion with "the household
of Caesar " (see Speaker's Comm. on Romans, in
loco). [W. T.B.J [F.]
• Of modern Versions the English follows the Greek,
and that of Luther the Ixttin text.
JUNIPER
JTJXIU8 ("IouAjoj), the courteous centurion
of '• Augustus' band," to whose charge St. Paul
was delivered when he was sent prisoner from
Caesarea to Rome (Acts xxvii. 1, 3). Augastus'
band has been identified by some comaaeatater?
with the Italian band (Acts x. 1); by others,
less probably, with the body of cavalry denomi-
nated Sebasteni by Josephus (Ant. xix. 9, § 2, &c).
It is more probable that the Avgustan cohort
was a detachment of the Praetorian Guards
attached to the person of the Roman governor at
Caesarea, and that this Julius may be the same
as Julius Priscns (Tacit. Hut. ii. 92, iv. 11),
sometime centurion, afterwards prefect of the
Praetorians. [W. T. B.J
JD'NIA ('lovrias, i.e. Jcnias), a Christian
at Rome, mentioned by St. Paul as one ef hie
kinsfolk and fellow-prisoners, of note among the
Apostles, and in Christ before St. Paul (Boai.
xvi. 7). Origen conjectures that he was possibly
one of the seventy disciples. Hammond also
takes the name to be that of a man, Juntas,
which would be a contraction (as Winer observes)
of Juniliui or Junianus. Chrysostom, holding
the more common, but perhaps less probable, hy-
pothesis that the name is that of a woman, J alia,
remarks on it, " How great is the devotion of this
woman, that she should be counted worthy of
the name of Apostle ! " Nothing is known of
the imprisonment to which St. Paul refers:
Origen supposes that it is that bondage from
which Christ makes Christians free. [W. T. B.]
JU'NIPEB. The rendering in A. V. and
R. V. (bat R. V. margin 6room) of the
Hebrew Dm, rothem; froD/nir, Qvr6r; jumpcrtu :
Arab. /) , ratam ; or Moorish fa 1 / 'Otaiui.
whence the Spanish retama, applied to the
Genista, or Broom. Bothem occurs but in four
passages ; 1 K. xix. 4, 5 ; Job xxx. 4 ; Ps. cxx.
4. There is no question as to identification of
the Hebrew name with the ratam of the Arabs.
as shown by Celsius (Hierob. ii. 195) and Forskal
(tlor. Eij.-Arab. Ivi.). It has nothing to d"
with the juniper, which is expressed by ~VHB,
'ar'dr [see Heath]. It is allied to the Genista
(or Broom) genus of the family Legvmmosae,
Retama raetam. Forsk. of botanists. It may be
considered the characteristic shrub of the desert.
as it is the largest, most conspicuous, and most
beautiful. It is as common in the dry wadys or
ravines as on the rocky plains, always on barren
ground, and rarely at a high elevation. It in
especially abundant in the neighbourhood of
Sinai and in the ravines of Petra, in company
with the caper or hyssop, and the savin juniper.
It is frequent all round the Dead Sea, and in
the ravines of the Jordan, and also on the barer
slopes of the hills of Gilead and Hoak Its
geographical range is from Arabia to Upper
Egypt and North-east Africa. Westward, in
the plateaux of Spain and Portugal, and in the
Canary Islands, it is represented by sifisd
species. Like many of its congeners, the
Brooms, it puts forth its blossom in the early
spring, before its leaves ; and in the month of
February, the shower of delicate white and
purplish-pink blossoms which cover it, as with a
ganzy mantle light as gossamer, renders it one of
the most graceful and beautiful of shrub*. It
Digitized by
Google
JUPITER
attains a height of ten or twelve feet, and
affords a grateful though not very impervious
shade. It was under a rothem bush that Elijah
lay down, when he fled into the wilderness, in
the solitary passage which connects the desert of
the wanderings with the subsequent history of
Israel. " He came and sat down under a juniper
tree (rothem) . . . and as he lay and slept under
a juniper tree (rothem) an angel touched him "
(I K. xix. 45). Dean Stanley incidentally
mentions (S. <$• I', p. 80) that, in the only storm
of rain he ever encountered in his travels in the
desert, he took shelter under a " Retera bush. "
It is ruthlessly uprooted by the Arabs, who
collect it wherever it is tolerably abundant, for
the manufacture of charcoal, which is considered
of the finest quality, and fetches a higher price
in the Cairo market than any other kind. This
explains the allusion in Ps. en. 4, "Sharp
arrows of the mighty, with coals of rothem."
The roots being of great thickness and solidity,
very much larger than the stem, a single bush
will supply no inconsiderable quantity of fuel.
There is more difficulty in the passage in Job in
which the word occurs, where the Patriarch
describes outcasts from Edom driven into the
wilderness, and in the last extremity of star-
vation " cutting up mallows by the bushes, and
ri'iihem roots for their meat " (ch. xxx. 4).
The woody root is of course uneatable, and the
bark of it is very bitter, but not poisonous ;
while the stems, leaves, and fruit are eagerly
sought after by goats, and in extreme cases
might, like many other leguminous plants,
maintain human life for a time. Gesenius
(p. 1317, ed. 1842) suggests that the root may
be used here in a general sense, for the whole
plant; and under C'X' (p. 1484) adduces
various arguments to show that the word
shoresh is employed sometimes to express the
whole product of a plant, what the root pro-
duces, and therefore its seeds or fruit, which
might be edible. One of the stations during the
forty years' wandering of the Exodus was named
Rithmah, i.e. the place of Rothem (Num. xxxiii.
18). [H. B. T.]
JU'PITEB (Zeis, LXX.). Among the chief
measures which Antiochus Epiphanes took for
the entire subversion of the Jewish faith was
that of dedicating the Temple at Jerusalem to
the service of Zeus Olympius (2 Mace. vi. 2), and
at the same time the rival temple on Gerizim
was dedicated to Zeus Xenius (Jupitrr hospitalis,
Vulg.). The choice of the first epithet is easily
intelligible. The Olympiau Zeus was the national
god of the Hellenic race (Thucyd. iii. 14), as
well as the supreme ruler of the heathen world,
and as such formed the true opposite to Jehovah,
Who had revealed Himself as the God of Abraham.
The application of the second epithet, " the God
of hospitality " (cp. Grimm on 2 Mace. /. c), is
more obscure. In 2 Mace. vi. 2 it is explained
by the clause, " as was the character of those
JUTTAH
1853
who dwelt in the place," which may, however,
be an ironical comment of the writer (cp. Q. Curt,
iv. 5, 8), and not a sincere eulogy of the hospi-
tality of the Samaritans (as Ewald, Qetch. ir.
339 n.). Jupiter or Zeus is mentioned in one
passage of the N. T., on the occasion of St. Paul's
visit to Lystra (Acts xiv. 12, 13), where the ex-
pression " Jupiter, which was before their city,"
means that his temple was outside the city.
[B. F. W.]
JU'SHAB-HE'SED QV3r}-2m"; B.'ApojSo - -
o-ovK, A. 'A<ro$atat ; JosabheseJ), son of Zerub-
habel (1 Ch. iii. 20). It does not appear why
the fire children in this verse are separated from
the three in v. 19. Bertheau and Oettli (in
Strack u. Ziickler's Kijf. Komm. in loco) suggest
that they might be by a different mother, or
possibly born in Judaea after the return, whereas
the three others were born at Babylon. The
name of Jushab-hesed = Loving-kindness is re-
turned, taken in conjunction with that of his
father and brothers, is a striking expression of
the feelings of pious Jews at the return from
Captivity, and at the same time a good illustra-
tion of the nature of Jewish names. [A. C. H.]
JUS'TUS ClovaTos). Schoettgen (ffor.
Jfebr. in Act. Ap.) shows by quotations from
Rabbinical writers that this name was not
unusual among the Jews. 1. A surname of
Joseph called Barsabas (Acts i. 23). [Joseph
Bars abas, p. 1807.]
2. A Jewish proselyte at Corinth, into whose
house St. Paul (Acts xviii. 7) entered when he
left the synagogue. Such a house might well
be a meeting place for Hebrew and Greek (cp.
Speaker's Comm. in loco).
8. A surname of Jesus, a friend of St. Paul
(Col. iv. 11). [Jesus, p. 1663.] [F.]
JUTTAH (Josh. xv. 55, plent HBV.
but xxi. 16, flt^: 'IrdV, A. 'lerri; Tori,
A. omits : Iota, leta), a city in the mountain
region of Judah, in the neighbourhood of Maon
and Carmel (Josh. xv. 55). It was allotted to
the priests (xxi. 16), but in the catalogue of
1 Ch. vi. 57-59 the name has escaped. In the
time of Eusebius it was a large village (k&ioi
luylarrf), 18 M.P. southward of Eleutheropolis
and in Daroma (OS. 1 p. 266, 49; p. 233, 10,
s. v. 'IerreV; letan). Reland (Pal. p. 870) con-
jectures that Juttah is the r6\ts 'loita (A. V. " a
city of Juda") in the hill country, in which
Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist, resided
(I.uke i. 39). But this, though feasible, is not
at present confirmed by any positive evidence.
It is now Yutta, a large village 15J miles
from Beit-Jibrin, Eleutheropolis, and near
Carmel, Kurmnl, and Ziph, Tell ez-Zif. Rock-
hewn tombs and wine-presses are found near the
village. The present inhabitants are verv rich
in flocks (PKF. Mem. iii. 310; Robinson, B. R.
1st ed. ii. 195, 628). [G.] [W.]
END OF THE SECOND PART OF THE FIRST VOLUME.
Digitized by
Google
LONDON:
PRINTED BT WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LuuTzn
(TA»rOU> 6TOEET AND CHAMXO CROSS.
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
\
vi*«
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11